people of this region of the online space. Know that there is a God, and know that this God has been with your father, and his father and the father before him. All generations of humanity and all peoples shall proclaim him YHWH. God of Jacob, Esau, Solomon, Moses and the glorious ethiopian kings at gondar. Return to his kingdom, you lost children

@@jpraise6771What ? This is Scarlatti lovers here.

His interpretation of Scarlatti is so romantic

​@@squirrel4727 I don't disagree. But calling it romantic doesn't begin to describe what he's doing.

Thanks for the inspiration!

Interesting, but deeply wrong.

@@perryphilias Why wrong?

@@metteholm4833 I wrote that comment spontaneously during a period of intense study of Scarlatti. I am trying now to reconstruct why I reacted in that way.

@Max M You can ignore it, and I can ignore it too. But I won't, because I have enough confidence in my musical judgment to wonder why I wrote it and try to discover again the reasons. Or I suppose someone may hold a moralistic view that only reactions of praise can stand unsupported.

He was killed ((((

@@elmiramuradova561By whom ?

Search out Marcelle Meyer's Scarlatti and Rameau...

Me too…

Nearly the same

This isn’t Scarlatti, that why you like it, Ms. Kurochkina. Unless you can call it “Scarlatti on steroids.” Gilels just pounds the f*ck out of the delicacy of the music with his stone fingers....there’s no nuance whatsoever, nothing deceptive, or simple, just *BANG!!! BANG!!! BANG!!!BANG!!!”* til I want to scream! As far as “genius” goes, I can’t agree....compositions aren’t supposed to be about the performers....they’re supposed to find the composer in the pieces they play, not completely ignore the composer and disregard performance practice. And I’m not talking about using period instruments, either; the only pre-piano composer whose works are completely destroyed on the modern piano is Bach, bc his dense contrapuntal landscape makes it extremely difficult for modern pianists to realize with so much resonance from concert grands. To my ear, Glenn Gould is the only pianist to play Bach with complete clarity, probably bc he first studied Bach on a pipe organ with an organist. Ashkenazy comes close. Anyway, Gilels didn’t play Scarlatti here....he beat the poor guy into submission.

@@petek3872 True. She is "the interpreter" of Scarlatti.

I think this is the way which can be called (if any) normal. All the sprinters totally take out the musicality. It can be played a bit faster on the Harpsichord, just because a Harpsichord is faster attack, and faster decay...

♉

0

Completely agree. Been enamoured of Gilels for decades.

Gilels, the pianist with the “golden” tone. His recording of the Brahms piano concerti with Jochum remains my favourite.

I wouldn’t go that far. His compatriot and contemporary Sviatoslav Richter was another giant, who had the most extensive repertoire and incredible power and ability to bring the most intimate moods and thoughts of composers to his listeners. In Russia then both had followers and admirers. Who is better? was discussed daily. I have loved both and was lucky to hear them live a few times.

Неоспоримо

Scarlatti was a sort of Sarasate/Liszt figure in the Baroque period. K. 141 d minor, which you are undoubtedly referring to, was used by Scarlatti himself for showing off speed. Suggesting Argerich is less correct (or any of the other musicians who did more research) is unfair to the musicians who knew what the meaning of the music actually was, in my opinion. The piece, to me, and nearly every musician, doesn't sound like it should be played neglected and depressed sounding. It should very very likely sound like a whirlwind, a panic, a fight, etc. Intensity is what is almost screamed by every marking and every note in the piece. If a child were to play Liszt Transcendental Etude No. 1 at a slower tempo than the one indicated by the composer himself, would that make him a better musician that Trifonov, who played it fast and triumphantly? Please, I beg of you, understand that to say one person is right, when this person is completely alone doing this thing, is to say that everyone else is wrong. Pletnev, Argerich, Dang Thai Son, Bunin, and even Sofrinitsky himself.

@@rampgamercracka4258 I believe the OP was speaking from his heart and wasn’t specifically saying other performers were incorrect. Only that Gilels’ interpretation moves him and is his particular favourite. His opinion has merit as does yours but his, all the more notable for its conciseness.

Emil Gilels is intense, deep, and far away when he plays. Show-off is in another world than his. Great dad you have !

@@rampgamercracka4258 I think you mean the K 141 D minor sonata.

@@madaboutvoice that's what I said

Yes! I had exactly that feeling with his rendition of Chopins third! Simply sublime.

ЧУДО! Ни у кого не звучит рояль так божественно, что за градации звука, не могу поверить что кто либо сможет достигнуть такого звучания на рояле! ГИЛЕЛЬС воскресил СКАРЛАТИ, который сам бы не мог представить, что так прекрасно могут его сонаты звучать. Можно с радостью сказать это ГЕНИАЛЬНО.

Clara Haskil

Well I wouldn't go that far.

Not better than Michelangeli, simply different.

Миелианджело как личность на такая яркая как Гилельс. Там больше декоративности. Мне еще очень нравится Скарлатти Клары Хаскил. Там другой подход возможно ближе к изначальному звучанию этой музыки.

Both fantastic !!!

that piano proud

+MrVoayer // True....a way more romantic version....away from the usual meticulous austerity

Gilels was definitely not a period performer. But let's remember what goes with so masterful a pianist as Gilels: he finds things in music that others would never think of. Such is genius. It is not musical purism in the sense that one expects of the late Gustav Leonhardt, but his approach gives us insight into the musical depth of Scarlatti that period purism cannot offer. Domenico Scarlatti is a musical genius, and he can be interpreted in many ways. See also Chopin. Were I a competent pianist I would surely play a Chopin ballade very differently from how someone like Arrau or Rubinstein did -- but I would still respect Arrau and Rubinstein for their performances. I would also play these Scarlatti sonatas differently from Gilels, as I could never imitate his musical personality. .

I do not like this approach of Scarlatti , but who cares ? The important thing is that there is great music , revealing what you noted as "the real depth" of Scarlatti . Thank you Emil Gilels . (very) Far from the magic of Horowitz and its beautiful illusions (?) .... I didn't expect , and I didn't want that depth by M. Scarlatti , but who am I to forbid Domenico to be romantic , to be human ... ?

@@Fritz_Maisenbacher why would anyone be more human by being romantic??? I find Scarlatti's music to be full of vigour especially because it is not an ideal-seeking music.

Scarlatti is deeper, than most people believe.

Most academics are the very definition of dullness.

Approvo quanto Tu dici...trovo Gilels maestoso in questo Scarlatti, collocato in un Universo atemporale,incantato.....nulla di strano, Amico,è Gilels!

+marco rotondi Il secondo Scarlatti !!!

grazie trovo questo commento molto bello. Per mio conto trovo interessanti anche le piccole sbavature di Gilels, le piccole imprecisioni, rispetto alla (quasi) assoluta precisione esecutiva del pure immenso Michelangeli

esattamente come fa il sommo Richter nel monumentale Preludio e Fuga BWV 869, una delle cose più stupefacenti che si possano ascoltare.

Да, если смотреть 24 года позже, концерт в Москве, темп (например в к 141) немного быстрее и слышится менее выразительно чем в этой записи...

Жаль, что сейчас уже невозможно сходить на концерт нашего Великого Гилельса и послушать его вживую(

Как хорошо вы заметили .

Beautiful but A.B.Michelangeli is unsurpassed!

Puede ser, prefiero no comparar; porque dentro de la obra de arte, el intérprete también pone su cuerpo y su alma para recrearla de acuerdo a su espíritu. Nada es igual todo enriquece.

Qué musica ACADEMICA ? Domingo Escarlati es la VIDA MISMA !

Nice that you mentioned Sokolov. After Gilels and Richter, he is the only one, who continues on the path of great Russian masters. Gilels was his mentor and friend, who awarded Grisha with 1st Tchaikovsky competition prize, going against the Kremlin wishes.

+bach5861 Well first instance on this first d minor sonata it might be a bit to much so ... it could be a bit more rythmic and angular......as opposed to Bach with the incredible polyphony..... but yes even Mozart and Bach have souls too that know a thing or two about romance of course within their period.

+bach5861 Well, yes, he can definitely sound that way in some of his works. But he's still always well within the Baroque language, which means he's the kind of genius capable to transcend his historical period without necessarily being a revolutionary or sorts.

me too

@ bach 5861--me too

Scarlatti is a genius .. his music anticipate the great romantic soul. Chopin Schumann Liszt...

This man, I don´t have words to express his technique. Perfection. First time I hear from his hands playing Scarlatti. Amazing. Love Schiff´s playing and Pogorelich. I´ll add his to my list. Thanks for posting.

5 years later than your reply. I quite agree it's so unlike others and so personal to Gilels. I don't know how many times I've heard this piece, but certainly never played like this. What a wonderful performer of music.

There is no such thing as Soviet pianistic art, or any art! It’s amazing, that there were incredible artists over-there, in those times despite the Soviet repressive environment!

@@stonefireice6058в СССР была самая настоящая демократия, т.е. власть народа, рабочих и крестьян. Репрессивное государство - это любое капиталистическое, где свобода и права есть только у кучки богатых, а миллионы людей труда бесправны и голодны.

​@@djenii2020😮

ascoltano probabilmente dj axe...

Ora 14 ...

dici bene: meraviglia. Forse i 20 "bischeri" ascoltano Allevi (!)

It's always surprising how everyone always refers to Argerich, and only to her. There are many very great interpreters of Scarlatti's sonatas : Larrocha, Zacharias, Perahia, A. Schiff, Barenboim (3 splendid sonatas in his last recording), Horowitz, and so on...

+margatroid derek It's a damn shame you weren't born in the 18th or 19th century and taught all those moron composers how to "do it right". Well, at least they had Haydn and Scarlatti to look up to.

...

+margatroid derek Who do you think you are?

Scarlatti is actually a Baroque composer. Early Haydn has Baroque traits but he is usually associated with Mozart in the Classical era.

Yes, excellent point. The greatness of the sonatas is shown precisely in how so much and so many different things can be drawn from them. You won't find that in Clementi for instance.

Bellissimo meraviglioso!!!!!!!!!!

+Mathview one of the best for sure

Personally, I find the mania people have re identifying 'the best' to be a disease of Post-Enlightenment culture and very 'anti-art'. Hope you are still enjoying Gilels.

Absolutely agree, there is just another music in this d-moll sonata, well, more likely, there IS finally music.

Gilels is a legend, Argerich is vastly overrated

Agerich’s interpretation of this piece is obviously not less insightful at all, not to mention less integrity. Different people have different understandings. I personally prefer agerich’s version.

If you listen to the harpsichord versions, a big part of Scarlatti is excitement, so Argerich's version should not be dismissed this easily. Classical music isn't all about "profundity". Not everyone is Bach, nor is Bach only "profound". Not that Gilels doesn't create excitement in thee music, but the excitement here comes from the rapidly alternating depth and scope. Just hope Gilels can be a bit more improvisatory/ impulsive as most Baroque music, especially Scarlatti's, should sound.

I really like Argerich performance. Yes, her tempo is brutal, but harmonics and melody are the same, and her passion for piano is felt through this piece.