Hello again, Jim
First, thanks for your compliment on my playing of this Prelude in D. On range of dynamics, some of it could have been me. Also, the cassette tape recorder was terrible! And, part of it might have been me getting used to a new piano. Before then, I played Steinway, but shifted to Baldwin. These recordings were done with the Baldwin. I recall that I was still trying to develop pianissimo on the Baldwin and hadn't quite perfected the required touch on a very different action. The piano is much more broken in now.
At the start of the piece, I first used the same fingering you mention here. I often employ that where there are leaps in the LH, as it can be a solid choice. In fact, I'm using in now in Debussy's "Reflets dans l'eau." But the more I experimented with the RH cross-over, the more I liked it.
In 32 I don't actually swap the hands over, although I do recognize the legato line, as the RH leaves off on the D and the LH takes over the line on the C. It has to be seamless there at the transition between the hands.
The polyrhythms, yeah, I know! A little ragged at times. At the time I was doing a lot of new repertoire, so stayed with this piece for eight weeks or so. I think had I lived with it longer, I would have been able to smooth those out more.
That big roll in 39 that you mention can definitely be unhurried. I just listened to it and didn't feel that the"gap" getting to the top note was too much. It provides a tiny interval anticipating the tenuto accent there. Probably a matter of personal taste.
Beginning at 48, what I wanted to achieve was a continuous, nonstop buildup to the climax, which would be an untra-romatic surge. So I agree, I didn't let it breathe very much there (although I took a breath
). I think my interpretation was to build tension and release. I probably could have polished it more though, which might have made it less hurried.
Hmmm... on that high D in 70: I used the G. Schirmer edition, although later I got the
B & H (A. Gutheil) edition. The measure is identical in both editions. The high D (dotted quarter) is definitely a separate note aligning between the D and A in the LH (another 2 againt 3). The D is not clustered with the chord (C-D-A-C). It looks the same as all the similar dotted quarter notes following chords or rolls starting back at measure 53. I wonder if you have a printing abberation there?
On the second to the last measure, the staccato note is not actually to be played staccato. I forget the source, but found it in a pedagogical account somewhere and marked it in the score. Perhaps it's because it would be out of character in a quiet diminuendo approaching the end of the cadence, i.e., too interruptive. I do it a bit more portato. The voice leading there is the high F# in the first beat of 76, down to the E at the top of the chord, then the two D's, the first (the staccato one) not as significant as the second. I recently found a similar situation in Debussy's "Reflets dans l'eau". In the first line there are tenuto markings over the melodic notes of the LH, which we pianists would do as we normally do. Debussy himself said he didn't want that-- rather, he wanted those notes played like "bells" using arm weight (before Matthay came up with the arm weight), and to not sustain the notes with the fingers! So there was a whole different intention despite the actual notation used by the composer. So in this codetta of Rachmaninoff, I believe a little portato works better there.
The pedaling I chose in 76 was to take the tenuto chord in a single pedal, lift, then catch the staccato D eight note in a pedal, hold it down and play the last chord in that same pedal, the tonality being the same, thus reinforcing it.
Once again, thanks for sharing your ideas!
David
Topic: Rachmaninoff, Prelude, Op. 23, No. 4 in D