Bach invention 9

[ghassen]

Hi,

so this is the first recording I do since i got back to piano a couple of months ago(6 months).
I am happy to get some constructive cristicism.... ways to practice.... repertoire suggestions...
I know i did miss some notes  but i was honestly a bit nervous with the camera.
   

[j_tour]

Hi,

so this is the first recording I do since i got back to piano a couple of months ago(6 months).
I am happy to get some constructive cristicism.... ways to practice.... repertoire suggestions...
I know i did miss some notes  but i was honestly a bit nervous with the camera.

Nicely done:  I didn't perceive that you seemed nervous at all in front of the camera.  At least no more than most anyone else would be.

A few moments you did manage what I think of as a classic, full, "singing" tone at the keyboard:  very much a good thing.

I don't really want to criticize in a negative way, but since you asked:  if it were me, I'd loosen up the pulse of the piece (or if you, like, the tempo — different technical meanings, but here, it's about the same sense).  Not in a romantic sense of rubato all over the place, nor in varying dynamics too wildly, but it seems a bit too metronomic or "straight" ("strict" is a better word?) for my tastes.

I think you did great, just a bit of loosening up and having fun with the piece is what I'd want to hear:  less strict scales, more music, in a subtle way.  I know it's not really a polka dance piece, but you probably understand what I mean.

[ghassen]

thank you for the response and for your suggestion. 
I have to admit, i do like playing the piece with a bit of rubato when i am playing for myself (I hold the first note a bit longer and then whenever the motif comes again i do the same small rubato) but since i was playing before my teacher ( my teacher thinks that kind of rubato is not stylistically correct ) i tried to keep a "steady" tempo. 

[j_tour]

(I hold the first note a bit longer and then whenever the motif comes again i do the same small rubato) but since i was playing before my teacher ( my teacher thinks that kind of rubato is not stylistically correct ) i tried to keep a "steady" tempo.

Well, opinions vary.  But a little bit of flexibility or looseness, especially if its not done in a mechanical way, I think can be defended.

Anyway, you're doing good, and of course you're most welcome to any small comments on my part.  After all, I've just heard your performance once, and it's very likely there's much more that can be said.

I hope some others will step up and offer opinions:  I can play, but I'm far from the most knowledgeable or skillful player around here. 

ETA Yes, I just read through it again at the keyboard.

This is a truly minor, so to speak, point, but I think it's better to just call it the "F minor invention."  The only reason I was able to hear it is that I ponied up for broadband internet literally today/late last night and was able to hear/see your recording.  Standard would be just to say the F minor invention of Bach:  yes, everyone knows what you mean, especially with the recording, but it can be confusing without actually hearing the tune.

And, yes, I like it a bit quicker than you play it, with more a song-like feel, I suppose, but I still think you did OK.

EETA And, no, about the notation, I was and still am truly trying to be helpful.  Here's something easy to understand:  many pianists prefer to arrange these cycles in different configurations, or perhaps in no particular order at all.  So, n°9 doesn't mean anything, except that one has to remember which keys Bach omitted in his WTC or in his inventions.  Trust me, it's meant to be a friendly suggestion, not to single you out or anything.

TBH, I was a little bit drinking Jameson whiskey late last night and got a bit ornery about "WTH?  The n° 9 Invention?  No, I'm not going to count in my head through all the keys from the Invent/Sinfon and remember which keys Bach omitted! C, Cm, D, Dm, E, Em, F Fm...sh*t, Bach did use Eb major for those!  Damn"   

But my listening to your piece was done earlier, in a very sober, analytic state of mind.

[ghassen]

thank you. 
II totally understand what you mean. I have not thought about it (F minor invention instead of n9 ) but now that you say it, it makes total sens.

[thirtytwo2020]

So, n°9 doesn't mean anything, except that one has to remember which keys Bach omitted in his WTC or in his inventions

I would recommend writing Invention No 9 in f minor...
In the well-tempered clavier it's more reasonable to omit the number, since there we have a prelude and fugue in every key. But in this context, it's better to use both number and key, which is also what most people do.

I think you did great, just a bit of loosening up and having fun with the piece is what I'd want to hear:  less strict scales, more music, in a subtle way.  I know it's not really a polka dance piece, but you probably understand what I mean.

This is where I agree with j_tour. But I don't think it has to be about rubato. Maybe it was because of your nervousness in front of the camera, but your playing sounds a bit mechanical. Have you thought about what mood or character you want to convey in this piece? (I don't have a "correct" answer to this question, I just want to set you thinking) Does it speak to you in some way or do you feel like it's just an exercise?

Listening to you again, I find that you start out with some nice expressive playing, but somehow it gets a little lost under way. Anyway, I'm glad that you've returned to playing, you are doing very well. Keep posting!

 

[j_tour]

I would recommend writing Invention No 9 in f minor...
In the well-tempered clavier it's more reasonable to omit the number, since there we have a prelude and fugue in every key. But in this context, it's better to use both number and key, which is also what most people do.

Why's that?  It's unambiguous to say the F minor invention, and it's unimportant and possibly misleading to mention some irrelevant "number."

Yes, maybe including the "number" is relevant to beginning students who play the invent. and sinf. according to a pretendedly canonical ascending order, but it's not necessary, nor is that the way most people learn or play these sets.  Nor, arguably, should one play or learn the pieces in these sets in ascending diatonic order, excepting the Eb in both sets.  Bach is one primary source that the "numbers" are irrelevant indices, but performance practice, such as it is, is another.

Doesn't hurt to be more precise, but there's only one F minor invention.  "N°9" is just added information which is likely to be deceptive or confusing.

Agreed about the WTC:  that's downright diabolical to just state the "number" or, equally, the BWV number.

Or even worse, people who say, like X's Sonata no. 18 among various other composers.  Yeah, people who say like Beethoven's Piano Sonata no. 19?  I have no idea what they're talking about without an Opus number.  Same deal.

[thirtytwo2020]

It's certainly unambiguous to say the F minor Invention, but I don't see why it would be misleading to mention the number. On the contrary, it will be helpful to people who are not 100% informed about keys and how Bach put together this particular set of pieces. (Which is about 99,99% of the world's population, including many who listen to or even play these pieces)

You may be right that in essence, the numbers are unnecessary and irrelevant, but the fact remains that in all editions and recordings of these pieces they are numbered from 1 to 15, including in Bach's own autograph manuscript. If you want to find it quickly in whatever situation you happen to be in, I would still recommend to ask for the number as well as the key.

Sorry to stray from the most important subject here, which was ghassen's playing...
 

[brogers70]

I echo all the positive feedback. As a suggestion for practice you might try this. Pick just one phrase in one hand and imagine you are a singer or a violin and play the phrase in the most expressive way possible. I don't mean lots of rubato and ridiculous, extreme crescendos or subito pianos and all that. Just try to get the natural rise and fall in dynamics that flows the rise and fall of the line, and maybe leave a little bitty space for breath at the end of a phrase. Do that for a phrase or two in each hand and enjoy imagining a great vocal or instrumental sound. After a while, that phrase shaping an breathing will take hold in you playing the whole piece hands together.

Another bit of advice I've heard from Josh Wright is (just for practice, don't play the piece this way for real), is to imagine that that Bach invention is a Chopin Nocturne. Play it with over-the-top pedal, rubato, expressive changes in dynamics, etc. If you just do what comes naturally in that way, you'll end up with good ideas about phrasing and shaping that you can then tone down into a Bach-appropriate way.