Oscar Peterson vs. Art Tatum

@niodari The Art Tatum recordings done by Norman Granz issued on Pablo are actually quite well recorded and it was a good piano.  

@vinylrestingplace The use of "vs." is a recognized and legitimate device used for comparison purposes in writing and speech.  It is not silly, it is simply a tool.  I will not apologize for using it.  If you listen to "Kind Of Blue" it is possible to hear Miles turn around, away from the mic on several spots.  There was no audience in the recording studio.  I point this out to explain that he did this for effect.  Turning around changed the sound of his trumpet.  He did not turn his back on the audience out of distain for his audience, frequently he was misunderstood in that regard, rather he did it for the change in sound.  He explained this in at least one interview, saying essentially- just listen to my playing.  Even though he mostly used a mute, he was an extremely assertive player and turning away from the mic made a distinct difference sonically.  With all that said, I have to agree with you concerning his "artistry" in his late career.  I believe his health was bad, he was playing crap that he did not care about, he knew it was crap and he was only in it for the money.  I couldn't listen to him starting with Bitches Brew.  Note for others:  This Miles conversation has no bearing on the main topic of this thread.

Nobody -- not Oscar, not anyone -- can rival the virtuosity and harmonic genius of Art Tatum. But having said that, I find Art’s playing to often veer into exhaust-the-listener excess. Too much genius in a 3 minute tune can be exhausting.

I’ve heard Oscar play live (not in person, but concert footage or talk show appearances). I never heard one bar of canned/practiced notes. He, too, was a harmonic genius, but one more fluid and audience-attuned. One of the great jazz pianists of the 20th century IMO.

My favorite, though, particularly adjusting for era, is Teddy Wilson. Many similiarities between Oscar, Art and Teddy, but TW played the fewest notes to reach the harmonic sweet spot, at least to my ears. He also absolutely excelled at accompanying singers (so many great recordings with Billie Holiday), which is something Art didn’t do as well.

Then again, it’s kind of stupid to compare great pianists like this. Each one is a generational talent, and once they’re gone, there’s not direct replacement. 

https://forum.audiogon.com/posts/2925767

Agree the use of "versus" is a legitimate way to tag a comparison, but its use in this particular case, comparing AT to OP, is silly for reasons already explained: they played in different eras, had vastly different influences (AT was in fact a major influence on OP), audiences and careers, etc.  They are both great, and frankly, beyond comparison.  Why even try? A comparison between Oscar Peterson and Miles Davis might be more apt, at least in the way we have discussed: their differing attitudes to LIVE audiences. I saw both perform multiple times. Unlike OP, Miles never spoke to the audience or introduced a number. He often wandered off stage and frequently turned his back to the audience, not for sonic effect (he was mostly amplified when I saw him) but to communicate better to other performers, and not to the audience. He thought himself an artist not a performer and did not need audience approval. Oscar Peterson was a gracious performer and enjoyed interacting with fans. Just so you know, I like "Bitches Brew" and even "On the Corner"...Miles' recorded work deteriorated less than his live playing in the later years. 

Art Tatum's best recorded work was done during the 78 RPM era, which is outside the experience of the audiophile audience. Some later work is preserved in mono on the Pablo label and is worth exploring. Oscar Peterson's best recorded work was done in the stereo LP era and has been reissued frequently in audiophile sound. This is yet another reason a comparison between the two seems silly in an audiophile forum.