Rachmaninoff, Prelude, Op. 23, No. 1 in F#m

[rachfan]

This piece presents a very dark mood--brooding and searching.

Update:  I deleted the CD cut (66 downloads) and replaced it with the original source tape recording which has better fidelity.

[pianowolfi]

I love this prelude! I think ths recording shows that you're on the way. I would recommend you to learn that by heart, not only to avoid page-turning while you record. This music should come from very very deeply inside and at the same time from very far away. Like from the Siberian Tundra. Out of a total Quietness.

The appoggiatura in the first measure rumbles a bit. To avoid that I play the first group of sixteenths with the right hand. If really the right hand should come shortly after the left at places like measure 2 is argueable. You're not the only one who does that. I don't like it so much but ok. there have been famous pianists with this habit and I respect it.The dynamics may also be worked out more, for instance the dim. in 5. Similar in 13 and others.In measure 6 I like to let the left hand part  fall back in ppp in resignation.  Measure 15, second half: my copy has an eighth triplet there, not a sixteenth. So it would be played  3 against 4. I'll continue later, because I have to leave.

Ok, I'm back now. 9: pp in the beginning of that measure, then you can do a better cresc. In the part beginning from 13 the mood changes. It gets brighter, there is a ray of hope. A low sun shines through the siberian winter. You build up the tension to the climax very well. Maybe there would be more effect, if the whole first section up to 12 in total were a bit softer and more mysterious. The Arpeggio in 26 might be smoother.
I'm not quite sure of your interpretation of the last three measures. That sounds irate to me. But maybe that was intended? If so, it' s your view of the piece. Btw it's quite a long time since you posted this. have you had a performance in between? So long, keep the good work, see you later on pf!

[rachfan]

Hi Pianowolfi,

I'm so glad that someone else likes the Op. 23 Prelude No. 1 in F#m!!  It seems these days that pianists do the Gm Prelude and think they've played the preludes.  Certainly, the F#m is not heard as much as it ought to be. 

Your comment of the music originating from inside and also from very far away is interesting.  I never thought of it that way.  It's like living the piece directly and also vicariously.  It's as if you're both actor and observer at the same time as you play it.

Haha!  I play the first appogiatura with a cross-over of the RH like you!  I start No. 4 in D the exact same way.  It works beautifully in both pieces.

On the RH and LH not being totally synchonized, you are right to criticize that.  When I first studied piano as a kid, some of the older artists of the day had studied with great artists and pedagogues from the late 1800s, where that trademark anticipatory LH was thought to bring clarity to important harmonies while adding some flair and drama.  Nowadays, the convention is to play both hands together at all times.  I try to conform to that, but once in a while as I listen to myself, I detect the old habit creeping in, which should really be avoided.  Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

In 6, I hear what you're saying about letting the LH fade there.  My objective was quite different though.  The LH there is actually playing a descending scale, and, I wanted it not to be lost on the listener.  I do think I could have still played it more quietly though, where it is marked pp, while still attaining my goal.

15: I agree with the notation as you describe it.  The first note of the 8th note triplet is a tie though, so only the second two notes of it sound.  I agree that it is still a 3 against 4, of course, the middle note of the triplet sounding between the 2nd and 3rd notes of the four group in the LH.    But I didn't want the polyrhythm to sound overly mechanical either, so made an effort to smooth out the execution.  I just listened to that spot, and I guess it is a bit rushed.  I probably took a bit of a liberty there.     

9: Yes, I agree.  Not being at pp there left me little room in which to build the crescendo.    And where it ascends only to mf anyway, the range of the dynamic is narrow to begin with, so your point is doubly on target.

26:  What I was intending to accomplish with the arpeggiated three-note appoggiatura there was, above all, to keep the whole thing noninterruptive, almost the equivalent of a single grace note, in theory.  I prepared for it with a very slight ritardando near the end of 25 to facilitate repositioning of the LH.   As a listen to it several times though now, it sounds on time and smooth--and noninterruptive--at least to me.  Incidentally, the way I play the one in 24 just before the climax, or "point" as Rach would say, was to split the appogiatura between the hands with the LH playing the first two notes and the RH the last three notes of the figure.  It worked quite well.  In general I am circumspect about distributing music between the hands, unless there is good justification.  That is a tough spot, so I did it.

Coda: Hmmm.  It sounds not irate to me, but yes, a bit forceful at least.  I believe Ashkenazy approaches it that way too, if I remember correctly.  To execute that, I voiced the tops of the RH chords with 5 and the LH tops with the thumb and leaned forward toward the keyboard to produce a greater volume of sound along with arm weight.

I like your imagery of the Siberian plains.  Are you perhaps a Russian pianist?

I just want to mention a few other things we didn't discuss on performing this piece, which you'll recognize immediately from playing it.  First, the accidentals are extremely treacherous, yes?  I've heard wrong notes even on professional recordings.  (There are a few klinkers in my rendition, but they were true mistakes.)  Next, Rach in composing the LH part actually created a kind of basso ostinato figuration--very clever indeed.  It always reminded me of rain falling, creating a melancholy atmosphere.   Another point: There are four levels of writing in this composition--the RH melody, duets in the bass, background accompaniment, and cross-overs.  Pedaling can be a real challenge, as most often the pianist is pedaling EVERY 8th beat to obtain clarity due to the chromaticism of the basso ostinato.  Not easy!   It's hard to see how anyone could not love this piece.

Pianowolfi, if you have played other preludes either in Op. 23 or 32 that I have also posted here, and wish to comment, feel free.  (My posts of these start way over on page 5 now.)  It's great discussing interpretation with another pianist who has a passion for this music.  Thanks for the suggestions! 





 

[jim_24601]

Hi there. Just poked my nose round the piano forum to see what's up, and was browsing the audition room for pieces I know, as one does, when I came upon your Rachmaninoff. I play a couple of the preludes, f#m being one of them, and a beautiful and underappreciated piece it is too. (Though having been prompted to dig it out this evening I find it a bit rusty - I'll have to polish it up again!)

I enjoyed your recording. I agree with what pianowolfi said, for the most part. I did feel that you were trying a little hard to bring out the chromaticism of the accompaniment in one or two places. If you trust Uncle Sergei and don't force the lh, but play it naturally, it will come out all right.

I think that I may be guilty of the opposite sin in b.15; I absolutely wallow in those triplet quavers, but I can't help it. That A major section just brings tears to my eyes. Again, I'd say trust Rachmaninoff here; he knows what he's doing. Don't be metronomic about it, let it sing and give it a touch of rubato.

As for the apoggiaturas, it never occurred to me to try your trick of bringing the rh in to help, so I obviously take a bit more time over them. I like to give Rachmaninoff's arpeggios and broken chords room to breathe. He writes enough enormous chords that ordinary mortals can't help but break that when he does give you an arpeggio to play with, you want to make the most of it

Of course, this is all probably months out of date, but it's a nice recording of an underplayed prelude so I thought I'd say hi.

[rachfan]

Hi Jim,

I'll be back here tomorrow night to respond to your ideas.  In the meantime, thanks so much for listening to my playing!

David

[rachfan]

Hi Jim,

I'm back.  Yes, Prelude, Op.23, No. 1 is an extraordinary piece!   I hear you on memorizing, although the sounds of the page turns does add some realism, or the sounds of desperation, haha!  I must say, in making home recordings, the challenge was always being the artist, the recording engineer and the page turner too.  I solved the recording engineer problem by get a tape deck remote control (with an extra long cord), so that I could manipulate it right at the keyboard, rather than having to jump off the bench to set up a retake.  But back to page turns, some of them come at the worst imaginable moments too. 

Rachmaninoff loves to conceal scales in his pieces at times, and this prelude is no exception.  In the LH, they occur in measures 6, 11-12, 22-23, 24-25, and 33.   Sometimes they're the bottom notes, sometimes in the middle voice--that's most difficult--and sometimes are the top notes.  Because they compete with notes in the same hand though, they do need to be brought out sufficiently for the listener, as scales have special significance in music.  But you're right too, one should not overemphasize them.  As Jorge Bolet used to say, "You don't need to hit the listener over the head with a two by four!"

In the A major section you like, Rach draws on Bach's device of statement and answer in two voices, the former up in the treble and the latter down in the tenor register.  I think its ok to dawdle a bit over that RH triplet in 15 you mention, (as I recall, I do that too) so long as you can still keep it smooth enough such that the triplet is still recognizeable.   I agree with you, I could have used a bit more rubato there.

I believe Rach's hands spanned a 12th.  Yes, it is difficult for us mortals to execute some of his chords and arpeggios.  In his early years he did a lot of conducting, then concentrated on composing.  Later in life he shifted more to performing in recitals in which he frequently showcased his own works.  That's key, because the fact is, he composed all these pieces for HIMSELF, not for you or me.  That's why we struggle. 

I agree with you that often you can luxuriate in one of his huge rolls or arpeggiated appogiaturas... but, not always.  The last prelude in the set is No. 10 (I recorded and posted that one here too.)  In the extended coda, he wrote almost unattainable rolls in the RH.  In fact, overpracticing them can actually be dangerous--and I have fairly large hands.  In this section, Ive heard some artists almost taking a leisurely bath in those rolls.  While they are poetic played that way, I don't believe Rachmaninoff ever intended such an effect.  Nor did he mark the section ad libitum.  As difficult as it is, I play them all up to tempo as indicated in the score.  Seldom do you hear a pianist attempt that.

Jim, thank you so much for listening and commenting!  It always a joy to compare notes with another pianist who has a passion for Rachmaninoff's music.