Program Advice

[k4pp4bl4nc4]

Hello everyone,
I hope you're all having a great evening.

I'm planning to record a program that I intend to perform in a recital several months from now, and I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. What impression does this program give you? Would you suggest adding, removing, or replacing anything?

Program

1. Robert Schumann – Blumenstück, Op. 19
2. Ludwig van Beethoven – Piano Sonata No. 31 in A-flat major, Op. 110
3. Alexander Scriabin – 5 Preludes, Op. 16
4. Sergei Prokofiev – 4 Etudes, Op. 2
5. Isaac Albéniz – Iberia, Book IV

Encore

Claude Debussy – Prelude from La Damoiselle élue

Any feedback regarding the programming, pacing, stylistic balance, or overall artistic direction would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

[thorn]

The one thing that jumps out to me is you have the Schumann and then several multi-movement/piece works, and perhaps it would be good to break this up a little?

Couple of examples:

The Beethoven is a big work so it might be worth following with something shorter/lighter (that isn't part of a set) as a palate cleanser for the audience?

I also wonder if playing 4 etudes followed by 3 pieces from Iberia is too technique heavy for a listener (love Iberia btw, so nice to see it programmed!)

Also have you arranged the Debussy yourself?

[k4pp4bl4nc4]

@thorn

Thank you for your response!

As for the palate-cleanser piece, I'd love to hear a few suggestions from you -- perhaps something that a non-pianist audience would find more familiar or immediately engaging?

My initial thought was that the Schumann could serve as a nice hook for the audience because of its simplicity and beauty. However, you've convinced me to reconsider the order. I just realized it might actually work better as a palate cleanser than as an opening piece.

Regarding the Etudes before Iberia, I think you're absolutely right. From my perspective, the Fourth Etude creates a bit of "technical breathing room" before Iberia, since I find it considerably easier than the Third Etude and Málaga. That said, this distinction is probably far less apparent to the audience. So for that reason I think placing the Scriabin before Iberia is the right move.

I'm also glad to meet another Iberia enthusiast!

I still wonder why Iberia, especially when programmed by book, isn't performed more often. Each book works remarkably well as a self-contained set. They are incredibly colorful, rhythmically vibrant, and full of surprisingly beautiful melodies (Málaga climax comes to mind). Even at the Van Cliburn, as far as I know, only one pianist programmed a piece from Iberia (Corpus Christi).

Also, the arrangement from La Damoiselle élue was actually made by Debussy himself!

[dizzyfingers]

Thanks!  A program I would like to hear - rare for these kinds of posts.

I think the Scriabin preludes work well as a relaxing episode after the Beethoven op 110, more so than the Schumann, which has a classical, more formal, vibe to it, even though it's Schumann (warm and romantic). I think Blumenstuck works well as a program entry point.

Don't be shy about being creative - - interspersing pieces from a collection with pieces from another collection.  Meaning you could mix Scriabin preludes, Prokofiev etudes and Iberia.  I went to a concert by Conrad Tao recently where he interspersed Brahms' op 118 with other works.  It was a refreshing and exciting concert experience.  I would at least do that with Scriabin and Prokofiev, to lessen the technical and cerebral hardness of the etudes.  That will refresh the audience enough to prepare them for Iberia - Malagra, which is a nice finale.

[thorn]

Don't be shy about being creative - - interspersing pieces from a collection with pieces from another collection.  Meaning you could mix Scriabin preludes, Prokofiev etudes and Iberia.  I went to a concert by Conrad Tao recently where he interspersed Brahms' op 118 with other works.  It was a refreshing and exciting concert experience.  I would at least do that with Scriabin and Prokofiev, to lessen the technical jack hammer effect of the etudes.  That will refresh the audience enough to prepare them for the weighty Iberia.

I think this is a great suggestion, and I've never heard of that strategy before!

As for the palate-cleanser piece, I'd love to hear a few suggestions from you -- perhaps something that a non-pianist audience would find more familiar or immediately engaging?

My initial thought was that the Schumann could serve as a nice hook for the audience because of its simplicity and beauty. However, you've convinced me to reconsider the order. I just realized it might actually work better as a palate cleanser than as an opening piece

I agree re. Schumann as the opening. What about Debussy La puerta del Vino or La soirée dans Grenade? (Or even some Falla if you want to save Debussy for the encore) to both palate cleanse and prepare the audience for the sound world of Iberia? And I didn't know about that arrangement, I'll check it out!

I'm also glad to meet another Iberia enthusiast!

I still wonder why Iberia, especially when programmed by book, isn't performed more often. Each book works remarkably well as a self-contained set. They are incredibly colorful, rhythmically vibrant, and full of surprisingly beautiful melodies (Málaga climax comes to mind). Even at the Van Cliburn, as far as I know, only one pianist programmed a piece from Iberia (Corpus Christi).

I agree. Richter once said he didn't play Spanish music because he got everything he needed from the French, and I think this still plays a huge part in stuff like Iberia and Goyescas not being programmed much. Have you played any of the others or did you go straight in at Book 4? (Jerez is my joint favourite from the entire set alongside El Albaicin)

[k4pp4bl4nc4]

@dizzyfingers

Thank you for the thoughtful feedback! I'm glad to hear the program appeals to you.
I hadn't considered interspersing the Scriabin and Prokofiev before; that's a very interesting idea! I'll definitely give that some thought as I continue refining the program... 

That will refresh the audience enough to prepare them for Iberia - Malagra, which is a nice finale.

I'll actually be performing all three pieces from Book IV... 
I agree Málaga is a fine piece, but I find the complete arc of the book especially compelling, with Eritaña providing a satisfyingly grandiose conclusion.

@thorn

I agree re. Schumann as the opening. What about Debussy La puerta del Vino or La soirée dans Grenade? (Or even some Falla if you want to save Debussy for the encore) to both palate cleanse and prepare the audience for the sound world of Iberia? And I didn't know about that arrangement, I'll check it out!

Thanks for the suggestions! I played both La Puerta del Vino and La Soirée dans Grenade. I feel like the latter would fit better in this program; I'll really consider it! 

My only experience with Albeniz before this was the Suite Espanola (nos. 1,3, and 5), and I jumped straight to Book 4 because I was really obsessed with Málaga, and from there I gradually became more interested in the rest of the cycle.

Jerez is extraordinary, one of the most reflective and atmospheric pieces in the entire set. It's also, in my experience, the most musically challenging piece in Book IV.

I love El Albaicín as well. It's definitely one of the audience favorites, not hard to see why it's as famous as Triana. I read somewhere that Debussy was influenced by it when composing La sérénade interrompue.

I agree -- very unfortunate that Spanish music has often been overshadowed by the French despite works like Iberia and Goyescas.
As for Richter's remark, I've sometimes wondered whether there may have been more to it than simply a preference for French music. Perhaps he felt that certain repertoire had already found its ideal champions. In the same way he reportedly avoided Rach 3 because Horowitz loomed so large over it, I wonder whether figures like Alicia de Larrocha may have shaped his view of Spanish music in a similar way -- only a speculation on my part.

[liszt-and-the-galops]

I still wonder why Iberia, especially when programmed by book, isn't performed more often.

Probably because of their difficulty. Book II has Triana, Book IV has Eritaña, and all of Book III is hellish but especially Lavapiés, which is arguably the hardest thing in standard repertoire. Book I is the easiest, but it still has El Corpus en Sevilla.

It should still be programmed more often though. IMO the suite deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as Liszt's S. 139.

[thorn]

I love El Albaicín as well. It's definitely one of the audience favorites, not hard to see why it's as famous as Triana. I read somewhere that Debussy was influenced by it when composing La sérénade interrompue.

Yes the influence is really clear! Apparently he called El Albaicin the perfect piece of music.

As for Richter's remark, I've sometimes wondered whether there may have been more to it than simply a preference for French music. Perhaps he felt that certain repertoire had already found its ideal champions. In the same way he reportedly avoided Rach 3 because Horowitz loomed so large over it, I wonder whether figures like Alicia de Larrocha may have shaped his view of Spanish music in a similar way -- only a speculation on my part.

That's a fair point. I remember reading that Krystian Zimerman didn't bother with Iberia for that reason- he didn't feel he had anything to add that Larrocha hadn't done. Apparently when teaching it to students he'd even call her to ask for advice.

[essence]

i did hear Larrocha do all the books at the Royal Festival Hall in London.

I think one of the problems with Iberia is that it is so difficult to play well. Take El Albaicin - difficult but not too bad to play the notes, but a good performance? Lavapies can sound a mess even with good pianists.

I can't think of any performance which come close to the above two. Orozco I consider one the the great pianists of recent times. Not as well known as he should be. Listening to a recording he made of rach 3 - dominates the orchestra in a good way, but also they can't keep up with him.