Rachmaninoff, Prelude Op. 23, No. 10 in G flat

[rachfan]

Rachmaninoff’s Prelude No. 10 in G flat is a lesser known prelude from Op. 23. The piece is a tearful one built on a sigh motif that often erases the bar lines for the listener. For these preludes most pianists try to guess Rachmaninoff’s programs. For me this piece is a sorrowful, parting farewell. Perhaps it is in a time of war when a young soldier is about to depart on a train headed for the front. His distraught fiancée is inconsolable. In the run up to the coda, the couple shares a too fleeting moment of splendor before the soldier boards the train. The music ends in a G flat cadence played forte suggesting a bright ray of hope. For me, this is a piece to be played from the inside out, not from the outside in.

Although it’s a short piece, it cannot be underestimated. Much of the singing melody is in the left hand. But there are intricate duets present too. So the pianist must continuously distinguish foreground from background. Also the piece requires much attention to voice leading and melodic voicing of chords which contribute to the long line. This prelude has two climaxes, or “crucial points” as Rachmaninoff called them, contrary to conventional advice given to young composers at the conservatories. Personally I don’t believe that this weakens the structure at all. In fact, Op. 23, No. 6 likewise has two climaxes and seemingly to good overall effect.

The most difficult technical challenge comes in the last quarter of the piece nearing the coda. The ecstatic rolls in the right hand are huge and difficult to execute at tempo even with forearm rotation. For anyone who would play this piece, I urge caution while practicing this particular section.

I hope you’ll enjoy hearing this piece.

Comments welcome.

David

Piano: Baldwin Model L Artist Grand (6’3”) with lid fully open
Recorder: Korg MR-1000
Microphones: Earthworks TC-20 matched pair of small diaphragm omni-directional condenser mics in A-B configuration

[p2u_]

I hope you’ll enjoy hearing this piece.

Well done, rachfan! It's very difficult to give this piece the right kind of magic and convince the audience that it's undeservedly lesser known.
P.S.: My favorite rendition is by Gilels, simply mesmerizing, but I guess you know that one already...

Paul

[costicina]

..lesser known, but not lesser beutiful. And the more the climaxes, the better!

Your intepretation is, as always, flawless and deep moving. Thank you so much, David!!!!

[rachfan]

Hi p2u,

Thanks for the compliment on my playing.  Yes the Gilels rendition is very good.  In general, sometimes I've felt that his tone was forced at times by the upper arms.  But he was still one of the best ever.  I have the Ashkenazy rendition here and have never much cared for it.  It's not very cohesive in my opinion, and given his small hands he seemingly plays the big rolls at the end leisurely.  Had Rachmaninoff wanted that, he would have written ad libitum or similar.  I was determined to maintain tempo even though it's higher-risk playing.  I also remember hearing the Kissin recording and thinking it to be too wooden quite frankly.  None of this is to suggest that my rendition is superior to those mentioned above.  They were and are great artists, and I certainly respect that.

Thanks for listening and commenting!

David

  

[rachfan]

Hi Marg,

Indeed!  

Thanks so much for your kind words on my rendition of this prelude.  It was tough in some ways, but worth the effort.  

David

[49410enrique]

i had never heard this piece (truth be told i've only peripherally dabbled with either listening or reading any rachmaninoff, even then mainly the earl wild song transcriptions...)

what an incredibly lovely and moving work! you do such a nice job of bringing out that tender 'goodbye' quality you spoke of, and you do it without letting it get overly sentimental, which i think is a tendency we can all easily fall prey too with these types of works/feelings. i very much enjoyed the flow and tempo (i think that is one of the main things i think that holds this together and keeps it from being too 'sweety').

thank you for sharing, let us know if you audition any more takes and update the recording. 

[rachfan]

Hi enrique,

Thanks for those nice compliments--I appreciate it!

Yes, were there are differing sections in this short work--which is good for contrast--attention to tempo is a cohesive factor in this music.  And I totally agree with you that in romantic works, you cannot allow them to sink into pathos.  Everything needs to be bound by the structure except a tasteful liberty here or there.

Thanks for listening.

David

[emill]

hello David,

One of the things I like most in many of your posts is the wealth of information that you give and often generated by those who comment. It gives me a much better perspective why a piece is so appreciated from a pianists point of view or the opposite.... why it is so disliked.

On a good number of instances, I am surprised at the excitement a piece generates ....  as if I am looking at a Picasso wondering what it is all about?  The background story or explanation often illuminates the theme of the piece and makes it easier to understand. Over the years in conversations with friends, lovers of classical piano, I am often surprised to be saying things about a piece almost exactly the way your info and the generated comments were posted.  I did not realize I have been slowly .... to slow in fact.... been educated.

Also I appreciate the quality of your recordings, using your configuration of mics which I have been experimenting myself.  The way you play gives an overall effect of pleasantness.  My ears can concentrate on the music and not get irritated by the manner of recording which distracts from appreciating the piece.

Thanks again David!

[rachfan]

Hi Emill,

Rather than simply posting the title and opus of a piece, I prefer to write some notes about it that might help the listened better understand its history and my interpretation.  It's like a blurb in a recital program or "liner notes" in a CD case.  Sometimes I like to to point out the pianistic challenges too. You and others have sometimes pointed out how my remarks are.  If it educates, as you say, then I've succeeded in my aim. 

My recordings don't challenge professional studio recordings, of course, as studios have at least a seven foot grand piano and very high caliber (and expensive) equipment.  However, for the next level down--home recordings--I think my equipment is very good for the purpose and up to the task.  I continue to be pleased with it, as you and others have commented favorably on that aspect.

I'm flattered by your kind words.  Thanks so much for listening!

David

[goldentone]

.

[johnmar78]

magical touch..10/10.

[rachfan]

Hi John,

Thanks for the compliment!

David

[zezhyrule]

I love this Rach prelude! Your interpretation was beautiful

[rachfan]

Thanks, zezhyrule, I appreciate that! 

David

[m1469]

Hi, David,

Just recently I was reminded that I have played this prelude several years ago.  I don't know how I could have possibly forgotten that I did, but I somehow managed.  I didn't love it at first but grew to appreciate it and eventually to love it, and now it holds a very special place for me.  It was also the first Rach Prelude I ever played and remember the challenges of the melodic LH, which you handled successfully.  I enjoy your idea of the ray of hope near the end, and I can hear perfectly in your playing what you mean by that.  What I know of Rachmaninov's music, it seems that there is often a kind of dance between darkness and light, and the light is often in glimmers.  Thank you .

[rachfan]

Hi m1469,

This was the second encounter with this piece for me.  My earlier analog recording dates from around 1985.  Thanks for your comments here.  You'll be surprised to know that I just added a new music file of this prelude here for the very reason you mentioned--"the challenges of the melodic line".  I wanted to better distinguish the foreground melody from the background accompaniment to enable the melody to soar higher. I believe I succeeded. If you have a moment, see with you think.  Just click on the second (lower) music file to play or download it.  Thanks for listening!

David

[ariel12345]

Hi David
Great playing (as usual...), I enjoy this touching little piece very much!

[costicina]

In your new recording this enchanting Prelude shines more than ever, with subtle, yet substantial refinements. Thank you, David!

[rachfan]

Hi ariel,

Glad you liked it.  I hope you listened to the second rendition--more polished in my opinion.  Thanks!

David

[rachfan]

Hi Marg,

I'm so glad you took time to listen to the revision.  What I wanted to do as the main refinement was to better distinguish foreground from background and to let the melody soar.  I'm satisfied with the results.  I'm happy that you could discern the difference as compared to the original recording I posted earlier.  Thanks so much!

David

[rachfan]

Hi zezhyrule,

Thanks for listening.  I'm glad you enjoyed my rendition!

David

[furtwaengler]

I had a teacher a few years ago who liked to be complete. He's performed in recent years Bach's complete WTK and Goldberg Variations, the complete sonatas of Mozart and Schubert, and in years gone, the complete piano music of Debussy...and yes the complete solo music of Rachmaninov. I remember distinctly this beautiful prelude in G-flat having a special place in his heart, being one of his particular favorites. Listening to both of your recordings it is easy to see why, as it is not merely the desirous beauty which grabs our appeal, but that in terms of the soul of Rachmaninov's music, it is the essence of his golden lyricism and harmonic world in concentrated form. Well, I could float away on a cloud!

Excellent work as always, and as always I need to thank you for your hard work, dedication, and sharing of yourself on these forums!

[rachfan]

Hi furtwaengler,

That's interesting that your former teacher particularly loved this prelude.  He knew his music!  It's sad that this piece is not played more often, thus goes under-appreciated.  I'm glad you so enjoyed hearing my renditions here.  "Golden lyricism and harmonic world"... yes, that's the essence of Rachmaninoff's music.  It's why he'll always be my favorite.  And thank you for your generous praise.

I wonder if by chance you preferred one rendition over the other? 

David

[goldentone]

Hi David,

I prefer your original recording, for these reasons.  In the second recording, where you aimed to distinguish the melody yet more from the RH chordal accompaniment melody, it ends up being too loud (it is marked mf), and for the character of the piece.  It has a kind of self-consciousness.  Then after the first minute you settle down where there is more richly differentiated playing in the second section than I hear in the original recording.  The strength of your original is that it captures the essence of the piece--it is cohesive and poetic.  There, when you enter the rolling chords, you are very much at ease and play it almost effortlessly.  That's good playing.  That section is serenly ecstatic, isn't it?  An interesting melding. 

I've worked on this piece myself, so I know how difficult it is to excecute.  But what beauty.

Very nice.  Thanks for sharing.

[rachfan]

Hi Goldentone,

Thanks for your thoughtful comments.  Yes, I would have to admit that the original recording very naturally takes on a life of its own, whereas the second recording looks more through an academic lens.  They both have strengths and weaknesses.  You're right, the test of the pianist's mettle lies in the rolling chords nearing the coda--very difficult to execute well at tempo. 

Hopefully more listeners will hear this piece.  It's a shame that so few know of it or play it.

Thanks again!

David

[gvans]

Hi David,

Thanks for a lovely rendition of this very evocative prelude. Bravo!

Glenn

[rachfan]

Thanks, Glenn!  I last recorded this piece back in the 1980s.  As I relearned it now in order to make a digital recording, I was surprised that my interpretation had changed a little over time. Earlier I had posted Prelude 23/1 here and I'm now working on 23/4, again to move up from analog to digital.  Then I'll continue on with this Rachmaninoff project of revisiting more preludes.  I must say though, getting these difficult pieces back into my fingers 30 years later is a harder task than I had presumed it would be!

Thanks for listening.

David

[cloverleaves]

  nice piece of work yet very conservative line.Second one is better

[rachfan]

Hi cloverleaves,

I too prefer the second rendition--better clarity of line throughout.  I plan to delete the earlier one soon.  Thanks for listening.

David