Scriabin - Etude Op. 42 No. 5 (Fiorentino, Neuhaus, Palvanov, Nikolayeva)

[@duqueadriano0081]

No one talking about Fiorentino's power

[@nunyabusiness8538]

borderline frightening

[@fabiopalma4429]

And super precise and dynamic melodies

[@adrianopiano5551]

Almost like richter

[@nicolasramirez3456]

​@@adrianopiano5551or Sofronitsky

[@epicaunleashed8764]

​@@adrianopiano5551 this surpasses Richter I fear

[@Alix777.]

Pavlanov is chaotic and passionate. I like it a lot too.

[@francescomariafederico6930]

Immenso Maestro Sergio Fiorentino! Straordinaria interpretazione!

[@alessandracenerelli8967]

Il Maestro Fiorentino è insuperabile: coniuga equilibrio e passione, tensione e lirismo, padronanza tecnica e fluida “semplicità” esecutiva. Le altre esecuzioni sono “oneste”

[@AsrielKujo]

concordo pienamente, Maestro Fiorentino è senza dubbio l'unico interpretatore per questo pezzo

[@press5693]

"onesto" Neuhaus? È stato uno dei più grandi su scriabin... E da questo studio si capisce il perché.

[@quennygreen]

Nikolayeva’s interpretation is the only one I enjoy where they take their time in the melodic chorus to really phrase it and voice the inner “horn calls” as I call them. Everyone else sounds like they’re rushing through it, in my opinion.

[@steveegallo3384]

You are right.....Nikolayeva RUUUUUULES too.....FANTASTIC!

[@RabidCh]

Edit: The Fiorentino recording has been found to be a heavily re-equalized (edited) version of Leonid Kuzmin's recording. Hate to say it because the recording is really amazing to listen to, but the Fiorentino sourcing is highly doubtful, coming from the same Concert Artist label that had the same Joyce Hatto recording fraud by William Barrington-Coupe. Ernst Lumpe, a good friend and great archiver of Sergio Fiorentino lists this recording as suspicious. This is one piece that Fiorentino had never recorded elsewhere, and it doesn't really sound like any of his recordings he made at the time (1966), let alone like many live recordings from that time period. Barrington-Coupe was known to take other recordings, degrade the sound, and sometimes even modify the recording speed to his taste. It's still an enjoyable recording, but I just don't believe it's Fiorentino.

[@Barichter74318]

Oh, thats very interesting. Thank you for sharing!

[@artmynk8999]

How did you even notice that?

[@epicaunleashed8764]

@@RabidCh whoever the artist is, this recording is perhaps the greatest of that particular etude, ever.

[@mr.hashundredsofprivatepla3711]

@@epicaunleashed8764 OP stated that the artist is Leonid Kuzmin, a Belarusian pianist.

[@mr.hashundredsofprivatepla3711]

Now I’m curious about what Kuzmin’s original recording sounds like compared to this one.

[@Alix777.]

Fiorentino is the best. Breathtaking performance.

[@sylvio1980]

Thank you for putting this together ! For me, Horowitz live 1953 is the greatest rendition of this piece. Something about that specific recording that is just touching my core.

[@duqueadriano0081]

Horowitz's dynamic range. Never heard anyone play the intro of this étude as gently as he does and later explodes the bass as he was used to

[@admortor]

I remember having heard him play this etude, dunno if it was in that same performance, but I remember I was amazed at the clarity he played it with

[@pedrodavila9270]

And his voicing and phrasing are unmatched too. I agree with you.

[@naphtanaptha]

fiorentino is just breath taking. close second to me is nikolayeva. I enjoy the different perspective with the slower tempo and even though she doesn't get as loud as Florentino or palvanov her climax has an exhilarating power due to the broader tempo. like an unstoppable tsunami.

[@christurner1107]

Thanks so much for putting this together. I'm delighted that you rate Fiorentino as the gold standard for this piece. I agree entirely. What a tragically underrated pianist he is! I've encountered quite a few pianists -- including Italians -- who've never heard of him. Staggering ....

[@Barichter74318]

Thank you for the video and the description! I really appreciate how different these recordings are. Fiorentino has to be my favorite from these 4. So much power and passion while not being harsh. Neuhaus one has such a sparkly and magical atmosphere. Palvanov one might be the wildest thing I have heard this week. I cant say it is my favorite but I can appreciate it for its absolute unrestrained power. Nikolaveya one is so grand! As you said in the description, I love her voicing.

[@MarciniakFred]

Hi and thanks for this interesting "performance comparairson" ! They are all great and i'm impressed by the "Nikolayeva version", it's powerful and clear at the same time, and we can hear so clearly the left hand and especially the rythmic part at the end (the duolet). Thanks again see you!

[@sirdicaudore]

Totally agree! My thoughts exactly!

[@gabrielevisentin2083]

I’ve started learning this piece for like two days… but in a couple of months it is going to be under my control😉. Though I really like the first and last interpretation and it will be difficult to decide which one imitate

[@SeigneurReefShark]

Ahah, well just mix what you love of both in one performance :) Good luck in learning that masterpiece!

[@joeyblogsy]

The last is the easier option to imitate by far, although a very valid and convincing interpretation also.

[@markus7894]

I like this first recording a lot. I also like Gavrilow's version from 1984 (not the later one) a lot, they are both more fired and "flying". Nikolayeva is (like also Kissin) for my taste too heavy and like working in clay and stone rather than in fire and air!

[@Ferdinand314]

Can't thank you enough for this wonderful compilation!

[@galimusic7164]

In my opinion, after listening the four versions, the best understanding of the piece is the one from Neuhaus (Sviatoslav). He "sings" the theme, the tempo is right, no matter the wrong notes, the version is my favourite from this selection. Of course, I have the perfect one (for me) in my head, but I would have the fingers (currently a bit sticky) and the time to study the piece

[@Ivan_1791]

Based opinion.

[@kallehed6330]

man, this piece is really difficult; not just playing the notes but getting the voices out right like you have 3 hands. Very fun to play though; the left hand arpeggios are pretty enjoyable, especially with the really wide gaps.

[@steveegallo3384]

BRAVO mon Seigneur! Scryabin's most fantastical piece. and....You recognize the Divine Savage Ulugbek....so Great but seldom mentioned...HIs Rakhmaninov II is also grand.....Our colleague itaparrika restored it last year......

[@steveegallo3384]

@steveegallo3384 -- Still now....a year later....Palvanov RUUUUUULES......He GETS it. BRAVO from Acapulco!

[@steveegallo3384]

....and....even Now.....from Mexico City after being uprooted by Otis (Acapulco).....

[@malikpiano]

It's not Fiorentino. It's Leonid Kuzmin's recording stolen just like was done for Joyce Hatto.

[@yagiz885]

WHERE THE FUCK IS SOFRONITSKY??? Wonderful vid btw

[@SeigneurReefShark]

Didn't include it because I like these performances more. But yes, he is at the top too.

[@marksmith3947]

I don't get the love for TN. I hear some artistic banging but nothing I would listen to again

[@robert-skibelo]

Thank you. An interesting comparison. At two points in the score there are asterisks above the treble staff, but unfortunately you have not preserved the footnotes that accompany these. It would have been nice to see them.

[@kliangennadii7254]

Daniil Trifonov performs well. I recommend to listen his interpretation

[@DynastieArtistique]

He doesn’t compare to nikolayeva and Neuhaus even a bit

[@Doozy_Titter]

Nikolayeva for the win

[@CatkhosruShapurrjiFurabji]

1:13 bells more like thunder

[@richardwagnerian8845]

Can somebody tell me is it Pavlanov or Palvanov? Just would like to look up more of his playings.

[@System.Error.]

For me the five best interpretations that seems to fit me are as follows in order: 1. Ohlsson 2. Fiorentino 3. Voskrezensky 4. Horowitz 5. Russo

[@user-oh3ou5sl5v]

ohlsson？

[@System.Error.]

​@@user-oh3ou5sl5v yes

[@DynastieArtistique]

Ohlssohn? Is this a joke😂

[@Viktor-lp4cn]

Nikolayeva is best!

[@GUILLOM]

Why didn't you write it as Etude op.XLII no.V 🤪

[@SeigneurReefShark]

Because I didn't

[@GUILLOM]

@@SeigneurReefShark But why didn't you write it as Etude op.XLII no.V 🤪

[@cschlums2235]

@@GUILLOM Because he didn't

[@steveegallo3384]

@@cschlums2235 -- ....and neither WOULD he.....

[@keithlaliberte4755]

Horowitz?

[@SeigneurReefShark]

Why ?

[@aidanm.1683]

@@SeigneurReefShark his playing is tragic, completely and utterly tragic I dont think this piece has a lot to do with desire, and I dont think this piece is ecstatic either I think this piece is a roaring sea of loss and pain It sounds like the world ending Listen to Horowitz's second b section, and imagine a person with their family, telling their spouse and children of how much they love them, how it'll all be ok, and the pain inside them (from previous parts of the piece) tries to turn into some kind of reassuring happiness, it'll be ok, it's all end soon, and then in the coda the person turns their head to face death (the bottom octaves being the powerful malicious calls of pain) and they look into horizon to see something they cant control approach them (like a meteor let's say), and then all the tension builds up and up into that final resolution where it seems to all dissolve into some kind of mournful tragic sorrow, it reminds me of the part after the climax in chopins op 28 no 8, and then it resolves into that final chord, where I imagine an earth burned apart. That was just some kind of emotion spew but horowitz's recording is so perfect for that, the tempo allows it to feel out of control at times like the 1st recording, while also being intimate like the 4th recording It's a great recording

[@eriksatieofficiel]

@@SeigneurReefShark Horowitz 1953 live is unmatched.