It does not mean "all is said", just that I stop arguing about it...

O.k., my friends, I have thought about all what was said and written here until now and I will do a re-recording one nice day (first, I will go to Leipzig), which is with less pedal in the runs and clearer (may be also slower) and more up to my "usual impeccable standards" as Chris has written not without being right up to a certain level, since you all don´t seem to like my fiery "effects of flush" in the runs, which I wanted to produce.
So, wish me, that I will not go lost in Leipzig and see you later...

And: Thanks for your comment, Didier.

Techneut wrote:


No problem and all is right, Chris. It´s just my poor English, which makes me difficulties to translate such "sayings". (I really had too look in different dictionaries, until I found a translation, which made a sense to me, and then it even was wrong.)

Haha I like that. You're not actually agreeing with me are you, if only to a certain level ?
Or are you simply resting your case ?

Don't get lost in the Thomaskirche !

First, I feel I have to follow the prevailing consensus and state that yes, it seems a little hurried, pushed forward, if you like. Maybe after some more practicing, these fast runs might be better articulated and sound more convincing. Nevertheless, I'll congratulate your effort. You try to remain musical all the way through despite the technical difficulty. So, my vote is a positive one.
I detect a significant improvement in your playing towards the end which means that if you had done another take, maybe it would be much better at the beginning also.

[...answering to your reply at the other post]
I'm also happy to meet again with you Andreas, as well with all my other friends here. Unfortunately, my time is limited. I'll definitely work on new recordings but at a slower pace. Meantime, I'll struggle to find the time to listen to your recordings and comment when possible. I really missed you guys.

Hi Andreas,

Wow, that rendition of the Impromptu left me agog! It's almost like playing the "Flight of the Bumblebee" in the RH throughout. And you almost always are able to maintain fine evenness too. There's no way I could play it. It would sound altogether too ragged. Speed like that has always been my nemesis. Anyway, I enjoyed listening. My hat is off to you.

David

While I cannot claim to have played this since the Middle Ages (I started it at the Renaissance) I do hope I know it resonably well. I cannot claim to pay it this fast throughtout, but I have tried and managed till the page turn! Section A is good, but I notice some ups and downs in the b section. I notice you slow down towards the codetta of B, which is something I had never thought of doing myself.

Maybe a bit of tranquility overall would help the interpretation.

I'm with Chris on this one. It sounds like you've chosen a tempo that's ever so slightly beyond what you can manage on such short notice (Three hours! I wouldn't like to try the same myself!) It's nothing to do with the pedalling; the tone is uneven, with some notes very much quieter than others. Actually I wouldn't mind if you used even a little more pedal, as long as the finger technique is good enough to support it.

Let's be very precise about this. The first note of bar 2 (the A flat) isn't distinct enough. I can't tell for sure at this speed, but I suspect that when you put your 4th finger over for the B flat at the end of bar 1 you get a bump in the sound at that point, meaning that the following note is quieter, so it sounds a little uneven. The second note of bar 3 (D natural) is almost inaudible. The second note of bar 4 (E sharp) is missing, as far as I can tell. You got all the notes in bar 5, but there's a "bump" crossing the bar line from bar 5 to bar 6: you land a bit too heavily on your thumb at the start of bar 6, so it doesn't sound quite legato. And so on.

(Of course I had to listen to it several times to hear all these details. My initial impression was just "it sounds a bit scrambled.")

I didn't hear any wrong notes as such.

I hope you don't mind me putting it under the microscope in this way. I mean it in a constructive way: I'm sure you're capable of fixing all these things once you're aware of what to listen for. I like the spirit in which you approach this piece, and I think the middle section is convincing.

Techneut wrote:


No, I´m not "resting my case" (I don´t really dare here to use such idiomatic english expressions, because I feel much too unsure with that ). Indeed, I mean, what I have written. I don´t agree completely with you, but only to a certain level (german: bis zu einem gewissen Grad).



Yippee, I have not been lost in the Thomaskirche! But I have brought many "treasures" from my field excursion. I think, I will make a thread in the general forum one nice day to let you participate all here a bit. And for you, Chris, I have a little private present, which will interest you, I´m sure.

I have played the Impromptu, op. 90, no.2, btw, for my pupils in Leipzig in the Mendelssohn-Museum, Goldschmidtstraße 12 in Leipzig on a super Bösendörfer grand-piano in the "salon-room", in which Mendelssohn himself played always for his guests and the guests themselves played there, too, of course. To these guests counted Clara and Robert Schumann, Friedrich Wieck, Wagner, Chopin and much more, of course. I also have played some Songs Without Words there. Concerning the Impromptu I have played the runs there a little bit slower and I think I have found a version now, which is good and better than my version here above.
Btw, I don´t think, the Impromptus count to the "difficult" pieces. They more are for the beginners than for the advanced players from the technical view. Musically you always can work on them, of course. I think, my speed in the runs in the version here above was just a little bit too high. (But I wanted that, of course. )

Wiser_guy wrote:


Yes, right.



Thanks for that.



Nice to hear that, Pantelis. So, see you.

David wrote:


Thank you, David, for your praise and encouraging words. You seem to discover, what Chris (unfortunately) does not discover in my rendition, it´s the aspect of that expression of highest speed. I think, the speed is just a little bit too high in my version here, no problem for me to slow down a bit, of course. In Leipzig I have tried out a version, which is good now. (See above, please, what I wrote to Chris.) I also still think, that the B-section in the version above is a convincing interpretation.

richard666 wrote:


I agree, but mainly concerning the A-section. Thank you very much for your comment!

hanysz wrote:


I don´t mind that all. Thank you very much for your detailed and constructive comment and thanks for the praise also!

An exciting rendition which certainly makes an impression on the listener. As others have commented, the runs aren't always clear (I think this is more prevalent in the louder runs). It's the sort of performance which works well live but maybe not so well in a recorded context. Despite my reservations, I enjoyed it and am glad I listened.

andrew wrote:


Yes, I agree to that.



Thank you for your kind comment. I´m glad you enjoyed it.