Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Members Recordings - Pianist Corner ok last one - Rachmaninoff prelude

Thanks to everyone who was critical in my last thread about this prelude. I just didn't get it...

Rachmaninoff is more of a blank canvas than I'm used to with Chopin who is mainly what I play.

With all these meno mossos and accelerandos, it's been difficult to allow myself to utilize them and be creative with it.

Now that I've digested and understand that I am allowed to make my own music with this prelude, I think I achieved a better performance. I am actually pretty happy with it. So thanks to those who who were resistant to my initial interpretation... I think it was for the best even though it was difficult to digest.

Now I took a much more free approach to tempo, which also allowed me to interpret this piece as a much more melancholy feel to it than previously. I like this prelude much more now hahaha

[video:youtube]o-hor7I924s[/video]

Noam,

All of your versions were very good, considering that you are an amateur pianist.

This last one is more convincing. I would begin the accelerando more slowly at 1:13, and at 1:29 you are rushing a bit, try to play those left hand notes distinctly and in tempo there.

As I said these were all very good performances, and it was interesting to follow how your interpretation evolved in each of them.

Hi Noam, it's great how you are striving for the best version possible, and I noticed with lots of pleasure, how free this last one is. And you are absolutely right: such an approach helps "transporting" a certain melancholy, maybe even despair, which is part of this wonderful music -- congratulations for a very touching document of your passionate search, I share your feeling of liking it

Richter had a gigantic repertoire...probably one of the largest in history. The single piece that he perofrmed more than any other(I'm guessing often as an encore) was the Prelude in G# minor.

I also like this one the best. I love how the accompaniment comes and goes in waves more here. I agree that one should feel free to find the music in different places at times, so if the accompaniment sings to you, bring it out. It can also retreat, which you've also done at times in places that seem satisfying to me.

In other words, I like the blend here. And the tempo is a lot more free, which is something I wanted a bit more of in the other versions. I think this piece gives you great tempo liberty with the shimmery treble.

I also wanted to point out that I love this piece and printed it out years ago in the hope that one day I would play it. I'm hoping it fits in somewhere soon.

Thanks for the lovely listen. The view outside is snowy but calm, and the piece fit in perfectly.

(Does anybody else walk around constantly internally picking pieces that would provide backdrop to any given moment? I swear, I think half my brain thinks it's making a movie of my life.)

Right from the outset the RH is really excellent and you grabbed me and kept my interest throughout with your free and dynamic shaping of the piece. I also enjoyed the evolution that brought you to this point. That journey is the most fun part. Thanks for sharing it.

I listened to the first recording and this one, and this one is much much better, more free. It breathes a lot more.

One thing about rhythm, in the section beginning at 1:13, my edition has the LH in eighth then quarter, with the RH figure taking up the quarter note each time. It sounds like you are playing LH in two eighths and compressing the RH figure into 32nd notes during the second LH eighth? so it sounds like it's in 4/4 instead of 12/8? Do you have it written this way in your edition or was it an intentional modification?

I actually don't know how to read rhythm in sheetmusic. I go by what it sounds like if I've heard the piece before, or I use the spacing to tell me how the rhythm goes. I know it's not ideal...

This is embarrassing.

My sheetmusic is probably right, and I'm just doing it wrong.

So I have no idea what you just about 4/4/ or 12/8 (look like dates to me) but here is what I'm doing:

Take 1,2,3,4,5,6 is one revolution.

1,2 LH
3,4,5,6 RH

How is it suppose to go?

EDIT - The LH and RH play the 2nd note of each measure at the same time don't they??? ooops!!! wait, I am confused. I just played it slow. The second note of the LH in each revolution is together with the first note of the RH.

I think I am doing it right...

I didn't listen to the other versions you posted, but this one was excellent. This is one of my favorite pieces to listen to, and one of my favorites to perform. If I could make one suggestion, go back to 1:34-1:44. Compared to how dynamic and free the rest of the piece is, this feels way too "straightforward". Still, very well played.

Thanks. Let me be honest. Me and 1:34-1:44 are not currently on speaking terms. I don't get it, and it doesn't get me! I actually thinking about rewriting that part. Haha j/k.

Things like this cannot be forced. I don't have a teacher. The piece will go on the shelf for a few months and when I bring it back, I would bet I have a love affair with 1:34 hahaha

No need to worry. Just a couple of minutes reading and you are done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_signature

Hi, Noam -- Well, for my taste, what a terrific performance of that prelude! You brought out the elegant melodic contours throughout, making it seem effortless, although it is anything but! I didn't listen to your earlier efforts, but this I thought was just superb in all ways. Thanks for sharing!

hahahaha what an excellent reply!

Have you considered playing the first few seconds, the rhythmic part before the melody recaps in the bass, at ff, and then dropping off to pp and playing the bass part extremely slow and light? Hard to describe in a few short words, but I usually hear it something like that..

Yes. I find that I only have 0.5 seconds to go from ff to pp is almost impossible.

What I mean by impossible is that I need to practice it more! Hahaha


PS thank you sincerely for everyone's compliment. Such an encouragement with this very strange piece

This is really remarkable, shocking, even. For someone to have reached the level of performance that you have and to say you don't understand rhythm as represented by note values and time signatures is ... (I can't find the word)! Relying on placement on the page is not a sure thing; the only sure thing is learning note values and how they relate to time signatures.



4/4 is a time signature: 4 beats to a measure, comprising one quarter note (two eighth-notes) per beat; 12/8 is also a time signature : 12 eighth-notes per measure; in this case, each measure can be considered to comprise four beats, but different from 4/4 in that each beat is comprised of three eighth-notes.



As a musical term, "revolution" means nothing to me; what to you mean by "one revolution"?



If we are talking about the section beginning at measure 24 :

we are still in 12/8 time (see above), and for the moment, think about this in twelve beats per measure for the sake of accuracy;
- on each beat the LH plays the first note of each two-note group on beats 1, 4, 7, and 10. The second note in the left hand of each two-note group comes on beats 2, 5, 8, and 11.
That means that the second note in the left hand coincides with the first note in the right hand after each eighth rest, as you said.

This begs the larger question, however, and I hope it's not considered impertinent : why is it that you never learned note values and have to decide on rhythmic values based on what you have heard before? It is such a rudimentary, fundamental and easy skill to learn that the idea that you haven't done so leaves me somewhat nonplussed.

Regards,

I just don't get rhythmic values. My brain wants to do the math 12/8 = 3/2 = 1.5

Like I said, this is embarrassing and I don't like talking about it
Hope you take this video as a joke...

[video:youtube]iiFIca-9kZ4[/video]

I'm afraid I don't believe you about not knowing 4/4 from 12/8, given the level at which you play... assuming the person playing and the person posting are the same person.

Anyway, the RH is coming in at the right time. The problem is that you are speeding up to 2x the speed when the RH comes in, with the result that the LH is playing eighth, eighth, eighth, eighth instead of eighth, quarter, eighth, quarter, and the RH is playing 32nds instead of 16ths. I'll try to find some videos and add them as an edit to this post.

Ashkenazy is pretty straightforward, this part is at 1:13
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13UlKWgwdZI
Sofronitzky uses more rubato but the basic rhythm is still LH eighth then quarter, good example of rubato while successfully communicating underlying pulse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0DXHD6wRqs

I'm not a troll hreichgott why would I pretend to be this person?


I know what 4/4 is. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
3/4 is like a waltz. 1 2 3 1 2 3

That's as much as I know about rhythm, and it's not necessary to know in great detail when all my repotoire is music I have heard before many times.

Yes, I play the right hand a bit fast. I wouldn't say I double the speed but I do speed it up a bit to add a reverberation effect. That's my interpretation of it.

Now I am second guessing myself.
I just record this section slow. Is the rhythm right or not please?

(even if it's not, i might keep doing it this way, i like it hahah)

https://app.box.com/s/h5ak1halroylzy97i3sr

Seems like you have it correctly when playing slowly and then, as you speed up, you compress the quarter note into what feels like an eighth note, turning the RH four note sixteenth figures into 32nd notes? Each little LH/RH figure ought to take up three beats, 1 2 3, 4 5 6, 7 8 9, 10 11 12, and while it does in the beginning, it stops as you get faster, going to what feels like 1-and, 2-and, 3-and, 4-and.

My ear is not as good as some here, but that's what it feels like to me. The four sixteenth notes have to take up a full quarter note, with 8th rests in between where the LH plays its initial eighth note.