Bach p&f A flat major

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Why the heck are their names so god damn long?!?!?!

[ranniks]

I'm to assume this was you playing?

Lord, you play so well! I never thought you could play like this, sorry=/. Marvelous!

Now play the bwv 1058^^, hehe.

[49410enrique]

well done!
please sir


can i have some more?

[chopin2015]

Woohoo! that was nice. What kind of piano was that?

[outin]

Great!
Your playing was so cool that I actually listened through it all, even though I really hated the piece...you know how I feel about this guy, right? 

[ajspiano]

Great!
Your playing was so cool that I actually listened through it all, even though I really hated the piece...you know how I feel about this guy, right? 

Careful..  you'll turn.

The bit I listened too sounded pretty good..  going to give it a proper listen soon. It often depresses me that most times I'm on the forum I have access only to piss weak speakers.

[j_menz]

Why the heck are their names so god damn long?!?!?!

For the same reason your's is, Mr Forever. 

On the piece. Bravo! Very nice indeed.

Your 5 cents is in the post. You are now a pro. 

Oh, and 47 to go.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

For the same reason your's is, Mr Forever. 

On the piece. Bravo! Very nice indeed.

Your 5 cents is in the post. You are now a pro. 

Oh, and 47 to go.

Hey, I'm only learning five more after this!

So don't push it kid!

And it should really be 46 in a half or just 46 because I can play the c major prelude on the guitar, and I knew the one in G minor for like a day in a half before I lost it.

[j_menz]

Hey, I'm only learning five more after this!

So don't push it kid!

And it should really be 46 in a half or just 46 because I can play the c major prelude on the guitar, and I knew the one in G minor for like a day in a half before I lost it.

Bach Preludes and Fugues are a bit like chocolates; once you start.....

Incidentally, just listened back to you earlier recording of this. The improvement is astonishing. 

** wonders if you know there are actually 2 in C major, and 2 in G minor. 

[ajspiano]

Bach Preludes and Fugues are a bit like chocolates; once you start.....

Maybe thats why outin finds bach so sickening.

[j_menz]

Maybe thats why outin finds bach so sickening.

Give her a couple more listens and an invention or two.....

[rachmaninoff_forever]

** wonders if you know there are actually 2 in C major, and 2 in G minor. 

WTC 1

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Great!
Your playing was so cool that I actually listened through it all, even though I really hated the piece...you know how I feel about this guy, right? 

Our feelings for that guy are mutual.

[davidjosepha]

Very good!

The one thing I'd say is that your tempo in the prelude is a bit inconsistent. When you hit 16th note passages, you tend to speed up and it sounds rushed. Other than that, great! The fugue is really beautiful!

[j_menz]

The one thing I'd say is that your tempo in the prelude is a bit inconsistent. When you hit 16th note passages, you tend to speed up and it sounds rushed.

Can't say I agree. Bach is not meant to be metronomic and I find the slight variation effective.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Can't say I agree. Bach is not meant to be metronomic and I find the slight variation effective.

That's odd, so far half of the people that listened to this said that I should keep a strict tempo while the other half is saying that I shouldn't.  So I don't know dude.

[davidjosepha]

That's odd, so far half of the people that listened to this said that I should keep a strict tempo while the other half is saying that I shouldn't.  So I don't know dude.

I don't know about strict. I liked the places you consciously slowed down (or was it just one place?), and feel free to take time between certain jumps or spots, but I think the base tempo needs to stay the same. What you were doing doesn't even count as rubato, from what I could tell--it wasn't push and pull, it just felt like you sped up considerably at the 16th note passages, and it felt rushed, like it was unintentional but you were getting excited and couldn't stop it.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

it just felt like you sped up considerably at the 16th note passages, and it felt rushed, like it was unintentional but you were getting excited and couldn't stop it.

I just listened to it again, and I don't hear it!

EDIT:

Never mind, I do...

[davidjosepha]

Never mind, I do...

Using a tap-along bpm calculator, I think your original speed was around 100bpm and got to 116-120bpm when you hit the first 16th note passage. You handle the 16th notes very well, so you might want to speed up the beginning to match it. And if you wanted, you might even be able to leave in a bit of a speed up, but anything over 10bpm difference is a bit excessive, in my opinion. Let's let j_menz pose his opinion before you make a decision though

[j_menz]

There are slight quickenings of pulse at points; they are slight (not considerable) and they are of pulse, which is appropriate. Further, they add to the effectiveness of the piece.

Bach lived and died before metronomes were ever created (lucky him!) and so the modern fetish with "exact" time would never even have occurred to him. Variations in pulse were probably even more acceptable given that harpsichords had no other means of varying the feel of a piece. If you do have other means, the need is perhaps less but is, within reason, perfectly valid.  The trick is to speed or slow the pulse ever so slightly to create or release tension. It is nothing like rubato, which comes from a time after metronomes.

What you have done is both correct and effective.  It is also very subtle, and I must say I didn't notice it at all until it was pointed out - which is as it should be.

[davidjosepha]

Bach lived and died before metronomes were ever created (lucky him!) and so the modern fetish with "exact" time would never even have occurred to him.

Not relevant to Rach's piece, but there are ways of achieving exact time without a metronome. I rarely, if ever, practice drums with a metronome, but I have pretty close to perfect time when playing them (proven to me by recordings). I've worked very hard to have very good time though I haven't used a metronome--I find them distasteful, given how much they accent having each beat perfectly in time rather than having the greater picture in time (which, when playing drums, will lead to having each beat in time naturally rather than forcing one's hand to try to sync perfectly with the beat). They also promote playing at a tempo other than the one you would naturally play at.

I disagree that "exact" time wouldn't have occurred to Bach. All repetitive motions naturally happen at a certain constant tempo unless something forces them not to be. You walk at a constant speed when you're walking a significant distance, when you tap your pencil on your desk in impatience, it's at a constant tempo. When you shake your head or nod, that's at a constant tempo. The idea of a metronome developed in order to create an objective way to monitor exact time. It did not create exact time itself.

[j_menz]

I disagree that "exact" time wouldn't have occurred to Bach.

Then why does so much of his music rely on flouting it?

All repetitive motions naturally happen at a certain constant tempo unless something forces them not to be. You walk at a constant speed when you're walking a significant distance, when you tap your pencil on your desk in impatience, it's at a constant tempo. When you shake your head or nod, that's at a constant tempo.

Nope. However much they might seem to, they don't. Our perception of time is flexible - our playing should allow for that. And influence it.

The idea of a metronome developed in order to create an objective way to monitor exact time. It did not create exact time itself.

Then why was the first thing invented after the metronome ways to get around it?

[davidjosepha]

Then why does so much of his music rely on flouting it?

Just because it occurred to him doesn't mean he thought it was the best way to play music or followed it.

Nope. However much they might seem to, they don't. Our perception of time is flexible - our playing should allow for that. And influence it.

Again, recordings of self and observation of others prove otherwise.

Example, foot tapping. I have given informal lessons to plenty of percussionists and drummers and even the bad ones can keep their foot tapping to a steady beat (verified by a metronome they could not hear). But when they started playing and got excited, their foot sped up (excitement being an outside cause, as I mentioned could affect these rhythms).

Then why was the first thing invented after the metronome ways to get around it?

I'm not saying exact time is intended for music, just that the idea of it is obvious. Rhythm and pattern and symmetry are natural things humans strive for on a rational level.

And rubato is supposed to still keep a constant tempo on a large scale, just not on the small scale. It's push and pull, not just push, not just pull.

[j_menz]

Again, recordings of self and observation of others prove otherwise.

Find me a jazz/pop/rock recording made before 1970 that can be matched to a bpm machine.

But when they started playing and got excited, their foot sped up (excitement being an outside cause, as I mentioned could affect these rhythms).

Which induces excitement in their audience, which affects the audience perception of the tempo making it seem slower, so the audience hears it as a constant tempo.

[davidjosepha]

Find me a jazz/pop/rock recording made before 1970 that can be matched to a bpm machine.

Anything with drums and a good drummer, basically. Not absolutely perfectly in time, but a constant tempo (which is more important than any given beat being perfectly in time). Example?

The entirety of Big Swing Face, for one. We can't hold everyone to the standard of Buddy Rich though, so...

Once the song actually starts at about 0:08, the tempo fluctuates around 110 ±1 bpm. At around 0:40, there's a drum fill, and after that, the song goes to about 112 ±1 bpm for the remainder of the song.

More often than not, tempo problems are a result of tension between different group members rather than a fault of any of the individually. In general, guitars and lead instruments push the tempo forward while bass and drums hold them back.

Which induces excitement in their audience, which affects the audience perception of the tempo making it seem slower, so the audience hears it as a constant tempo.

Hard to replicate that excitement on a recording and so it's noticeable to the observer, or at least to me.

[j_menz]

the tempo fluctuates around 110 ±1 bpm. At around 0:40, there's a drum fill, and after that, the song goes to about 112 ±1 bpm for the remainder of the song.

So close, but no cigar. 

Hard to replicate that excitement on a recording and so it's noticeable to the observer, or at least to me.

Perhaps that is why "live recordings" are often less satisfactory than studio recordings that are less satifactory than being there.

[davidjosepha]

So close, but no cigar. 

But that's not a change in tempo. It's a fluctuation, comparable to rubato. What you're discussing is actually altering tempos significantly (again, 16-20bpm is A LOT), I'm talking about staying at the same tempo, but breaking away from it occasionally and very slightly. I'd say that's "exact" time.

Perhaps that is why "live recordings" are often less satisfactory than studio recordings that are less satifactory than being there.

Yes. There are bands I know that set their click 20 bpm when playing live than in a studio because playing the speed they play in a studio would feel slow live.

[outin]

Bach Preludes and Fugues are a bit like chocolates; once you start.....

I kind of like chocolate, but not ANY chocolate, I am picky. And I am not one of those people who cannot stop eating chocolate. I can have some and get bored with it.

Pizza on the other hand...

[costicina]

Great performance!
You should consider to change your nickname: how does it sounds Bach_forever? 

[rachmaninoff_forever]

So close, but no cigar. 

Perhaps that is why "live recordings" are often less satisfactory than studio recordings that are less satifactory than being there.

Sorry, but you lose this one.

My teacher said that the tempo sucked.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

J Menz - 0

Davidjosepha - 1


Cmon Menz, get it together.

[chopin2015]

next time you record on a weird piano, start at fast enough tempo and then stop and start again at the same or different tempo(depending on how you feel) you do not have to stop recording, just keep going and pick a take you like. Also, do you play in your head what tempo you are going to play at before you start?

[j_menz]

Sorry, but you lose this one.

My teacher said that the tempo sucked.

Not conceding. Your teacher is wrong.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Your teacher is wrong.

I wish that were true.  I asked a couple people and all of my teachers said the temp(i) sucked but the music teachers at the school said it was fine. 

Also my current teacher said the piano was out of tune and that it was my weakest piece.

[j_menz]

I wish that were true.  I asked a couple people and all of my teachers said the temp(i) sucked but the music teachers at the school said it was fine. 

Also my current teacher said the piano was out of tune and that it was my weakest piece.

The tempo is fine. Ask "all" of your teachers which Gould Goldberg they prefer. My prediction? The first. (Also wrong, IMO)

The piano is as in tune as any piano I have ever heard.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

The tempo is fine. Ask "all" of your teachers which Gould Goldberg they prefer. My prediction? The first. (Also wrong, IMO)

The piano is as in tune as any piano I have ever heard.

Was it also the weakest out of the rest of the pieces I posted on here?

Oh dude he had NOTHING to say about the Babajanian!!!  What the heck, how?!?!

[j_menz]

Was it also the weakest out of the rest of the pieces I posted on here?

IMO, no. The Liszt is IMO, but is still a good performance.

Oh dude he had NOTHING to say about the Babajanian!!!  What the heck, how?!?!

He sounds like a nihil nisi malum kinda guy, so I'd take that as a compliment.

BTW, are you going to post the Pathetique?

[davidjosepha]

J Menz - 0

Davidjosepha - 1

The score's gotta be higher than that, more like

J Menz - 0

Davidjosepha - 173

[quantum]

That's odd, so far half of the people that listened to this said that I should keep a strict tempo while the other half is saying that I shouldn't.  So I don't know dude.

You need to make a decision and stick with it, regardless of what people say.  There will always be someone who disagrees with your interpretation and try to sway you the opposite direction.  You need to deliver your interpretation with conviction.  Sitting on the fence and being indecisive makes the music sound like it has no direction. 

Every teacher I've studied with has had their own opinion on how Bach "should be played."  They all conflict with one another to a certain extent. 

***

I don't get it.  You are always proclaiming your feelings on Bach, yet you deliver this sensitive and musical performance.  Bravo! 

You really should play more Bach you know, you're good at it 

[j_menz]

The score's gotta be higher than that, more like

J Menz - 0

Davidjosepha - 173

There's delusional and then there's.....

[j_menz]

Every teacher I've studied with has had their own opinion on how Bach "should be played."  They all conflict with one another to a certain extent. 

Haha, that is so true. IMO, the more dogm,atic they are (and this is an are very saturated with dogma) the less able they are to actually play him themselves.
 

You really should play more Bach you know, you're good at it 

+ 1

[emill]

"PERFECT" !!!  and I thought my son played the "best" Bach out there.
I have to admire too the excellent way this was recorded.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

You really should play more Bach you know

-1756178914751237582789412341272541979791947917949199873577745537542756