Liszt Fantasy & Fugue on the Theme B-A-C-H revisited

[arielpiano]

I played this F&F a week ago at an open-air venue in Rome (Teatro di Marcello), competing with the helicopters, ambulances, and an amplified pop concert nearby. The microphone was inside the piano, so it didn't pick up any of the ambient sounds, but the audience surely did.

&feature=plcp
Rome is a fantastic city. Highly recommended.

[andhow04]

although i play and like this piece, i have always found it very strange, and not one that really inspires "love", so i found it impressive that a such a young person like you would want to play it. it is difficult harmonically, and not like most of his other pieces, though there are a few he wrote that i find it comparable to (Totentanz is one in particular).  

the thing for me that is different about this phantasy then the rest of liszt's repertoire, is the complete lack of lyrical relief.  even totentanz has some scintillating passages, but this is all doom and gloom, darkness and strife, madness and finally a sort of victory at the very end.

that all makes it very hard to shape as one idea, and i think that despite how impressive your playing is, that is your main weakness. in the phantasy, i feel loud piled upon loud, but don't feel how one section relates to another in terms of intensity. is any part more particularly intense or turbulent?  i can't tell from listening.

a good example would be the third page or so in, i think it is marked quasi presto (i dont have my score). i hear loud chords and loud sixteenth notes, but can't tell how they are supposed to relate to each other.  is the bass supposed to be stronger than the treble chords? a re the chords supposed to be stronger than the sixteenth notes? they can't all be the same volume, there has to be a texture.

another thing missing for me in the phantasy is the sense of an organic flow; for instance right before that third page passage i mentioned above, you all of a sudden do some of the lower octave ostinato in staccato, then just put down the pedal. it is inconsistent; and then before the hand-crossing passage, there is a short fermata i believe, and you come in at quite a loud volume, not letting that passage grow out of the quietness beforehand.

i think the same comments hold for the fugue. there is not enough magic in between different textures, and as a result it sounds like a lot of loud.

in the marziale section, ther ehas to be -some- difference between the higher chords and the lower chords. we have to feel that there are two instrument groups or two keyboards of the organ, or whatever, fighting each other.  they are exactly the same volume.  

i do want to be encouraging because like i said its impressive that you find this piece interesting and want to play it. it repels a lot of people honestly. your strengths are: clean technique, genuine feeling, and a calm demeanor thruout the most intense passages. i think your biggest weakness is not refining different levels of intensity, the result being that it sounds all too similar.

here's a link to my post on this piece:
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=47219.0

[rachfan]

Hi arielpiano,

Bravo!  Not having played this piece, I can't offer a specific critique.  But from an overall perspective, I found your playing of this large and challenging work to be outstanding.  I really enjoyed hearing your rendition. At a young age you've been able to develop a very capable technique which serves your artistry well.   

David

[arielpiano]

Thanks guys for listening to this long and challenging piece and for commenting in such detail.
Andrew, I have read your comments very carefully and listened to the performance you uploaded, and I must say I have reservations regarding both. In fact, the two are related.
I must admit that my performance is quite loud (although I never bang...) This is one very loud piece, strongly influenced by Wagner both in its harmonies and in its character. Liszt chose a harsh, chromatic subject and treats it with great intensity, mixing chromatic passages with Wagnerian chords, with many of the notes in the lower registers. So yes, except for a few quiet interludes, the piece is loud, but so are Siegfried and Gotterdammerung, which Wagner was writing at the same time. I noted in your performance crescendos, accelerandos, and subito pianos that are not grounded in Liszt’s text. In my opinion, they are not consistent with the spirit of the piece either. This is not Liszt-the-friend-of-Chopin of the 30s and 40s but Liszt-the-friend-of-Wagner of later years (Chopin has been dead for more than 20 years), so the ritenutos and rubatos that you use have no room in this piece in my opinion. Of course, you can choose to ignore Liszt’s notation, but you do so at your peril. I noticed, for example, that you changed some of the note lengths for reasons that are not apparent to me (or else you did some major accelerandos that are not indicated in the text). I’m not sure whether this is on purpose or an oversight; I suppose it is an oversight because there are some wrong note lengths at 2:45, 2:52 (the rests are quarters, and you play them as eighths) and at 3:11-3:14 (or is that an exaggerated ritenuto that makes the eighths notes sound like quarters?) And there are similar instances in the fugue. Perhaps this was a live performance. In any case, I try to keep closer to the text and take fewer liberties because I don’t believe that the highlighting the textures you mention, which are so important in early Romantic music, have the same importance in this chromatic, Wagnerian piece.
Having said all this, I admire the wide range of music you have mastered so well and the many insights you provide in your posts. And again, I appreciate the close listening and the detailed comments.
Ariel

[andhow04]

Thanks guys for listening to this long and challenging piece and for commenting in such detail.
Andrew, I have read your comments very carefully and listened to the performance you uploaded, and I must say I have reservations regarding both. In fact, the two are related.
I must admit that my performance is quite loud (although I never bang...) This is one very loud piece, strongly influenced by Wagner both in its harmonies and in its character. Liszt chose a harsh, chromatic subject and treats it with great intensity, mixing chromatic passages with Wagnerian chords, with many of the notes in the lower registers. So yes, except for a few quiet interludes, the piece is loud, but so are Siegfried and Gotterdammerung, which Wagner was writing at the same time. I noted in your performance crescendos, accelerandos, and subito pianos that are not grounded in Liszt’s text. In my opinion, they are not consistent with the spirit of the piece either. This is not Liszt-the-friend-of-Chopin of the 30s and 40s but Liszt-the-friend-of-Wagner of later years (Chopin has been dead for more than 20 years), so the ritenutos and rubatos that you use have no room in this piece in my opinion. Of course, you can choose to ignore Liszt’s notation, but you do so at your peril. I noticed, for example, that you changed some of the note lengths for reasons that are not apparent to me (or else you did some major accelerandos that are not indicated in the text). I’m not sure whether this is on purpose or an oversight; I suppose it is an oversight because there are some wrong note lengths at 2:45, 2:52 (the rests are quarters, and you play them as eighths) and at 3:11-3:14 (or is that an exaggerated ritenuto that makes the eighths notes sound like quarters?) And there are similar instances in the fugue. Perhaps this was a live performance. In any case, I try to keep closer to the text and take fewer liberties because I don’t believe that the highlighting the textures you mention, which are so important in early Romantic music, have the same importance in this chromatic, Wagnerian piece.
Having said all this, I admire the wide range of music you have mastered so well and the many insights you provide in your posts. And again, I appreciate the close listening and the detailed comments.
Ariel

thanks for listening also, and of course the detailed reply! you are obviously a very thoughtful person, no wonder you like this piece.
i think your chronology is slightly off. Liszt composed this piece originally in 1855, when wagner may have been composing the text of gotterdammerung (called Siegfrieds Tod at first), but the music certainly did not come till later.. in fact i am not even sure he was writing tristan und isolde at this point. but that can be looked up. the harmonic difference between liszt's 1855 version and a revision in 1870 is really not significant.

but i find it surprising that you cite wagner's influence as a reason to make liszt's music more strict, and not more elastic.. wagner was the father of the late nineteenth century, early-mid twentieth century conductor, the kind of conductor who took different tempi for different themes in a symphony, who added instruments in classical works in order to fit them to current styles, and who was a star on the podium rather than a time-keeper.  can any of us name one conductor from the 1820's? not counting beethoven.

in general i don't have an ideological approach to the very elusive concept of style, which of course is based on a whole set of cultural conditions, and is not even necessarily the same in any two people from the same era. i think you make one error of logic when you write,

I noted in your performance crescendos, accelerandos, and subito pianos that are not grounded in Liszt’s text.. the ritenutos and rubatos that you use have no room in this piece in my opinion. Of course, you can choose to ignore Liszt’s notation, but you do so at your peril.

an omission is different in this case from a negation. in other words, had liszt written at some bar, "non accelerando," to accelerate would be to "ignore" or omit his notation; but if nothing is written, there is nothing to ignore. my interpretation comes mostly from a dramatization of the structure of the music as i experience and see it; liszt's notation comes into play when he chooses to give it!
thanks again