In measure 24, there are 50 notes in that one bar in the RH... luckily there is a fermata on the final 8th note of the bar.

But the first beat and a half are played in tempo...

So where exactly do the notes in the LH fall compared to the RH?

There is a Dotted eight and a sixteenth, how does that fit the RH run?

Karl

about 100 rotations does it. sorry, i just can't resist...

but seriously, and i sincerely hope this doesn't turn into a taubman thread, it's unnecessary to play them to fit into 4 beats. things like these aren't mechanically in-time.

for instance, hamelin's performance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBygW-3ffOY

As long as you play the left hand dotted eighth-note plus sixteenth then the eighth-note relatively in tempo, it doesn't really matter where the right hand notes fall. The right-hand notes are a quasi cadenza, and making an attempt to "fit" the right hand notes with the left hand spoils the improvisatory nature of the cadenza.

Or, to put it in other words, it doesn't matter where the right-hand notes are played in relation to the left hand notes; place them where you wish as long as the right-hand passage has the appropriate improvisatory feel to it.

Regards,

Just play them in rhythm with the ones before - Liszt always pulls mini-cadenza tricks like this. Just humor him and play them like normal notes, or perhaps do some interesting rubato. I'm too lazy to go compare what great pianists have done now - for more specific help, ask your teacher (if you have one).

EDIT:
Bruce said it more elegantly than I. I would listen to him.

Okay, but are we at least assuming that probably 2 or 3 notes are between the sixteenth note and chord that starts the 2nd beat?

This is not a Taubman thread... nice try!

Possibly; but why count them? Keep the left hand in tempo until the fermata and just "go with the flow" of the right hand as you feel appropriate.

You might want to work it out so that the top note of the right hand is played simultaneously with the eighth-note chord (C-sharp/D-sharp) in the left hand; it's up to you to decide how you play the ascending passage: in relatively strict time or starting slower with an accelerando leading to the top note. There's no prescribed way of playing such a passage; one way not to play it is to try to work out the placement of notes in regular rhythm with a strict number of notes per beat.

Regards,

Thanks for the advice.. I agree with this...

I sometimes think its okay to at least have a goal of one note that will coincide with a left hand note, just to give it some sort of a framework...

Complete freedom can sometimes be chaos..

I dunno..

Karl, This is a cadenza. There are other variations of this measure by Liszt, as well as others. You could play the LH as a rolled chord under the first high E for example.

Also, if your approach to this piece is from the spirit of a Gipsy Cimbalom band, then this is a moment (among many) to play with tempo, octaves, scales, whatever moves you.

Check out these for inspiration:

Roby Lakatos http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXeMllI9yk0
Carpathian Folk Quartet http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0jkl8HtiHc

Kind Regards,
Michael

Thanks... still working on this piece, and have a new question:

In measure 35, where the Capriccioso section begins..

Where do the 32nd note triplets in the Left Hand fall in relation to the Right Hand?

Thanks!

Karl

Well, if you do the math : this section is in 2/4 time so where do you think they would fall in order to get two full beats in the measure? The first note in the left hand is an eighth-note, the last note in the left hand is a quarter-note; what does that leave?

Regards,

This is far from simple math...

The difficulty is that there are pickup notes leading into each beat, usually 2 pickup notes, but 3 pickup notes in measure 35. These pickup notes have no exact mathematical placement, the pickups are written as TWO sixteenth notes (mathematically impossible of course if these were actually sixteenth notes).

Next, the 32nd notes are written as triplets, which fit into a sixteenth note, but they coincide with the pickup notes which have no set value.

Ok, so basically, if the pickup notes werent there, this would be simple, but they are there.

I guess the 2 pickup notes could coincide with the other 2 triplet notes, but then why did he write them as 16th note pickups in the RH?

Anyone know the answer?

i've always played them as accidentals. there's no "right" or "wrong" answers.

you need to listen to yourself and ask: what placement makes it sound the best? feel free to listen to recordings and decide for yourself.

wrt notation: i just picked an edition on IMSLP. i don't see explicitly written out triplets. maybe it's an edition thing?

I don't see any other choice then to fit the RH and LH together exactly, so that the triplets fall together with the 16th pickups..

Otherwise, you have 2 pickup notes against a triplet, all within a sixteenth note space, that is a confusing 3 against 2 or something!

I have the Hinson edition, he writes them as 32nd triplets, what do you have them as?

As in Maurice Hinson? Ugh.

I'm not necessarily a fan of Hinson, and neither of my editions indicates the LH "grace" notes as triplets in the measures in question. Nevertheless, I do agree theoretically with Hinson that it does have to be a "simple" math question. Also, theoretically, Liszt's notation is wrong unless you consider the left hand grace notes as triplet sixteenth-notes making up the "missing" eighth-note, because "grace" notes in Romantic literature are not part of the "counted" notes - at least in my experience. In these measures, not counting the "grace" notes as timed notes, Liszt has one eighth-note and one quarter note in the left hand, and that doesn't add up to 2/4 time.

- The time signature is 2/4.
- The left hand contains an eighth-note on the first beat and a quarter note on the second beat.
- You need another half beat (i.e. eighth-note) to complete the 2/4.
- Where will it come from unless you make the "grace" notes in the left hand as triplet sixteenth-notes played in the time of one eighth-note?

The question arises : why has Liszt incorrectly written the left hand timing in measures 35-42, but correctly written the left hand timing in measures starting at 43?

Liszt is more precise - and more correct - starting at measure 43 in both my editions. There, he has two quarter notes in the left hand, one on each beat. Moreover, he adds a dotted eighth-rest above the bass quarter note on the first beat of each measure, which surely indicates that the following "grace" notes are played as triplet thirty-second-notes making up the last quarter of the first beat (in other words, three thirty-second notes in the time of one sixteenth-note. The fact that they are written as sixteenth-notes is immaterial, just as the cadenza in measure 24 is written in (small) sixteenth-notes; they are not played as "counted" or "timed" sixteenth-notes. Grace notes and fioritura passages are usually written in smaller print and often with two stems and just as often with three stems, but rarely, in my experience, do those stems indicate actual note values.

One could argue that since this is to be played somewhat freely, the precise co-ordination of right hand/left hand is not critical. That doesn't explain, however, Liszt's erroneous notation.

As for the right hand, I have always considered the notes in question as quick grace notes to be played before the beat so that the notes in "regular" size print are timed precisely as they are written.

However you finally play this, the important point is that the notes in "regular" sized print be played in time. Fit in the grace notes however you will.

Regards,

Early publishers must have had a heck of a time figuring out what Liszt meant... "Hey, Franz? What is this diagonal squiggly bit supposed to mean? A 32nd note? But the measure is already full, what do you- fine. Fine, I'll put it in. Next time, buddy, make it work out in simple math. Please. Do it for the children..."

=D

My edition in measures 35-42 have a sixteenth rest added, and those 3 notes are all played in the time of a sixteenth note, not an eighth note.

The question is obviously, what do your editions say?

And what does Liszt's original text say?

I think Hinson tried to make measures 35-42 match what happens later...

As you say, starting in measure 43, there is again a sixteenth note rest and so its 2 in the RH against 3 in the LH in the space of the last sixteenth note of the first beat.

So this would imply that he intended a triplet against 2 notes, or 3 against 2... right?

Wow!!

Working on the Hungarian Rhapsody some more today...

We have this 3 note "triplet" or whatever it is in the left hand, occuring against all sorts of multiple rhythms..

First, it occurs against a bunch of grace notes...

Next, it appears against a group of four 32nd notes (perhaps implying triplet against 2 rhythm)

Later, we have FIVE against these THREE!!!! ... with the 3 being written in my edition as occuring in within the space of a 16th note, while the Five occurs within an eighth note.

I'm still wondering what people say about how to treat this 3 note figure... in all these different instances, against all these different right hand situations...

"Just play it anyway you want" seems very inadequate and a cop-out, no offense!!!

I'd be wary of trying too hard to work out the rhythm slowly. It will take you much more time to get it up to speed than necessary.

When I first learned that section, I made very little effort to sync up each individual note, choosing instead to ensure only that the "big" note was in its proper place. Then, I just added the 3 "little" (technical term?) notes beforehand by means a swift rolling motion. As soon as it was in memory, the rhythm worked itself out.

That suggestion sort of works in a few of the places...

But doesn't really solve the 5 against 3 problem, since I have no idea where to even begin the left hand..

If there is a 16th note rest, where does it start in relation to 5?

Is this jazz improvisation?

KP:

Have you tried playing this section hands separately? It should be pretty easy to follow the notation and get the feel of the rhythm doing it that way. That may help eliminate the problem, which, by the way, you may be thinking too precisely about. Play - and learn - each hand separately, in strict rhythm, then put them together.

Regards,

I think you are making this too much work. If you can manage to learn the intricacies of playing two and a half against three and think it's a good use of your practice time, then have fun. You really only have a couple of other choices. First, you can do as Bruce suggested and learn hands separate until you are completely comfortable and then put them together or you could fudge a little and just line the notes up together like this:

Okay, I like these 2 suggestions!!

Practice hands separate is something I was taught not to do, but this place may be an exception...

Lining them up the way you did with the crayons is basically the way I've been doing it... except the 5 against 3, which is crazy!!

Thanks..

Karl