I finally have something to offer again for your consideration. Now that with help I've finally used all this stuff I bought in February, hopefully my submissions will be more frequent. Here is the lovely prelude in D major. Comments and helpful critiques welcomed

Rachmaninov - Prelude in D Major, Op.23, No.4

Hi Eddy,

I really enjoyed listening to your rendition of 23/4, one of my favorites. I've recorded the piece myself so know it well. I believe that you played the prelude in a very thoughtful and beautiful way. I like how you voiced the melody as it transferred between the hands, always focusing on lyricism to form a cantabile long line throughout the piece. You carefully distinguished foreground from background in your playing too. Your timing and building of the big climax (or "crucial point" as Rachmaninoff would call it) was wonderful. A very artistic performance! The piano sounded great too. Also I think you did very well in your selection of recording equipment. But like I always say, while room acoustics, recording gear, and the piano are factors, what makes for a fine recording like this one is truly the pianist.

David

Sounded very nice, Eddy. I love Rachmaninov. I know this piece but have not studied it so I can't offer anything useful. One thing though...I noticed you use a compression rate of 128 kbps. You'll get a little more clarity with 192 kbps, which is our maximum allowed rate.

This is on the site.

@ David. Thanks for the encouragement. By no means a perfect rendition, but at least I'm posting. (That microphone does wonders on your nerves; exactly what I need.) This piece has some of the most difficlut voicing requirements that I have ever seen. For half of the piece (A, A', B, A'', those bolded) there are 3-layers of sound that have to be managed, where as the following 2 preludes (Nos. 5 and 6) have generally only 2. I will be submitting those two soon.
@Monica. Thank you too for your supportive words. I expect that you will have things to offer when I submit No.6, as you have recorded it too. I look forward to your comments. Regarding the file, I went back and now see where I can select the compression rate and have a new file at 192kbs. Attached is the newly compressed version.

Hi Eddy,

I have found that sitting in front of two microphones is more exacting and demanding that playing in a recital.

The voicing requirements in No. 4 are challenging. But in No. 6, there are also decisions to be made in that regard. No. 5 is more straightforward although it's a very athletic piece. I've recorded those too, but like No. 4 they are not posted here. If I start to run out of new repertoire, I'm thinking I might revisit Opp. 23 and 32 again to rerecord the 10 or so preludes I did back in the 1980s, this time in digital sound. It would be an interesting project, as I might see some things in a different light.

I'm glad you could submit a recording!

David

A really great performance. I have played this some years ago and I also remember it being very demanding to play the different layers properly. Well done!

I remember having a couple problems with no.6. I'm sure you'll play it very well. I wish I had time to learn more Rachmaninov. The drama in his music is just so great; I'd love to lose myself in it.
Anyway, I have replaced the file.

Very nice indeed. A couple of missing LH notes (I think) and some one or two slight rhythmical issues around the polyrhythmic bits but nothing to worry about.
The sound, while good, is not as gorgeous as I'd have expected from am audio engineer.

Hi Chris, yep, see my replies to No.6 on the sound/recording quality stuff. I have a lot to do on this. I dropped a note for the first time (while recording!) in one of those 3-layerd passages, a really difficult one. Maybe that is what you're referring to? If I have a rhythm that isn't clear, I need to work that promptly! Could you be more specific as to where? I would appreciate it.

Really difficult, hehe. Never expected you to say that
I thought I spotted several missing notes, or maybe my bad ears are playing up (down?) again. I'm sure you can locate them yourself, but if not I'll have another listen.


I refer specifically to the couple of 2-against-3 moments that seemed a bit messy to me. I could be wrong but that's what it sounded like to me. Apart from those, there's not so much rhythm in this piece

Hi Eddy, nice to see your threads again on the AR! As I saw them on the list, I thought you posted the recordings from the recital you had prepared. But they aren't! Did you play that recital already? Then did I miss your live recordings?
Anyway this is a beautiful interpretation. Just a comment about the sound: I know nothing about recording technique, but to my ear (with a good headphone) some emphasized notes on the melody line sound too harsh. Maybe was the distance between the grand and the recorder too short?

Hello Hye-Jin,
Good to hear from you. My intent is to play in fall of 2012. These (3) Rach preludes are of course on the program. We've had some discussion on the sound. Yes, it is too bright (harsh even, sometimes). I'm experimenting with the recording techniques, but ultimately my piano needs a voicing job. Thank you for the comment regarding the interpretation!

Regards,
Eddy