Piano Forum

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Topic: Why not Scriabin?  (Read 19976 times)

Offline verwel

  • PS Silver Member
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
Why not Scriabin?
on: February 27, 2003, 12:18:53 PM
Yesterday, I was privileged to here Scriabin's 2th piano sonata (tremendously played by Elisabeth Leonskaja) and again it reinforced my believe that Scriabin was the most exiting, imaginative piano music composer till now. So why is everybody still stuck to Chopin, Liszt and Rachmaninnoff. These three seem extremely boring to me, compared with Scriabin (however, no one has to share my views, I'm well aware off that). Anyway, it amazes me that Scriabin is still largely ignored by pianists, so what is the reason for that? Maybe that Scriabin scores are very difficult to read, in general? Are is it because he was Russian, but then again, Rachmaninnoff was to. Anyone any clues?
Logged
Sign up for a Piano Street membership to download this piano score.
Sign up for FREE! >>

Offline ned

  • PS Silver Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #1 on: February 27, 2003, 07:20:22 PM
Good question. I love Scriabin. But there are some things that work against his being as popular as Rachmaninoff/Chopin, and for me they are questions of structure. I feel that Scriabin cannot end his pieces effectively. Take two of his most exciting etudes op 8 no 12 and op 42 no 5. These pieces just end abruptly or die away. Many other of his pieces do the same. (Schumann has the same weakness in my opinion) Compare that to the incredible logic of Chopin and Rachmaninoff etudes or preludes, to say nothing of their large scale pieces.  The big Scriabin Fantasy op 28 has gorgeous material but seems to go nowhere after the climax in the middle. Of course Scriabin was exploring some very unusual approaches as was Schumann.
Even Richter performed very little Scriabin in the last 20 years of his career. And Scriabin's scores are very difficult to learn. I play the two left hand pieces and several etudes. I am interested in some of the short later pieces but have not spent much time on them. But you are right, Scriabin makes some incredible sounds
Ned
Logged

Offline xenia

  • PS Silver Member
  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 38
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #2 on: February 28, 2003, 01:47:39 AM


Oooooo!We never talked about Scriabin!
You are  right about him,about his music.But, he comes later,I think,because his imaginative(hard to understand) and filosofy music.
Scriabin isn't  ignored by pianists in Serbia.
I'm good in Scriabin.Now,I practice five preludes op11 and etude op8 no12.Sonatas are too much(filosofy) for me.For now!

;)
Logged

Offline rachfan

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3026
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #3 on: February 28, 2003, 06:10:08 AM
ned gives some really excellent insights here.  I love Scriabin's music too, and have it on my planned repertoire list if I ever get to it.  I have done a considerable amount of Rachmaninoff though.  Beyond the complexity issue which do pose difficulties in learning many of Scriabin's pieces, there is a duality that has made Scriabin not wear well with many listeners over the decades.  

His earlier works up to Opus 50 are truly neo-romantic.  But unlike Rachmaninoff, who had his own idiom or composing "voice", many of Scriabin's works of that period are more Chopin-esque in character and are often deemed as derivative in style rather than being as original in concept as Rachmaninoff's works.  

Then comes the opposite problem. The farther beyond Opus 50 you get, the more wierd Scriabin's music to the average recital attendee.  Once Scriabin got into his mystic period, the more the average listener found his works to be less accessible.  Great pianists like Horowitz over the years have championed some of Scriabin's later works, but to little avail.  I have to confess that I enjoy his earlier sonatas far more than the later ones, and that's a common reaction, even if not justified by the inner genius of the later compositions.  It's the perception of aesthetics, a personal and subjective matter residing in the ear of the listener.  So I believe it's Scriabin's odd dual nature of having written seemingly derivative works (but certainly not all of them by any means)  followed by more inaccessible mystical works which have put audiences off balance and caused them to be tepid and tentative in their response.  Rachmaninoff, however, is always Rachmaninoff and people gravitate to him immediately and remain unshakably loyal.  Again, I am very definitely a strong Scriabin fan, at least of his pre-mystic output.  
Logged
Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities.

Offline ned

  • PS Silver Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #4 on: February 28, 2003, 07:53:33 PM
Just to continue:
Fortunately we have available all of Scriabin's scores thanks to Dover Publishing and I have recordings of all of his works. I have spent a lot of time listening and reading. In my own repertoire I have chosen the following: Prelude and Nocturne for the left hand (really beautiful), Etudes op 8 no's 5 and 12, Poeme F sharp op 32, Albumleaf op 45, Etrangete, Guirlandes and Flammes Sombres,op 73, Prelude op 59/2 and Etudes in Sevenths and Fifths, op 65. These pieces are all short and very striking.  I might some day tackle Vers la flamme and first sonata. My teacher, who graduated from Moscow Conservatory and has recorded Sonatas 4 and 5 and some preludes, does not like the later works.  So I don't pester him too much about it, but he really loves Lyadov. Following his recommedation, I am working on Prelude op 11 no 1. He is right. It is a very, very haunting piece and so Russian. (Lyadov's mazurkas are much better than Scriabin's). I also am looking at Lyapounov's Lezginka ( a BIG piece with great atmospherics, easier than Islamey or the Scriabin Fantasy).
Arensky and Glazounov have some nice things. I also know Bortkiewicz, a contemporary of Scriabin and Rachmaninoff who wrote some very rich pieces.  Unjustly neglected. If you are interested, Hyperion has good recordings of each of these composers.
Ned
Logged

Offline Colette

  • PS Silver Member
  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 95
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #5 on: March 01, 2003, 02:14:57 AM
I love Scriabin, but unlike some of you I greatly prefer his later works, particularly his sonatas 5-10. I'm working on his ninth and tenth sonatas which both offer otherwordly, sometimes frightening sounds. He called his tenth sonta "the sonata of bees" appropriately. I think Scriabin requires a special sort of approach and listening from the player and the layman. It helps if one knows about the composer himself and his intent. He was as fascinating and strange as the music he created. As you may know, he had "colored hearing" (he associated particular colors with every note). Reading his own color/sound descriptions gives his compositions another level of new and intimate meaning.
Tangent aside, Scriabin's piano music is often butchered by pianists who think his fortes and chords should sound like Rachmaninoff and his pp's like Chopin. Scriabin has a unique quality that is extremely difficult to pinpoint and/or translate to the audience. It must be fragile, transparent, mystical, but not risk sounding like Debussy or Messiaen. Perhaps that is why his music is less frequently embraced by the public and avoided by many pianists.
Logged

Offline rachfan

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3026
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #6 on: March 01, 2003, 05:13:29 AM
I envy ned's extensive Scriabin repertoire.  I'm the same way in building my Rachmaninoff pieces.   I'd love to get to Scriabin's Etudes Nos. 6, 8, and 12 as well as attempting either the Sonata No. 3 or 4--splendid works!  

I agree with Colette's point on dynamics in Scriabin.  One can generalize on that too.  An ff in Faure is different from one in Rachmaninoff.  And an ff in any one Rachmaninoff piece is completely relative to other dynamics occurring within that particular piece.  There can be no such thing as an absolute ff.  Pianistically it is a relative concept.  Chopin demonstrated that in his own public performances.
Logged
Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities.

Offline MzrtMusic

  • PS Silver Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #7 on: March 01, 2003, 05:39:21 AM
I agree with Colette about liking late-Scriabin better. I've always thought this was rather funny, but I have to G. Schirmer score of the complete Scriabin Sonata's, and there are comments on how to play them. Some of the are below for your reading enjoyment!

They start in Sonata No. 6 Op. 62

"Mysterious, with Concentration. Strange, fleet. The Dream takes shape (clean, sweet, pure). More and more carried away with enchantment."

Sonata No. 7 Op. 64 "White Mass"

"With Sonorous mystery. Menacing. Like Lightning flashes."

Sonata NO. 9 Op. 68 "Black Mass"

"As if recounting a legend. With growing langour. Gently caressing, more and more intoxicated."

Sontat NO. 10 Op. 70

"With veiled, intense ardor. Panting. With luminous élan"

OK... For whatever that's worth, selections from Scriabin's comments on his sonatas.

Love,

Sarah
Logged
My heart is full of many things...there are moments when I feel that speech is nothing after all.
-- Ludwig Van Beethoven

Offline verwel

  • PS Silver Member
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #8 on: March 01, 2003, 03:02:59 PM
Gosj, it will be hard for me to continue this discussion, my english is not to good and some of these answers are very eloquent... For now (don't have much time), I'll just stick to this: I've worked my way downwards into the works of Scriabin ("modern" music doesn't frighten me) and I  don't agree to much with "his works being Chopinian". He always had a very own style - a bit weird - even in the beginning. I understand the reason for Schumann turning up in this discussion though, but I'll try to answer in a bit of a quality way later.
For now, greetz, and hope to be able to continue this discussion in a worthy way.
Logged

Offline OneHand10Fingers

  • PS Silver Member
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 9
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #9 on: March 01, 2003, 05:08:10 PM
why not scriabin?
Logged

Offline JamesCreasy

  • PS Silver Member
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 2
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #10 on: March 11, 2003, 09:16:34 PM
isnt one main reason we hear more rachmaninov than scriabin (they were classmates) is that scriabin died much younger and was lost in retreat of communist russia from the rest of the world while rachmaninov moved to the US and lived much longer.  

most of the music is less accessible than rachmaninov, et al, and although ive been pleased with some of my performances of late scriabin, the audiences have been surprisingly unmoved.  esp vers la flamme which i thought could be a crowd pleaser.  oh well.  

james

Logged

Offline titos

  • PS Silver Member
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 16
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #11 on: April 20, 2003, 11:42:20 PM
  Scriabin... I remember when I first started learning his Etudes op.8 (now I am glad to have them all in my repertoire), my teacher said something, which now I realize it was absolutely true: "In order to play Scriabin you must have a very special feeling for this music, that can't be actually tought". Scriabin unlike any other major composer for piano is strongly associated with exaggeration. Exaggeration in dynamics and feelings in general. I think this has in a way to do with his personal pholosophical readings (Nietzsche and eastern philosophies). However, a performer must have an amazingly good taste in his performances of Scriabin in order to control this overwhelming power of his music and still not produce dry and empty "salon music", which so many many times happens and does not let this music speak to our hearts. Yes, Scriabin was influenced by Chopin enormously in his first composing years, but his musical language is so individual! Make an experiment: play the 24 Preludes Op.28 of Chopin and then immediately the 24 Preludes Op.11 of Scriabin. Although there are so many things in common in these cycles, any pianist will feel in his fingers that the two ways of writing are unique.
  I tend to believe that it is not so bad after all, that Scriabin is less popular than Rachmaninov. For me the character of this music is for few ears to listen. Inevitably...
Logged
TITOS

Offline GodScriabin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 7
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #12 on: December 04, 2003, 02:40:22 PM
SCRIABIN IS GOD!
Logged

Offline sausagefingerz

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #13 on: June 02, 2016, 03:49:40 PM
&ab_channel=p0lyph0ny

At 1:18 Gould talks about Scriabin only using one chord.
Logged
Fckin love Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli at the moment.

Offline briansaddleback

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 705
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #14 on: June 02, 2016, 10:07:57 PM
Yeah I learned late how wonderful Scriabin pieces sound. They do have their niche and I am one to want to explore that niche.
Logged
Work in progress:

Rondo Alla Turca

Offline rachfan

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3026
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #15 on: June 03, 2016, 04:05:49 AM
Hi Everyone,

I noticed that I participated in this topic back in February 2003! ;D

Since then here is an update on my part:  They are all in Index to Audition Room under Scriabin:

Preludes

Op. 11, No. 12 in G#m
Op. 11, No. 13 in G flat
Op. 16, No. 1 in B
Op. 31, No. 1 in D flat/C
OP. 7, No. 1 in B flat minor
Op. 17, No. 3 in B

Poem

Op. 32, No. 2 in D

Etude

Op. 42, No. 4 in F#

Misc.

Feuillet d'Album, Op. 45, No. 1 in E flat


There are Scriabin pieces submitted by others too.

So there have been efforts of late made to record more Scriabin for the members and visitors. Off course, the more the better!

David
Logged
Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities.

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #16 on: June 03, 2016, 04:30:34 AM
I find this thread odd...Why would anyone need to ask such a question, his is piano music at it's very best...
Is he still ignored by pianist now over 10 years later? It's a bit hard to tell since I seem to have collected quite a collection of recordings of his music and heard it in several of the few piano recitals I have been to.

I have only just started to learn any:
Prelude 11-4
Prelude 15-5
Prelude 74-4 (WIP)
Prelude 27-2 (WIP)

Some of his preludes seem a bit more boring I must admit, but I still have selected about 15 that I would like to learn...
Logged

Offline quantum

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6260
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #17 on: June 03, 2016, 05:04:47 AM
Fascinating reading this thread now.  Scriabin's early works are what initially drew my interest in his music, however it was the late compositions that really solidified my attention to his oeuvre.

Here is part 2 to the video above.


Logged
Made a Liszt. Need new Handel's for Soler panel & Alkan foil. Will Faure Stein on the way to pick up Mendels' sohn. Josquin get Wolfgangs Schu with Clara. Gone Chopin, I'll be Bach

Offline medtnaculus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #18 on: June 03, 2016, 10:58:16 AM
Scriabin, Roslavets, Feinberg and Sabaneyev all deserve way more attention.
Logged

Offline visitor

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5294
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #19 on: June 03, 2016, 12:10:32 PM
Quote from: medtnaculus on June 03, 2016, 10:58:16 AM
Scriabin, Roslavets, Feinberg and Sabaneyev all deserve way more attention.
and Myakovsky  https://www.myaskovsky.ru/?id=32  , heavily influenced by Tchaikovsky in orchestration and melodic texture and developments, but also Scriabin. Was glad to know you did work to post sonata no 1 w score on your channel. I really like no 8 too (though there's internet chatter that no1 is heavily influenced by Scriabin and Glen Gould was quoted as claiming it was one of the most remarkable pieces of its time...)


Sonata No. 8 in D Minor, Op. 83: I. Barcarolle-Sonatina (Allegretto)

Sonata No. 8 in D Minor, Op. 83: II. Song-Idyll (Andante cantabile)

Sonata No. 8 in D Minor, Op. 83: III. Chorale-Rondo (Vivo)
Logged

Offline mjames

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #20 on: June 03, 2016, 12:15:30 PM
i wanna play the valse
Logged

Offline josh93248

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #21 on: June 03, 2016, 04:28:04 PM
I really like Scriabin and don't agree that his early works are unoriginal. His later works are also probably the only time I've ever liked something (quasi) atonal. Some people have really responded to my playing of Scriabin and have asked for more haha.
Logged
Care to see my playing?

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBqAtDI8LYOZ2ZzvEwRln7A/videos

I Also offer FREE PIANO LESSONS over Skype. Those who want to know more, feel free to PM me.

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #22 on: June 03, 2016, 07:29:46 PM
Quote from: mjames on June 03, 2016, 12:15:30 PM
i wanna play the valse
Which one?
Logged

Offline visitor

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5294
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #23 on: June 03, 2016, 07:33:10 PM
Logged

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #24 on: June 03, 2016, 07:42:40 PM
Logged

Offline visitor

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5294
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #25 on: June 03, 2016, 07:58:22 PM
Quote from: outin on June 03, 2016, 07:42:40 PM
Oh, the boring one  ;D
precisely?

 :D
Logged

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #26 on: June 03, 2016, 08:02:33 PM
Quote from: visitor on June 03, 2016, 07:58:22 PM




Did she just hear the 6th sonata for the first time?
I'd like to play that. Is it hard?  ;D
Logged

Offline mjames

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #27 on: June 03, 2016, 08:06:18 PM


Logged

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #28 on: June 03, 2016, 08:11:54 PM
Logged

Offline mjames

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #29 on: June 03, 2016, 08:19:52 PM
BOOOOOOOOO!!! Boo!! Outin, boooo!!!

i also want to learn the 2nd sonata. so pretty~
Logged

Offline visitor

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5294
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #30 on: June 03, 2016, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: mjames on June 03, 2016, 08:19:52 PM
BOOOOOOOOO!!! Boo!! Outin, boooo!!!

i also want to learn the 2nd sonata. so pretty~
always sayin how my favorite sonata and probably favorite piano piece of all tim is the Fantasie op 28

but my 2nd favorite Scriabin piece is the polonaise op 21. it's totally jiggy (as especially so all that middle period stuff to about op 50is to 63 ish or so)
Logged

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #31 on: June 03, 2016, 08:22:29 PM
Quote from: mjames on June 03, 2016, 08:19:52 PM
BOOOOOOOOO!!! Boo!! Outin, boooo!!!

i also want to learn the 2nd sonata. so pretty~

That's not really my favorite either...too pretty I guess  ;D
Logged

Offline mjames

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #32 on: June 03, 2016, 08:41:18 PM
Fantasie is def rad. .....and really difficult too.

OK outin, you cant deny the 5th sonatas greatness can you?!!!
Logged

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #33 on: June 04, 2016, 01:39:50 AM
Quote from: mjames on June 03, 2016, 08:41:18 PM
Fantasie is def rad. .....and really difficult too.

OK outin, you cant deny the 5th sonatas greatness can you?!!!

It's nice but it's not my favorite sonata either. He wrote more imaginative stuff...
Logged

Offline mjames

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #34 on: June 04, 2016, 01:52:09 AM
I'm going to send putin after you.

What are your favorite works?

I guess you should know by now, that I REALLY love the "BOOM BOOM!" kind of piano music.
Logged

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #35 on: June 04, 2016, 02:04:58 AM
Quote from: mjames on June 04, 2016, 01:52:09 AM
I'm going to send putin after you.

What are your favorite works?

I guess you should know by now, that I REALLY love the "BOOM BOOM!" kind of piano music.

And I don't so much :)
We'll see about the favorites later...some of his early works are lovely, but also many of his late works...

Putin is welcome...hope he likes cats, Russians often do...maybe I'll offer him some surströmming for lunch  ;D
Logged

Offline mjames

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #36 on: June 04, 2016, 02:27:55 AM
I like introspective piano music too..but you gotta understand. I only started playing a few years ago, the thrill of going fast and loud is still fresh in my mind (<33 op. 44 polonaise).

I really, REALLY, REALLY, like his preludes. Like the entire 70+ cycle.



Think this is too pretty for you XD
Logged

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #37 on: June 04, 2016, 09:10:27 AM
Quote from: mjames on June 04, 2016, 02:27:55 AM
I like introspective piano music too..but you gotta understand. I only started playing a few years ago, the thrill of going fast and loud is still fresh in my mind (<33 op. 44 polonaise).
Didn't we start about the same time? I just never had that really...

Quote from: mjames on June 04, 2016, 02:27:55 AM
I really, REALLY, REALLY, like his preludes. Like the entire 70+ cycle.

Right now these are my favorites of the preludes and I want to play them so badly...won't be easy though...
only just started nr 4.


Pretty enough for you?


Quote from: mjames on June 04, 2016, 02:27:55 AM


Think this is too pretty for you XD
At the moment yes...but maybe if played live by someone else when I am in a sensitive mood  ;D
Logged

Offline visitor

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5294
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #38 on: June 04, 2016, 01:01:46 PM
Quote from: outin on June 04, 2016, 02:04:58 AM
And...

Putin is welcome...hope he likes cats, Russians often do...maybe I'll offer him some surströmming for lunch  ;D
as supreme leader i approve.  cats are swell
 dont you dare open that can outin! 
give.me that cracker!!
and im must go, my people need me
Logged

Offline pianorahrah

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #39 on: June 04, 2016, 06:03:23 PM
I'm playing Scriabin 2nd sonata too! It's such an amazing and beautiful piece.
I have the EXACT same question as you, why not Scriabin?
Sorry I couldn't give an answer, I'm just sharing my opinion.
Logged
Scriabin, Chopin, Ravel, and Handel.

Offline visitor

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5294
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #40 on: June 06, 2016, 12:10:28 PM
Quote from: mjames on June 03, 2016, 08:19:52 PM
BOOOOOOOOO!!! Boo!! Outin, boooo!!!

i also want to learn the 2nd sonata. so pretty~
do listen to Michel Block's version. I believe althoug Sofronitzky is king in general, Block's is probably the finest version of this piece. I just started work on a suite Block composed and hope to record it. You'd be well rewarded for spending time listening to his various recordings (ie his Bach Liszt Transcriptions, Albeniz, etc).



Michel Block (January 12, 1937, Antwerp–March 4, 2003, Bloomington, Indiana) was born of French parents in Antwerp, Belgium. He was a renowned pianist and winner of the 1962 Leventritt Competition. As a child, he moved with his parents to Mexico, where his grandfather had settled in 1870. Block studied piano in that country and later at the Juilliard School in New York City.

In one of the most famous of all competition incidents, Block won the Arthur Rubinstein Award in Warsaw at the 1960 International Chopin Piano Competition. As a contestant in that year's competition, he failed to capture the top prize. What he did capture, however, was the attention and allegiance of one of the jurors, Arthur Rubinstein. The legendary Polish-American pianist created the Arthur Rubinstein Award then and there for Block, a dramatic gesture that said plainly and loudly that he believed Block should have been the winner. Two years later, Michel Block won the Leventritt Competition in New York, adding his name to the illustrious list of winners, among which Alexis Weissenberg, Van Cliburn, Eugene Istomin, etc.

Like most pianists of renown, Block appeared with the great orchestras and conductors in the United States and in Europe. Among them were the Berliner Philharmoniker, New York Philharmonic Orchestra, Chicago Symphony Orchestra, London Philharmonic Orchestra, and Concertgebouw Orchestra in Amsterdam; and among the conductors, Georg Solti, Carlo Maria Giulini, Riccardo Muti, and Bernard Haitink.

In 1978, Block joined the music faculty of what is now known as the Jacobs School of Music at Indiana University Bloomington, and ceased pursuing his career as a pianist. In later years, he performed only rarely in public; when he did, his recitals were eagerly anticipated events. In 1996, The Pro Piano New York Recital Series was extremely honored to present Michel Block in New York for the first time in nearly fifteen years.

His playing was characterized by a rich singing tone, lyrical phrasing, transparent voicing, and wonderful dynamic control. Now widely considered to be one of the great pianists of the 20th century, and a favorite among cognoscenti, his peers and the public alike continue to regard him as a pianist's pianist. In 1997, Block retired from teaching and lived a quiet, uneventful, and happy life.

Block made numerous recordings (many of which are now out of print) for major labels, including EMI, Pathé Marconi, Pro-Piano and Deutsche Grammophon. He recorded music by Sergei Rachmaninoff, Robert Schumann, Frédéric Chopin, J.S. Bach, Franz Schubert, Enrique Granados, Alexander Scriabin, and Isaac Albéniz (including his celebrated disc of the complete Iberia (Albéniz)).
add'l interesting chatter
https://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/477877/Michel%20Block??.html
Logged

Offline xdjuicebox

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 281
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #41 on: June 07, 2016, 05:58:10 AM
Scriabin was convinced that he literally was the Messiah

Sometimes I'm convinced that Scriabin was literally the Messiah

But most people aren't convinced that Scriabin was literally the Messiah
Logged
I am trying to become Franz Liszt. Trying. And failing.

Offline rv

  • PS Silver Member
  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 69
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #42 on: June 07, 2016, 03:49:53 PM
Believe it or not, some people find Scriabin boring. But I believe some of these people simply haven't delved deep enough. When you start digging deeper you discover one little treasure after another.
I don't think he is that unpopular, in fact I think he is one of the more popular piano composers, just not among the most popular.
Logged

Offline steinway43

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #43 on: June 09, 2016, 07:37:54 AM
I know his Sonatas 2, 3 and 5, and I may want to learn the first one. I love the first movement of the first Sonata but the second movement doesn't live up to the first, in my view. 2,3 and 5 I love, though, with a passion. That being said, I don't find the rest of his work all that exciting. Just me.

 
Logged

Offline arensky

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2324
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #44 on: June 10, 2016, 03:02:06 AM
I think his music is extraordinary and I've played quite a bit of it. It is difficult to read and difficult to play and it is strange and forbidding to many pianists and listeners, whereas Chopin Liszt and Rachmaninov are quite "normal"  for lack of a better word. Like Medtner, his music does not usually have a "big tune" and that is what most people respond to and gravitate towards. Scriabin appeals primarily to musical sensualists, those who value sheer sound and lush harmony as much as or more than melody. He definitely has an important place in music history but is clearly not for the majority.
Logged
=  o        o  =
   \     '      /   

"One never knows about another one, do one?" Fats Waller

Offline mjames

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #45 on: June 30, 2016, 03:19:44 AM
Quote from: outin on June 04, 2016, 09:10:27 AM
Didn't we start about the same time? I just never had that really...

Right now these are my favorites of the preludes and I want to play them so badly...won't be easy though...
only just started nr 4.


Pretty enough for you?

At the moment yes...but maybe if played live by someone else when I am in a sensitive mood  ;D

OK.
I admit I was always a bit biased to the more 'romantic' scriabin BUT now I'm completely in love with his late work.
AND YES
THOSE PRELUDES ARE PRETTY ENOUGH!!!

I have new goals............................................................................



I will probbaly die before my power levels are strong enough to play this piece. :( :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
Logged

Offline outin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8211
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #46 on: June 30, 2016, 04:28:22 AM
Quote from: mjames on June 30, 2016, 03:19:44 AM

I will probbaly die before my power levels are strong enough to play this piece. :( :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

I really love that one...They say the composer thought it was too dark to play in public. Lets make it our shared goal.

And think positive...You should still have a lot longer than me...just remember to eat your vegetables :)
Logged

Offline quantum

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6260
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #47 on: June 30, 2016, 11:52:06 PM
Love No. 6.  If memory serves, Scriabin was only willing to play bits and pieces of it for friends, never the entire thing. 

I think No 6 and 7 would make an excellent pairing.
Logged
Made a Liszt. Need new Handel's for Soler panel & Alkan foil. Will Faure Stein on the way to pick up Mendels' sohn. Josquin get Wolfgangs Schu with Clara. Gone Chopin, I'll be Bach

Offline lostinidlewonder

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7839
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #48 on: July 03, 2016, 02:38:08 AM
Why not Scriabin? Well most of his works are not appreciated by the general public, his ideas can simply be alien to most of them. He is certainly not as accessible compared to the other great composers. He thought way too much about himself and music though, a little arrogant, I don't feel they mysticism of his music (or find the mystic chord use so uber exciting), scriabin had orgasms musically while he played, I'd not like to experience that, certainly not with my own works lol.
Logged
"The biggest risk in life is to take no risk at all."
www.pianovision.com

Offline mjames

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
Re: Why not Scriabin?
Reply #49 on: July 07, 2016, 05:56:53 PM
WOW YOU LIKE IT TOO OUTIN!
I'm so glad...


you do have a heart

I am now sort of familiarized with his late sonatas and I must say, they're glorious. Scriabin is very amazing...




Fairies dancing on trees.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
For more information about this topic, click search below!
 

Logo light pianostreet.com - the website for classical pianists, piano teachers, students and piano music enthusiasts.

Subscribe for unlimited access

Sign up

Follow us

Piano Street Digicert