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!
Beautiful sound. Expressive playing. Good control of dynamics and phrasing. The tempo is right and your pedaling is good.
I would make the 4 against 3 rhythm more exact. Currently it is like 6 or 5 against 3. At the end where the theme comes in the left hand, the rhythm is not very clear on the left hand, and there some accents on the right hand.
All in all this is a good performance and I enjoyed listening to it.
BTW, if that is "super slow," I'd like to hear your "slow" version. Or, the fast one...
Pretty much, you had me, until measures 56 and 57, when I said to myself, "there's noambenhamou." The most glorious part of the movement that needs the utmost sensitivity and nuance, you placed with wooden insensitivity and a total lack of respect. This bothered me, because you demonstrate you have the touch for these measures in the following mm. 59-60.
Also, I am curious... How did you decide to place your microphones for this recording?
Very well played. It makes me want to re-learn the piece. I attempted it when I was younger against my teacher's advice and completely butchered it. Until I grew up I never knew how beautiful it could be played. Thanks for wonderful and very spiritual rendition of yours.
You did that very well, I enjoyed listening. Sometimes the triplets can be a little obtrusive, with accents which don't always sound necessary and logical to my ears, but nevertheless I have a very good overall impression.
Did you know that Andras Schiff plays the whole movement in one pedal? He plays very fast and very softly, and it sounds great -- maybe you want to try that, too?
From 07:36 he talks about this dotted rhythm -- very convincingly, IMO. By the way: the whole video is a wonderful and very insightful document, helping to hear this famous movement in a very unusual and refreshing way -- do you agree?
From 07:36 he talks about this dotted rhythm -- very convincingly, IMO. By the way: the whole video is a wonderful and very insightful document, helping to hear this famous movement in a very unusual and refreshing way -- do you agree?
Schiff is actually playing it the correct way. That is 4 against 3. And I am suggesting it played like this in my above post. So I did not get when you say whether this was a good idea. You don't approve Schiff's dotted rhythm?
Of course I do, and I also approve Noam's rhythm! I simply think, real 4:3 would be different, the sixteenth of the dotted rhythm would follow the last one of the triplets a little quicker. But nobody plays it literally like this. Am I wrong?
Of course I do, and I also approve Noam's rhythm! I simply think, real 4:3 would be different, the sixteenth of the dotted rhythm would follow the last one of the triplets a little quicker. But nobody plays it literally like this. Am I wrong?
On a second listen Noam's rhythm seems close. But what I want to emphasize is that the funeral march rhythm on the top notes of the right hand must sing within itself and on exact time. And there must not be slight pauses between the bars. I kind of think it as an orchestrated part, where the right hand triplets and the top note dotted melody (tam-ta-tam) are played by different parts (e.g. strings and winds)
On a second listen Noam's rhythm seems close. But what I want to emphasize is that the funeral march rhythm on the top notes of the right hand must sing within itself and on exact time. And there must not be slight pauses between the bars. I kind of think it as an orchestrated part, where the right hand triplets and the top note dotted melody (tam-ta-tam) are played by different parts (e.g. strings and winds)
Interesting thoughts! But if you divide this 4:3 into 12 equal parts, the triplets come on 1, 5, 9, and the sixteenth follows on 10, when you really want to play it exactly as written. But what people normally do (and I think they are right to do so) is dividing into 6, with the triplets on 1, 3, 5 and the sixteenth on 6. That's how I hear it when I listen to Andras Schiff AND to Noam. The REAL 4:3 comes later, for example in "Soirée dans Grenade" by Debussy. Anyway: it's a difficult question, and we are not the first ones to discuss it....
If anything, you should work on voicing. The triplet middle voice pattern plays more of an accompaniment and mood-setting role than a melodic one and should not be in the foreground. Try to bring out the melody more.
Beethoven marks this movement senza sordino. You need to interpret this for your piano. A suggestion I have read is to engage the pedal just enough to get the blurry sound, but not so much that the decay from each note lasts too long. I didn't hear this in your recording, but that could be technical issues on my end rather than your playing.
I enjoyed the expressive and flowing playing (at a fairly good clip tempo wise) and aside from the minor slip of not getting all the right notes in the last diminished arpeggio - you gave a nice performance.
It appears that your playing was on the moderate to faster side regarding overall tempo since it finishes in just under 5 minutes - look at some of the recordings by other famous pianists and you will see many of them play this in the 6 minute range - and, there are also performances of well over 7 minutes in length. However, please note there is no reason to change your current tempo due to my preferences on the matter - as you are doing well! I am a little bit old school and tend to like the slower paced performances by the great German and Austrian pianists of the past - which includes Rudolf Serkin, Wilhelm Kempff, Alfred Brendel, etc. Most of their tempos are on the slower side and some are at 6 minutes and longer - it requires intense concentration.
Comment on diminished arpeggio:
I would be sure to make the correction for that last diminished arpeggio by practicing it very slowly and watching exactly which fingers play those notes so it becomes engrained and you do it the same way each time. If you aren't absolutely sure as to the notes you are playing (and the fingers you are using) then you are bound to repeat the mistake again and again - also, the notes have to be counted precisely in triplet groups of three and if you do this very carefully the passage will eventually fall into place. Do not allow the descending arpeggio to fall into two-note groups as your ear may tend to hear this although that is not correct. Practice with the score in front of you until you clearly perceive and play the three-note groups. Hope this helps!
And, so that you can hear the piece played very precisely here is a recording I made at the V-Piano with extended sustain and decay added to make it sound as close to an acoustic piano as possible. And, note that the length of the performance is just shy of 7 minutes:
I do believe that many digitals (other than the V-Piano) do not have sufficient sustain and decay and this is why I think the current recording is probably my best performance of this piece. The V-Piano truly allows the player to sustain those long "singing" lines. I have studied and played the first movement of this sonata for many years and have found that slower tempos tend to lend real seriousness and all encompassing breadth to the playing. I would take Rudolf Serkin's recording to be an excellent bench mark for how the music can be performed - and, here it is:
Also, I did not intend to copy Serkin's playing tempo (with my recording above) although our timings appear to be fairly close together as I seem to have (or, feel) this tempo innately in my senses - and, this may be partly due to my great respect and admiration of his commanding and stately performance.
It is important (and, yet rather difficult) to maintain a virtually rock steady tempo (or, beat / pulse) throughout the entire movement without being rigid and sounding like you are playing along with a metronome - from the first note to last - i.e., the music still must flow along as naturally as possible.
From 07:36 he talks about this dotted rhythm -- very convincingly, IMO. By the way: the whole video is a wonderful and very insightful document, helping to hear this famous movement in a very unusual and refreshing way -- do you agree?
I tried Schiff's idea of playing senza sordino and, out of respect for Noam, posted the result in a different thread. If anyone is interested in discussing the relative merits of that interpretation, it can be found here. Although, I must say, I'd rather hear it played to that effect on a nice piano like Noam's!
I've heard one major pianist(can't remember who?) argue that the interpretation of senza sordino that most adopt is incorrect. He claimed that "without dampers" simply mean to employ the pedal throughout the entire piece but does not mean one must use one continuous pedal.
Schiff says that it is a matter of taking Beethoven at his word. I think the key to understanding the idea is that the modern piano is a much more powerful instrument, with greater sustain, bigger volume, and a much cleaner tone. So, to try to play it "without mute" (senza sordino) and with a normal touch is very, very difficult and requires a very different way of thinking about the way one approaches the movement. I mean, if anyone were to simply sit down at the piano, mash down the sustain pedal, and go to town, yeah, it would not work. But if you approach it from the standpoint of "there is an effect here that the composer wants. What is that effect? How can I find that effect and translate that to a modern instrument in a way that makes sense?," the door is open for exploration.
To illustrate what I mean by translating an understanding of the sound from a period instrument to a modern instrument, here are some examples.
1. If I am understanding correctly, this is Beethoven's Broadwood Fortepiano, restored. This was one of two of the finer instruments Beethoven worked with, and was available to him only in the last decade of his life.
I would surmise that, prior to that, Beethoven's instruments may have been something like the next two examples.
2. Notice in this example that the first thing the pianist does before playing is to raise the dampers using the knee lever, located under the keybed.
3. Notice in this example how the dampers interrupt the flow of the music:
Schiff is out of his mind and don't know what he is talking about (the pedal thing). His recording is just silly, ridiculous and ugly. He is lucky that Beethoven is not around.
Do you play any Debussy or Ravel or even Scriabin--the kind of music where the composer intends to create a specific effect by his notation and instructions? One could make a case that not only was Beethoven someone who broke trail for the Romantics, he also prefigured Impressionists, especially in this case.
Schiff is out of his mind and don't know what he is talking about (the pedal thing). His recording is just silly, ridiculous and ugly.
@Hakki,
I have to agree with you 100% on this as I see no reason whatsoever to run everything together in a massive blur with the pedal. I am absolutely certain that Beethoven would have not done this if he could have had access to a modern grand piano with all of its glorious resonance.
I don't hear anyone else (except for Schiff) playing it in this manner - and, I don't think that deliberate over pedaling improves the piece in any way.
Listen to the Serkin recording posted above (or, my recording at the V-Piano) as we both use a lot of pedal although it has to be regulated.
I wanted to add here that Schiff apparently employs some sort of partial half pedaling effect to his playing, i.e., it is not being held all of the way down but is probably somewhere in between so that he avoids a big blur of sound.
Anyone can experiment with this - however, I don't recommend it as it does not apply to Beethoven since he was not a French impressionistic composer.
I wanted to add here that Schiff apparently employs some sort of partial half pedaling effect to his playing, i.e., it is not being held all of the way down but is probably somewhere in between so that he avoids a big blur of sound.
Anyone can experiment with this - however, I don't recommend it as it does not apply to Beethoven since he was not a French impressionistic composer.
No, he wasn't, but he often wanted the pedal to be used in a very unusual way! Have a look at the first movement of op. 31/2! So it's certainly not crazy what Andras Schiff does! I heard him playing op. 27/2 live in concert, and it was a wonderful and very convincing experience. This man is highly intelligent and has lots of taste, he always knows very exactly what he wants and why he wants it! But let's come back to the topic: I have a deep respect for Noam's way how to play this movement, I listened again to his recording, and I still like it!
Schiff is out of his mind and don't know what he is talking about (the pedal thing). His recording is just silly, ridiculous and ugly. He is lucky that Beethoven is not around.
I quite disagree. I heard him a few years ago play all 32 and his "moonlight" worked very well. Try Beethoven's instructions on a good pianoforte and you'll see he's not out of his mind at all.
"And if we look at the works of J.S. Bach — a benevolent god to which all musicians should offer a prayer to defend themselves against mediocrity... -Debussy
"It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right."
I wanted to add here that Schiff apparently employs some sort of partial half pedaling effect to his playing, i.e., it is not being held all of the way down but is probably somewhere in between so that he avoids a big blur of sound.
Anyone can experiment with this - however, I don't recommend it as it does not apply to Beethoven since he was not a French impressionistic composer.
You are exactly right that he uses only 1/4 to 1/2 pedal. It does, however, apply to Beethoven in this instance, since his own instructions call for us to use the pedal differently.
"And if we look at the works of J.S. Bach — a benevolent god to which all musicians should offer a prayer to defend themselves against mediocrity... -Debussy
"It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right."
I've no idea what Shuann Chai is doing. Maybe she is one of Podesta's students.
"And if we look at the works of J.S. Bach — a benevolent god to which all musicians should offer a prayer to defend themselves against mediocrity... -Debussy
"It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right."
