It's very interesting. I'm not sure how many people are going to agree with you; the question then arises - do they disagree because they are used to tradition?I don't know the piece intimately from a performer perspective as I've only played around with sections of it, though I have of course heard dozens of recordings (it was one of my teacher's specialities, and I regret not getting round to studying it properly with him.)My prevailing impressions are that you are probably correct in terms of interpretation of some of the staccato markings, with one general caveat which essentially stems from the following observation. My score (which is Dover, a reprint from a version edited by da Motta) only has pedal markings in a few specific places. Liszt wasn't, as I'm sure you know, always fastidious about writing out pedal markings, and so the absence of them doesn't necessarily imply no pedal. Consequently, your choices at, for example, around 15.00, 15.33 sound odd (albeit, to a conditioned ear) and I'm not convinced they make dramatic sense; it sounds like the bass part of the harmony is dropping out where its inclusion adds depth and gravity to the proceedings. Yes I know it's marked staccato, but staccato of course doesn't imply no pedal. On the other hand, there are also points where your pedalling choices result in things being heard in the left hand which the listener doesn't normally hear. There was one definite passage (from 22.15? - I spotted this first listen but didn't note it down; on second listen this matches my impressions) where the lh was clearly derived from the thematic material, so I'm inclined to feel your view has validity there. Similarly, the passage at 8.30 I felt I heard anew.Overall I think the sound is maybe a bit brittle, but I don't know to what extent I attribute that to your pedalling decisions, to what extent to the recording, and to what extent to my own aesthetic preferences. A bit of a superficial post I'm afraid, but I've not studied it properly enough to be more detailed, thus my own ideas about the piece aren't as developed as they might be. Certainly much food for thought in the performance however. Finally, it might be worth posting this in the audition room and see if there's feedback by that route.
Thank you so much for making the recording! Do you plan on doing similar projects for any other major works by major composers? Just curious. But nonetheless this was a fantastic recording, like a trip back to 1850s. Always fascinating to see how composers revise their works. Nice touch on those abrupt staccatos too, it adds so much color to the piece. Dayummn, can't express how much I'm loving this man...*favorites*
Those hyper short staccatos sound terrible.
Well, here's an interesting find. It's a piano roll recording of one of Liszt's own pupils playing the B minor Sonata. Obviously the performance isn't quite captured on the piano roll but I think you get enough of a sense of how it would have been played.
Clara Schumann and Hanslick are some names who would easily agree with you, no doubts.
Anyway, Liszt's intentions are written down, so it seems you prefer the "mistaken traditional interpreters" more than what Franz Liszt wrote (if you know music theory and read scores then you know what is a "spiccato" and how "short" they are - both staccato and spiccato are present in the score - just check the first and second page - there is no excuse for do not play them).
Dear Klavieronin,If you take the time to listen to the audio of the master-class I posted here:https://opusdissonus.com.br/CIMIRRO_studio-master-class_002.htmyou will noticed I mentioned Friedheim's recording and I posted the score with Friedheim's handwritings about how to play the full work - and I also explain where is and why there is differences between Friedheim's version and Liszt's original intentions.Friedheim's version is a revision of textures in order to make the public fells easier the connection between the different sections of the sonata,Please, check the master-class audio before replying.Thanks anyway.BestArtur
I'm familiar with the backstory of the work and the reactions it recieved from the above mentioned people. Unlike them however, I'm a big fan of the work (I studied and performed it last year).
The thing is, regardless of what you call it, none of these marks have a meaning that is cut in stone, and the way you play and interpret them varies based on taste and context.
For example, a staccato on a quarter note might be longer than a staccato on an 8th note in the same piece. Or again, it might not.
Dear cimirro,I hope you don't think that my posting that video was a criticism of your interpretation. I just thought that since there was a discussion about the interpretation of the sonata that people here might be interested to hear one of Liszt's pupils play it. That's all.I didn't know you mentioned Friedheim's recording before I posted that video because I had only listened to your recording of the sonata (as I suspect is the case for most of us here).I have listened to most of your master class now and followed along with the score. It was interesting and for all I know (which, to be honest, isn't much) you may be exactly right. Even so, I think I still prefer Bolet or Hough.
Topic: FRANZ LISZT - Sonata in b minor s.178 (a new "first" recording) 