Here's my complete recording of the 5th French Suite that I did this afternoon. Each movement was recorded as one take, but I tried most movements a couple times, so the entire thing wasn't a once through...



I'm submitting this to the Chicago competition, and there are still a few days to make interpretative modifications. What do you think?

Thanks,
Mark

P.S. I changed it to a Youtube video with the score. It's my first time making one of these - kinda fun

Just in case listening to the whole suite is more than you care for at the moment, and you'd like to spot check things, here are the individual movements:

Allemande
Courante
Sarabande
Gavotte
Bourree
Loure
Gigue

Mark -

This is really excellent !!

Following along with the score, I note that in measure 14 of the Sarabande, you're not playing the rhythm indicated in the RH - unless the first 8th note should actually be a dotted 8th. Also - the passages you play in the final four measures of the Sarabande differ slightly from what is indicated in the "score" that you posted here. Finally - the ornamentation you use in the Sarabande also varies from that indicated in the score - but it sounds just fine to me !!

An overall comment....You clearly have this under your fingers and you do some really nice things from an interpretive standpoint. However, "sometimes" the playing sounds a bit tenuous - particularly the first section of the final Gigue which seems to lack the crispness and excitement that you achieve in the Courante.

But these are all minor concerns. You really do a great job with this suite. Thanks for posting - and best of luck with your submission !!

Thanks for posting this! I agree with Carey's impressions. I think you don't have anything to worry about on getting into the competition. Regarding what to work on from this point, I'd strongly suggest that the main emphasis should be on greater evenness, both within a beat and from beat to beat. Recently we had a discussion of the pros and cons of working with a metronome and there was a surprising amount of "anti" opinion, but I'd suggest a lot of work with the metronome, first of all to become more acutely aware of where the issues are, and then to help iron it out. BTW the first movement is the main part that seems to need this, but in other movements you could also benefit from more of the "crispness" that Carey mentioned. But mainly, you already have a very good command of the piece -- good performance! Good luck, and I look forward to meeting you in Chicago.

Thanks Carey for your response! I debated posting the Youtube video with the score because the only freely available scores on IMSLP seem to be a little archaic, and vary some from the Henle score I used. I checked the spots you mentioned, but I'm playing the correct rhythm written in my Henle score.

I agree that the first part of the Gigue sounds a little off balance - that's the movement that still needs the most polishing. I'll see how much more polishing of it and a few other spots I can do in the next 2-3 days.

Thanks for the good wishes!

Thanks for responding Mark! I followed the metronome discussion on that other thread. I have an extremely good sense of rhythm actually - if I'm not paying attention to myself, things come out completely metronomically. After recording one take of the Allemande that was totally straight and I thought a little boring, I decided that the movement needed more push and pull. I almost mentioned that the takes of the Allemande and Bouree were somewhat experimental in that sense, but I figured I wouldn't draw attention to them unless it was noticeable. I guess I went a little to far out there, huh?

Way too far. In principle I even like the idea of such 'push and pull' -- a lot. But you made it sound like you don't have that good sense of rhythm that you do have!

It reminds me of one time when I rehearsed the last mvt of Schubert's little A major sonata in front of some friends. In the development section, I tried playing the octave passage with some rubato -- y'know, to do it with more "feeling."
They told me it sounded like I just couldn't play the octaves....

LOL, OK, duly noted. I'll tone it down a lot, but still include a LITTLE of it.

I think I kept a little of it too.

Hey, MarkH!

Nice job!!! I know this represents A LOT of work! And when did you get a real piano?

Bouncing off of carey and MarkC, I heard some un-evenness, too in a few places. I think I noted this before in another thread where you asked for comments, but it sounds to me, especially in the Courante, to be a finger strength issue. I did not hear tentativeness in the Gigue at all, really, but I did hear it in the Gavotte. I liked the push/pull that you did in the Bouree, but it seemed a little out of place, since the rest of the Suite is played pretty strictly. The Bouree can certainly stand its ground without it and then your conception of the Suite will hold together better, imo. I really liked the Gigue!

I enjoyed listening to this! I sure hope to hear you in Chicago! (I plan to be in the audience! ).

--Andy

Ahhhh, you noticed that I have a real piano this time. All of my previous recordings have been on my Yamaha Clavinova, which has some evenness issues with the dynamic levels around middle F, so sometimes a stray loud note comes through on it. For the Spring I'm teaching at a college that has a very nice older 6 foot Steinway that's in decent tuning. I recorded it using an Edirol digital recorder sitting about 4 feet behind the bench.

There was a little period during the first week or so of being back to a real piano that my fingers were adjusting to the greater weight, but now, I think it's more of an "independence" issue in a few little spots than anything to do with strength. Whatever "independence" means to you, I'm sure I could stand to have a bit more of it.

I did throw some push/pull into the Gavotte too on the first three notes of each section. I think I've heard such a thing in harpsichord performance, but I'm not sure I'm totally convinced by it on piano. I'm glad you commented.

To be honest, part of the push/pull in the Bourree is that it allows me to hide the trill at the beginning of the second section. I find it so awkward! (dotted quarter on D, two sixteenths on E & F#, repeated F# with a following upwards trill to G and finishing two sixteenths of E and F# again - I'm too lazy at the moment to go through the effort of pasting the score in here, but its visible in my Youtube video at 6:21) I end up playing the repeated F# with 3 and then trill upwards to the G with 1, which is not easy for me. It comes through well about 1 time in 20. Trilling with thumb up has always been a challenge, but it seems like the best solution in this case. Assuming I make the first hurdle, there's still lots of time till May

Thanks for listening Andy!

Yes! I understand.

You probably already know this, but the push/pull idea in harpsichord performance is meant to help compensate for the lack of dynamics available with that instrument. In other words, timing is used as a means of expression, since volume is not there to be used.

So, you really do have to decide on an interpretive style. If the push/pull idea suits you at the moment for whatever reason , then play to your strength and use it consciously, judiciously and as a recognizable conceptual aspect of your performance. I mean, don't sit on the fence with it, because that way, it seems awkward. Either employ it as a meaningful artistic device, or don't. And I have to say, I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other to share an opinion with you, because when you play with a strict tempo, it sounds very proper. The push/pull in the Gavotte sounded like a mistake, to me, but in the Bouree it sounded mannerly.

I hope these comments help. I know how thoughtfully you work. All the best to you!

--Andy

On the rhythm for the first few pieces:

Prelude: Much too unsteady, so much so I first thought there was something wrong with the recording.

Allemande: much less of a problem with rhythm

Sarabande:Rhythm seemed fine to me

Gavotte: some places seemed unsteady due to technical difficulties

The general problem for me seems that when there is unsteadiness(most apparent in the Prelude) it seems more like it is due technical difficulties(not being that sure of the notes?) because as a conscious choice it seems unjustified.

I don't think it's just a question of doing it or not.

Playing completely metronomically would almost never work IMO, but I also think that any rhythmic shaping of the phrases has to be for a lot more than "for whatever reason" and more subtle than the recorded performance. For example, in the Prelude, I could not see any possible reason for any of the chosen rhythm variation(unevenness).

Pianoloverus,

When I said, "for whatever reason," I was cutting Mark some slack about creating a facilitation to accommodate what he has already heard and shared with us about "finger independence." I'm sure Mark has studied his own recordings enough to know where the weaknesses are. I am saying to Mark, "Play to your strengths."

--Andy

Hi Mark, nice work; and isn't it such a glorious piece of music! I just have the Allemande and you've inspired me to work up the whole piece.

For the Allemande, at times you suddenly speed up, like measures 9 and 11, and funny thing is I felt the same thing at those moments, but overall just have a steady "flow" to the movement. I think what you did in mm18 going into e minor was nicely done, so the character changes are good as long as the tempo remains even.

Courante: superb, excellent!

Sarabande: I feel like you might want to try and soften the downbeats, particularly beat 1. I know this may be more difficult if "1" has a trill, but the tempo would allow you to ease into them.

Gavotte: I thought that the top notes of the right hand could be voice a little more, for instance the downbeats where you have two half notes in the right hand.

Bourree: My personal taste, and I could be wrong, but I wanted to hear more legato for the 1/8 note pairs in the right hand, for example mm6-10

Louree: being nit picky here- top notes of right hand on beats 3 of mm 7 and mm15(my henle has staccato markings here)

Gigue: wonderful, delightful!!

Anyway, great work Mark, I wish you luck in the competition. I hope you take what I said as only with good intentions and productive intent

Thanks for the comments Antony. As I've been learning this piece more and more deeply, I'm feeling like it's perhaps the most satisfying piece I've ever played I'll think about those comments you made.

Thanks to all of you - I re-recorded the Allemande, Gavotte, Bourree and Gigue. The Allemande, Gavotte and Bourree are now much more steady, with just a little bit of ebb and flow. And I managed to get a take of the Gigue that has a little more crispness and evenness.

Here's the final revised product: French Suite No. 5

Yes! Listened just to the 1st movement, and yes, this is a lot better. Well done!

The Prelude is like night and day(better)compared the first recording. Do you like better this way?

cool, MarkH -- I'll see you in Chicago too

Wonder if any of our other people are applying....

Not me! I'll be there to provide moral support, though!

MarkH:

This latest interation is very, very nicely played indeed!

--Andy

I love the allemande (it reminds me of the Goldberg's) but will have to revisit it the whole work.. I always resented the French influence for some reason.. not churchy enough for me i guess. I have much enjoyed your playing tho.

I like them both. One of the things that I'm working on musically speaking is making the music "breathe" in satisfying ways. Rachmaninoff and others from his generation plays things with an ebb and flow that some consider sacrilegious and others find very satisfying. I fall into the second camp.

I THINK I recall you making comments before that Rachmaninoff's interpretation of the Op. 9 No. 2 Nocturne was too self-indulgent. If I'm right in remembering that, it makes sense that you would like something to be played a little straighter...

However, it seems that everybody agreed with you, so I fell short in my goal. I'll have to continue experimenting.

I'm not counting my chicken before it's hatched, but I hope to see you there Gorden!

When you say Goldberg's, do you mean Gould's? Or our forum member Goldberg? Or someone else?

I'm not really sure what you mean when you say you resent the French influence. Bach himself didn't call them French, and although an early biographer supported that name, others disagree:



I react pretty strongly against French Overture rhythm - it's so repetitive! There are a couple P&F's from the WTC that I may never play because the French Overture rhythm of their preludes just irritates me like crazy. (Strangely enough, I totally love Bach's Overture in the French Style )

What French elements do you object to?

I don't think so. I think I liked that performance a lot, and Rachmaninov IMO tends to play with minimal rubato especially for his time. I don't find his interpretations self indulgent at all and think of him more like a contemporary pianist or timeless in terms of his way of playing.

Mark.. i don't know...

these suites are not like the Bach I usually play.. they are dancy and not intrigueing to me, altho when you play them they sound inviting. You do a wonderful job on the gigue.. a great job!

Personally, I mostly love the intricacy of the darker fugues and the dramatic organ music of Bach compositions.

i was referring to the Goldberg Variations.

first, well done on learning that whole thing. i am working on just the Gigue right now. That being said... I was looking for interpretations on this and came across this most gorgeous rendition of the Gigue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVwhKF0sm1s&feature=g-hist&context=G2b42991AHTzM4cAANAA


What do you think of this version?

I think it is very nice, and totally Schiff. I think Mark's is very nice, too!