That's the only extra mordent I show. By the way, back on your post of the Mazurka 59/1, I have a repeat sign at measure 12.

Don't tell me I've missed a repeat !
Will check tonight.

Chris, your Polonaise 26/2 is really great! And, it is already said here, but cannot be repeat too much, your right hand runs are evenly and fast. Congratulations for that! It belongs to the best Chopin recordings I heard from you, and not only from you.

Your Mazurka op. 63 sounds very well to me too. I don't like to enter the discussion whether here and there is a trill missed, there seems to be different scores, it is also not the most important thing to me. At least I myself did not hear any slips or things what pertubed the listening.

Also the reverb is not too much, but sounds nice - especially on 26/2, the staccato notes in the meno mosso part - it is not only a reverb, it is a little echo too, but decent. Have to use the same kind of reverb in CoolEdit. Can you tell the exact name of the reverb, please?



No, I don't find your playing emotionless. You are a great player, and you have marvelous sight reading abilities. However I agree with some other comments that - for my taste - you could do more, on some recent Chopin recordings (the other mazurkas you posted some days before e.g.) even much more expressionwise. I could hear on your Polonaise, also Mazurka 63/3, that you play with emotions. It could be only ... even more.

Maybe it is easier to give more expressions if the head is relieved from looking to the score. Playing from memory is not only to impress listeners, some say that only if one can play from memory, one truely knows the piece. What will have influence on the expression while playing, I am pretty sure.

Already the kind you answer corresponding remarks from listeners here, says much. I agree, "exaggerated rubato" - noone likes this. Exaggerated means artificial, but what counts is honesty. And there exist honest rubato, this comes if one feels that the melody line demands for it.
You speak of "not a sentimental pianist". Beeing sentimental, that has also a something slightly negative taste. Playing with lots of feeling however has not at all bad taste to me. Just the opposit. You wrote once to me, that playing the right notes is only the first step. Yes, I agree!

To give the Mazurkas "tender loving care" is the right approach in my opinion too. If you could anyhow manage to play really soft (that is what I associate in first rank with tender playing!), to give the piano that mellow silvery sound on suitable places, it would be even more convincing to me. I know that it is difficult with a heavy action piano, but don't think it is much easier on an easy going action - playing soft and even is never easy.

Thanks Olaf. Johnmar had me worried there for a moment about the lack of emotion

Funny you mention the staccato sections in the Polonaise, these are what bother me about this recording. I am always afraid to produce a real dry staccato so I fumble with the note values and the pedal, and the result is not always convincing. Seems to sound a bit pasty when I listen back to it.

Yes it would be nice to produce a soft silvery tone.... But I find the Edirol does not register very soft notes, now that I have it further away from the strings. I am not sure it can be done - but I'm working on it. Perhaps the next batch of Mazurkas will improve a little.

I am pretty sure that many professional recordings are doctored with in terms of dynamics. In a concert hall it is a different ballgame, as the sound must travel much further. I think there the pianissimo exists only by the grace of the fortissimo.

The Cooledit reverb is the very first in the list, "Light Concert Hall".

(Sigh of relief...) I have a double bar line there, but no repeat. These seem to be used in my score whenever there's a contrasting section in terms of tempo or key signature.

Strange. I guess it like someone here just said about editions being different. I think that same thing happened with a polonaise you recorded a coupld weeks ago.

Yes I think the Peters scores are not too scholarly and authentic compared to Mikuli or Paderewski. For the Polonaises I have the Paderewski so that should be ok..... Otherwise I dunno what to believe !

[quote="techneut"]Thanks Olaf. Johnmar had me worried there for a moment about the lack of emotion

Chris, Olaf expains a much better than I I did. There are some emotons..but not enough at least for my taste....
I agreed what Olaf said about "knowing the music thru memorisation"....
Anyway, you sparked me, I should start doing my mazurkas next week.

Memorization is for wimps who can't sightread

Then again, sightreading is for wimps who can't memorize. It doesn't bother me and you would never know if you did not hear the page turns now and then. I believe I can stay more faithful to the score that way than somebody who plays from memory (especially doing so for a long time is dangerous).

haaaaaaa. You made me laugh again Chris. Yes you are right.

I have had a problem with my neck muscles due to sight read at my previous training--15 years ago. Every time I read the scores during practice...perhaps due to repetitive training. at the back of my neck gives me a VERY PAINFUL muscle twitch at particular head movement after training. Thats why, I do all my trainings with my HEAD DOWN with photo copied scores(two page at a time) on my lap(weird eh?)and tried to meomorise. Thereofre, you can see why I have to play all from memory and other beneifits not just from interpretation but for the sake of my long neck.....

In your recording, I can not hear the page turning, did you stick all together and in a smaller photo copied version?? Ddi you ever get a sore neck problem like mine? but I did the reverb(artificial but I wasnt at the bengining untill Olaf mentioned it.

Ps, at one stage, I have a choice between play the piano or give up(due to my neck), and I resolved the prblem my memorisation or trainng with scores on my lap.

No, I really like the manner you play the staccato sections, and also the nice reverb audible escpecially there.



I am sure that the Edirol captures everything. It has 24 bit inputs, and even 16 bit are sufficient enough to capture a 100 dB pressure hammer sound as well as a whisper in 100 meter distance without changing input level. No, for sure, the Edirol captures nearly all what a human ear receives too!



I do believe too that often the dynamics seem to be manipulated. The recent WTC1 recordings by Barenboim come to my mind - there is a really unbelievable dynamic difference in the sound, can't believe that this is not manipulated.
And you are right, dynamics live through contrasts, and a ff anywhere in a piece helps to appreciate the pp even more. The only point is, in my case (maybe in yours too), it is much easier to play ff instead pp. The latter needs much concentration and all muscles must be completely relaxed (maybe it is what Johnmar calls gravity playing).




Yeah, you are right, the best thing is one can excellent sightread like you, and to memorize too. And I can imagine too that one can stay more faithful to the score with sightreading, also that the long time playing from memory is dangerous. So far, you are right.

The thing is only, that faithful staying to the score has the inherit danger that one indeed stays to the SCORE instead to the MUSIC. At the end, it does not count that one "execute" every expression mark exactly as written in the score (even Chopin did not so himself - it is said he could play a piece differently each time, but it sounded always convincing). And staying to the MUSIC through strong listening to it while playing - that is what seems more important to me, and memorizing helps perhaps for that !?

I am a lousy sightreader but memorize pretty well. But I rarely take out the score to compare to what play so it eventually gets a bit wrong here and there. The advantage of being a good sightreader is that you can have a large output on recordings as you obviously have. However, I have the advantage that I can play my repertoire anytime without bringing the score. But well, nobody cares to listen anyway .

I sometimes do. It depends on how the page turns fall - sometimes it is no problem - and on how lazy I am (and on whether the damned printer cartridge is not empty once again). Sometimes - if it falls nicely between phrases I can just stop, turn at leasure, continue, and cut the whole mess out later. It's cheating, I know.... But if it's in the middle of something, and I did not copy it, there's no choice but to leave it in - any attempt to edit them out has been fruitless.

techneut wrote:

(and on whether the damned printer cartridge is not empty once again).

Hint: In the "Print Setup" section set the printer to "draft" then goto "advanced" (or something similar to that) settings and maybe you can adjust the "dry time" and "ink density" set that crap all the way down. The sheets are still easily readable but your printer wont cough up so much ink to do the same job.

The copy function does not use all that as it works independently from the PC. Will have to check the buttons on the thingy itself. But i don't think draft mode will be sufficient. I may be a good sheet reader but it has to be printed loud and clear.

These ink cartridges go empty ridiculously quickly. It is the biggest rip-off in history. I pay more per year on those than the printer is worth.....