Bach Prelude No. 2 in Cm from WTC Book 1

[rachfan]

I can assure you that Sayers is not me.  Whereas your critique is directed toward the Bach P & F, that would be me.  I agree that the RH and LH need to be in better synch.  I spent hours with the metronome trying to make that happen, but I couldn't get it just right without it.  I'm not planning any other Bach pieces.  I leave that to the Bach enthusiasts. 

David

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Interesting to hear you playing something outwith your 'comfort zone'! It's not really my area of critical knowledge either, but I'll have a go. In the prelude, which is not bad, there seem to be marginal tempo changes or, rather, inconsistencies, which I found a bit disorientating. Towards the end the unison wasn't very clean and the scales sounded uneven (tbh, I think the latter is a natural consequence of playing a lot of pedal-heavy Romantic literature - suddenly, when passagework becomes exposed, it turns out less tidy than one previously thought). I thought you were a lot happier in the Fugue, which began confidently, and I found the octaves adding a layer of sonority. Interesting listening to this, and food for thought.

[rachfan]

Hi ronde,

Good to hear from you!  Yes, you're right about the need to stay with the tempo in the prelude.  I too noticed that I sped up and slowed down at times on page 1 and the top part of page 2.  Below that, however, Czerny changes the tempo at least three times--from allegro vivace to presto to adagio to Allegro and ending with lento.  In retrospect, I'm thinking that I should have avoided Czerny's changes to play it straight through at the original tempo.

I agree that I felt more free in the fugue.  All things considered, my experiment confirmed that
I'm not cut out to be a Baroque pianist. It's that simple. Not that I would want to spend limited time on that genre of serious music.  I could have invested that  time far better playing music that I enjoy. 

Thanks for your comments.  I appreciate it.

David

[michael_sayers]

Hi ronde,

Good to hear from you!  Yes, you're right about the need to stay with the tempo in the prelude.  I too noticed that I sped up and slowed down at times on page 1 and the top part of page 2.  Below that, however, Czerny changes the tempo at least three times--from allegro vivace to presto to adagio to Allegro and ending with lento.  In retrospect, I'm thinking that I should have avoided Czerny's changes to play it straight through at the original tempo.

I agree that I felt more free in the fugue.  All things considered, my experiment confirmed that
I'm not cut out to be a Baroque pianist. It's that simple. Not that I would want to spend limited time on that genre of serious music.  I could have invested that  time far better playing music that I enjoy.  

Thanks for your comments.  I appreciate it.

David

Hi David,

I very much enjoyed this, and rather than thinking it suggests you aren't cut out for baroque music, I feel that the freedom you experienced with the fugue shows it is in you.  Maybe this is music with which one's ideas on its interpretation evolve over time?

I would be particularly interested in hearing you play the B Minor Prelude and Fugue from W.T.C. I, and also one or more of August Stradal's arrangements of Buxtehude's music, which are listed in groups at this page with the Chaconne and the Prelude titles:

https://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Stradal,_August/Arranger

My apologies again for what transpired earlier in this thread.


Mvh,
Michael

[emill]

This is my first Bach recording since 1963.   

Really?  Would there be a particular reason?  that would be half a century later.

The subsequent discussions are quite informative especially when dealing with markings and tempos.
We the lay public or at least I was of the impression that Bach pieces have a very precise and specific tempo and structure, unless it was transcribed not be so like transcriptions by Busoni?  But Bach pieces by Bach himself ... learned something today.   THANKS.

NICE playing and recording as usual.

[rachfan]

Hi emill,

Yes, it's true, 1963.  In my early piano training (the first 10 years), I entered the annual adjudicated National Piano Playing Auditions run by the National Guild of Piano Teachers.  Being a "well rounded pianist" meant preparing/memorizing 10 pieces from the Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and Modern/Impressionistic periods.  Although I played Bach, I never enjoyed it.  After I collected my rewards and did my senior recital, I never played Bach again.  In my 40s I studied with an artist-teacher who insisted on at least playing Classical, but understood my aversion to Bach.  I had paid my dues to Bach. Everyone has preferences. Horowitz once made this remark: "Brahms and I are on bad terms."  He simply did not play Brahms for that reason. That alone tells me that musicians including pianists like the music of some composers but not all. If I'm playing Rachmaninoff, Scriabin or Catoire, I feel free to decide on a rendition that comports with the composer's intentions, but also the freedom to allow a bit of my own personality to enter the performance as well.  That's how I put a piece across to the listener.  However, if I have to play Bach, my heart is not in it. There I'm restrained by the conventions of the purists' performance practices, and to me that must feel like being in jail.  The scope of the piano literature is enormous and way too large to be experienced in one lifetime or even many.  I love specializing in the Late Romantics, and at my age I feel free to do so.  Given the size of the repertoire, even a pianist who specializes merely scratches the surface!  

David

  

[gvans]

Hi David,

Thanks for posting. And thanks for mentioning Andras Schiff's playing. I recently attended a concert of his, with a late Beethoven, a Mozart, and a late Schubert, and was knocked out by his pianism. Phrasing, thought, control, and tempo were all perfectly conceived and executed. Every measure was given attention. As you say, with Bach (and, really, the above composers as well), the music is very transparent and leaves no place to hide--especially, if one abjures excessive pedaling, as you did and as Schiff does.

Bravo for going "outside your comfort zone" and playing JSB. We should all do the same!
As Jascha Heifitz said, while playing a violin concert for the troops in WWII, when the audience groaned at his announcement of his plan to play a Bach partita:

"Bach is good for you. Like spinach!"

Glenn

[rachfan]

Hi Glenn,

As for the Baroque and Classical eras, I think it would be difficult for any pianist to outplay Schiff.  He's truly a wonder.  Somebody like me who has spent minimal time with Bach has to keep in mind the long lists of "must do" and "never do" rules.  Schiff plays with intelligence but also with every execution is so mindful of phrasing, thought, control, and tempo, as you noted.  Schiff is an institution. Although I'm not a Baroque fan, I marvel (with much envy) at his interpretations.

Pianists who do play a lot of Baroque music encounter and discover in Bach's music ways to overcome obstacles which helps them to build wonderful techniques. And those strong techniques are transferable, thus enabling a pianist to apply those skills in playing the music of later eras and composers too.  I don't think that Rachmaninoff ever spent much time with Bach, but he did thoroughly enjoy playing Scarlatti just for himself, likening it to a "cold shower".

Basically my intention was to take a bold step by playing a Bach piece--even though, admittedly, my Late Romantic style of playing was not up to the Baroque standards.  I can certainly appreciate though that it's a positive way to build one's pianism--but a huge investment in time too.

Thanks for commenting.

David