Home
Piano Music
Piano Music Library
Top composers »
Bach
Beethoven
Brahms
Chopin
Debussy
Grieg
Haydn
Mendelssohn
Mozart
Liszt
Prokofiev
Rachmaninoff
Ravel
Schubert
Schumann
Scriabin
All composers »
All composers
All pieces
Search pieces
Recommended Pieces
Audiovisual Study Tool
Instructive Editions
Recordings
PS Editions
Recent additions
Free piano sheet music
News & Articles
PS Magazine
News flash
New albums
Livestreams
Article index
Piano Forum
Resources
Music dictionary
E-books
Manuscripts
Links
Mobile
About
About PS
Help & FAQ
Contact
Forum rules
Pricing
Log in
Sign up
Piano Forum
Home
Help
Search
Piano Forum
»
Piano Board
»
Repertoire
»
Bartok for Children- Original or an Arrangement?
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Down
Topic: Bartok for Children- Original or an Arrangement?
(Read 701 times)
jcmusic
PS Silver Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 26
Bartok for Children- Original or an Arrangement?
on: September 07, 2020, 11:44:47 PM
Hi,
Bartok did a cycle of short piano pieces for children, and based on folk songs. Finished in 1909, and revised in 1945. Heard Vol. I, #3 (Quasi Adagio) on a podcast the other day. It wasn't the one in either the 1909 or 1945 revision. Had a deep bass, and a great dissonant section in the middle. The podcaster didn't identify the pianist, but fiddling on the net, looks like it might have been Zoltan Kocsis:
https://www.daysofdisorder.com/posts/zoltan-kocsis-plays-bartok-for-children
See 0:30
Does anyone know if this is Zoltan's arrangement, or was this written by Bartok? Would love to see the sheet music if by Bartok.
Thanks so much,
John
Logged
jcmusic
PS Silver Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 26
Re: Bartok for Children- Original or an Arrangement?
Reply #1 on: September 09, 2020, 02:43:42 AM
Idiot. It's # 17 of book 1. I wasn't even close on the rhythm.
Idiot.
Sorry for wasting your time.
Embarrassed.
John
Logged
jcmusic
PS Silver Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 26
Re: Bartok for Children- Original or an Arrangement?
Reply #2 on: September 09, 2020, 03:05:21 AM
Idiot. Did it again.
Bartok did two versions of his For Children-- 1909, and revised them in 1945, just before he died. #17 with the dissonance in the middle, is in the 1945 version, not the 1909.
So I still feel like an idiot, but the podcast announcer apparently got it wrong, too, as he said it was the 1909 version.
Feel slightly better, as not alone. But not much better.
Thanx,
John
Logged
Sign-up to post reply
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Up