(though it is not to be found where you placed the link).
It is if you supply the closing bracket yourself, this was a pasting accident (Stu's, not yours: the closing bracket is outside the link delimiter instead of inside).
... consisting ... of an A major chord ...
or even Ab major
... any agitation is to be laid at Tchaikovsky's door, because there is so much happening all at the same time.
I agree, particularly those groups of arpeggiated chords which come hard on each other's heels, they just sound a bit "busy".
I can detect no listeneable flaws. At times the right hand seems to fast, but, as the left is doing its job very well, I can only imagine this is how it should be.
I get the slight feeling that Stu allows the piu forte section midway through the piece to excite him into moving the tempo up a notch or two, a temptation which I suspect ought to be resisted. There is also a bit of unevenness (not too noticeable) in the section later on, where the right hand has those triplet chords against the left hand duplets, but it seems to sort itself out once it gets going after the first bar or two. But this is difficult; triplets against duplets are hard enough to navigate when you're allowed to articulate all the notes, but here the triplets are tied to make the downbeats silent (well, not strictly silent, just not articulated); the only reference points (articulated downbeats) you have are in the left hand, and Stu is doing a great job of not allowing himself to over-emphasize them.
I cannot detect what your problem is with the last chord. It seems to die off very soon. Is that it? I like the way it is written, with breves at bthe extremes and with quavers in the middle followed by rests. How does one play that as written?
That's easy to answer, because "as written" also includes the pedal instructions, which indicate (at least in the version of the score I followed) that it is to be held for the entire length of the final two bars. That, in effect, makes the rests "impossible" and the final quaver equivalent to a semibreve. It reminds me of Eddy commenting on the impossibility of staccato in the piano's high undamped register. If there was a reason for writing it that way, perhaps it is that the articulation one uses to attack the last note would be a little different in the way one would choose to let one's fingers "land" on the them, between the two cases where the fingers would then stay put (as for a semibreve) or be soon lifted off again (for a quaver). I guess as written the effect would be to make the last quaver a touch more audible. It seems to me what is intended is that the final breves are to be held by pedal only, hands coming fully off during the first half of the second-last bar, you then play the last three octaves using both hands, and then most of the last bar is totally hands off.
I have met the same thing in another score, but through a miracle I managed to strech my finger to reach a thirteenth, but here It will not work!
Why would it not work here? No stretching is required: You could do it like this: In the 3rd-last bar, left hand plays Ab Eb using 5 1. In the 2nd-last bar right hand plays Ab C using 4 5, and then, during the 1st and 2nd beats, the left hand surrenders the Eb to right thumb (the key stays pressed, of course, the Eb is not re-articulated), and the left thumb then moves (also silently) to the Ab. You can then play the octave Ab chords using left hand 1 5. There is the complication, of course, that the upper note of the octave coincides with the 3-bar-long held Ab.
All in all a good one, this one.
Indeed. Nicely played. I think the recording
is too quiet, though. It should not have been necessary to amplify in Audacity. Was the input gain on the recorder high enough? If not, perhaps the playing was a bit too quiet too. Everything is relative, and given that the dynamic goes down to pppp, which must still be audible, then pp (which most of the piece is) needs to be robustly louder than pppp.