Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Cziffra Improvisation - New score realization

New score!

Thought that everyone might like to see a new excerpt in notation from Cziffra's fantastic improvisation (recorded in 1962) and this is a realization of only the opening section up to the Chopin etude. It comprises just a little over 3 minutes of playing and here is the score:

https://app.box.com/s/xdhi8n0q98qoia72845x

It is very accurate as you will see and has already been revised for a few minor notational errors, etc.

Here is Cziffra's amazing performance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2uXnlZI_TI

Now that we have a score is there anyone else who can play it?

Any comments on the notation is welcome.

I can't imagine why anyone would want to play this "Improvisation" even if he could.

Regards,

To show off?

Yeah, I don't really know either. Why not do your own improvisations, instead of painstakingly copying out somebody else's and imitating them?

BTW, how is it known that this was really an improvisation?

You can pretty much tell from the way he plays it. Believe me; I've got quite a bit of expertise in this area.

You would never accept an answer like that from someone else!

And here's what you'd say:

"Can you be more specific?"


BTW, I think I probably do know sort of what you mean, BUT -- I don't think those things indicate it's really an "improvisation." Like, it could be a melange of different kinds of riffs that he's done before, perhaps which he does all the time -- and really, that's exactly what it seems like to me, rather than an improvisation.

And here's why. (See, I'm being specific!)

The material shows a great deal of talent and flair, both musically and pianistically. And I think if someone with that kind of talent and flair were doing an honest-to-goodness improvisation, it would be more coherent than this.

Isn't that sort of the definition of an improvisation? It's a compilation of different techniques you know into a coherent (or not-so-coherent ) whole. The more techniques you know (aka the more experience you have), the better you improvise.

Not to me, at all, in the least.

BTW, when people argue, often they aren't really; they're just talking about different things.


You misunderstood what I was saying.

I didn't mean just a compilation of techniques that are already familiar to him; I meant material that is already familiar to him. You thought I meant that he had played similar stuff before. I meant that I think he had played that exact stuff before, and many times, just perhaps not in that exact sequence.

If you consider that an "improvisation," be my guest. I suppose you can define it however you want. But I don't think it would be very many other people's ideas of what it means.

I think it was in Schonberg's "The Great Pianists" that I read the story of a child prodigy in the 19th century who was taken around by his father, playing supposed "improvisations." At one of the performances, the kid stopped, turned to his dad and said, "Papa, I have forgotten." That was considered scandalous. I'm saying that most likely this is the same kind of "improvisation" -- only he didn't forget, he remembered.

Show me the pieces where these excerpts come from.

Yes, yes, you're going to get smart and explain very innocently about how he plays the Chopin etude...besides that I mean.

You misunderstood again. I didn't say the material came from any known pieces. I'm assuming he did "invent" the material, but I'm doubting that he made up much or any of it on the spot.

The same could be said of certain others I know of, Mark.

So he invented all these "riffs," as you call them, separately and then put them together? Maybe the idea has some credibility (such as with the lightning-fast chromatic runs where the notes are all but indistinguishable; these he must have played before) but I'm pretty sure there is some fresh improvisation going on also.

Yes, I know that all too well.

Sorry, I said more than I needed to.
I edited out most of the last post.

Here is a passage that I am attempting to determine as to how Cziffra executes it, regarding the double-handed octaves, and, here are two different notations for that passage:

1st version - L.H. leads the playing:

http://imgur.com/QYqWX2p

2nd version - R.H. leads the playing:

http://imgur.com/iqK5pVz

Question:

Does Cziffra play the octaves leading and giving priority to the L.H., or, the R.H.?

Any pianist knows that playing it as in the first example is different as for the execution when compared with the 2nd example. At very high speed the passages sound similar although the hand action is not the same.

Even though I did not notate either transcription each transcriber had a different idea as to how they thought Cziffra intended to play it.

Any comments on this octave passage?

The first one is certainly easier to read.

@Derulux,

Yes, I agree the 1st example is a little easier as for note reading although I find it interesting that 2nd example was notated with the R.H. leading since most double-handed octaves I have seen (in many other pieces) have the opposite.

I have yet to find out which one is actually correct as I am going to use "Transcribe!" from www.seventhstring.com to see if I can actually make out what Cziffra is doing in this passage. I have saved an MP4 from the video so that I now can open it in Transcribe! which allows one to slow down the video as well as the audio. Please note that Cziffra's hands are clearly visible on the keys for a good portion of this opening section.

If anyone else can determine the hand leading here let me know as I will be collaborating with at least two other transcribers (perhaps three) in the near future as for two more realizations.

Why would you want to bother to go to all that trouble? As I suggested earlier, I rather doubt that anyone would want to see the notation let alone consider playing it. Musically, it seems worthless.

Regards,

I tend to agree with Bruce. Its real value is that it is improvised, but it is not a memorable piece pianists would want to play again and again.

I think that's pretty strong but it's close.

But, need we say, these things are subjective. PV88 considers it fantastic; we don't. I think it shows a lot of ability on the part of Cziffra, but not much as a piece. And as per the above, I doubt it's really an improvisation in any usual sense, but maybe to someone who loves it, that doesn't matter.
So, take your pick.


What if it wasn't? Why do you think it was?
And, why would music that's not real good be of any extra value for being improvised?

I think that very good music becomes more impressive (even more impressive) if it was improvised. But if it isn't very good music.....I don't see it.
Not to mention if it wasn't really improvised.

I have given a couple of examples above and wanted to know if anyone thinks that Cziffra plays this specific octave section leading with left hand, or, right?

As for now there are only two realizations available and neither one has been confirmed as to how Cziffra actually plays it.