Ewww, yuck, don't say that. It grosses me out. But anyway, this is up.

You mean "head-pivot"? Does it make you think of the Exorcist?



Thanks, Monica! After all the controversy I seem to have raised, I wasn't sure it would find a home here.

Monica, I notice that you put up the unedited version. Did you mean to do that?

Bruce

No, I actually meant the 'heat of musical passion' thing. Ick! I don't like seeing someone do that...


Don't know....I did delete two files but I thought they were the same.

In the matter of dynamics, I find that in recording a piece in one continuous take, it's imperative that I give careful attention to dynamics. Of course, this comes down to the musician listening to himself in performance. Should I fail, then another take is the order of the day. I've heard attempts at editing dynamics, and it rarely sounds like the real deal. When I hear that on a commercial CD, it seems especially artificial despite the electronic wizardry. And when the recording engineer goes so far as to "enhance" the dynamic of a very difficult-to-voice middle line in a phrase, it's downright annoying! Yes, I know it's "old school" thinking; but when I record a piece, even if there are a few fluffs, I derive a far greater sense of accomplishment and satisfaction than if I were sitting in front of Audacity tinkering and transfiguring the real into the unreal. In this world, there is already too much that's unreal without my adding to it. Worse yet, I would know that I had not been true to myself and my art, such as it is.

David

I think that's a good way of putting it (the end in this case I'm assuming to be the interpretation). Wrong notes just are what they are, a mathematical reality like errors in binary code. But when someone starts tampering with interpretation, it's like they're not even playing any more but rather adjusting how they'd like to be playing. A fine line maybe, but a dangerous one IMO. Just given modern expectations, I find myself often overly concerned about accuracy, a wrong note sometimes seeming to be an unfortunate blot on an otherwise decent performance, which prompts me to resort to editing. Still, I have to reiterate that I admire David's approach (with the exception of the obtrusively noticeable page turns ). It's what I really hope to do with future stuff, no editing except the reverb and other post-processing tweaking of course, even if that means working extra hard, doing more than just a couple of takes, or putting up with a wrong note or two.



Well I know I seem to be in the minority on this issue nowadays, but why, I still wonder... Why, in other words, do anything that's obviously unnecessary and doesn't directly serve the music? As if to say, "Look at me, look at how into this I am!" Well if someone really is into it and doing something interesting, it will come across naturally without that. And if it really isn't self-serving, I stand corrected, but then it just seems like a bad habit of which one should disabuse oneself. To me, it's a bit akin to a ballet dancer who starts flailing her arms for no apparent reason. In art, I believe economy of motion should be the rule. Call me old-fashioned, but I'd say a pianist should look like a gentleman, not a circus freak, during a performance.



Well I did and I didn't mean it like that It is true that here I was really only referring to this specific piece. And I would also agree that those who want to revive lesser-known works, all power to them. That said, however, Chris has hit the nail on the head that I don't often find much merit in such composers' oeuvres. My reasoning is this: why play rather unsatisfying (to me of course ), even if somewhat superficially appealing, music when life is short and there are still so many fabulous pieces in the primary repertoire that I have only read through, learned cursorily, or not learned at all (Moscheles for me is one exception; I've always liked his work and can see why Chopin did too). To be frank, I must say that I suspect one reason why some people tend to play minor composers' work is to try to avoid the criticism that is more likely with playing more standard repertoire, even though I doubt, even if I'm right, that such people would admit it. It's akin to the academician who writes a dissertation on a fifth-rate poet simply for the sake of putting on the emperor's new clothes and carving out a "niche," even though, if critics often weren't so spinelessly imitative of their peers, they would realize there are still a virtually unlimited number of things to say about Shakespeare or Milton. The wonderful thing about Bach, Chopin, Schubert, and Mozart, it seems to me, is their depth: they lend themselves to a richness and variation in interpretation that the more minor ones don't. But again, only my two cents, and admittedly perhaps it's that I haven't discovered the wonders of Zipoli, knowing effectively nothing about him. It was just a gut reaction on my part to this one short piece that I'd never heard before.


Anyway, I didn't mean to offend, Bruce, and despite my opinionated artistic reservations, I don't think anyone could say this isn't very capable playing.

Joe

On the matter of page turns, I'm toying with the idea of posting here only short works and trifles devoid of page turns, while posting larger works requiring page turns at the other site, as there are never complaints about page turns there. That way I can keep two separate audiences happy. It does seem like a clever solution.

David

I know—I did make things rather confusing for you! Sorry about that. Here's the better version, the one I'd really like our visitors to enjoy:



Thanks!

@Joe - I'm one of those who like to explore unfamiliar composers' music too. Yes, I also play the 'usual suspects' except when it comes to sonatas. Since we're being so honest around here - I will tell you that I don't listen to ALL of your recordings because you play mostly the old guys and their sonatas. I am so bored with many of these! It's nothing against your playing; you play very well. I just like listening to shorter pieces by familiar composers or unfamiliar composers. I need variety!!

And btw - did you guys know that Paderewski practiced with a mirror on the piano desk so he could be sure his face was expressionless? Interesting.... (I really like him )

@Bruce - I'll take care of replacing the file tomorrow - I'm too tired now.

I know, Monica, and I think that's absolutely fine. To each his or her own. Maybe it's just me, that I've been so steeped in the standard repertory and still feel I need to learn and explore that...so maybe it's my own limitation. Incidentally, do you know anything of Ignaz Moscheles (who I mentioned above as one of my exceptions of lesser-known composers)? Chopin typically used Moscheles etudes to prepare students for his own etudes. That's a composer I really like, displaying IMO a combination of Schubertian texture and ambience as well as a virile, devil-may-care side. I hope to submit a couple of his etudes here in the not so distant future and even volunteer in advance to write a bio if you or Chris deem it worthy of its own page

Yeah, I've been in a bit of a sonata spate of late, but my next project I'm working on is the Chopin preludes and Scriabin Op. 11 preludes, and especially regarding the Chopin, it's possible you and many others will have much to say there and probably much of it not good

That's amazing, Monica. Going a bit far, don't you think?

What I've been trying to avoid as I play is not expressions, but facial tension. I made videos of the Vandall pieces I uploaded a week ago. I love them except for one thing: I was jutting my lower jaw way out and can't bear to look at them.

So (and Joe, you might be interested to know this), when I made the Zipoli video I kept reminding myself to do two things: sit up straight (because I tend to slouch), and relax my jaw. And, I've made some progress with both, I'm happy to say!



Sounds great. Thanks!

Thanks, Joe, I appreciate that.

I missed this bit before...very interesting and did not know that. Well I guess Leschetitszky (probably didn't spell that right, but too lazy to look it up ) always described Paderewski as one of his weaker students, but he did always seem dignified at the piano at the very least, though that hair is a bit offputting for my taste

Ok, Bruce, the file is replaced. And no I don't think what Paderewski did was going too far. On the contrary. I believe it was his mother who told him to practice with the mirror. Maybe he had that "showing musical passion" disease and he needed a cure. I hope it worked for him - I've never heard otherwise, and everything I've read about Paderewski was that he was a gentleman and extremely intelligent.

Joe - no, I have not heard any of Moscheles music, so I look forward to hearing some from you. Back to Paderewski - yes, that hair was a little wild, but I don't care - he was very handsome anyway - I'm sure I would be one of the swooning ladies at his concert. And besides, a man's smarts and/or talent turns me on more than his looks. Also did you know that Paderewski was good friends with my other love Granados? IIRC, Padereswki attended Granados' last concert in New York, after which Granados attempted to travel back to Europe but drowned. Paderewski was one of the friends who soon after put together a memorial concert in Granados' honor. Ohhh, I'm going to cry now....

It's also worth noting that Paderewski was Prime Minister of Poland in 1919. He's buried in Arlington National Cemetery in Washington, DC.

David