Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
Here's a work that has quickly become one of my favourites by the maestro. Unfortunately this is the only recording on youtube and it's sung in English rather than the usual German.
In fact all of Liszt's Psalm's are great pieces deserving of more attention. I posted 137 in the OP, but 18 and 23 are also very good.
Algernon: I hope, Cecily, I shall not offend you if I state quite frankly and openly that you seem to me to be in every way the visible personification of absolute perfection.
Jesus, I was practicing Mazeppa with the music and I realized that the octaves are faster than 16th notes! They're triplets of triplets, if you get what I mean, so 18 a measure. I don't think anyone comes close to playing them that speed. Maybe Hamelin could do it if he tried.
Jesus, I was practicing Mazeppa with the music and I realized that the octaves are faster than 16th notes! They're triplets of triplets, if you get what I mean, so 18 a measure. I don't think anyone comes close to playing them that speed. Maybe Hamelin could do it if he tried.
They're sorta cadenza-like passages, so I don't think they really need to be in time. That's one of the cases where I think you can be flexible with Liszt's rhythm - just hammer out those octaves at a speed which does service to the music without destroying your hands!
Working on: Chopin - Nocturne op. 48 no.1 Debussy - Images Book II
They're sorta cadenza-like passages, so I don't think they really need to be in time. That's one of the cases where I think you can be flexible with Liszt's rhythm - just hammer out those octaves at a speed which does service to the music without destroying your hands!
You think? Usually when that happens he writes a "quasi una cadenza" or something in there, but this is written out metrically correct, which is really disturbing because if I try really hard and deprioritize accuracy I can barely do it at what I consider slightly under tempo (granted, I've only really worked on it for maybe 1.5 months, not much practice done over the summer ). I end up missing quite a bit of notes, my arms get very sore, and I start sweating pretty bad lol. If you transplant Berezovsky's octaves, then it would almost be up to tempo for the tempo I like.
Of course no one ever plays it in tempo, and I don't plan on trying to do it for real, I just really wonder why Liszt would try to write it like that.
They're sorta cadenza-like passages, so I don't think they really need to be in time. That's one of the cases where I think you can be flexible with Liszt's rhythm - just hammer out those octaves at a speed which does service to the music without destroying your hands!
You think? Usually when that happens he writes a "quasi una cadenza" or something in there, but this is written out metrically correct, which is really disturbing because if I try really hard and deprioritize accuracy I can barely do it at what I consider slightly under tempo (granted, I've only really worked on it for maybe 1.5 months, not much practice done over the summer ). I end up missing quite a bit of notes, my arms get very sore, and I start sweating pretty bad lol. If you transplant Berezovsky's octaves, then it would almost be up to tempo for the tempo I like.
Of course no one ever plays it in tempo, and I don't plan on trying to do it for real, I just really wonder why Liszt would try to write it like that.
The overall tempo is just a plain old allegro, for one thing. Most people try to play the whole piece too fast for that spec, IMO. And too, Liszt was writing for pianos on which it was easier to play this kind of stuff. A key dip that's just a little bit shallower can make a huge difference in how effortful or effortless this kind of thing feels.
Yea I understand, I happened to get a chance to play a Bechstein that Liszt used, and the keys were extremely light. Completely takes the load off your fingers for Chasse neige, for example.
Today I noticed that the 2nd time those octaves come, he starts to disregard the meter and just writes everything into 3 bars. I guess that's enough evidence supporting the quasi cadenza idea that I shouldn't worry too much about playing it as written.
It is my opinion that Liszt is vastly underrated as a composer of orchestral music. The criticism of his orchestral music is remarkably persistent and, I have found, much of it is unfounded. Even the nicer critics will give this remarkable side of his output due credit for being extremely important in the development of program music, thematic transformation, harmony and, to a lesser extent, use of the orchestra - but only the very brave will give the music itself much credit - which is a shame. In my opinion it simply comes down to prejudices, which lead to misunderstanding, and the fact that much of Liszt's orchestral music is actually pretty complex program music and not the cheap thrills that people seem to link his name to. Even the most educated critics seem to be blind to this side of his music. I read recently Charles Rosen calling Liszt's orchestration 'dreadful,' and when esteemed critics like Rosen are making those judgements, what are others supposed to think?
I don't know why Rosen would have made that claim. Maybe it's because Liszt's orchestration isn't as colorful and immediately exciting as Berlioz or Strauss - who knows. Here's a summary by Michael Saffle on Liszt's orchestration:
"Instead of novelty or complexity, Liszt specialized as an orchestrator of transparency. Only when necessary did he double parts, and then most often to give his string parts more emphasis. Almost never did he produce muddy-sounding or poorly balanced passages, as Schumann and even Brahms sometimes did; certain murky effects in Tasso are an exception, introduced for programmatic purposes. Instead, Liszt's more heavily scored passages are forthright rather than merely exaggerated; his sectional scoring, especially for winds, is noteworthy for its clarity and logic, and his use of solo instruments is both infrequent and highly effective. Liszt also wrote well for percussion; consider the delightful and mostly understated military passages in Hungaria. On occasion he may have employed cymbals and other noise-makers a bit too enthusiastically - but as the years passed his orchestration, in general, grew more subdued."
I'm starting to consider Liszt as not only a composer with a first-rate orchestral output, but also a very good orchestrator - not at the level of, say, Berlioz, but a very good one regardless. I find even the worst his orchestral music to be at least good, very intersting, and certainly worthy of occasional listening - and the best is among my favourite orchestral music. His tone poems are, on the whole, among my favourites and his two symphonies are both tremendously innovative and novel masterpieces that are worthy of frequent recording and performance. Here's a good recording of the Dante (even though the treatment of Liszt's cymbals in the Inferno movement is dreadfully ugly and vulgar at times, and the Purgatorio movement too slow, it is still among the best in a un-competitive environment - perhaps second only to Barenboim, whose recording is also on youtube but in many parts).
Here's my favourite recording of the Faust Symphony:
And some of my favourite tone poems by him:
This recording of the Heroide Funebre is almost ridiculously slow and probably not going to endear itself to new listeners - but actually very compelling if you believe in the work itself beforehand. I only put it here because it's the only video on youtube containing the whole piece in one video - there are other, faster ones on youtube for those who are interested.
Ce qu'on is a flawed, yet remarkable and very innovative composition.
And of course, then there's the more famous (and brilliant) ones like Tasso, Les Preludes and Mazeppa, the other great ones like From the Cradle to the Grave, Der Nachtliche Zug, etc.
I read recently Charles Rosen calling Liszt's orchestration 'dreadful,' [...] I don't know why Rosen would have made that claim.
That's from 'The Romantic Generation'. I agree that Rosen's a bit excessive there (he is elsewhere patronizing about Mendelssohn), but his astute observations in the rest of the chapter more than make up for it. Certainly it gave me a renewed appreciation of some aspects of Liszt which I had formerly excused as 'guilty pleasures'!
Unfortunately Rosen isn't as enthusiastic about the Sonata, in fact he seems somewhat apologetic that it doesn't fully merit the praise bestowed upon it by the rest of us. He rightly points to the Faust Symphony in its more sophisticated use of thematic transformation, but then that occasions the 'dreadful' orchestration.
Otherwise I cannot recommend Rosen's book highly enough, though with the caveat that some of it makes for rather opaque reading. Especially in chapters dealing with music of less interest to me, I thought 'well now, Charles, you've lost me.'
Quote
Here's my favourite recording of the Faust Symphony:
A fine one indeed. Also try to hear Beecham's early stereo recording from 1958. It has long been considered a classic, and EMI's sound is amazing for its age. Bernstein's early recording on CBS was predictably kinetic in its excitement, but is marred at the end by a tenor (remaining nameless in this post) who sounds like a wizened old queen.
I read recently Charles Rosen calling Liszt's orchestration 'dreadful,' [...] I don't know why Rosen would have made that claim.
That's from 'The Romantic Generation'. I agree that Rosen's a bit excessive there (he is elsewhere patronizing about Mendelssohn), but his astute observations in the rest of the chapter more than make up for it. Certainly it gave me a renewed appreciation of some aspects of Liszt which I had formerly excused as 'guilty pleasures'!
Unfortunately Rosen isn't as enthusiastic about the Sonata, in fact he seems somewhat apologetic that it doesn't fully merit the praise bestowed upon it by the rest of us. He rightly points to the Faust Symphony in its more sophisticated use of thematic transformation, but then that occasions the 'dreadful' orchestration.
Otherwise I cannot recommend Rosen's book highly enough, though with the caveat that some of it makes for rather opaque reading. Especially in chapters dealing with music of less interest to me, I thought 'well now, Charles, you've lost me.'
Quote
Here's my favourite recording of the Faust Symphony:
A fine one indeed. Also try to hear Beecham's early stereo recording from 1958. It has long been considered a classic, and EMI's sound is amazing for its age. Bernstein's early recording on CBS was predictably kinetic in its excitement, but is marred at the end by a tenor (remaining nameless in this post) who sounds like a wizened old queen.
Absolutely. I also can't recommend the book enough and a good part of my confusion about him making that claim is that he is really such a terrific writer on music. It shows, to me, that despite how penetrating many of his insights are, he is still human like the rest of us - opinionated, has his own specific tastes, has his biases/prejudices, and is also agenda driven at times, and despite all the times he is highly agreeable there are many others where he's not and that's what's always going to happen when someones writes about music.
As far as the Liszt chapter goes I also can't agree with Rosen's dismissal of Liszt's choral music (perhaps the best part of his output not including his piano music), as well as the quality of his late piano music. His view on the Sonata not fully deserving the praise we heap on it seems to be a taste thing more than anything. He diverted the importance from one aspect of it to another, but as far as quality goes his main gripe was about the work containing "a good deal of bombast and sentimental posturings in between its finest passages." The sections of the piece that he feels deserve that description most of us revel in - and him calling the Liszt Sonata overrated based on that is purely an opinion based on peronal taste. I find Rosen too...'highbrow' in a sense to fully appreciate Liszt's music in the way he does Chopin and Schumann - despite, ironically, his defending of the Rhapsodies and Etudes. I find the negative sentimental posturings comment disagreeable when Rosen elsewhere stated that Chopin's music is fully free of sentimentality, but I digress...
As far as recordings for the Faust go, I have not heard Beecham which is a classic by all accounts. It's high on my to-buy list - and the two CD set i'm thinking of getting also includes a full blooded performance of the 13th Psalm (in English) and a good performance of Orpheus - as well as Silvestri in Tasso and Les Preludes. Looks like a great buy!
![[Linked Image]](http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab26/tehjolteonmaster/steinway.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/273/289/b5a.png)
). I end up missing quite a bit of notes, my arms get very sore, and I start sweating pretty bad lol. If you transplant Berezovsky's octaves, then it would almost be up to tempo for the tempo I like.