VIDEO: Prelude in C Major BWV 846 by J.S. Bach as block chords

[michael_sayers]

The back story to this recording is that it was made for a pianist to illustrate a way to seek out and acquire a feel for an interpretive ebb and flow to the music.

[derschoenebahnhof]

The back story to this recording is that it was made for a pianist to illustrate a way to seek out and acquire a feel for an interpretive ebb and flow to the music.

Hmm, didn't Rachfan make a point already?

Please get a real piano (and a teacher).

CG

[michael_sayers]

Hmm, didn't Rachfan make a point already?

Please get a real piano (and a teacher).

CG

I studied with a true master of the piano.  If I were to tell you who it was, neither would you believe me, nor would you accept that he was a master.

[stevensk]

I studied with a true master of the piano.  If I were to tell you who it was, neither would you believe me, nor would you accept that he was a master.

-Who was your teacher Michael?

[perfect_pitch]

I studied with a true master of the piano. 

Mmmm - either it's time to go back and get some help again, or I'd fire him. Please, enlighten us and tell us who it was you studied from... LANG LANG???

[michael_sayers]

Since you asked, here is my teacher - though I did say you would not believe me, and perhaps as well he is not a master in your eyes because he does not adhere to your methods and concepts of music interpretation.

[chopinlover01]

I'm struggling to see who. Too many portraits of old dead people, agh.

[perfect_pitch]

Since you asked, here is my teacher - though I did say you would not believe me, and perhaps as well he is not a master in your eyes because he does not adhere to your methods and concepts of music interpretation.

Okay... I officially call BULLSH!T THEN... That is a picture of Franz Liszt... a great pianist who died in 1886!!! So technically speaking, even if you were alive and learning from him as a child (say 5 years of age) in 1885, you'd have to be at last, 135 years of age right now.

Please don't try to play us off for a bunch of bloody twats!!! It took me exactly 2 seconds to realise who that was.

Franz Liszt IS a master in almost every single pianists eyes, but I'm sure even he would be appalled by your pithy, laboriously torturous attempts at piano pieces.

[stoat_king]

Have you considered that Franz Liszt may be Michael Sayer's spirit-guide?
I thought not.

So closed-minded lol

[michael_sayers]

Franz Liszt IS a master in almost every single pianists eyes . . .

As it is possible that I am the only living person who has heard him, how would they know how he played/sounded at the piano or not?

, but I'm sure even he would be appalled by your pithy, laboriously torturous attempts at piano pieces.

Actually, I've gotten some of my best ideas from him, including for the melodic and harmonic content of the first 23 measures of a just completed music composition. The total is 152 measures with a repeat at measure 40.

I am happy an opportunity has presented itself for me to give credit where credit is due.

[michael_sayers]

Have you considered that Franz Liszt may be Michael Sayer's spirit-guide?
I thought not.

So closed-minded lol

Bingo.

Since I was 24.

[perfect_pitch]

Have you considered that Franz Liszt may be Michael Sayer's spirit-guide?
I thought not.

Please tell me you laced those words with sarcasm, and garnished them with humour...

If not, please seek PROFESSIONAL help.

As it is possible that I am the only living person who has heard him, how would they know how he played/sounded at the piano or not?

[michael_sayers]

Hi perfect_pitch,

This last post of yours truly is beyond the pale.  For you to come here without the proper qualifications and issue medical opinions on the mental health of two members because they have said things which do not agree with your religious beliefs (or your non-beliefs) is way over the line.  Much can be said and tolerated, but not this, probably not even at Piano Street.

I do not judge you for this, yet it concerns me that you do not know this is one of those lines that simply never is crossed.

I think that here you have exercised very poor judgement.

[michael_sayers]

perfect_pitch -

You should consider such expressions as you have made here, to be beneath you.  I know you are worth more than this and are much better than what has been done here.  Please think on this.

[stoat_king]

Please tell me you laced those words with sarcasm, and garnished them with humour...

If not, please seek PROFESSIONAL help.

Your comment is more perceptive than you likely realised.
Here is a picture of me relaxing with my team of full-time carers:

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Not taking sides here, but I can't think of anyone more fitting to be a pianist's teacher (in the metaphysical sense) than Liszt. Not just for what he did in developing the piano, but, whilst he was no saint, his attitude to Music and his fellow musicians is a wonderful moral exemplar to all of us.

[michael_sayers]

Not taking sides here, but I can't think of anyone more fitting to be a pianist's teacher (in the metaphysical sense) than Liszt. Not just for what he did in developing the piano, but, whilst he was no saint, his attitude to Music and his fellow musicians is a wonderful moral exemplar to all of us.

He was not a saint, but his heart was in the right place.  What other pianist, when touring, would let his "servant" stay in the master quarters and have the best of everything, while Liszt used the servant quarters?

His compassion and deep love of other persons was exceptional beyond belief.

There are the reams of performances for charitable causes, and his letters of excitement in great anticipation of these.

He even tolerated the company of Wagner whilst so many other persons, including Princess Carolyne Sayn-Wiittgenstein, urged him against it.

He would perform Beethoven's concertos against the advice of other musicians due to them having become (in Liszt's lifetime) unpopular and unloved music.  He personally raised the funds for the first Beethoven monument in Europe, transcribed all the symphonies for piano solo, and edited an edition of the 32 sonatas.

A man of unbounded patience, caring and especially action - and totally without fear - that was Liszt.

If in his heart he knew it was right, he did it without exception.

[michael_sayers]

The point which I am getting at here is this: Liszt is "every" pianist's idol, yet he did not play the music as it was notated - not even his own music.  I get abused here for following the example of everyone's idol.  This seems to present more than a bit of a logical inconsistency in thought, in my opinion.

[j_menz]

Ah, but he did it well.

[pianist1976]

The point which I am getting at here is this: Liszt is "every" pianist's idol, yet he did not play the music as it was notated - not even his own music.  I get abused here for following the example of everyone's idol.  This seems to present more than a bit of a logical inconsistency in thought, in my opinion.

"A new Oedipus, Liszt, has solved it, solved it in such a way that had the composer himself returned from the grave, a paroxysm of joy and pride would have swept over him. Not a note was left out, not one added... no inflection was effaced, no change of tempo permitted. Liszt, in thus making comprehensible a work not yet comprehended, has proved that he is the pianist of the future."

Hector Berlioz (commenting on Liszt's performance of Beethoven's Hammerklavier Sonata in the Salle Erard) 1836

[perfect_pitch]

I do not judge you for this, yet it concerns me that you do not know this is one of those lines that simply never is crossed.

Well, here's a picture of myself...



You claim to get your advice from the spirit of Franz Liszt, and yet you play without giving a damn about the musicality of the pieces you've destroyed. THIS is why we play music - to express... but your 'bastardisations' (because I can't bring myself to call them 'performances') have NO regard or respect to the composers intentions.

Granted music is about trying to stimulate, embody and exhibit an emotional feeling that is unique and original to the audience members as well as the performer, but taking the music and saying 'TO HELL WITH THE TEMPO, OR ANYTHING ELSE THEY'VE BLOODY WELL WRITTEN (like you have)' is not music.

I know you are worth more than this and are much better than what has been done here.  Please think on this.

You should do the same with your performances. I'm not prone to typing gibberish or writing at a whim, so I can assure you that sometimes, someone needs to step in and say a few hard, critical (sometimes harsh) words to bring back some semblance of sanity into a thread... and it's what I'm good at. Granted at first, your performances probably made a few people laugh and it was comical at first, but now you're drowning the Audition room with recordings that are cringe-worth, fit-inducing derelicts of what they're supposed to sound like. It was odd and quirky in the beginning, but now it's just becoming painful.

I get abused here for following the example of everyone's idol.  

You've done nothing of the sort. Liszt never took the 'liberties' that you have, and he always played the piece without degrading the performance by giving the rightful composer the respect he/she deserves by following what was written on the score. 

I'm going to leave it at that for now, as it's late. Oh and by the way...

yet he did not play the music as it was notated - not even his own music.  

Did Liszt tell you that himself... in your sleep or something??? If so, I re-direct you back to my previous post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your comment is more perceptive than you likely realised. Here is a picture of me relaxing with my team of full-time carers:

I'll admit - that was good - gave me a laugh... I'll leave you alone.    

[michael_sayers]

Hi perfect_pitch,

Do we really need to review the facts of Liszt's performance style as documented in numerous books including from the 1800s, or would it be better to let this rest?  I have studied these books in addition to having heard the master himself play the piano.  

I also have studied what is written about Beethoven's performance style of his own music, something of which you possibly would not approve.

Sure, Liszt could play music pretty much as notated, and sometimes he did this though it was by far the exception, and one needs to remember what playing the music as notated would mean in the context of the 19th century articulation of musical pulse and composition structure.  Brahms seems to have played his own music as notated, which to Brahms included rolling the chords and varying the tempo.

Even in Liszt's near-urtext edition of the Beethoven sonatas he changes the inversions of some chords.  I know this because I have studied it.

Liszt was not the Pollini of the 1800s as you make him out to be.

[chopinlover01]

This last post of yours truly is beyond the pale.  For you to come here without the proper qualifications and issue medical opinions on the mental health of two members because they have said things which do not agree with your religious beliefs (or your non-beliefs) is way over the line.

Don't ya love sarcasm? 

[perfect_pitch]

Not taking sides here, but I can't think of anyone more fitting to be a pianist's teacher (in the metaphysical sense) than Liszt.

Granted - that is a beautiful quote, and quite dignified as well. However I think given MS's posts, he hasn't taken anything emotional, technical, pianistically or metaphysically from Liszt, given the plethora of Audition room samples he has dredged upon us, but I think my main concern is the crazy that seems to be seeping from this thread and the original thread creator:

As it is possible that I am the only living person who has heard him

Nothing quite extinguishes the possibility that the poster may be sane, but claiming something like that... OR trying to claim his liberal attempts to manipulate the expressions, dynamics and adding extra notes from the music; were inspired by Liszt, I think is hogwash.

Brahms seems to have played his own music as notated, which to Brahms included rolling the chords and varying the tempo.

Small changes in tempo is called Rubato - almost every single romantic composer did that. There's a difference between playing a Bach Prelude at 66pm and say 14bpm. Please don't try and lump Brahms, Beethoven and Liszt as doing similar to what you do. That's just insulting to about 200 years of classical music right there...

Liszt was not the Pollini of the 1800s as you make him out to be.

I think you need further studies, but even if you don't agree with me, Liszt had... (and I say again) - more respect for the original composers intentions than you do.

...would it be better to let this rest?

I think so... as long as you don't force upon the poor Audition room, recordings of you playing pieces at 1/6th the tempo, beating the crap out the piano when it's pianissimo, or throwing the concept of normality, metre and time out the window. Seem fair? You want to post something that seems like you've given a 'great deal' of careful, meticulous thought into, that gives credibility to the original composers intentions - sure. I'd like to hear it...

[stoat_king]

I think so... as long as you don't force upon the poor Audition room, recordings of you playing pieces at 1/6th the tempo, beating the crap out the piano when it's pianissimo, or throwing the concept of normality, metre and time out the window. Seem fair? You want to post something that seems like you've given a 'great deal' of careful, meticulous thought into, that gives credibility to the original composers intentions - sure. I'd like to hear it...

I don't see Mr Sayers recordings in quite the same light as you seem to.

It seems to me that his focus is on freedom of artistic expression - as you put it: "throwing the concept of normality, metre and time out the window." You could possibly add convention / tradition to that.

With this in mind, its to be expected that many of them sound strange and / or wrong. Personally, I like the 'omg what's he going to do next' thing, but I dont expect many others to share that view.

Nevertheless, when it does work, something special results.
A good example is "VIDEO WITH AN IN TUNE PIANO: Resignazione by Franz Liszt".
I really like this interpretation - its very uncomfortable to listen to - which is entirely in keeping the spirit of the piece imo.

In short, I appreciate the chance of hearing something new, even if the cost is that much of it falls flat. For me, even the ones that don't work are interesting but I can see that is a minority opinion.

I think Mr Sayers is to be commended on his approach.
You must admit, its not boring

[michael_sayers]

Hi perfect_pitch,

How the 19th century pianists played is something one can research at any university music library.  We aren't talking about tempo rubato, we are talking about changes in tempo during individual compositions and movements.  I spent a great many hours researching this, including quite old sources and periodicals having information not sourced in the published books on the subject.  I don't think it serves much purpose for us to discuss this if I am comfortable going based on research and facts and you don't think conclusions need to have or correlate with sources.  What do you think?  You seem to feel you are above the findings of objective research.

I also am concerned that you can not be objective about pianists.  I enjoy every pianist from Pollini to Nyiregyhazi to Gould to Alessio Bax to Earl Wild to Hofmann, Cortot, Rosenthal, Paderewski . . . and the huge array of very young pianists today such as Michelle Candotti, Lindsay Garritson, and many, many more.  Having favourites doesn't blind me to the transformative power of great music regardless of the interpreter - even jazz arrangements of the classics can be compelling.  This pianist here is no incompetent simply because he plays the music in a way Bach never could have imagined - far from it, in my opinion:

&index=25

I am having a very enjoyable time hearing Lindsay Garritson's art deepen, and after recently coming across this I am especially eager to see where she goes with it:

&index=2

She might even end up being one of the pianists on the boat.

About my time with Liszt, I believe in freedom of religion, so if you are an atheist have an issue with this it is fine by me.  These are personal subjects which everyone must decide individually and with no one telling someone else what they must believe (and atheism, too, is a belief . . . ).

Attacking non-atheists as though they are mentally ill is not appropriate, and I am surprised it is tolerated in these forums.

Atheism is a belief, too, and I know all the ins-and-outs of it from the 18th century rationalists up through the logical positivists and beyond - I am well read in these subjects.

[chopinlover01]

(1) Attacking non-atheists as though they are mentally ill is not appropriate, and I am surprised it is tolerated in these forums.

(2) Atheism is a belief, too, and I know all the ins-and-outs of it from the 18th century rationalists up through the logical positivists and beyond - I am well read in these subjects.

1- He didn't attack non-atheists, he attacked you. And he attacked you because you seem rather insane, saying that Liszt is your teacher, and that all of your (mis)practices are in his spirit and style; they are not.
2-Atheism is the rejection of belief without evidence. We don't believe in anything if there is no evidence for it.
There's just as much evidence that Liszt was your teacher as there is of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, with an interesting parallel- both are, and should be treated as, jokes
Ra-men!

[michael_sayers]

1- He didn't attack non-atheists, he attacked you. And he attacked you because you seem rather insane, saying that Liszt is your teacher, and that all of your (mis)practices are in his spirit and style; they are not.
2-Atheism is the rejection of belief without evidence. We don't believe in anything if there is no evidence for it.
There's just as much evidence that Liszt was your teacher as there is of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, with an interesting parallel- both are, and should be treated as, jokes
Ra-men!

I don't think the attacker can be separated from the attacker's beliefs (and the attacked person's beliefs) so easily.  Either way, he attacked - we agree on this.  The only thing we disagree on is that I feel it is inappropriate to perceive someone as mentally unwell, and to then attack the person for it - and perfect_pitch (with you supporting him) takes the opposite stance.  I doubt he has the right professional qualifications to say such things, and he should not be using these forums for such a purpose as to identify and attack another member based on a supposed mental condition.  I really am amazed that it is okay for someone to come to these forums to degrade and abuse another member in such a way.

[michael_sayers]

1- He didn't attack non-atheists, he attacked you. And he attacked you because you seem rather insane, saying that Liszt is your teacher, and that all of your (mis)practices are in his spirit and style; they are not.

I have my own pianistic style, though I do get some ideas and influence from Liszt, including the interpretations for two of the concert etudes and with some modifications to the music as it was published, and portions of the content for two music compositions and the entirety of one transcription (which is but one of many transcriptions, the others were accomplished without Liszt's direct involvement).

What is truly amazing are the fingerings of Liszt for Gnomenreigen . . . ingenious and tremendously flexible.  That is one selection where I play the music very much as Liszt wants.  Without his assistance I would never have arrived at an adequate interpretation, and his interpretation is extraordinary.

More amazing than all of this is what one feels when Liszt is present . . . such a majestic, commanding and awe inspiring presence, and yet so fatherly and comforting . . . when he is present it feels as though he is a great religious figure.

I just completed a new composition these past three days and with the full force of inspiration.  The music I notate as of this year makes all my prior music seem like rubbish.  I am grateful for Liszt and the Holy Spirit's intervention in my life, making me into a new person, and giving me a direct connection to the source of inspiration out which I am steadily learning to conceive the sounds of what will eventually emerge as a new type of music no one has heard before.

[perfect_pitch]

There's just as much evidence that Liszt was your teacher as there is of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

HEY...     Don't make fun of the flying Spaghetti monster - he's real you know...



(just kidding)   

On a more serious note. As Chopinlover said - I was not attacking religious people, something you again mis-interpreted (much like your recordings).

I don't think it serves much purpose for us to discuss this if I am comfortable going based on research and facts and you don't think conclusions need to have or correlate with sources.  What do you think?  You seem to feel you are above the findings of objective research.

No... No I don't think I am above the findings of objective research. I'm saying that in all the years that pianists have been playing, none of them have ever defied the directions given on the written sheet music and played like yourself, probably because you seem to have mis-interpreted the research. No pianist in their right mind would study the Preludes of Chopin, and think - This needs octaves and ffff's all over the place, when it isn't written in. Granted there is research about how to ornate and perform Baroque music, however that's simply because most Baroque keyboard music was written for the Harpsichord, so we have to try and find a balance between authenticity to the music despite playing it on a piano, and trying to ornament them similar to what the composer would have done. Since of course, there was no recording technology back in the 1600's and 1700's, it's very hard to know EXACTLY what Bach would have done... but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have played his preludes at about a quarter the speed.

I doubt he has the right professional qualifications to say such things

You see - mentally stable human beings usually have the grounds to perceive what sounds sane, and what sounds insane. If someone said they say Brad Pitt walking down the street - we'd believe them because that sounds plausible. If someone said that they were the only person to ever hear Liszt, then... well, you get the picture.

I have my own pianistic style, though I do get some ideas and influence from Liszt, including the interpretations for two of the concert etudes and with some modifications to the music as it was published.

Do you have any of this objective research to back your findings or did Liszt tell you himself???

I also am concerned that you can not be objective about pianists.  I enjoy every pianist from Pollini to Nyiregyhazi to Gould to Alessio Bax to Earl Wild to Hofmann, Cortot, Rosenthal, Paderewski . . . and the huge array of very young pianists today such as Michelle Candotti, Lindsay Garritson, and many, many more. 

You see, you don't know me at all. I can be objective with Pianists. I've got over a dozen different recordings of Rachmaninoff's 2nd Piano Concerto, and I listened to them all, took in what the pianists did with the music (tempo choices, clarity of playing etc...), and based on an objective opinion, I chose my favourite interpretations of that work based on how close a pianist kept to the composers intentions with the music.

I just completed a new composition these past three days and with the full force of inspiration.  The music I notate as of this year makes all my prior music seem like rubbish. 

This seems to be one thing you've overlooked... I've never commented on your compositions, because as they are YOUR compositions, you have the right to write them as you wish, interpret them as you wish and play them as you wish - since it is your Composition. You are allowed the freedom you want to do with them as you please.

As for the music of Bach, Beethoven and the other great masters... You don't have the right. None of us do.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

As for the music of Bach, Beethoven and the other great masters... You don't have the right. None of us do.

Taking this out of the context of what MS is doing, this is actually a very difficult, and I think quite an interesting, question. It's particularly pertinent to Liszt. It is documented (in Gollerich I think, and quoted by Kenneth Hamilton, though I don't have the exact quote to hand) that at Liszt's Weimar masterclasses he explicitly told the students something along the lines of "if you have the technique to play my transcriptions or the Hungarian Rhapsodies, you have earnt the right to do with them as you wish". I suppose the best way to view this, in the Lisztian context, is that if someone like Cziffra or Earl Wild (who both altered Liszt's scores with some degree of regularity), then we MAY choose to judge them on the persuasiveness of their alterations - purists, of course, can choose to differ and find it unacceptable. My view is that if someone alters the score of works such as I've mentioned, where the music has an improvisational genesis, convincingly, and remains "in style", then why not? Of course there are limits to what is acceptable, but they are not set in stone, it's up to the taste of the individual as to where the line should be drawn.

[alistaircrane4]

Ah, but he did it well.

Yes!! Thank you for this.

[alistaircrane4]

The point which I am getting at here is this: Liszt is "every" pianist's idol, yet he did not play the music as it was notated - not even his own music.  I get abused here for following the example of everyone's idol.  This seems to present more than a bit of a logical inconsistency in thought, in my opinion.

Saying Liszt is "Everyones" idol is a bit subjective even when related to pianists. Accounts of Liszt's playing are well documented as is the playing of other pianists of his day. One in particular who by all means was more adept than Liszt.

[j_menz]

"if you have the technique to play my transcriptions or the Hungarian Rhapsodies, you have earnt the right to do with them as you wish".

I think this is especially true of some of the transcriptions and some of the HRs. These have a very particular "show off" factor, where Liszt quite evidently pulled out the stops to wow the audience with his technical brilliance using relatively simple and/or familiar material as the base. Especially in these cases, individual pianists have different  "I'm particularly good at..." elements, and these will not necessarily align with those of Liszt himself - so to maintain the spirit of that show offy wow factor, it would be perfectly correct for a pianist to ditch those elements that weren't their strength and replace them with those that were.

It would be an entirely different matter, however, to do the same thing in, say, one of the Lagubre Gondolas.

[alistaircrane4]

I have my own pianistic style, though I do get some ideas and influence from Liszt, including the interpretations for two of the concert etudes and with some modifications to the music as it was published, and portions of the content for two music compositions and the entirety of one transcription (which is but one of many transcriptions, the others were accomplished without Liszt's direct involvement).

What is truly amazing are the fingerings of Liszt for Gnomenreigen . . . ingenious and tremendously flexible.  That is one selection where I play the music very much as Liszt wants.  Without his assistance I would never have arrived at an adequate interpretation, and his interpretation is extraordinary.

More amazing than all of this is what one feels when Liszt is present . . . such a majestic, commanding and awe inspiring presence, and yet so fatherly and comforting . . . when he is present it feels as though he is a great religious figure.

I just completed a new composition these past three days and with the full force of inspiration.  The music I notate as of this year makes all my prior music seem like rubbish.  I am grateful for Liszt and the Holy Spirit's intervention in my life, making me into a new person, and giving me a direct connection to the source of inspiration out which I am steadily learning to conceive the sounds of what will eventually emerge as a new type of music no one has heard before.

I'm guessing Liszt did not tell you about the time he played embellishments over a piece by Chopin and what the composer said to him after. If he did you would understand why what you have done to the Preludes is unjustifiable and unforgivable. I mean you destroyed one of my favorite pieces of music ever written, the Op.28 no.6.

[j_menz]

I mean you destroyed one of my favorite pieces of music ever written, the Op.28 no.6.

Nonsense. Chopin has had far worse done to him and survived.

Go look on your shelf, or on you iThingie - you'll find it's still all there, intact as ever.

[chopinlover01]

I'm guessing Liszt did not tell you about the time he played embellishments over a piece by Chopin and what the composer said to him after. If he did you would understand why what you have done to the Preludes is unjustifiable and unforgivable. I mean you destroyed one of my favorite pieces of music ever written, the Op.28 no.6.

I'll quote him, just for the record...
"Please, my friend, I beg of you, play my compositions as I wrote them, or do not play them at all!"

[mjames]

I'll quote him, just for the record...
"Please, my friend, I beg of you, play my compositions as I wrote them, or do not play them at all!"

Chopin also disliked Schumann's music. He can go screw himself in his coffin.

Nonsense. Chopin has had far worse done to him and survived.

Go look on your shelf, or on you iThingie - you'll find it's still all there, intact as ever.

Exactly this. I mean i find Sayer's work interesting but not appealing. But that's it. If I don't find it appealing I move on. "Destroyed my favorite pieces of music!" "A tragedy!"

Seriously, some of these guys can be pretty damn dramatic.

[alistaircrane4]

Chopin also disliked Schumann's music. He can go screw himself in his coffin.


Exactly this. I mean i find Sayer's work interesting but not appealing. But that's it. If I don't find it appealing I move on. "Destroyed my favorite pieces of music!" "A tragedy!"

Seriously, some of these guys can be pretty damn dramatic.

We are trying to get him to stop so he doesn't do it anymore.

[mjames]

We are trying to get him to stop so he doesn't do it anymore.

Lol, you want me to give you a clue on how to do that? I'll give it you.


HINT HINT HINT:

Don't click his threads. I know, i know. I'm a genius.

[8_octaves]

[...]It is documented (in Gollerich I think, and quoted by Kenneth Hamilton, though I don't have the exact quote to hand) that at Liszt's Weimar masterclasses he explicitly told the students something along the lines of "if you have the technique to play my transcriptions or the Hungarian Rhapsodies, you have earnt the right to do with them as you wish". [...]

Hi Ronde,

that's very interesting, I think! I had a short glance at the Göllerich, but didn't find the actual quote. (That's not because it won't perhaps exist, but the Göllerich-pdf I have is in German, and maybe I have searched for the wrong keywords, and it has more than 450 pages ).

But a short pdf of Kenneth Hamilton exists, giving, perhaps, some summarized insight to those who might be interested in Liszt:

https://www.academie-villecroze.com/pdf/Colloques/Colloque%20Liszt/03%20-%20Hamilton.pdf

Furthermore, there should be a shorter bio out there (pdf), written by Christern: "Franz Liszt: Nach seinem Leben und Wirken" ( Hamburg und Leipzig: Schuberth & Comp. , ca. 1841 ) but it of course (see: year ) doesn't cover Liszt's whole life. But it's in German, and it's in Gothic print, which people who want to read it, should be accustomed to.-

Cordially, 8_octaves!

[alistaircrane4]

Lol, you want me to give you a clue on how to do that? I'll give it you.


HINT HINT HINT:

Don't click his threads. I know, i know. I'm a genius.

That stops me from knowing. That doesn't stop him from doing. You should have worked on your sarcasm a bit more so it at least makes some form of sense.

[michael_sayers]

Hi perfect_pitch,

Let's break this down a bit, first regarding fortissimo and its notation.

The logic that music after the 1800s MUST be louder than music from the 1800s, because 20th century composers were more liberal in fortissimo notation, is false.  Chopin's C Minor Prelude is as mighty a composition as Rachmaninoff's Prelude in C sharp Minor with the "fffff" and there is no reason why it should not be as loud.  And just because Rachmaninoff didn't play the Prelude in C sharp Minor with orchestral volume of tone doesn't mean that he did not want to play it that way.

About how the 19th century pianists played, I don't think there is much point in us discussing it when your position is one of "my mind is made up, don't bother me with the facts".  In addition, it is a mute point in a way as my approach to piano playing is not rooted in scholasticism.  I played like this before I even knew that playing styles in the 1800s were different from and more varied than playing styles of the 20th century.  It is in my nature, and this is art - in art there is freedom of expression and creativity (both legal and moral) and no one is to claim freedom of expression as his own right and not the right of other persons.

For you to say that you know what Bach's keyboard tempos were or were not is false.  There are, however, contemporaneous things written about his keyboard style.  Maybe with careful research one could identify estimates of the duration of performance with some of the church cantatas, and get ideas on if the overall tempos were faster or slower than today's tempos in that same music.  As far as I know, no musicologist has attempted this, but Bach was not my research specialty, and this very well may have already been done.

And here perhaps we get an echo of how Liszt played Schubert, through Mary Siloti who was the daughter of one of Liszt's closest students, Alexander Siloti - notice what happens a little after two minutes in.  It had to come from somewhere.  Maybe it didn't originate with Liszt, but that doesn't matter because it is beautiful, and as the great composer Debussy so well argued, and also proved with his power of invention, if it is beautiful in sound then it is okay - it doesn't matter what any of the supposed "laws" of harmony, style, et c., are.  One's perception of beauty is the best final arbiter of a musician's judgement.

Now back to my cross beaming in Finale!

p.s. - Liszt doubled bass lines in octaves all the time and compulsively, anyone can read about it.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Hi Ronde,

that's very interesting, I think! I had a short glance at the Göllerich, but didn't find the actual quote.

As it happens, I was mistaken: it's not in the Gollerich, I just assumed it was because it was an observation from masterclasses. I quote Kenneth Hamilton [After The Golden Age, 236]: "As far as his own music was concerned, Liszt encouraged the more talented pupils to put their own ideas into his virtuoso pieces like the operatic fantasies or Hungarian rhapsodies. Sophie Menter was told in 1880, 'Alter, cut and imrpove the Huguenots Fantasy at your discretion. Such pieces are only to be performed by extraordinary virtuosi - thus Sophie Menter' [Short, Liszt Letters in the Library of Congress, 220]. Alexander Siloti was given similar license..", etc

[michael_sayers]

As it happens, I was mistaken: it's not in the Gollerich, I just assumed it was because it was an observation from masterclasses. I quote Kenneth Hamilton [After The Golden Age, 236]: "As far as his own music was concerned, Liszt encouraged the more talented pupils to put their own ideas into his virtuoso pieces like the operatic fantasies or Hungarian rhapsodies. Sophie Menter was told in 1880, 'Alter, cut and imrpove the Huguenots Fantasy at your discretion. Such pieces are only to be performed by extraordinary virtuosi - thus Sophie Menter' [Short, Liszt Letters in the Library of Congress, 220]. Alexander Siloti was given similar license..", etc

And thus we have:

&index=43

This, however, is supposed to be based on Stavenhagen's personal recollections of how Liszt performed the music.

[mjames]

That stops me from knowing. That doesn't stop him from doing. You should have worked on your sarcasm a bit more so it at least makes some form of sense.

You're the one who needs to make sense. "WE NEED TO STOP HIM FROM DOING THIS"

If you're not interested in his take on music then leave him be. Stop listening to him.  Not everyone in this world needs to cater to your damn interests.

By the way, taking everything at face-value doesn't make you smart. You annoying, inbred, egocentric, half-wit.

[stoat_king]

^ "MichaelSayers-madness" is understandable, but theres no need for "MichaelSayers-rudeness" lol

[perfect_pitch]

Chopin's C Minor Prelude is as mighty a composition as Rachmaninoff's Prelude in C sharp Minor with the "fffff" and there is no reason why it should not be as loud.  

False... if it was meant to be fffff, then Chopin would have written fffff in. Rachmaninoff wrote fffff explicity the Prelude to try and stress that he didn't want it to just be very loud (as in the opening of Chopin), he wanted it very loud, broad in sound and projected. If he wanted it to be as loud as Chopins Prelude, he would have simply put ff.

I'm amazed you seem to think the 2 signs are interchangeable... because that's simply wrong.

About how the 19th century pianists played, I don't think there is much point in us discussing it when your position is one of "my mind is made up, don't bother me with the facts".  

Again, you seem to be mis-interpreting me. My convictions are the way they are, because I know the facts. Granted I won't say I know them all (as you seem to think you do), but your assumption that ff and fffff as above as being interchangeable (only 1 example), is just wrong... so I would check your facts, if I were you. I'm happy to talk about proper musical appreciation, technique and pianism, when you stop saying ridiculous things like you're the only one to hear the music of Liszt. The type of people who usually have that sort of ego and make those sorts of statements have something mentally wrong with them, as of course there is no credible proof for them to back their claims.

For you to say that you know what Bach's keyboard tempos were or were not is false.  

First of all, we have a good idea on what they were. The use of tempo markings written from the early 1700's give us a good estimation of the intended speed. Although no specific metronome markings are given, there is a clear difference between playing a piece that's Andante at 70-80bpm; than at say 16bpm. You need to stop mis-interpreting what I say and trying to twist it.

You've taken excessively massive liberties for the music, to the point of just being stupid for the sake of being stupid (or different)... either way, it doesn't work. Many people have discussed their horror at hearing your interpretations in most of your recordings, so if you want to play it how you like in your own home - you have the privilege. If you want to join a piano board, where serious musicians and pianists reside and frequent - you're going to have to do it properly, with thought, conviction and authenticity.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Although I'm pretty sure I've made my view clear, I feel that trying to argue with someone who is incapable of reason or understanding (like yourself) is probably a waste of time, primarily because you seem unwanting in trying to better your technique and understanding of the music of the great composers and how to interpret it. You can take massive liberties if you want and bugger it up any way you want, and I shall continue learning, researching and playing the pieces with the composers intentions.

...get on the boat now before it is cut loose from the pier.  Because once it gets moving, if you aren't on it, you aren't going to be able to catch up and get on.

I suspect you will be the only person standing on said boat... drifting into the open waters, possibly never to be seen again.



Make sure you bring a life-jacket...

[8_octaves]

False... if it was meant to be fffff, then Chopin would have written fffff in. Rachmaninoff wrote fffff explicity the Prelude to try and stress that he didn't want it to just be very loud (as in the opening of Chopin), he wanted it very loud, broad in sound and projected. If he wanted it to be as loud as Chopins Prelude, he would have simply put ff.
[...]

Hi perfect_pitch,

in the case of the underlined sentence, there's a little problem, because, a ) instruments Chopin played may have had different abilities than the instruments Rachmaninow played, and b ) the concepts of "ff" of each of the two, Chopin and Rachmaninow, may, additionally, have been not exactly the same.

To one of his students, Chopin said approximately this, referring to the Military-Polonaise:

"If I could play the polonaise the way I wanted, the whole piano would break down!" ( or: "all the strings would be torn!" ) - but there's only 4 times or so "fff" written in it. For smashing a piano one would need more power, I think.-

There's Rachmaninow's op.22, the Variations on especially Chopin's c-minor-prelude. In my Boosey&Hawkes-Edition (Corrected printing from 1995-version), I can see that Rachmaninow hasn't changed the "ff" in the theme (which precedes the variations), compared to Henle. But he made other changes (for example: shortening the prelude. This is, of course, because here we have variations on a THEME, but nevertheless, he did it. )

There are recordings, too, and no pianist's concept of "ff" is exactly the same as that of another. Even not in these two recordings:

Earl Wild:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qLURwCU9jw

Nikolai Lugansky: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94fhvjO-glk

Cordially, 8_octaves!

[michael_sayers]

 

Hi perfect_pitch,

With all the beauty and deep thoughts in my mind, a little life jacket and a boat is all I need to get by in life.  Epictetus and Hemingway would be proud of me (though I am not very proud of Hemingway who, though a great artist, had very much in his life and its anguished conclusion to be criticized . . . a subject for a different thread).

As for the Bach C Major Prelude, BWV 846, the last time I checked it there wasn't an "Andante" or any other tempo marking.  I can't really say for sure, because once I know a piece of music, I know it forever, and I can't even remember the last time I looked at the score.  YOU think it should be "Andante", but it is not for you to decide the tempo for EVERYONE - as I said, there is freedom of expression in the arts.

I think it is interesting that you bypassed comment on the Jacques Loussier jazz Bach arrangement link.  The impression is that you feel music should only be performed exactly as notated - and no jazz, and nothing otherwise or anywhere in between.

Luckily, you don't decide how things have to be for billions of people.  They decide by supporting the performers they like, just as you do.  It is as simple as that.  For all your pontificating, there are no laws that only one style of music is permitted in this world or that all music performances must meet your criteria.  If there were or had been such laws, we would still be stuck with the monochord.

When the boat sets sail, I'll be ready.  And if I am the only one on board, I am fine with it.  I'll get to be the Captain in that instance and to enjoy a lot of time to myself.  Solitude is a great blessing, and the uncharted waters are the most inviting of them all.

I won't be the only one though.

The way classical has been done rigidly for all these decades, it has dropped down to only 3% of the music market.  Once something goes as low as it can, there is only one direction it can move in.  When the resurgence arrives, and how it arrives - this will be one of the most important transitions in music history.  The economics of it and the need for other than what is being expressed through classical music in the era we were born in, these things and many free spirits all together will clear the path to the triumphant return to public greatness for classical music.