Rossini-Thalberg Dal tuo stellato soglio (live)

[ronde_des_sylphes]

..or better known as Moses' Prayer. In effect a theme and variations, it's really the second half of Thalberg's (in)famous Moses Fantasy, but I've taken to playing it in isolation as a more readily digestible shorter piece. From an informal recital earlier this month - a few slightly splashy passages but hopefully still acceptable and entertaining.

https://soundcloud.com/andrew-wright-35/rossini-thalberg-dal-tuo-stellato-soglio-live

[faulty_damper]

The arpeggios in the 3rd hand section sound like they disappear.  Sloppy and sounds like piano playing, not music.  Never let the piano get in the way of music-making.

Tempo could be slightly faster in the beginning as the melody drags.  The melody is naturally sad, but the tempo needs to be fast enough so that the listener hears that sadness, not anticipate it.  When the listener already knows what you're going to say before you say it, it becomes unnecessary to say it.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Tempo could be slightly faster in the beginning as the melody drags.  The melody is naturally sad, but the tempo needs to be fast enough so that the listener hears that sadness, not anticipate it.  

Absolute subjectivety with no merit other than that of a personal opinion, but presented as objective fact. My tempo choice (which is also, ultimately, a subjective one) is a very deliberate one, based on considerably more time with this piece than I imagine you have spent.

Still, I would expect nothing less from Pianostreet's new resident "technique guru".

[j_menz]

Nicely done Andrew, and it works very well in this form.  FWIW, I thought the tempo perfect - Rossini would have approved.

For these transcriptions (paraphrases, fantasies on etc...), I find it usually pretty essential to know the piece upon which they are based - usually before starting to play it, but certainly as part of the learning process. In their day, that would have been assumed knowledge - certainly for the performer and most likely for the audience. You clearly do, and have done justice to Thalberg's reworking.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Thanks - I think tempo considerations are fundamentally a matter of taste and there is no absolute correct one, rather a set of acceptable boundaries (one which furthermore has to take the inevitable difference in sonorities between the transcription and the original, and even the acoustics of the hall, into consideration).

For these transcriptions (paraphrases, fantasies on etc...), I find it usually pretty essential to know the piece upon which they are based - usually before starting to play it, but certainly as part of the learning process. In their day, that would have been assumed knowledge - certainly for the performer and most likely for the audience. You clearly do, and have done justice to Thalberg's reworking.

I think you can approach them purely pianistically, but it's certainly beneficial to listen to the orchestral original. Absolutely agreed about the assumed knowledge part, the audience's knowledge was the raison d'etre for the pieces in the first place!

[faulty_damper]

Absolute subjectivety with no merit other than that of a personal opinion, but presented as objective fact. My tempo choice (which is also, ultimately, a subjective one) is a very deliberate one, based on considerably more time with this piece than I imagine you have spent.

Still, I would expect nothing less from Pianostreet's new resident "technique guru".

You're welcome.  But it isn't subjective.  It drags.  It won't seem like it does to most people until they hear a side by side comparison. 

Thanks - I think tempo considerations are fundamentally a matter of taste and there is no absolute correct one, rather a set of acceptable boundaries (one which furthermore has to take the inevitable difference in sonorities between the transcription and the original, and even the acoustics of the hall, into consideration).

The acoustics of the hall do not dictate tempi contrary to what is romantically thrown around.  The music dictates tempi.  Just like two people with different vocal timbres will argue at the same tempo, so too will musical performances.  However, dynamics of certain aspects of the performance may change due to the resonance of the hall.  If it's very sonorous, parts may be softer than in a dry hall.

[dima_76557]

@ ronde_des_sylphes

Nice duet.
Do you play primo or secondo?
Who's the other player?
^_^

[dima_76557]

It drags.  It won't seem like it does to most people until they hear a side by side comparison.

Does that mean that you are finally going to post something to illustrate your expertise?

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Dear faulty, thanks for your thoughts - they have been most illuminating, albeit probably not in the manner you anticipated.

Absolute subjectivety with no merit other than that of a personal opinion, but presented as objective fact. My tempo choice (which is also, ultimately, a subjective one) is a very deliberate one, based on considerably more time with this piece than I imagine you have spent.

But it isn't subjective.  It drags.  It won't seem like it does to most people until they hear a side by side comparison. 

Unless you truly are the font of all wisdom, your opinion is by definition subjective as the tempo does not vary drastically from other performances. In my experience, musicians know there is no such thing as an absolute tempo choice - even humble piano-players appear aware of this.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

@ ronde_des_sylphes

Nice duet.
Do you play primo or secondo?
Who's the other player?
^_^

  Haha. The piece does actually exist in duet form!

[faulty_damper]

Just because others play it at a certain tempo doesn't mean it's the best one.  E.g. Beethoven's Pathetique sonata, Adagio cantabile is often played too slow; Brahms Intermezzo, Op.118 No.2 in A major, is also performed at a drags pace.  Both of these pieces have one thing in common: a textural inner voice.  The common mistake is to make a big deal out of that inner voice, and thus sacrifice the flow of the melody.  And guess what - the Moses fantasy has just this kind of texture.  And guess what you did - you emphasized that texture at the sacrifice of a flowing melodic line.  That texture, while important for the contrast, is secondary to the melody.  If you listen to just the melody, and ignore the inner voice, you'll very clearly hear that it drags.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Just because others play it at a certain tempo doesn't mean it's the best one.  E.g. Beethoven's Pathetique sonata, Adagio cantabile is often played too slow; Brahms Intermezzo, Op.118 No.2 in A major, is also performed at a drags pace.  Both of these pieces have one thing in common: a textural inner voice.  The common mistake is to make a big deal out of that inner voice, and thus sacrifice the flow of the melody.  And guess what - the Moses fantasy has just this kind of texture.  And guess what you did - you emphasized that texture at the sacrifice of a flowing melodic line.  That texture, while important for the contrast, is secondary to the melody.  If you listen to just the melody, and ignore the inner voice, you'll very clearly hear that it drags.

I'm afraid hakki, whilst slightly rude, was right about you. Almost throughout the recording, with the exception of a few places where the balance isn't quite right for various reasons, the melody is quite audibly predominant and the textural accompaniment second - the exact opposite of what you are claiming. I leave whose opinion is correct to the judgement of other forum members who may read the thread.

[faulty_damper]

If you read on, you'll have read that another member makes a similar and more direct comment about the inner voice being too prominent.

Also, I made no statement bashing you in any way.  My comments were only directed at the performance.  It is you who started bashing me.  If you don't want me commenting on your performances, I won't.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

If you read on, you'll have read that another member makes a similar and more direct comment about the inner voice being too prominent.

Also, I made no statement bashing you in any way.  My comments were only directed at the performance.  It is you who started bashing me.  If you don't want me commenting on your performances, I won't.

One of us clearly has comprehension issues.. Opinions are naturally welcomed, but not when dogmatically presented as fact. I wouldn't mind if you answered dima's question, and for that matter, explained to me (and him) how you come to interpret his post as a 'direct comment about the inner voice', etc. Thanks in advance. Failing that, yes, I'd prefer it if you left this thread, simply because your comments are not accomplishing anything, whilst being the inverse of helpful and not based on fact, to say nothing of logically absurd. You say "Just because others play it at a certain tempo doesn't mean it's the best one." and then say it should be played at another tempo. So if you were (very hypothetically) to play it at that tempo, it would suddenly be the "best one", whereas Lewenthal or Capello, for example (who actually play the theme slightly slower than me) are suddenly "wrong". Tempo choices don't work that way; all musicians know that - at least the ones I know seem to. (Amusing that you mock awesom_o for defaulting towards consistently advocating slow practice and practice without pedal, when you default towards consistently telling posters their tempo drags).

[goldentone]

So much life, depth, and dimension in your playing, Ronde.  It was such a pleasure to listen to, and a lot of fun.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Thanks. I've had a lot of experience, and indeed fun, with this piece over the years. I'm very much inclined to take it (in its entirety) and record it in a studio setting next year. It would be nice to get everything the way I want it instead of being slightly approximate in a live context: I have definite views and ideas regarding it and thus I feel it is worthwhile to input the effort required.

[ted]

Beautiful, anything you play is always a treat. I still haven't worked out how you produce the effect you do, but over the last few months I have heard it sporadically in my recorded improvisation and some people have remarked about it. So some sort of osmosis must be happening, which I am very pleased about, even if I haven't a clue what is going on. It is nothing simple, that's for sure, not this or that technique. Whatever it is, never lose it.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Thanks ted, glad you liked it, and I'm pleased if you feel listening to my playing is adding something to your improvisations! I don't know what exactly it is you perceive to be so worthwhile about my playing, so I hope I don't lose it either! I know I have very definite views that music, especially of this era/genre, should not be approached as a linear progression through time, but as a succesion of lines connected by curves, if that makes any sense. My playing has faults too; it wouldn't surprise me at all if the plusses and minuses are the flipsides of the same coin, i.e. having had a rather unconventional musical education, not been through the conservatory treadmill etc.

[ted]

....... i.e. having had a rather unconventional musical education, not been through the conservatory treadmill etc.

That might just be it. My musical education, or the lack of it, was also unconventional, and I've happily flown off the handle completely since middle-age. Subconscious recognition of birds of a feather perhaps.

I know I have very definite views that music, especially of this era/genre, should not be approached as a linear progression through time, but as a succesion of lines connected by curves, if that makes any sense.

Agreed. I like my forms to be biological rather than structural, dynamic rather than static, evolving organisms rather than Meccano models; anything but linear anyway. I am convinced that whatever a player thinks about these deeper issues somehow comes out in his sounds, even contrary to intention. I don't know how but I am sure it does.

[rachfan]

Hi ronde,

Wow, what a piece--highly virtuosic! Thalberg's music is often difficult to play, and especially when he employs his third hand technique.  I believe that you do well keeping the melodic line in the limelight, while maintaining the accompaniment in the background--very good balancing the hands to accomplish it with so much going on.  Also when melody is within the chords, you think about horizontal direction and voice the chords accordingly, also allowing those chords to resonate that are clearly harmony. There is a good deal of filigree present, arpeggiated accompaniment for example, and you judiciously restrain it to always allow the melody to soar.  I noticed too that sometimes in the piece there are scalar figures which you allow to be sufficiently heard, which is proper, as scales take on importance in composition. The scale in thirds was wonderfully executed.  The octaves are always well executed too. You also play the various touches masterfully. I liked how you take advantage of the quieter dynamics to leave yourself ample space to "spend" crescendos.  Whatever the challenges, you certainly demonstrate a formidable technique to deal with them effectively. Very importantly, you always play with clarity.  Very fine and impressive playing, ronde.  Congratulations on a marvelous rendition of this transcription.  You always play with musicianship and artistry which is the case here as well.  Thanks for posting this music.

David  

[ronde_des_sylphes]

The scale in thirds has been a bugbear of mine for a while - Thalberg weaves the melody under the scale and ultimately into its termination and it's quite tricky to control. I had a marginal loss of control af the very end, but it's consistently much better in general than it was years ago when I first played the piece - and I'll forgive myself in the context of playing on an unfamiliar piano, having had two minutes warmup.

I have several recordings of this piece, and I notice that different pianists have sometimes very differing approaches to balancing the filigree and the melody, but all allow the melody to predominate, as it should. I find this live rendition (of the full "Moses Fantasy") quite fascinating in the segment of the fantasy I was performing - he probably has a memory lapse in the final arpeggio section, but it is very imaginative and individualistic, quite unlike any others. I doubt my ability to perform with such exquisite pp touch (perhaps on a Steinway I'll get close, the above performance was on a Boston).

Mykola Suk:

the variation starting from 5.14 I find to be remarkable pianism.

Thanks for listening!