Senior Recital, 4/26/08

[dnephi]

https://ilocker.bsu.edu/users/dbaker/WORLD_SHARED/Senior Recital, 4_26_08.zip

Program:
Haydn Sonata in F Major, HBK XVI:23, first movement
Schumann Fantasiestucke- Op. 12
       Aufschwung
       Warum
Debussy
        Le Cathedrale Engloutie
Bach-Liszt
       Prelude and Fugue in A Minor, BWV 543.

Enjoy!

[allthumbs]

Well done, I really enjoyed your program and in particular the Debussy piece.

Thanks for posting it.

Cheers, 

allthumbs

[kd]

I'll say a few words about the Haydn as I happen to know it.

My general impression is: you have the right notes, but not always at the right time - less unevenness and more steady tempo would be nice. Also many trills weren't, so to say, convincing enough. Articulation seems quite fine, dynamics also, more or less, though I didn't like some accents and some places they didn't occur.

Now a few more detailed things:
bar 6: 2nd group of 4 16ths uneven (both takes).
bar 11: Something wrong with the 3rd third (both takes).
bars 12, 14, 16: The groups of 4 16ths are too rushed (especially in 14, 16, both takes).
bars 28-29: The accents in bar 28 seem excessive, while there's no accent on the first beat of 29 (and actually something wrong with LH in the 2nd take). Doesn't fit together very well.
bars 33-36: More dynamic contrast (e.g. at most piano vs. at least mf) would be nice.
bars 41, 43: Trills not clear enough (and too rushed). Also applies to 122.
bar 45: Why such a LH accent on the 1st beat? To my taste, the whole passage (44-46) should be just a crescendo (and without an accent on the final chord). Similarly in 125.
bars 50-53: Most of the groups of 4 16ths too rushed.
bar 60: An accidental note on the 3rd beat or what? Maybe not very serious, but a clear pause should actually be audible there!
bar 68-76: The whole passage is actually bad (very uneven and also accelerated). I know it's hard to control evenness there due to unusual unsymmetric distribution between the hands, but it definitely needs fixing.
bar 79: 3rd and 4th beats unclear (especially 3rd)
bar 81-82: Seems a few beats are missing there... Different edition or a memory lapse?
bar 83-84: Lack of dynamical contrast (83 should probably be a real forte).
bar 88: 3rd beat, RH - I don't know what it was, but definitely not an ornament.
bar 110: Shouldn't the trill be finer (e.g. in smaller note values)? And the ending was just not there.
bar 114-117: see 33-36

OK, enough, that's the Viennese Classicism after all, flaws show up instantly while it's a highly nontrivial problem to work out all these nasty details. Anyway, I suppose if you're going to perfect it, evenness is the only more 'structural' technical thing (also more globally, e.g. steady tempo).

What about the other two movements?

PS. Don't link to space-containing filenames unless you want to make people browse your public directory and admire all the stuff there first

[allthumbs]

Holy crap! You must be a recently graduated or about to graduate music major trying to impress everyone in your vivisection of dnephi's recital with your newfound knowledge.

It was his senior recital and I'm sure his performance was already critiqued (if that even occurs at such an event), by those much more knowledgeable than yourself or are you a music professor?

I read his post to mean "Enjoy" as in have a listen, not to micro-dissect his performance.

My 2 ˘ 

allthumbs

[franzliszt2]

Hey Well done! You play very musically!


My only comments (feel free to totally ignore these) are that in the Haydn, you could make more of the accompaniment parts. In Haydn, almost everything is melodic, and I think you could bring this through a little more. Also, I think you could have a feeling of having more time in the fast notes, think of them as equally important as the slower melodic passages, and also it would help prevent you from rushing. You have got the style for the piece, which is very good! I think you could afford to bring even more charatcer to it.

The Schumann... Very good, I like the way you shape everything, and the way it is phrased.  I think you could get more of a sweep to the line, think very long line, and have a very strong sense of direction, it sometimes sounds a little vertical. Maybe a little more contrast between section would be nice..I feel you do get the contrasts well, but I think you coukld do even more, and maybe vary the way you play things when they come back. I sometimes feel as if you could let go more, and really go for some of the climaxs, and make people shocked (in a good way)


Warum... I think you could play it more "questioningly" 

Debussy

I think you could have a more "serene" feeling. It sounds a little "in tempo", which I don't think is suitable fo rthis sort of music. Watch your dynamics, remember that in music liek this, the registers used, and textures determaine the dynamics a lot of the time...so it can sometimes feel as if you are trying to make no dynamics, but they come through naturally. I just feel as if sometimes your cresendo's are a little uneven.

For the Liszt I would just work on the legato touch of the fingers, and a more Religious feel maybe? I think you could play it more like it was by Bach.


Those are just my comments, that are intended as advice, and as an opinion. I really liked it though, you are very musical, and have a convincing sense of style throughout. Congratulations!

[thierry13]

Sometimes because of your too light touch in Haydn you loose contact with the keyboard and therefore loose some sound and articulation quality. Also you could try adding a little bit to the "conversation" dimension. Otherwise I tought that was a very nice interpretation. In the first schumann you should watch how you use rubato in some places where the opening motiv returns. Also I didn't feel the end was an end actually. I'll listen to the rest later. You're very good keep it up!

[kd]

Holy crap! You must be a recently graduated or about to graduate music major trying to impress everyone in your vivisection of dnephi's recital with your newfound knowledge.

It was his senior recital and I'm sure his performance was already critiqued (if that even occurs at such an event), by those much more knowledgeable than yourself or are you a music professor?

I read his post to mean "Enjoy" as in have a listen, not to micro-dissect his performance.

My 2 ˘ 

No, no, no, it was definitely not my intention either to impress anyone with a lengthy analysis, or to say I didn't enjoy the performance.

The facts are:
1. I actually enjoyed the Haydn. Musically it was a very nice interpretation (evidently planned and executed), and in just a few places where it wasn't, it didn't come out of lack of coherent musical concept, so to say. I would try to be more melodic, more transparent with the articulation and more precise (i.e. convergent with the score) with the dynamics, but that's just my point of view which I don't consider as incontestible truth.
2. I don't know if the performance has already been critiqued, and for that matter, I'm surely not the most qualified person to do this (or to play flawlessly). All the things I commented on were just intended to help make (already very good) command of the piece even better. I apologize if I didn't make that clear enough. I just wanted to give some constructive criticism (I have no power to ensure it will be useful, anyway ).
3. I enjoyed the other pieces even more. Though it's actually a lot easier to enjoy a piece you just heard once or twice in your life and don't know very well!

Anyway, posting here is probably not intended just to get hundreds of comments "I enjoyed it a lot", so I tried to write something more. Shame on me if I failed.

All the best,
KD

[dnephi]

I appreciate your comments, kd, FL, et al.  I understand that it's far from perfect and I will continue to work on those issues in general.  IN particular, the bar by bar analysis demonstrated how all-pervasive and visible those issues are.  I was a bit shocked when I saw it, but I appreciate that you took the time to write it in the first place.

Thanks,

Daniel