Talk:Leopold Godowsky

message: In the family section, Leopold Godowsky, Jr. is mentioned as the co-inventor of color photography, when he was in fact only the co-inventor of kodachrome, the most popular of many methods of color photography. Consider these photos that predate Godowsky Jr.'s patents: Color Photos from WWI. The more specific language from the article Leopold Godowsky, Jr. should do the trick.
Jbruder (talk) 21:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Godowsky, Jr. Bit

message: The existence of Poland as a national entity is problematic during the 19th Century up to the end of the first world war, and Godowsky himself was itinerant (Germany, France, USA, Austria, England, USA again) so was Godowsky really Polish?  Would it not be better to describe him as Lithuanian and remove the Polish composers and pianists categories?  --RobertG | (discuss) 16:45, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello.  I'm amazed I didn't see this query earlier.  One problem with calling him "a Lithuanian pianist" is that Lithuania is now an independent nation, and saying that would be misleading.  He became an American citizen, so that needs mentioning too.  He may have been born in the territory of what is now Lithuania, but it was at the time part of Russia, so it might be more accurate to call him a Russian-born American pianist.  I believe his family was of Polish ethnicity, spoke Polish, and considered themselves Polish.  Maybe the full story is : an American pianist, born to Polish parents in what was then Russia but is now Lithuania.   What a corker!  What troubles we make for ourselves when we have silly wars.  Cheers JackofOz 23:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Godowsky's Nationality

message: I hope I don't sound too pragmatic, but did Godowsky really go to Antarctica? The article mentions that his concert career took him to every continent except Australia. Not that I mind if he didn't go to Antarctica, but if he did go, that'd be a fun bit of triva. S.Bowen 17:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Every continent 

message: Chopin's etudes have their own entry, giving descriptions of each.  I think Godowsky's 53 could be briefly written about, even just what the modifications on each are. Also a publishing date for these would be nice.MotherFunctor 19:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etudes 

message: Yup, godowsky might have been the best chopin interpreter of preludes. He covered most of Chopin's works and put em down on paper. Godowsky is mostly forgotten today, that's a phenomena.
Godowsky managed to transcribe all Chopin's Etudes, composing the most difficult piano solo pieces. As one put it:
"Chopin's etudes are inverted, laid on top of one another, or made into variations. Nowhere is Godowsky's ingenuity more apparent. The resulting pieces are among the most clever and most difficult, ever written for the piano." I would not say most difficult but they certainly take the cake! Still, I cant find any of his cd's on a major market! Stupid people dont appreciate beauty... same goes for wikipedos who run wikipedia, they think they owe the whole world, i should rewrite this whole article, tons of things missing including his contributions to recording industry...
:We don't think we "owe" (or even own) the world.  We like to collaborate on articles to improve them over time.  If you have other information of value about Godowsky, please feel very free to add it in (with references).  That's how Wikipedia works: anyone can edit articles.  Far better to make a positive contribution and share your knowledge, than stand on the sidelines criticising.  Cheers.  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forgotten Pianist 

message: > [Arrau] complained that Godowsky "never played above mezzo-forte."[10]
Pot to kettle! Pot to kettle!
67.180.44.133 (talk) 01:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arrau's comments 

message: As it seems there may be some errors in the article concerning the difficulties in Godowsky's piano works. While it is true that some of the Studies on Chopin's etudes are difficult enough most of them are comfortably playable. (taking a virtuoso's point ov view of course) In most cases Godowsky's tempo as indicated with figures for the metronome is much slower than that of the original etudes.
Godowsky's first study was that on the etude op.25,6. In this case all trills and runs in thirds have to be played by the left hand instead of the right. However, there is no need to despair. Trills and runs in thirds can of course already be found in Czerny's works. One of Godowsky's first studies for the left hand alone was that on Chopin's op.10,2. This study is indeed devilishly difficult, but this is an exception. The left hand study on Chopin's op.10,4 is also a very difficult one. On the other hand there are pieces like the left hand studies on the etudes op.10,3, op.10,6 and op.10,11. Every single one of them is a beautiful piece of music and not hard to play. In the study on Chopin's op.25,1 (of which there is an image of the first page in the article) the difficulty is more for the mind than for the fingers. You have to play all those figurations and besides two melodic lines. As a matter of fact I never heard a recording that did justice to this piece. Jorge Bolet for example very loudly accentuated the upper melody while a listener can only guess that there is still a second melody in the lower part. In the first study on Chopin's op.10,1 Bolet's tempo was much slower (about the half) than that as indicated by Godowsky. The same goes for Marc-André Hamelin whose interpretation can be found at YouTube. Playing it that way is not very difficult.
Arthur Rubinstein's statement, it would take him 500 years for reaching a technique like Godowsky's, is due to the fact that at that time Rubinstein was a rather lazy boy. Godowsky wrote a piece "Triana" after Albeniz for him and Stravinsky the three pieces from "Petruschka". Rubinstein never played neither this nor that since he had just no fun in practicing the piano. As opposite to Horrowitz there is neither any need for getting six hands for playing the Passagaclia after Schubert. In comparison with Liszt's Figaro-Fantasy as played and recorded by Horrowitz Godowsky's Passacaglia is rather easy. Unfortunately Godowsky's piece is by no means a popular one for which Horrowitz could gain much applause. So it is this reason for which Horrowitz didn't like to play it.
Godowsky's transcriptions of Bach's sonatas and suites for Violin and Violoncello are not "for the same instrument", by the way. They are transcriptions for the piano instead. 217.253.94.248 (talk) 15:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some errors?