please listen to track 1 first then 2...3. in that order as if i am doing a recital..

Please critise as much as you like as if i am your child or student.

Thanks

Hi, I am new to this forum. Good, I will download and listen....

Hi Johnmar78, I think you play well and I'm not the greatest at offering comments. I liked all of your recordings except the Mazurka. It felt a little hurky-jerky to me and sort of...dry, is the only word I could think of. Everyone here knows that I am not a great Mazurka player, so I could be totally wrong. Maybe the tempo was too fast? I don't know. I guess wait until the others reply. They usually can put things into words better.

I really liked the way the Etude flowed, and how you kept the melody line clean and clear.

haaaaaaaaaa, no worries from the piano lady....Yes its a bit dry, I only use pedal on the first beat instead of holding down. And the tempo i was playing is what I called 'johnmars happy tempo", if i slowed down, it would be very uncomfortable/????/. Thanks for the feed back.

With the pedal, i think i tried to creat a clarity and speed???thereofre only the first beat.

with the etude, slow practice, close to the key...I mean lay complete close to the key and let the key fall into the bottom of the key bed with mimium strengths. Once its done. use gravity playing..eg adding your shoulder weight including the finger power as mentioned in first line.

Minimiun energy is required as possible so as mimium muscle strain and strench. Once tense, no strench is allowed therefore, no power is generated, --harss sound.
Learn to relax first,,,keep the key so close as part of your hands.....

Just listened to the Etude 25/1 (first take)

I like it a lot, you bring out the melody lines very well. Tempo is ok too. The last bars with arpeggios sound not so good to me, it is not really soft and not even sounding. But overall good performance.

FI op 66:
The begin end end part A (if one structures the FI with A-B-A-C) is a bit hectic to me, pretty fast, sounds a bit stiff to me. The slow B part I really like, also the coda C part. Some notes in the C part sound a bit easier than in the score - but not that I could play it better, I know the difficulties here. I have a recording from Cortot - he literally cheats complete bars in the tricky C part. Overall also a solid recording.

Will listen later on to other recordings. Thank you for sharing, a good debut here!

thank Olaf,

op25 i might be overdone on the ending bits and deliberate to bring out the eb notes...

the op66, agitato ...I was a bit aggressive(my interpretation), and soft done on second part....I have head howiwize playing---very slow..i suppose he was 83 when he did that-the last 2 concert before he passed away.

anyway, thank pal.

I have only heard the 10.1 (first version) and 25.1 so far. I notice there is a second version of one, but I do not agree with posting multiple versions of one piece. You decide which is the best, then submit that.

The 25.1 has nice tempo and tone. Could do with some more dynamics and a little more rubato here and there (just a little though). What I did not like is the way you sometimes lump your notes together in groups of six, making it sound patchy and uneven. This one, while not so difficult, requires rather more smoothness. I also did not like the concluding arpeggio section, too aggressive and brilliant, while it should be no more than a final ripple that winds down the previous waves. The slips are not so very distratcting here, but try to cut down on them anyway as there are still too many.

The 10.1 then .... Hats off to everybody tackling this piece. Many great pianists are scared stiff of it.
However, this is terribly sloppy playing. These top notes can, and will, go wrong occasionally, but you should try and get a significant percentage of the notes right before submitting. You also need a much firmer tone here. Some authority is need to convey the power and sweep of this piece.

But keep going.... you can do it !

thanks tech.
op25 is unfinishined piece and it will never finish. the op10 no1 just learned. it required lots of concentration to get free of wrong notes. I did this album for my own collection as to my friends. There is no commericial purpose at all. I do recording each year-home made album just to keep up my standard. I only practice 3-8 hours a week beside my full time job.
The op10/1 will master eventally but could not fit in time with my others. my aim is to bring the LH melody with a shaddy rh play(give me 6 months).

Just listened to your nocturnes 9/1 and 9/2.
They sound both very good to me, and I would vote (although having myself no suffrage...) to have it up to the site here (although there are already some recordings of that, nevertheless, those nocturne jewels can't be too much here...).
On nocturne 9/1 I especially like the really soft touch in the middle. Maybe on nocturne 9/2 the left hand could hold back a little more so that the melody shines a bit brighter. But overall, very good done for my taste, also the coda trill passage of 9/2!

With the polonaise op.53 I did not get warm so much. But I liked how you played the famous octave passage, soft and calm. Some passages did not went so well. I think, you have a very well developed technique. Maybe you suffer from the same problem I have, that is enough patience to work on those famous last percents of perfection, what needs the most amount of time. But with a regular day job and only some hours per week practising time, one could only decide to work on less pieces, but instead longer. Not that I have more patience, either...

thanks olaf.

I will do the recording again 2007 album), and it will polished even better-op53. This will be mazukas and richard claderman.
Last night I re did the op25 no1 with soft ending pppp ending and this would be the v3(version 3 ) and will be upload sometime tommorow for you to comment. So as op10 no1. I reinforced furtheer and updated my recording. I will upload tommorow for you guys to comment on.

Thank pal

I enjoyed your op. 25 no. 1 very much, both versions. Great sound, great piano, great recoding, great pianist . I like the melody in the first recording, but I liked the tempo of the second better. In the second you did a great job with the little notes. The missed notes don’t really bother with such a good recording .
Your op. 9 no. 1 was nice, again very nice sound. The only thing is that I think it’s a bit rushed and agitated, especially in the beginning. I prefer a little slower and more “peaceful” . But you did a great job, producing nice sound, nice lines.
The waltz op. 64 no. 1 was played with much ease and much leggiero. Again, just as in your other recordings, you produce nice sound and nice lines. I only think it’s a little dry and metronomic, and although you produce nice lines, you could make the runs more exciting, the dynamics a little more extreme and the middle section a bit slower perhaps and more sostenuto and cantabile perhaps…
With the mazurka, too, I think you did a great job playing it light and delightful, but it sounds even drier. Perhaps you could vary the dynamics a little more. The nuances are good, the sotto voce is played quite well, but still it sounds very straightforward and I prefer a little more freedom, especially in the rhythm and greater contrasts in the dynamics.
I think you did a greater job with the Fantasie-Impromptu. Impressive playing, no real technical problems, although you seem to have a little trouble with some passages. At least you vary your dynamics a little (although it’s really a little), create nice nuances (the middle section was very nice, in contrast with the outer sections) and play better. The only thing is that I would like a bit more power in the outer sections. They are played very chopinesque, but it could’ve been a little more exciting.

Maybe the recording is a bit “away”. It sounds like a small room in which you recorded it. The sound seems a little weak. How did you record it?

It seems as if you play harder pieces better than easier pieces, I don’t know why… You have a great technique. You play quite close to the way Chopin played I think, not using too much forte, very nice, melodic. I would just “sing” a little more, it tends to be dry. This is quite controversial. I like your playing far more than those of people who play Chopin rotten with sentimentality, too much contrast, too loud, too much rubato. You seem to be exactly the opposite, playing runs that are delightful, never too loud, not too much rubato and very “cool”. I think the best way of playing Chopin is somewhere in the middle, more like your playing, but a little more exciting, more concentrating on the development of the melody, while the other notes form a solid accompaniment.

Well done and post more recordings!

thanks LOL, I have alredy re done my op66, op25/1, op10/1 with a much REFINED version after allthe critique I received. And thank you all, it was very fruitfull.
Tommorow you will receive the lastest update V3.

All done in a smallromm eith minidisc and sony steero digital microphoe. ALl dds up450AS thats cheap. All music are done in purest form and NO EDITING or artificial sound.

I listened to some more of your tracks. Overall you have a good technique indeed, runs and trills come off really well, but rhythmically you are a bit fanciful. And it's all rather dry. You should not be afraid of using a little more pedal, and taking some time at high points and beteewn phrases.

9.1 - A very steady performance but rather breathless for a Nocturne. It's ok that you do not want to smother it in rubato, but without any tempo flexibility this does not sound like a nocturne. Some phrasing, articulation, and dynamic contrast are in order too. The basis is good though, a steady pulse that you build upon. Wrong notes are very few but you execute some bars in a rhythmically strange way (did not have the score when I listened but I can point them out if you want). The kids' voice at the end is a nice touch

7.1 - A drunken butterfly is the first thing that sprang to my mind after a few measures. Isn't that strange ! This thing lollops around in a rather comical, random way, the tempo being pushed and pulled around in every bar. A steady pulse is needed. The trills are strange, you need to get some consistency in there. The closing bar, which is quite hard to bring off, is very well done.

64.1 - Technically good, but quite some wrong notes in the RH. Little dynamic contrast (could be the recording), e.g. I missed the long crescendo and the forte at the start of the theme recapitulation. The ending down run is beautifully done, but you could make more of the last two bar - observe the cresendo and make a little ritenuto. All of it is just a little too casual - Chopin needs to sing to us rather than prattle on.

I wonder if you have lessons from a good performing teacher ? That is when things like this can be worked on to great effect. YOu certainly have the potential.

thansk Tech....Wrong note???? strange...
I have no teachers for the last 10 years but I have lots of musicians that associate with classical music, sometimes we go for a short recital.

My weird tempo frees me a lots MAY be its why I DNT USE metronome...1% usage.
Thanks PAl...