appassionata / waldstein (Read 2261 times)

paoloo · « on: September 30, 2006, 12:29:13 PM »

i'm am working on appassionata, and first it was going good. But now i don't
feel good about it. I have to performe over 6 months. And my teacher and i must
choose between Waldstein or Appassionata. What do you think is better. Is waldstein
easier in technique. Waldstein is also maybe not overplayed as appassionata is.
which one should i choose

thx

zheer · «Reply #1 on: September 30, 2006, 12:37:49 PM »

Waldestin is technically and musically more difficult than the appassionata. OMI

paoloo · «Reply #2 on: September 30, 2006, 01:28:54 PM »

are you sure? I have to make a decision this week which one i am going to play.
But you say that you can learn appassionata faster as waldstein

zheer · «Reply #3 on: September 30, 2006, 01:42:52 PM »

Quote from: paoloo on September 30, 2006, 01:28:54 PM

But you say that you can learn appassionata faster as waldstein

Well what might be easy for one pianist, might be difficult for another pianist. Since i have playd both sonatas i found the Waldestein to be more demanding, infact the 3rd MVT of the appassionat i have recorded and posted in the audition room, i would say that this MVT is less difficult than the Walldestein 3rd MVT. YOu have to remember the first MVT of Waldestein needs to be very fast.
Good luck, i know which i would choose.

maxy · «Reply #4 on: September 30, 2006, 05:00:21 PM »

Quote from: paoloo on September 30, 2006, 12:29:13 PM

i'm am working on appassionata, and first it was going good. But now i don't
feel good about it. I have to performe over 6 months. And my teacher and i must
choose between Waldstein or Appassionata. What do you think is better. Is waldstein
easier in technique. Waldstein is also maybe not overplayed as appassionata is.
which one should i choose

thx

You should pick the one you prefer. If technically you can play one, you can play the other. I find op 57 emotionally harder to manage, but as zheer wrote, different people will say different things. If technique is mostly the issue, Waldstein does contain unusual tricky parts...

nick · «Reply #5 on: September 30, 2006, 09:52:45 PM »

I think the Appasionata would be a bit easier, the most difficult part in the left hand alternating between an octave and the third with fingers 2 and 3. Whatever you choose, only play at the speed to can play cleanly and without inapproprate tenion-visionally fingers sticking up far from the intended note before playing or the "hitchhiker thumb" where the thumb looks like you are hitchhiking. You can play it more slowly if your technique is not at the point it is on recordings and very musically.

leucippus · «Reply #6 on: September 30, 2006, 11:33:33 PM »

Quote from: paoloo on September 30, 2006, 01:28:54 PM

are you sure? I have to make a decision this week which one i am going to play.
But you say that you can learn appassionata faster as waldstein

If they are that similar in difficulty I'd simply choose the one you would prefer to play. Surely you have an inclination to one or the other.

I personally would chose Waldstein simply because I could definitely get into it deeper emotionally. But that's just me.

I would never choose a piece based on how "overplayed" or "underplayed" I though it might be. That simply wouldn't even be part of my consideration process.

brewtality · «Reply #7 on: October 01, 2006, 12:03:33 PM »

They are both terribly overplayed. Especially Appassionata, the third movt is a killer btw if you play it at the required speed (~ 4'30" w/o repeat). Play something else.

kd · «Reply #8 on: October 01, 2006, 01:06:51 PM »

Quote from: zheer on September 30, 2006, 01:42:52 PM

YOu have to remember the first MVT of Waldestein needs to be very fast.

So what is the recommended speed for this mvt if some play it at 9'20'' and others at 11'40'' ?

zheer · «Reply #9 on: October 01, 2006, 02:05:34 PM »

Quote from: kd on October 01, 2006, 01:06:51 PM

So what is the recommended speed for this mvt if some play it at 9'20'' and others at 11'40'' ?

8' 35" and not slower than that.

zheer · «Reply #10 on: October 01, 2006, 02:12:08 PM »

Quote from: brewtality on October 01, 2006, 12:03:33 PM

They are both terribly overplayed. Especially Appassionata, the third movt is a killer btw if you play it at the required speed (~ 4'30" w/o repeat). Play something else.

Well you know my favorite recording of this is by Wlhelm Kempff and he plays it in 9 minuts.

kd · «Reply #11 on: October 01, 2006, 02:58:26 PM »

Quote from: zheer on October 01, 2006, 02:05:34 PM

8' 35" and not slower than that.

For such time the tempo would have to be around 188. I have never seen such figure in any metronome indication, the largest I know is 168. And the fastest performance I know is 9'30". Are you really playing it at such tempo?

zheer · «Reply #12 on: October 01, 2006, 03:27:27 PM »

Quote from: kd on October 01, 2006, 02:58:26 PM

For such time the tempo would have to be around 188. I have never seen such figure in any metronome indication, the largest I know is 168. And the fastest performance I know is 9'30". Are you really playing it at such tempo?

You know thats fairly reasonable, most people play a lot fater , like 8'01".
8'35" for the first MVT yes. Anyway try not to think in numbers, if it sounds good thats what matters. Dont be discouraged go for it.

kd · «Reply #13 on: October 01, 2006, 05:15:03 PM »

Quote from: zheer on October 01, 2006, 03:27:27 PM

You know thats fairly reasonable, most people play a lot fater , like 8'01".
8'35" for the first MVT yes. Anyway try not to think in numbers, if it sounds good thats what matters. Dont be discouraged go for it.

To achieve 8'01'' you would have to play like in the attachment (a quick recording of the initial bars at 1/4 = 200). I'm not saying it's technically impossible, but at this speed the piece becomes very unmusical. I haven't played the mvt, maybe I'll learn it one day. And if so, I'll definitely keep the tempo below 168. It is marked Allegro con brio and not Prestissimo after all. There is a good reason for this.

zheer · «Reply #14 on: October 01, 2006, 05:27:21 PM »

Quote from: kd on October 01, 2006, 05:15:03 PM

To achieve 8'01'' you would have to play like in the attachment (a quick recording of the initial bars at 1/4 = 200). I'm not saying it's technically impossible, but at this speed the piece becomes very unmusical. I haven't played the mvt, maybe I'll learn it one day. And if so, I'll definitely keep the tempo below 168. It is marked Allegro con brio and not Prestissimo after all. There is a good reason for this.

Yes slightly slower than that, infact have you type "Beethoven waldstein" on youtube, you will find a lady ,an amature pianist who plays it at about 8'11".
No thats too fast.

kd · «Reply #15 on: October 01, 2006, 07:43:24 PM »

Quote from: zheer on October 01, 2006, 05:27:21 PM

Yes slightly slower than that, infact have you type "Beethoven waldstein" on youtube, you will find a lady ,an amature pianist who plays it at about 8'11".
No thats too fast.

Yes, she makes it in 8'01''. But there is a hook: she plays without repeat. With repeat the total time would be about 10'20'' - that's a figure I'm more familiar with. So if your indication

Quote from: zheer on October 01, 2006, 02:05:34 PM

8' 35" and not slower than that.

does not include the repeat, then I share your view on the tempo, though it wouldn't be "very fast" by my standards.

appassionata / waldstein (Read 2261 times)

paoloo

appassionata / waldstein

zheer

Re: appassionata / waldstein

paoloo

Re: appassionata / waldstein

zheer

Re: appassionata / waldstein

maxy

Re: appassionata / waldstein

nick

Re: appassionata / waldstein

leucippus

Re: appassionata / waldstein

brewtality

Re: appassionata / waldstein

kd

Re: appassionata / waldstein

zheer

Re: appassionata / waldstein

zheer

Re: appassionata / waldstein

kd

Re: appassionata / waldstein

zheer

Re: appassionata / waldstein

kd

Re: appassionata / waldstein

zheer

Re: appassionata / waldstein

kd

Re: appassionata / waldstein