Holes in Repertoire

[petenaga]

In another post, people said that I "skipped" many pieces in my repertoire
Anything I should add?

My Current Repertoire:

Chopin-
Nocturnes Op. 48 and Op. 9
Sonata no. 2
Etudes Op. 10
Liszt
Don Juan Fantasy
Gnomenreigen
Schumann
Traumerei
Mendelssohn
Op. 16 no. 2
Mozart
Fantasy in D minor
Ravel
Ondine and Scarbo
La Valse
Stravinsky
Petrushka Mvmts. 1, 3
Balakirev Islamey
Beethoven
Les Aideux
Moonlight
Schubert
Impromptus op. 90
Bach
French Suites nos. 1, 2, and 5
English Suite no. 3
Concerto for Keyboard after Marcello
Rach
Concerto 2 Mvmt 1
Prelude Op. 3 no 2
Prelude Op. 32 no. 6

[awesom_o]

If I were you I'd add some French Baroque and some of my own compositions. How are your op. 25 Etudes coming along?

Have you devoted much time in your study to chamber music  of any sort or four hands duet?

[j_menz]

So in the three weeks since you asked this exact same question you've added a teensy bit of Rachmaninoff and ignored all the other suggestions made then.

Go back and re-read the earlier suggestions. If your not going to take them, stop asking.

[theholygideons]

Your repertoire is far too hackneyed.. stop learning stuff for the sake of learning sh*t.

[lojay]

I smell bullshit!  I think the OP is a troll or is lying.  Probably both!  I will apologize if that's not the case, but come on...

Anyone else find it strange that someone with that repertoire is asking for suggestions?  When someone claims that a piece is a part of their repertoire, I take it to mean that they're so thoroughly acquainted with a piece that they can have it ready for performance in really short notice.  It's highly unlikely that someone with the repertoire listed will be asking for general suggestions.  By the time someone has a repertoire like that he/she would have played through most of the standard repertoire.  I mean it would be different if the OP were asking for some obscure suggestions...

Also, who the hell learns just the outer movements of Petrushka and Gaspard? 

[j_menz]

Also, who the hell learns just the outer movements of Petrushka and Gaspard? 

Claustrophobic thanatophobes?

[to4ko99]

I, too, find this post very strange. Who has played only 4 nocturnes, the first set of etudes and jumps to the massive second sonata by Chopin... Not a single ballade, scherzo, or whatever. The OP couldn't have possibly started with Gaspard de la nuit and not with Le Tombeau de Couperin or some menuet when it comes to Ravel's music.
Rach 2 1st movement but not a single Mozart sonata?

[lojay]

@to4ko99:  Someone who actually has that kind of repertoire is just at a completely different level than most of us on the forums.  Someone at that level could probably sight read a Chopin Ballade/Scherzo or a Mozart Sonata better than most our performances of these pieces even after we've studied the piece for months. 

Is it wrong for me to assume that if someone can play sh*t out of Gaspard or Petrushka they can pretty much play anything?

[j_menz]

Is it wrong for me to assume that if someone can play sh*t out of Gaspard or Petrushka they can pretty much play anything?

The generally mediocre (at best) performance of compulsory Mozart pieces in competitions would suggest the assumption is in fact wrong.

[lojay]

Could they actually play the sh*t out of Petrushka/Gaspard?  I'm not talking about a half assed performance...

[j_menz]

Could they actually play the sh*t out of Petrushka/Gaspard?  I'm not talking about a half assed performance...

I'm talking about international, big end competitions. They can play to the level that you are critiquing the finer points of their interpretation.

[to4ko99]

@to4ko99:  Someone who actually has that kind of repertoire is just at a completely different level than most of us on the forums.  Someone at that level could probably sight read a Chopin Ballade/Scherzo or a Mozart Sonata better than most our performances of these pieces even after we've studied the piece for months. 

Is it wrong for me to assume that if someone can play sh*t out of Gaspard or Petrushka they can pretty much play anything?

As a great pianist once said, "Liszt isn't hard. It's Mozart that I find difficult to play", or something along those lines. You are wrong, nobody can pull off a great performance of a Mozart sonata by sight-reading it for the first time. If the OP was that good, he would have played the whole Gaspard, the whole Petrushka, not only the outer movements. Or are you telling me he/she has learned and polished the whole first movement of Rach 2 in less than a month? If he/she was on a completely different level from "most of us on the forums", then why would he/she waste their time instead of actually adding a sight-readable Ballade to their repertoire?

[lojay]

Someone seems mad.

You are wrong, nobody can pull off a great performance of a Mozart sonata by sight-reading it for the first time.

You think so?  Some pianists are just so familiar with all the standard repertoire from years of teaching and listening.  They've also been exposed to so much music that there's very little they haven't seen from a technical standpoint.

Anyway, my claim was that a real pianist with the repertoire of the OP will sight read better than what most of us can do with a piece after we've studied it for months.

Of all people who play the piano, how many do you think make it to advanced repertoire?  I would bet that the bulk of forum's visitors and contributors that do play piano haven't started advanced repertoire yet.

Also, do you actually think that most people who spend months on a Mozart Sonata can pull off a great performance?  I mean great performances are just so rare...

If the OP was that good, he would have played the whole Gaspard, the whole Petrushka, not only the outer movements.

I completely agree with you.  I thought I did more than imply this in my first post.

Or are you telling me he/she has learned and polished the whole first movement of Rach 2 in less than a month?

Huh?  I do not know the OP and I don't speak for him/her.

Also, getting the Rach 2 ready for a performance in a month is definitely doable for some people.  I probably wouldn't be able to even if I ate, breathed, and shat the Rach 2, but I had a teacher who claimed that his teacher (faculty at Julliard) learned the notes to Rach 3 in a few weeks for a competition.

If he/she was on a completely different level from "most of us on the forums", then why would he/she waste their time instead of actually adding a sight-readable Ballade to their repertoire?

Again, this is what my original post was implying!  I've never made any claims that the OP is actually on this level, I thought I was pretty explicit that I thought the opposite.

I will entertain you though!  I mean it's highly unlikely that someone is at this level, but let's assume he/she is.  Perhaps the OP is a child prodigy not familiar with much of the standard repertoire?  Maybe he/she just studied the pieces he was assigned and his/her teacher is like Gulda?  There are an infinite number of possible responses...

[to4ko99]

Someone seems mad.

Can't argue with that... 
It's just that I hate trolls and spammers, like the OP.

You think so?  Some pianists are just so familiar with all the standard repertoire from years of teaching and listening.  They've also been exposed to so much music that there's very little they haven't seen from a technical standpoint.

Well, they for sure have played Mozart. I never said they can't sight read a Mozart sonata, it's just so many details that it still won't be a great performance.

Anyway, my claim was that a real pianist with the repertoire of the OP will sight read better than what most of us can do with a piece after we've studied it for months.

The OP's repertoire is not that advanced (it is, but it is quite small). I really think that it's impossible to pull off a greater performance than one played by "us", who have studied the same piece for months. It's just... impossible...

Also, do you actually think that most people who spend months on a Mozart Sonata can pull off a great performance?  I mean great performances are just so rare...

And how would a one-day Mozart sonata be better?

Huh?  I do not know the OP and I don't speak for him/her.

Also, getting the Rach 2 ready for a performance in a month is definitely doable for some people.  I probably wouldn't be able to even if I ate, breathed, and shat the Rach 2, but I had a teacher who claimed that his teacher (faculty at Julliard) learned the notes to Rach 3 in a few weeks for a competition.

In his previous post, started on July 29, he claims to not have played it (Rach 2 1 mov). Now, after a month, he does. Yes, it is possible to learn it in less than a month, but... come on, he didn't. 

[lojay]

I think you're still misunderstanding my initial post.

"Someone who actually has that kind of repertoire is just at a completely different level than most of us on the forums.  Someone at that level could probably sight read a Chopin Ballade/Scherzo or a Mozart Sonata better than most our performances of these pieces even after we've studied the piece for months."

Like I've said before, I've never claimed that it'd be a great performance...just better than most students can do.

Also, my previous response was specifically directed at your statement that "nobody can pull off a great performance of a Mozart sonata by sight-reading it for the first time".  Notice how I said "some"?  Think of beastly international concert pianists (Richter, Ashkenazy, Barenboim, etc).

I bring the above up, because you state:

Well, they for sure have played Mozart. I never said they can't sight read a Mozart sonata, it's just so many details that it still won't be a great performance.

in response to my claim about "some" meaning any possible pianist.  Notice how we're no longer talking about a pianist that has a similar repertoire as the OP and you're just simplifying and combining everything when there is a distinction.

The OP's repertoire is not that advanced (it is, but it is quite small). I really think that it's impossible to pull off a greater performance than one played by "us", who have studied the same piece for months. It's just... impossible...

The "us" specifically refers to the average forum visitor that plays piano - someone who hasn't even touched advanced repertoire.  In other words, someone that isn't fully technically developed.  Someone that has trouble sight reading and would take months (or possibly never) just to get the notes for a Mozart Sonata.

Also, see the underline:
"Anyway, my claim was that a real pianist with the repertoire of the OP will sight read better than what most of us can do with a piece after we've studied it for months."

A real pianist (I must emphasize I am not talking specifically about the OP) that has Gaspard, La Valse, Don Juan, Petrushka, etc. in their repertoire would have studied exponentially more works than the pieces listed in their repertoire.  If you had to write a repertoire list, would you include every single piece you've learned?  Wouldn't you just include the works you're comfortable performing?

Put it this way:

Who would you rather hear?
An intermediate level student performance of Mozart
or
DMA Candidate from Juilliard sight reads Mozart Sonata

[ale_ius]

I thinks holes in repertoire are okay only sometime. I have three, for my loose sheet in binder so turn pages of scanned/copy of repertoire is easy.

similar to this


but yes better to not have holes, sometimes hole is through part of the music itself so you must consult original for notes 

[j_menz]

Put it this way:

Who would you rather hear?
An intermediate level student performance of Mozart
or
DMA Candidate from Juilliard sight reads Mozart Sonata

Mozart is actually eminently sight readable if one is a reasonably proficient sightreader.  Though that raises the question of what is meant by "sight reading" here.

There wouldn't be many DMA's who hadn't heard all the sonatas, and probably few who hadn't played several and read through the rest. Not exactly "at sight".

If it was a sonata they'd managed never to hear before, they would still apply a certain knowledge of Mozart to their performance.

It is unlikely to be a "great" performance, but it may well be acceptable.

As may the intermediate student's performance.

I'd also add that there are plenty of high level pianists whose Mozart leaves a lot to be desired, and who I wouldn't cross the street to listen to, even if they'd worked on it.

[to4ko99]

Also, my previous response was specifically directed at your statement that "nobody can pull off a great performance of a Mozart sonata by sight-reading it for the first time".  Notice how I said "some"?  Think of beastly international concert pianists (Richter, Ashkenazy, Barenboim, etc).

I didn't know we are talking about Richter... Of course he could sight read a Mozart sonata and make it a good performance. I really can't argue with that.

I bring the above up, because you state:
...
in response to my claim about "some" meaning any possible pianist.  Notice how we're no longer talking about a pianist that has a similar repertoire as the OP and you're just simplifying and combining everything when there is a distinction.

I didn't mean every possible pianist, I meant those people you refer to as "some".

The "us" specifically refers to the average forum visitor that plays piano - someone who hasn't even touched advanced repertoire.  In other words, someone that isn't fully technically developed.  Someone that has trouble sight reading and would take months (or possibly never) just to get the notes for a Mozart Sonata.

Also, see the underline:
"Anyway, my claim was that a real pianist with the repertoire of the OP will sight read better than what most of us can do with a piece after we've studied it for months."

A real pianist (I must emphasize I am not talking specifically about the OP) that has Gaspard, La Valse, Don Juan, Petrushka, etc. in their repertoire would have studied exponentially more works than the pieces listed in their repertoire.  If you had to write a repertoire list, would you include every single piece you've learned?  Wouldn't you just include the works you're comfortable performing?

I know who "us" are. I did understand you think the OP is a troll, as you have stated it in your first reply. Yes, if I could play all those stuff, I would have said I've played a bunch of Mozart sonatas. People would know I've played them in the past. Of course, I wouldn't have included every single etude I've played, or Fur Elise.

Who would you rather hear?
An intermediate level student performance of Mozart
or
DMA Candidate from Juilliard sight reads Mozart Sonata

A DMA Candidate from Julliard is very far from what you mean by real pianist. An intermediate level student will play the Mozart better than the second guy since the Mozart sonatas are obviously not in the advanced repertoire list, the one expected to be played by the... you know...

[chopinrabbitthing]

I wouldn't really call them holes, but the repertoire could look a little bit more, let's say, "tidy". Just some suggestions.

-For Liszt, you could play the other Concert Etude - Waldesraushchen.

-You could try finishing out Gaspard de la Nuit and Petroushka. And maybe playing the complete Rach 2

It sounds better when you can say "I can play Gaspard and Petroushka", rather than two thirds of both. They should be no problem, since you can play pieces of this difficulty, good or bad (no offence).

You could also look at less well known pieces, or easier pieces - which seems like the opposite of what you have.

[jknott]

what about some brahms? all those intermezzi in op.116-119 etc.