paganini

But does Klaus Kinski's Paganini have the quotability and outrageous lighthearted over the top-ness of Russell's Lisztomania?

For example, the story of Paganini and how he had a strange/rare disease that made his fingers extremely flexible.

Sure, and having Niccolo Paganini playing violin in your personal concert hall would be better than going to a random orchestra.

Then came Paganini and it was game over for the rest of the instruments.

Little did they realize I hung out outside so I could wait for that Paganini concerto to finish.

Some people want to play Liszt and Paganini - those pieces are really fun.

Seeing someone playing Paganini in person makes it laughable that the DAW can replace a human playing the violin at a high level.

New interpretations of the Hammerklavier and the Paganini caprices come out rather frequently.

I'm reminded of Klaus Kinski, who wanted to make Paganini desperately, but couldn't convince Werner Herzog it was a good idea.

Liszt was a very different musician in a very different time than Handel, and he was mostly just cribbing off of Paganini when it came to these antics.

Learning pieces by listening rather than reading works for easy pieces, but I bet nobody has learned the Hammerklavier Sonata or a Paganini Caprice by ear.

> but I bet nobody has learned the Hammerklavier Sonata or a Paganini Caprice by ear.

For example, who wouldn't want to play on the same instrument once owned and played by Paganini?

Just because I can't humanly play Paganini's Caprices doesn't mean it's bad music.

Paganini is a good example: delightful melody, amazing technical displays, but not a lot to sink your teeth into.