Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Sviatoslav Richter or Martha Argerich?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sviatoslav Richter or Martha Argerich?

post #1 of 18
5/2/09 at 3:39pm
Thread Starter 
Which of these pianists do you prefer?
Reply
post #2 of 18
5/2/09 at 3:50pm
For which composer?

I have a lot of both, I'm not sure I prefer either.
Reply
post #3 of 18
5/2/09 at 8:46pm
well these are two of my 4 favorite pianists (Gilels and Michelangeli are the other two)........there is no clear winner when discussing greatness like that. What it really comes down to is who is a greater specialist in your favorite composers. And even then Argerich and Richter overlap in many many composers. I believe Richter had a slightly greater range.

In the Liszt Sonata (which by the way is my favorite solo piano work of the latter half of the 19th Century completed in 1851 ;-_) ) I prefer Argerich....but being that she recorded hardly any other Liszt, Richter would have to tie her in the Liszt category
In the Rachmaninov 3rd Concerto I prefer Argerich
In the Rachmaninov 2nd Conerto I prefer Richter, though I don't believe Argerich has recorded it. Richter performs my favorite Rach 2 of all time
In Schubert, obviously Richter as I don't believe Argerich recorded much Schubert (if any at all)
In Schumann, its an absolute toss up, but I give the edge to Richter (except in the Kinderszenen)
In Bach, the obvious answer is Richter who recorded far more bach
In Chopin, I say Argerich wins hands down
In Beethoven, which neither of them specialized in, I say Richter is an obvious choice....though Argerich has recently embarked on Beethoven
In Ravel definitely Argerich
I'm not familiar with either of them performing Debussy
In Brahms definitely Richter
And in Prokofiev defintiely RIchter.....
I probably left out other substantial artists

At the end of the day I would say this.......... Argerich's best recordings are amongst the most exciting ever recorded. But Richter reaches an equally emotional experience without being overly capricious as Argerich sometimes is.
I've been talking headphones with you for years. Now I can help you with your purchase:) Sales Specialist & Headphone Guru @ Headphones.com
Reply
post #4 of 18
5/2/09 at 9:46pm
Most of time I would say Richter.
Argerich offers interesting reading, but some of her best in my mind typically are topped by others..
For example, I would take Francois for Ravel..

Things are a little bit different in chamber music recording.
Though I love Richter in his chamber music recordings in Live Classics, Argerich can pleasantly surprise me for her reading.
Reply
post #5 of 18
5/3/09 at 12:23am
Yeah, and Brendel for Schubert. And Bernstein for ...er... some things. And Andre Watt for the Saint-Saens...

Give me a couple years to listen to all my Argerich and Richter all over again enough times to become familiar with them.
Reply
post #6 of 18
5/3/09 at 2:54am
Thread Starter 
I dislike Argerich. For me, there's really little depth to her playing. She rushes like mad and bangs the piano, just to show off her technique. Sure, she can bang loudly and play fastly, but that is not the point of music. Her recordings always leave me feeling empty
Reply
post #7 of 18
5/3/09 at 4:10am
I think on record/cd at least, Richter has left us a greater legacy. Of course Argerich is also fantastic and a living legend, if only she would turn up to more of her concerts!
Reply
post #8 of 18
6/20/09 at 9:13pm
I like both, but I prefer Richter.. I adore Richter's Schubert.. and Brahm's 2nd..and Beethoven..and Prokofiev
Reply
post #9 of 18
6/20/09 at 9:36pm
I know very little of both performers outputs, but dang it, Argerich's Rach 3rd is a pleasure to listen to. I need to acquire Richter's Rach 2nd, but I would have to say that I like both of them from what I have heard. I am virtuoso when it comes to piano performances, now if you were to start a conversation on conductors I could offer better assessment.
Reply
post #10 of 18
6/20/09 at 10:01pm
I prefer Richter. He doesn't dominate the music; he is a facilitator who simply gives us a glimpse into the genius of the composer.
Reply
post #11 of 18
6/22/09 at 1:57pm
Depends on the music. For Rach 2 its SR. For Tchaik 1 it's MA. Both are great artists. But neither is my own personal favorite: Gilels.
Reply
post #12 of 18
6/23/09 at 10:25pm
As much as I like the both of them, I much prefer Richter to Argerich overall. Richter is one of my four favorite pianists along with Sofronitsky, Cortot, and Moravec.
Reply
post #13 of 18
6/23/09 at 11:46pm
I posted earlier in this thread, but I'm just wondering how it is that Richter and Argerich got compared. They're not particularly contemporaneous, no are they really overlapping in much repertoire.

It's impossible for me to pick an overall favorite pianist because repertoire is key. In Brahms Gilels is my favorite, in Liszt Argerich is my favorite (though she didnt record much) in Rachmaninov its Richter........etc
I've been talking headphones with you for years. Now I can help you with your purchase:) Sales Specialist & Headphone Guru @ Headphones.com
Reply
post #14 of 18
6/24/09 at 4:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post
I posted earlier in this thread, but I'm just wondering how it is that Richter and Argerich got compared. They're not particularly contemporaneous, no are they really overlapping in much repertoire.
Maybe the idea was that they are close to polar opposites in a way? Although perhaps Horowitz vs Richter would have been even better then. I agree, comparing pianists like this is kinda ridiculous. I guess in the end I would grudgingly admit to prefering Richter, because I feel his interpretations have a depth that Argerich can't quite get to, but I wouldn't want to be without Argerich's myriad colours and blazing interpretations either.

Also, I have a bit of a soft spot for Argerich, because at least I have had the change to hear her in the flesh a couple of times. (Yes, she actually showed up! ) Unfortunately I never got that chance with Richter.

Now, if you would ask me for a list of pianists I didn't like... No problems there.
Reply
post #15 of 18
6/24/09 at 4:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oistrakh View Post
... Argerich... She rushes like mad and bangs the piano, just to show off her technique. Sure, she can bang loudly and play fastly, but that is not the point of music.
I feel this way, but I don't completely dislike her playing. Depends on what she's playing, but she plays a bit too fast on most stuff IMO.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Sviatoslav Richter or Martha Argerich?