Sviatoslav Richter plays Bach Italian Concerto BWV 971 (2/2)

Part II
Bach - Italian Concerto, BWV 971
II. Andante
III. Presto
Recorded in 1948

[@antonellamajorano5348]

Lei é uno dei miei maggiori fornitori di Richter. Bene...continui così 😉

[@mariafernandamusic]

Such a beatiful piece and an amazing interpretetion!!!

[@ИринаНовикова-ы8э]

Спасибо. Когда слышишь такое исполнение хочется жить. :)

[@Groek123]

@ingullar Gould himself said that he learned from Richters interpretation . He was faszcinated from Richter .

[@MrGer2295]

Beautiful! Thanks for sharing!

[@eilathan1]

Richter est sans conteste dans le tempo de Bach. Un réel plaisir d'écouter toutes ses prestations quelque soit le compositeur. sous le charme...

[@gugulia]

there,s wisdom in this performance, and patience. i think this why it is perfect.

[@SsteinwayS]

The first movement is also lovely!

[@jonnsmusich]

@SsteinwayS I think the point might be that Bach sought to express the joys and pains of sacred feeling rather than profane contingencies. And he wanted the Biblical text used in the service to find expression through his music. So his music is profoundly emotional. He did it so well, I think, that the feeling comes through for everyone. Not just Lutherans.

[@SsteinwayS]

I agree! In the presto movement, I especially love his attention to the forte and piano markings, which are very rare in Bach. The "voicing" (though they are often only two or three is splendid) . His technical control is ASTOUNDING! I love it. His second movement is dissapointing though...I'd have loved more rubato.

[@SsteinwayS]

Yes, I agree. Looking at his vocal music and orchestral music just shows how much emotion and power he's capable of. Also, there is SO much potential for expression in Bach's keyboard music, so why do you ignore it just because the harpsichord is inexpressive itself? I think that's ridiculous.

[@truecrypt]

Check Part I in "related videos" to the right of video.

[@kikkimaki]

I think so many people are used to listen this from Glen Gould. You can find somethings more different in this playing than his. I remind you this is "interpretation", and also I remind you you are listening Richter who is extremely special pianist.

[@bucciflash]

Interesting that Richter apologized for playing F-sharp rather than F in the third measure before the end of the slow movement (4:24). This mistake he did through forty years (Wikipedia)

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

I swear Gould plays a wrong note in this piece too. I don't think he KEPT playing the wrong note though. haha. kzbin.info/www/bejne/fpaQaIenbL2Iq9k 67 versions of JUST the 2nd movement. enjoy.

[@Groek123]

The young Glenn Gould said he learns the Art of playing slowly from Richter .

[@SsteinwayS]

I love playing it expressively, because it IS expressive. There are two views of Bach: he wrote for the harpsichord and therefore it should be flat and boring or that it's now being played on a modern piano, so live with the expression, buster. And obviously we choose option two! Why not exploit such beautiful emotion?!

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

It's for the double Harpsichord - so there is expression built into the different timbres

[@advisorC101]

I agree. And the thing is Bach was one of the few composers who's music works on just about any instrument. There is no "reason" to not play it on the piano.

[@madaboutvoice]

@dolofonos Which/whose performance of this on the harpsichord do you think shows the "brilliance" you refer to, I'd be very curious to know. IMHO the harpsichrd cannot ever come close to displaying the emotional depth of the middle movement and I truly believe Bach would absolutely go for the piano were he able to hear GG play his music on it. IMHO

[@SsteinwayS]

By the way, my KZbin name is based on the "Steinway" brand of pianos...so it's sort of sad you failed to spell it right. Also, who told you that? Hear the joy and exultation in his religious vocal music and you can't think that he wrote music to be stale and money-making...if he did that it wouldn't still be so popular today!

[@talaska]

exultant

[@AlexDeBronhe]

лучший темп 3-ей части, бриллиантовые мелизмы во 2-ой

[@ingullar]

Gould performed this piece more interesting way all the same... But still - it is performed great by Richter too:)

[@bafr1]

this deserves 5***** , cool

[@SsteinwayS]

The second is a tad faster than some, the third is definitely slow compared to how Gould plays it.

[@polymath7]

Gould hated this piece? Really? I don' t suppose you can recall a source -I'd be most interested to hear what he had to say about it at length.

[@FurutayoshimotoAgon]

1948！

[@JanM351531351]

Does he play the F# in the 3rd last measure here or not? I can't hear it it's too fast lol

[@SsteinwayS]

Are you insane? He doesn't use rubato in the second movement, but in my opinion he should. And presto slower than allegro? Presto means as fast as possible!!

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

67 versions of the 2nd movement. His version has Rubato enough kzbin.info/www/bejne/fpaQaIenbL2Iq9k

[@truecrypt]

"so much rubato"? What are you talking about?

[@jonnsmusich]

@mltube You obviously never read Spitta, Schweitzer or Wolff... Better to make such observations afterwards...

[@Geopholus]

You can count on Richter to give a profound and delicately balanced performance. He really knows Bach.. Gould was an amazing musician. But he often stumbled over his own obsessive thought process. Compare the Bass notes ( D,D ) in the Andante, Richter gently sounds them like a bell, sonorous and sweet,... Gould picks at them like an angry bird,..destroying the flow and feeling of the movement.. If Bach had wanted to make them 1/64th notes surrounded by 7/64th rests, he would have .

[@IbstisztBlogspotHkgracomtey]

u miss one tempo marking - prestissimo

[@SsteinwayS]

Why is it bad to have emotion in Bach? I doubt that he never felt sad or happy...

[@ShabaniShabnam]

it;s too fast. like yudina's playing

[@Lukecash12]

I want to shoot myself in the foot for saying it, but the tempo goes up noticeably. You'd be hard pressed to hear me say that about Richter.

[@NikkDriver]

needs some serious tunage

[@Terrdemarzielle]

No it's not.

[@JanM351531351]

Nah don't think so

[@borispetkov8580]

This is not Richter!

[@385Mercedes]

Richter is brilliant, of course, but Gould is matchless in this.