Chopin Ballade No.4 f-minor

[m]

.

[kony]

excellent performance.

though a little heavy handed at times?

thoroughly enjoyable.

[rachfan]

Hi marik,

I listened to the ballade twice.  Masterfully played.  Bravo!

[allthumbs]

Wow, awesome, I wish I could play like that!

allthumbs

[michel dvorsky]

Your interpretations are so dramatic and effective.  Much rubato, but the line is always so well maintained. 

You make this old warhorse sound so fresh.  We're lucky that you share your masterful playing with us.

[Essyne]

Phenomenal, as always.

Happy playing.

[tds]

i really enjoyed it. thank you. tds

[slobone]

The opening of this piece always makes me think that it starts in the middle of a sentence, as if you walked into a room while somebody was already talking.

Superb, brilliantly played. You have great control and get a beautiful sound from the piano. And you have something interesting to say at all times.

LATER: I just watched several performances on Youtube and I like yours even better. I hadn't realized this piece was so difficult. It's easy to fall into the trap of not enough energy (Zimerman), too much rigidity (Richter), or too much aggression (Berezovsky).

You have the ability to make it sound like you're continually discovering new musical ideas as you play. I love that in performances of Chopin, or anybody, really. Horowitz had that same quality.

[general disarray]

Remarkable pacing, phrasing . . . and so beautifully sung.  I've heard this piece to death (my own pathetic version echoing most in my head), but this scrapes the barnacles off and gives the Ballade back its poetry.  Bravo, maestro.  That fat, rounded Russian tone of yours is a most welcome sound!

[would you be in residence in the NYC area, say, beginning this October?  Do you take private students?  I know an accomplished pianist who would gladly audition to be your student.]   

[thalberg]

This was a world-class performance.  It had everything- originality, taste, lush tone, refinement, interesting inflections, singing phrasing.... I was fascinated the whole time.  Your fioratura variation was so gorgeous and poignant I could not believe it.  And for a live performance, this was remarkably problem-free. 

This excellent playing did not surprise me because I have learned to expect such things from you.  That is why I always download your recordings!

[alhimia]

Dear Marik,

Your Ballade sounds excellent and in many ways very professional. You show a lot of drama and passion where it needs to be and you managed to get many different sounds, colors, moods and great dynamic range in this demanding piece.

There are, however, a few intsances where I feel it gets a little bit too intellectual and too serious. There I miss some feeling of improvisation and spontaneity.  You make a lot of ritardando in for example  the section where the  first theme appears . It seems if you try to calculate almost every note. I would do that a little bit less. Also I would play a slightly faster tempo in this section and the one startting from bar 80. I think this shouldn't be played too serious (although the general character of the piece is quite dramatic, which you express very well).

The section that starts from bar 100 sounds brillant!

From bar 152 it sounds very  dramatic and passionate which I think fits very well with the content of this section. However I feel passages can sometimes be a little more legato  and the sforzandos a bit softer, but maybe it's also the piano or the place of microphone.

The coda is excellent too.

Good work!

Best,
Alhimia

[goldentone]

At 3:40 when the transition begins, the music is nigh breathtaking in its beauty.  I was listening to this every night for awhile.  The world would be the poorer without your playing.

[m]

I completely forgot I posted it... in any case, thank you all for your kind words about my playing.
I learned it when I was young and after that have not played it in ages. Not long ago I had a terrrible dream I had to go on a stage and play this piece having a distinct feeling I don't know it...
Sometimes I have those weird dreams, when I know I have to go on stage and play a piece I haven't played in ages... that was the same with this Ballade, with Tchaikowsky 1st Concerto, and esp. terrible dream with Rachmaninov 3rd.
Usually, after those I go to practice the pieces like crazy, to get rid of that feeling...

There are, however, a few intsances where I feel it gets a little bit too intellectual and too serious. There I miss some feeling of improvisation and spontaneity.  You make a lot of ritardando in for example  the section where the  first theme appears . It seems if you try to calculate almost every note. I would do that a little bit less. Also I would play a slightly faster tempo in this section and the one startting from bar 80. I think this shouldn't be played too serious (although the general character of the piece is quite dramatic, which you express very well).

I think this is a very good observation. When I listened it back I had exactly the same feeling.
I always think the tempo is a matter of acoustics and remembering it back, the hall was very spacious, with a great sustain (mabe not so much felt in the recording) clearly asking for some slower tempi than I was used to (and could handle), which could perfectly explain a slower than my usual tempi.
This piece is so hard in term of accomodating to acoustics and "hall feeling". It feels like every time it should be felt through and adapted to new conditions again and again. In fact, this piece is so personal that it is born only on stage and only in that particular situation, which we live through only ones... That's why it is possible to play it only very limited number of times on stage. 
There is no wonder of that feeling of being "too intellectual", when in fact it is just a mere strugle with paricular situation in that particular hall.

In any case, I greatly appreciate your comment.

Best, M

[opus10no2]

My comment, like any great work of art, was open to subjective interpretation.

I fail to see why it was censored.

[fnork]

A very moving performance, I listened to it several times. It's very well constructed, and you manage to maintain the simplicity in the music and at the same time having it very singing and with rubato. Bravo! And thanks for sharing with us!

There were a few details I was thinking about, but I will listen to it once more and see if I still feel the same way. Overall, the performance is world-class.

[enderw20]

I completely forgot I posted it... in any case, thank you all for your kind words about my playing.
I learned it when I was young and after that have not played it in ages. Not long ago I had a terrrible dream I had to go on a stage and play this piece having a distinct feeling I don't know it...
Sometimes I have those weird dreams, when I know I have to go on stage and play a piece I haven't played in ages... that was the same with this Ballade, with Tchaikowsky 1st Concerto, and esp. terrible dream with Rachmaninov 3rd.
Usually, after those I go to practice the pieces like crazy, to get rid of that feeling...

I think this is a very good observation. When I listened it back I had exactly the same feeling.
I always think the tempo is a matter of acoustics and remembering it back, the hall was very spacious, with a great sustain (mabe not so much felt in the recording) clearly asking for some slower tempi than I was used to (and could handle), which could perfectly explain a slower than my usual tempi.
This piece is so hard in term of accomodating to acoustics and "hall feeling". It feels like every time it should be felt through and adapted to new conditions again and again. In fact, this piece is so personal that it is born only on stage and only in that particular situation, which we live through only ones... That's why it is possible to play it only very limited number of times on stage. 
There is no wonder of that feeling of being "too intellectual", when in fact it is just a mere strugle with paricular situation in that particular hall.

In any case, I greatly appreciate your comment.

Best, M

Marik,

This was an excellent performance! I was just curious, how long were you playing before you attempted this piece, and how long did it take you to play it at a level that you felt comforatable performing it in public?

[concerto_love]

hiyaaah! Wonderful!

[m]

My comment, like any great work of art, was open to subjective interpretation.

I fail to see why it was censored.

Sorry, but I fail to see what comment you are talking about, what kind of great work of art you mean, and what was censored

[mephisto]

Sorry, but I fail to see what comment you are talking about, what kind of great work of art you mean, and what was censored

He made some childiss comment about how this recording made it obvious to him why you weren't a famous pianists. He's a idiot.

[opus10no2]

He isn't famous.

Do his recordings not reveal why?

Am I saying they are bad? No.

Even if I were, am I only entitled to an opinion if it's positive?

[enderw20]

He isn't famous.

Do his recordings not reveal why?

Am I saying they are bad? No.

Even if I were, am I only entitled to an opinion if it's positive?

Is this because he wasn't impressed by Grynyuk's octaves?

[opus10no2]

No.

[kelly_kelly]

Somehow I have never been satisfied with other recordings of this piece. Yours is the first that has truly inspired me. Thank you!

He isn't famous.

Do his recordings not reveal why?

Am I saying they are bad? No.

Even if I were, am I only entitled to an opinion if it's positive?

Of course you are entitled to your own opinion. But you are not entitled to express it in such a rude way.

On second thought, I should have followed Marik's signature...

[m]

He isn't famous.

Do his recordings not reveal why?

Dear Opus10No2,

Apart from the fact you are crossing any ethical borders and taking way too much liberty going into such personal matters, I am just not sure what do you mean.
But since we are on the topic, let me tell you it does not take much to become famous. There are three things needed:
1) Lots of money
2) Good manager
3) To know a little bit to play.

In order to become famous it takes a certain type of personality, with certain type of ego, ambitions, and burning desire. Unfortunately (or fortunately), I never had either--the reason after playing over 200 concerts a season I just dropped out the race loooong ago, made other choices in life, and don't have any ounce of regret.
There were times when I did not practice for years and sold my instrument, just later to realize that in the end, piano playing is still an important part of my life. In fact, as always, you are way off in your deductions, and whether you like it or not I am quite famous... just in other fields, albeit one or another way somewhat musically related.

As a side note, FYI, I play the instrument not to become famous, but this is one of the ways for me to self-express, to be honest with myself and others, and one of the ways to become a better person--this is what I believe in and try to follow to the best of my abilities, as in my mind, even the idea itself is already some little drop of good will to make our crazy world at least a little bit better place.

I gladly admit, this is not what the modern world wants and how it functions, and most likely such nonsenses are not even in the consiousness of many, but this is already not my problem, and is a topic for completely different discussion...

All the best, M

[pianowolfi]

Dear Opus10No2,

Apart from the fact you are crossing any ethical borders and taking way too much liberty going into such a personal subject, I am just not sure what do you mean.
But since we are on the topic, let me tell you it does not take much to become famous. There are three things needed:
1) Lots of money
2) Good manager
3) To know little bit to play.
In order to become famous it takes a certain type of personality, with certain type of ego, ambitions, and burning desire. Unfortunately (or fortunately), I never had either--the reason after playing over 200 concerts a season I just dropped out the race loooong ago, made other choices in life, and don't have any ounce of regret.
There were times when I did not practice for years and sold my instrument, just later to realize that in the end, piano playing is still an important part of my life.

FYI, I play the instrument not to become famous, but this is one of the ways for me to self-express, to be honest with myself and others, and one of the ways to become a better person--this is what I believe in and try to follow to the best of my abilities.

I gladly admit, this is not what the modern world wants and how it functions, and most likely such nonsenses are not even in the consiousness of many, but this is already not my problem, and is a topic for completely different discussion...

All the best, M

Sure, I agree with all that Marik says, as far as it's possible to have a real impression of a person/artist over a forum/over the internet. The real artists don't need to be actually "famous". What makes a real artist is a hell of a lot about what marik says. And his recordings speak for themselves, anyway.

[general disarray]

To be famous takes an egotism that few people care to cultivate, thank God. 

Opus, you're so naive about the way the world works.  Your odd, Little-Nell-From-The Country assumptions that cream rises to top with no effort of its own is so, well, split off from reality.  You take the stance that if it's really that great, it will manifest itself spontaneously to the world.  Snap out of it, pal.  You have MUCH to learn. 

The finest "cream" is often quite at the bottom. 

Managing a career of any kind to achieve "fame" means an obsession with egotism and self-promotion.  It's what movie stars -- for one obvious example -- have to do on a daily basis and they have an army of publicists pushing their names and photos into print constantly.

Musicians, who want fame, must do the same.  Those who don't, aren't accorded "fame."  That doesn't diminish their fine artistry one iota

[opus10no2]

An artist without compromise rarely finds fame.

marik is clearly a very good pianist, I was just being intentionally provocative,  while stating I believe that his recordings are quite different from Lang Lang's, who happens to be the worlds most famous pianist.

[nilsjohan]

These are some of the comments which were previously removed:

opus10no2:

Now I know why you're not famous.

tds:

what is that supposed to mean?

opus10no2:

It's self-evident.

opus10no2, you are now letting us know that you by exactly the above statements meant:

I believe that his recordings are quite different from Lang Lang's, who happens to be the worlds most famous pianist.

If that's what you meant you should consider spelling out your thoughts in a more understandable way instead of trusting your fellow member's mind reading abilites, in order to avoid the discussions going off topic in this way as well as causing an unnecessary negative atmosphere.
Provocative comments are welcome but if you do not elaborate on them and share your opinions you are just causing frustration.

Even if I were, am I only entitled to an opinion if it's positive?

No, but if posting, please do share your opinion.

[opus10no2]

Maybe I intended a little frustration to be caused, and wanted a vitriolic response. It wasn't nice of me and I apologise, but perhaps this is only because I have been disrespected in the past by mr marik.

[michel dvorsky]

It wasn't nice of me and I apologise, but perhaps this is only because I have been disrespected in the past by mr marik.

When ignorance is called by its name, it isn't disrespect. It's honesty.

[thierry13]

When ignorance is called by its name, it isn't disrespect. It's honesty.

Sometimes people should accept that things aren't all kind and pretty. That's why I agree with you, and honesty should be accepted even if it's rude, as long as it is rational (something opus10no2 is not often).

[opus10no2]

Quote examples of me being ignorant/irrational.

[thierry13]

Quote examples of me being ignorant/irrational.

I don't think I can quote all of one person's posts in one post, can I?

[opus10no2]

1 would suffice.

[m]

Maybe I intended a little frustration to be caused, and wanted a vitriolic response. It wasn't nice of me and I apologise, but perhaps this is only because I have been disrespected in the past by mr marik.

Dear Opus10no2,

I appreciate your apology, even though I did not ask for that.
As far as your feeling of being disrespected from my side, let me offer you some explanation.
As you might know, I have studied piano for many years of my life with some greatest minds and GREATEST TEACHERS of our time, including L. Naumov, L. Vlasenko, V. Gornostaeva, i.e. people with whom studied such pianists as Pogorelich, Radu Lupu, A. Sultanov, A Gavrilov, Pletnev, Toradze, Babayan, etc.
I also got an exhaustive training in music theory (including dictation, harmony, polyphony, contrapunctus, etc), musicology and music history, and pedagogy, and although my DMA is only in piano performance, my MM degree is in three disciplines. Needless to say, I still feel myself humble enough every ones in awhile to take lesson, even though lately I don't concertize frequently.

I however still give piano lessons myself and usually, by the age of 13-15 MOST of my students become accomplished pianists, meaning they play piano absolutely professionally, with great artistry, without having any troubles with most demanding pieces of piano literature such as Chopin and Liszt Etudes, Prokofiev 3rd Concerto, Rachmaninov Concerti, Ravel Scarbo, Islamey, Liszt Rhapsodies (including the 6th), etc. etc. etc.

As I mentioned above, my profession has shifted and nowdays I mainly work as a recording engineer and I also design microphones. I know quite a bit about analog electronics and acoustics. Of course, I have some basic knowledge about digital electronics. I however, would never ever start arguing about matters of digital jitter (for example) with professionals (i.e. people, who exhausted their studies on the topic; people, for whom all this field is like an opened book; people, who see the field as a whole, as well as every single little detail in the field like a bird from the height of its flight). All I'd do is shut up, listen, and learn.
 
I find it however quite amusing, when you, never having formal studies in music and (as you say) never having even a piano teacher, with straight face starting offering me (as you put it) "show the light in the end of the tunnel", or "enlightening me".
Common dude, you cannot be serious, and I don't have much time for those jokes.

You present your so called "ideas" as "opinions". Sorry Opus, opinions called opinions only when they are based on knowledge. You even don't realize how little you know about piano and technique, as well as you just don't have enough knowledge to realize how every single statment of yours on that topic reveals it explicitely. Unfortunately, you even don't seem to be in rush to figure those out. Make some basic thinking to realize that it is not for nothing many members of this community have noticed that. Please have enough intelligence to realize it is  impossible that so many could be wrong...

You are asking for example of your ignorance. Sorry dude, but it screams in almost every single post of yours about piano, or technique. In any discussion you never can keep and stay on topic, prefering to hear only what you want to hear, jumping from point to point at your convinience. To be fair and for sake of being balanced, I have to admit, indeed, sometimes you would surprise me and write some nice and intelligent posts... rarely, and on more general matters. The fact is, even in such a simple topic as "Grynyuk--the octave marvel" you cannot define what is your point. I even don't mention your ideas of "raw speed"...


As I have already suggested before, I urge you to open your mind, forget your silly "ideas and opinions", become humble and obedient, find a good teacher, and start educating yourself. I urge you to open your mind, forget your stupid stopwatch, and finally start discovering that beautiful world which called "music". Then you might discover the true meaning of such words as "piano", "technique", and "virtuosity". Then you will gain much trust and respect of this community and I will be the first to congratulate you with that.

Best regards, M

[teresa_b]

This is so, so beautiful, I truly found myself mesmerized by your playing.  I have recordings by Zymmerman and Ollsohn, and I like yours better! 

Despite its frequent performance, this is still my favorite of the Ballades. I can't touch it (I'm still trying to get the coda of the G minor right  ) but I do understand its challenges, and I admire someone who has the mastery you do.  Please concertize more!

All the best,
Teresa

[opus10no2]

Marik, it is with great respect and interest that I read your words, and believe it or not - I do understand most of what you say.

I simply have different ideas, different goals, and admire different things about people.

I'm not going to change , my interest in speed has never been in question, but my interest in music has...when have I ever said I dislike music?

I'm more interested in creating my own, and the only written works I may play are of the etude variety.

If I decide to teach, it is with more traditional method that I shall teach, because I assume students would want more traditional results. However, I myself don't.

[dnephi]

Thank you, Marik, for a description of your background.  It gives us a better perspective with which to view your posts.

[general disarray]

Marik, it is with great respect and interest that I read your words, and believe it or not - I do understand most of what you say.

I simply have different ideas, different goals, and admire different things about people.

I'm not going to change , my interest in speed has never been in question, but my interest in music has...when have I ever said I dislike music?

I'm more interested in creating my own, and the only written works I may play are of the etude variety.

If I decide to teach, it is with more traditional method that I shall teach, because I assume students would want more traditional results. However, I myself don't.

You should be praised and thanked for your ability to accept criticism.  So, I'm doing just that.  You're clearly a very intelligent guy and, despite some pretty serious past provocations on your part, I enjoy reading your posts.  When you're "on," you're really on and fun to read.  Hang in there and compose.  I bet you really have something to say.

[opus10no2]

Thank you, I enjoy your posts and wish you the best too.

I have to say all this niceness feels awfully uncomfortable though

[arensky]

The pianistic mastery and complete professionalism of this recording aside, what really struck me about this interpretation was the individuality of the playing and how Mark let us into his own personal world of the f minor Ballade, not caring about how others have played it in the past but what it meant to him at the moment. The intimacy of the playing in the quieter moments didn't clash with the grandiose episodes. Overall I was reminded of pianists of the pre WWII era, when individuality was a virtue in an artist. Bravo bravo!

I have never heard the coda played with such clarity, I felt I had a new understanding of it as I listened to it (and immediately listened again). Thanks for that. 

[rob47]

I like it better than Horowitz my previous favourite.  So much of what arensky just said is what i also felt listening. CAn you please post a recording of you playing a prokofiev sonata?

[quasimodo]

drools!!!!

but, yeah as someone said...

more fantasy

less thinking

you have the chance of being at a level that allows to play without worrying about ANYTHING

you should do that

[dnephi]

I like it better than Horowitz my previous favourite.  So much of what arensky just said is what i also felt listening. CAn you please post a recording of you playing a prokofiev sonata?

The 1940s Horowitz recording is my personal favorite, although this is quite exceptional.  I second the request for a Prokofiev sonata, asking specific for 3s 1,3,4 or 7.  I rather wonder what you would make of the 1st, which is a bit of an anomaly.

[michel dvorsky]

If I'm thinking of the same Horowitz 4th Ballade, then I prefer Marik. 

My favorite of all time are Moiseiwitsch, Richter, and Hofmann.  Marik's is still spectacular though.  It really does have its own artistic voice.

[fnork]

It's such a powerful interpretation of this piece, I somehow keep coming back to listening to this...Really, I've heard very few recordings as convincing as this one - and those were definately not live recordings!
A few things though, which mostly deal with the most difficult part of the piece - the first 3-4 pages; first of all, I agree with all of alhemias comments - especially about it's a bit too intellectual and planned, it could feel more sponaneous and improvisatory at times. And your left hand when the theme comes in the beginning - it is very beautifully done, how you let the bass notes sing and how you play the chords much softer, but, perhaps it is slightly too...how should I put it...pedagogical?? You follow the bass line very well but maybe one wants it slightly more in the background? I remember how you wrote in another thread about this ballade that "Just listen to any other waltz--left hand is the most important thing--accent on one, and then two->three, where the three is the lightest beat", and, the thing with your recording is that I feel you're somewhat overdoing it. It makes the opening feel more "heavy" than "melancholic", since you're putting an 'accent' of every third note...Thats just my take on it.

Another thing is how you shape the melody in the first pages - it's very beautifully done and there are many things I wouldn't change about it. However, you tend to do the same rubato many times - when you have the four repeated notes, you usually slow down between the 3rd and 4th note or gradually, and the sixteenthnotes that come right before the repeated notes are usually quite strict in time. It simply feels a bit predictable after a while, to my ears. Hope it makes sense, it's difficult to put this into words..

[pianistimo]

dear marik,

you have a lovely tone and feeling.  i like the comments above about feeling different elements to this ballade.  at some places a waltz - at others dreaminess.  one thing that bothers me is the strict timing with the melody line.  i'd like to hear two and three notes paired up.  basically, the low to high (staccato?) - and then da, da,da.  maybe chopin didn't write this?  maybe i am just thinking too much how i would like to hear it.  it's like someone is coming up close to you and then backing away in quick three steps.  ballet- like.  the da-da-da part being the whispered backing up with f-mf-mp dynamics. 

i got my chopin ballade book out - and i see that there is no staccato marking - but personally i would staccato the Db in measure 8 but use pedal at the same time.  also, i see that measure 8 sets up the 'a tempo' and you can really expand the first note with an accent and more time.  almost like you are first hitting the bow to the violin.  the reason i like the staccato idea on the uppermost note is that the lower B-natural is then tied as though it is where the voice 'is going.'  The next note i would staccato is in measure 9 - and is the Bb. (right before another tied note).

what do you think of this interpretation?  crazy?  i know chopin may have written a long phrase marking over the entire phrase - but sometimes i think they manipulated the inside of the phrases slightly while still holding pedal.  a kind of phrasing of the notes with the fingers alone.

[pianistimo]

one last thing - is that the contrast between what you do with the C and F in measure 8 along with the E-natural in measure 9 - is to go from louder to softer.  This is a complete contrast with measure 11 - starting on the second beat of 6/8 - and playing three notes that get softer to louder.  It's like Chopin is mirroring - but with rhythm alone and then dynamics.

[m]

CAn you please post a recording of you playing a prokofiev sonata?

I don't have at the moment any Prokofiev recordings, but next season I am playing No.7, so if it goes well I might post it then.

I remember how you wrote in another thread about this ballade that "Just listen to any other waltz--left hand is the most important thing--accent on one, and then two->three, where the three is the lightest beat"...

I cannot believe you remember that... 

As I wrote earlier, the main difficulty here is to find exactly right tempo--then everything flows nicely and naturally.

dear marik,

you have a lovely tone and feeling.  i like the comments above about feeling different elements to this ballade.  at some places a waltz - at others dreaminess.  one thing that bothers me is the strict timing with the melody line.  i'd like to hear two and three notes paired up.  basically, the low to high (staccato?) - and then da, da,da.  maybe chopin didn't write this?  maybe i am just thinking too much how i would like to hear it.  it's like someone is coming up close to you and then backing away in quick three steps.  ballet- like.  the da-da-da part being the whispered backing up with f-mf-mp dynamics.

i got my chopin ballade book out - and i see that there is no staccato marking - but personally i would staccato the Db in measure 8 but use pedal at the same time.  also, i see that measure 8 sets up the 'a tempo' and you can really expand the first note with an accent and more time.  almost like you are first hitting the bow to the violin.  the reason i like the staccato idea on the uppermost note is that the lower B-natural is then tied as though it is where the voice 'is going.'  The next note i would staccato is in measure 9 - and is the Bb. (right before another tied note).

what do you think of this interpretation?  crazy?

I think if Mr. Chopin wanted there staccato  undoubtedly, he would mark it in the score.

one last thing - is that the contrast between what you do with the C and F in measure 8 along with the E-natural in measure 9 - is to go from louder to softer.  This is a complete contrast with measure 11 - starting on the second beat of 6/8 - and playing three notes that get softer to louder.  It's like Chopin is mirroring - but with rhythm alone and then dynamics.

Sorry, maybe I am overlooking something, but I don't find any "contrast" or "mirroring" there, rhythmic, dynamic, or otherwise.

Best, M

[sarrasani]

Wonderful playing, different as style but near as quality to my favourite version
(Samson Francois). Absolute control, expressive and natural use of rubato and of
ALL the dynamic nuances.  Amazing pianist, thank you for sharing.
All the best,
Sandro