Lack of sense of uncontrollable enormousness among Japanese which caused such kind of catastrophe of nuclear power station which can be rarely seen in music except this piece; the sunken cathedral by Debussy.

MUSIC FROM 4th AERA.
Taking a general view of the history of music one can say there are 4 stages of development:The era of improvisation which began with human history, where the music is becoming and forming one. Then the era of composition which began already with antique period and lasted until 19th century where music appears as fixed program which can be typically seen in Bach's contrapunkt sheet music. And then recoding era comes which is typical phenomenon of 20th century. The performance is originally now or ever but recoding technique makes it possible to repeat and reproduce many times as Walter Benjamin once wrote, like some Furtwaenglers disques. And now it begins the era of music editing which begun already in late recording era as partial modification of alrady recorded performance. On this stage, each part of music can be all over modified and edited as one wishes. This is one of this era's example.
the piano: Yamaha CF3

If you mean to say that this recording has been 'all over modified and edited' we can't have it one the site. We are fine with cutting out mistakes or using multiple takes, but not with detailed digital editing.

What is the differnce between the partial modification and the all over modification. If you once begin with modifying music even partially, then immediately the totality of music breaks, like recordings since 1970 which were taken being devided into small parts and afterwards they are artificially unitfied. Btu it lacks biological and mental coherence as the steam of consciousness breaks. Once one enters into the world of modification of recording, into a devil world, then even if it might be a small partial change, it loses the totality. But one can recover it in our time using computer. I think totality which we have lost since modernisation sectionalizing every fieldcan be recovered in our time. Didn't Mrs. Schelly warn this modern tendency writing Franckenstein? Please be generous and don't exclude new music! I beg you your generousity towards new music. This discussion was once done 6 years ago and finally it was accepted, I think.

Kazekayou,
You are confusing categories in your original post. The composition of music is entirely different from the capture of it in recordings and the second has nothing to do with the first. Eras of music are discussed by means of style (individual and communal including: rhythmic, harmonic and melodic elements) and notation. If you wish to discuss the capture of performances, you would begin with reviews, then Thomas Edison cylinders, and proceed forward to include TV and video as well as audio. But to Monica's point, though I am new here, I understand that the purpose of PS is to be a vehicle for pianists to display their live or [home] studio performances as recorded. Editing is for the purpose of sound quality, not performance quality. For performance we work hard (or I am anyway) to "get it right." Then we can play with the sound engineering software to control volume, ambience, timbre, etc. As to your performance, I must sadly say that it lacks of unity, the reason being that there is no consistent pulse to the tempo (as an example, the beginning is too slow for what follows, and other examples). I would suggest you practice the work with metronome (perhaps for the quarter note/crotchet) until it is reunified tempo and rhythm-wise. Then you can move to exercising some ebb and flow as artistically indicated.

Best wishes,
Eddy

We don't exclude new music. I was not even aware this is new music
Indeed we had a similar discussion before. But it was never clear how your recordings are being produced.

Thank you for your generosity! I would like to explain a little bit about this system. I think that you have heard an automatic piano playing in a hotel lobby which sounds what once a pianist played. This equipment was invented in order to record and playback at the absence of a pianist without using loudspeaker.It is a typical recording era equipment. Rudolf Steiner didn’t recognize loudspeaker music, as it doesn’t sound real sound. But I think he must have accepted this equipment as the sound itself is real. One might understand that this automatic piano is an electronical extension of Piano Roll system into which once famous pianists of 19th century recorded their piano playings. But it isn’t enough known that once a sequencer intervenes into this automatic piano, this piano springs into editing era transforming its function, even if the idea itself originates from music box. I would like to explain a little bit in a concrete way: First of all I take a sheet music into a sequencer utilizing scanner and begin with editing on a sequencer in computer in order to make an interpretation of a piece which lasts only several minutes which needs more than several hundred hours or more. One must give each note each optimal length and intensity. Yet the interpretation reminds always unnatural and artificial: it changes tempo always so abruptly: I am disappointed and consulate myself muttering that human being cannot reflect enough his own shortcomings. Or the control of this equipment might be as difficult as manual space ship drive. If human being cannot bear absolute freedom, this equipment is too enormous for him not only for me. Every day I give up, as I cannot control it, yet I restart hoping that somebody in the future might find the best solution. At least, a person who drinks, who exercises sport, who makes love (perhaps?) cannot complete this kind of editing. Always it lacks time to the editor.

Hi Kazekayou,

For me, any editing of a recording is far too much. I do all of my own recordings in a single take and have always done so.

To be helpful I'd like to make a few comments about your sequenced performance:

I agree with Eddy that the opening tempo is definitely too slow.

Also on page 1, the chords at the bottom in Phrygian mode are marked pp, but your chosen dynamic sounds more like mp.

At the bottom of page 3, I'm fine with your long damper pedal there, as it's traditional. But at the top of page 3 it's essential to pedal each quarter octave in the bass separately for clarity. These are not only neighboring tones which tend to blur, but they are in the inherently more powerful bass, and even worse, reinforced as octaves as well. Right now there is way too much a wash of sound there in my humble opinion.

Also at the top of page 3 starting at the third measure, the most effective way to play this section is to take each and every contra C in the bass in the middle sostenuto pedal and hold it down until the next contra C comes along. Also use partial damper pedal releases on each of the block chords to "spill" their overtones, again for the sake of clarity during the apparition of the cathedral. So this means employing a combination of sostenuto (middle) and damper (right) pedals.

For the measures at the bottom of page 3, you can very effectively employ Walter Gieseking's technique of "silently retaking chords". (As you know, Gieseking was one of the legendary artists who played Debussy.) To do so, you play the whole note chords on the first beat with the damper pedal and hold the damper pedal down for the following chords and their tied chords; while those chords are held by the damper pedal, lift your hands off of them and silently retake the initial chords from the first beat; when you next lift the damper pedal for the quarter rests, you will hear the ghostly sympathetic vibrations of those downbeat chords. It has to be a very prompt, efficient and totally quiet manipulation of the hands.

On page 4 it seems as though you play f there, although it's marked pp. There is no f dynamic until the third line at the C# altered chords which involves a prior crescendo as well.

Fourth line down, fourth measure in: The right hand should play the second chord of that measure in the treble (see the clef change just before the bar to that measure), not in the bass clef.

On the last page, here again it's immediately marked pp, but it sounds more like mf. To attain the right balance of the hands there, the left hand should actually be played ppp to achieve a "quite lake effect". The right hand melodic chords are all played pp, but voiced by the thumb to bring out the lowest melodic note of each chord.

I hope this is useful to you. I don't normally do this, but I've attached my own recording of the piece, in case you want to hear the "silent retaking of the chords" effect.

Best,
David