An attempt at the Goldberg Variations, progression of learning

[m1469]

I am trying to organize a learning program for the Goldberg variations.  First, in line with trying to learn easier to harder, I have decided that I don't need to learn in order, including the aria.  I am not sure if this is a good idea or not.

I have seperated out the variations by number of voice parts (although there are a couple of questionable ones).  I am attempting to derive a progression that makes sense, but I will say this is taking me ages as I have never done anything like this for complete works.  This is what I have so far, though I think I gave up somewhere along the lines.

27
29
7
28
5
1
8
14
11 
20

Does anyone have any suggestions?  How would you change the progression?  Suggestions are more than welcome (I am getting stuck).

m1469

[iumonito]

What a great work, isn't it?  I have never mastered it up to performance level, so take with a grain of salt:

One third of the Goldberg are canons, another third are virtuoso, mostly two-part, pieces with lots of hand-crossing.  The other third are "character" pieces (dances, ariettas, etc.)

The third group tends to be the easiest and the second the hardest.

Also, if you have a university library handy, read Alan Street's article on this work.  Very inspiring.

And stay away from the Gould recordings.  They could not be more astray musicologically (they are great, but they are so very wrong).  For a good "how-does-this-thing-go" recording, try Trevor Pinnock.

[whynot]

iumonito, you are my new best friend. 

m1469, good luck w/ the Bach.  I'm working on it also. 

[mound]

I was not at all familiar with the Goldberg Variations, believe it or not, until this past weekend when I was watching Silence of the Lambs on TV and a scene came on, he was listening to this amazing piano music, I knew it had to be Bach but wasn't sure what it was. Looked it up on Google and low and behold!   I too would like to learn this at  some point.


ps. - does anybody know which variation in particular was used in that scene in Silence of the Lambs? I couldn't find that

[Goldberg]

Oh, I love that movie.

It has, however, been a long while since I've seen it, but if I recall correctly, and I'd like to think I do, in the prison break scene Hannibal is listens for sure to the 7th variation, and there is, I think, also a bit of variation 3, maybe no. 2, and possibly the aria.

That's a lot of uncertainty, though--I'll check it again in a few hours to be sure, unless someone else happens to find the thread. I do believe all the tracks are from Gould's early recording. The aria also plays a role in the mediocre sequel, Hannibal--that one, I think, is Gould's late recording.

It's interesting to note as well that Hopkins himself is described as being a "virtuoso pianist" in a few articles I've read on him (I don't know exactly what that means as I haven't read any more, or heard any recordings. Something tells me he doesn't whip out the Don Juan during film breaks...). He is seen playing, I think, a gorgeous Bechstein or Bosendorfer or something in the movie Hannibal, but as far as I know it's not actually him performing.

[m1469]

What a great work, isn't it?  I have never mastered it up to performance level, so take with a grain of salt:

One third of the Goldberg are canons, another third are virtuoso, mostly two-part, pieces with lots of hand-crossing.  The other third are "character" pieces (dances, ariettas, etc.)

The third group tends to be the easiest and the second the hardest.

Also, if you have a university library handy, read Alan Street's article on this work.  Very inspiring.

And stay away from the Gould recordings.  They could not be more astray musicologically (they are great, but they are so very wrong).  For a good "how-does-this-thing-go" recording, try Trevor Pinnock.

I have been meaning to respond that this is quite helpful for me and will help me make a plan.  I have heard that Trevor Pinnock is a great one to listen to for Bach  , I will be sure to do this.

m1469, good luck w/ the Bach. I'm working on it also.

Thanks, you too 

m1469

[gouldfischer]

I am also starting to play the Goldbergs myself... well, so far I only play the Aria and the first half of the 1st variation :-) but sometime in the (not so near) future I'm sure I'll have completed the whole set.

Btw, I decided to learn the variations following their staight numeric order. Is it that bad? (Ps.: Although I've been playing the guitar for sixteen years, my piano experience consists of not much more than the Ana Magdalena Notebook and the 2-part Inventions, but I sincerely think that my play is ok - so far, at least... let the real Goldberg challenges begin to swallow my brains...)

Thanks to you all for such a good group. I'm learning a lot here.

[iumonito]

I have been meaning to respond that this is quite helpful for me and will help me make a plan.  I have heard that Trevor Pinnock is a great one to listen to for Bach  , I will be sure to do this.

Thanks, you too 

m1469

Hi m1469,

I am glad my clumsy comment was of any help.  Here is a follow up thought.  The piece is also divided in two half.  The first piece of the second half, 16, is a French overture.  For reference on how to play this special piece, it is helpfull to listen to recordings of the B-minor French Overture (the companion piece of Concerto Italiano) and good recordings of the Partita IV, which also starts with a French overture.  You will notice that the first half has runs; these are to start later and run faster than written, even though the overall tempo stays quite regal.  then the second part is kind of fugatto in 9/8 right, if it is not in 9/8 it should be, so that's something to play with.

And the Quodlibet (the last variation) makes a lot of sense if you know the songs that are pastiched in.

[thalberg]

Hi there,

I just played the Goldberg Variations in a recital about eight weeks ago.  Any questions you have, feel free to PM me if you want.

So how are you getting stuck?  If you're trying to start with the easy ones, I'd say your first few are absolutely correct.  19 is really easy, and 10 and 18 aren't too bad if you're looking for some to learn next. 

If you need any help on any of the artistic dilemmas (or technical ones) let me know. 

Here's one thing I did.  I was having trouble artisticaly with the canons, so I discovered it works really well to bring out one voice all the time.  Then when the voices cross and stuff, everything still makes sense.  I particularly liked this approach for #6.

[happyface94]

I don't know, to me it just feels natural to start in the right order.

[m1469]

One third of the Goldberg are canons, another third are virtuoso, mostly two-part, pieces with lots of hand-crossing. The other third are "character" pieces (dances, ariettas, etc.)

Okay, I am going to work on grouping them as such and will be coming back here soon, hopefully.

Hi m1469,

I am glad my clumsy comment was of any help. Here is a follow up thought. The piece is also divided in two half. The first piece of the second half, 16, is a French overture. For reference on how to play this special piece, it is helpfull to listen to recordings of the B-minor French Overture (the companion piece of Concerto Italiano) and good recordings of the Partita IV, which also starts with a French overture. You will notice that the first half has runs; these are to start later and run faster than written, even though the overall tempo stays quite regal. then the second part is kind of fugatto in 9/8 right, if it is not in 9/8 it should be, so that's something to play with.

And the Quodlibet (the last variation) makes a lot of sense if you know the songs that are pastiched in.

Thank you again, this is helpful advice.

Hi there,

I just played the Goldberg Variations in a recital about eight weeks ago. Any questions you have, feel free to PM me if you want.

So how are you getting stuck? If you're trying to start with the easy ones, I'd say your first few are absolutely correct. 19 is really easy, and 10 and 18 aren't too bad if you're looking for some to learn next.

If you need any help on any of the artistic dilemmas (or technical ones) let me know.

Here's one thing I did. I was having trouble artisticaly with the canons, so I discovered it works really well to bring out one voice all the time. Then when the voices cross and stuff, everything still makes sense. I particularly liked this approach for #6.

What I am getting stuck on right now is not just about the Goldberg Variations.  I have a huge amount of repertoire I think I would like to learn and I am striving to put together some kind of plan of attack that will allow me to glean the most I possibly can from every single piece that I play, as well as use my time most efficiently.  I want to grow pianistically and musically in the smoothest ways possible through the study of the repertoire I would like to learn.   Your offering of help is very generous and I appreciate it.  I will be coming back to this thread within a couple weeks, hopefully with more organization (I also teach and would like to have a plan to learn this work for my students).

m1469

[gouldfischer]

Hi there,

If you need any help on any of the artistic dilemmas (or technical ones) let me know. 

Well, I guess I need some help now... if Thalberg or anyone else can reply, I'll really appreciate.

(Sorry for the greenhornish doubt, first of all...)

What is the fingering you use in the 1st Variation, 8th bar, LH? I've seen different fingerings printed here and there for this phrase. I personally prefer  |121451325142|5, but some people seem to find |121241314142|5 better.

Whichever be your choice, is there any rational reason for one being better than the other, or is it just a matter of personal taste? (I mean, can the wrong fingering yield some kind of bad habit which will be hard to get rid of, in the future? Well, I think so, hence my question...)

Thank you guys!

[whynot]

m1469, I have some things to say.   First, I'm going to quote you back to yourself.
 
"the MOST I possibly can"
"from EVERY SINGLE PIECE I play"
"MOST efficiently"
"smoothEST ways possible"

Okay?  You would not let anyone else get away with that.  I admire, as does everyone, your passion, intelligence, talent and pluck.  You already have the determination, you already have the techniques or the ability to learn them, and you already have this music inside you.  So, --I hope it's okay that I'm saying all this! (too late now)-- I don't think you have to force this to happen.  It will happen.  I also don't think that it is possible to pursue your dreams (repertoire or otherwise) in a mistake-proof fashion.  It is good to have a plan, I think almost everyone should have a plan.  But there is no perfect plan.  There isn't.  You would have to do the thing first, make a plan afterward based on the wisdom and insight you gained from doing it, then go back in time and redo the whole thing with that plan.

You don't need to strive for maximum efficiency.  I wouldn't say that to everybody!  But I believe you are ready to go deep.  Am I right?  You are on an exploration.  The first Europeans to go to Iceland (on purpose) didn't say, "I'll be back in exactly six months."  I mean, I wasn't there, maybe they did! but we can see from such events that if they did say that, it still didn't happen.  They weren't trying to win a race, they were LOOKING for something.  You are looking for something.  Something that takes time and grace to find.  I think you have to give yourself time and allow for that grace-- you can't plan for it. 

I respectfully suggest the following short-term plan first, which I think will jump-start your long-term plan: 
     Do make the excellent lists and divisions suggested by others, because those will be really useful very soon (I plan to use them myself).  Meanwhile, look through every work that you're interested in and write down five movements or short pieces-- all from different works-- that you feel you TOTALLY relate to right now, whether they seem easy, unplayably difficult, or somewhere in between.  Learn just the opening sections of those in the next week.  Don't spend time on the choosing--you already know what speaks to you, don't analyse them first, don't listen to twelve recordings first.  Just sit at the piano, play them and learn them.  Memorize if you can, but more important to be really at ease.  After that (or during), you'll have urges to work more on certain pieces.  So go ahead with those.  When that gets rolling, then take another look at your big plan and see if it hasn't given itself a little more shape already.  In fact, maybe make a latte date with yourself every two weeks and look it over, see how you want to sculpt it more and more.     

Why?  I suspect that the pressure of building your comprehensive plan (which is a really good idea, but I'll finish my thought) can make actual playing a little daunting.  So forgive me if that's not the case, but if it is, then best to make some personal contact with the music you love as soon as possible.  And the music itself will show you what to do next. 

[m1469]

Whynot    Words cannot even begin to describe how extremely timely and pertinent your response to me is.  I have been simply fit to burst and upon reading your wonderful words I just went ahead and burst from the absolute pit of me.  YES, YES, AND YES !!!  At the risk of sounding extremely cheesey (mmmmm, cheese  ) I thank you so much and feel truly and deeply honoured to have you on my side.  Okay, whynot, okay.... you're exactly right and I thank you again.  I have not been able to figure out what is wrong with me... LOL.  Somehow, you just made everything feel like it is all going to be okay... how did you do that, magical person ?  What a wonderful person you are.


m1469 

[whynot]

Mmmm.... cheese

I'm sure you have noticed that everyone else is on your side, too. 

[m1469]

Okey Dokey, this was kinda fun.  It would be great to see what other people have come up with/ do come up with.  One of the only recordings I have on hand was entirely Harpsichord; Helmut Walcha.  I noticed that I started to be able to recognize which category I thought they belonged to just by looking at them.  Who knows, maybe I am (slowly) learning something 

Aria    Character piece; Vocal

1   Character piece; Dance

2   Canon

3   Canon and Character piece; Vocal

4   Character piece; Dance

5   Virtuoso

6   Canon

7   Virtuoso and Character piece; Dance

8   Virtuoso

9   Canon

10   Fughetta

11   Virtuoso

12   Canon and Character piece; Vocal

13   Character piece; Dance

14   Virtuoso

15   Canon   

16   Character piece; Overerture

17   Virtuoso

18   Canon

19   Character piece; Dance

20   Virtuoso

21   Canon

22   Character piece; Dance

23   Virtuoso

24   Canon and Character piece; Dance

25   Character piece;  Dance

26   Virtuoso

27   Canon

28   Virtuoso

29   Virtuoso

30   Character piece; Vocal

[gouldfischer]

Well... I'm done with the Aria and Variation 1. :-)
How are you going, m1469?

[BoliverAllmon]

how long have you been working on the Goldberg?

[m1469]

Well... I'm done with the Aria and Variation 1. :-)
How are you going, m1469?

Well, he he, I felt guilty after reading your post... very, very guilty, because I had only gotten to that stage you see above us there  .  SO, I went and played through the Aria.  Very beautiful, very beautiful indeed !!  I am on a new kick in my prcatice plan and so I think I will be finding a space for some of the Goldbergs in there. 

how long have you been working on the Goldberg?

What you talkin' 'bout Willis ?  he he, sorry couldn't resist.  Now, are you talking to me ?  Anyway, I have been working on the Goldbergs for as long as this thread is old.  And most of the work has been listening and then what you see here.  Well... I could say that OR "my entire life" 


Thalberg, I have question for you, if you don't mind too much.  You mentioned having played the Goldbergs in concert not too long ago, may I ask... how was it received ?  The work itself, not just your playing it.  I am curious because I truly wonder how well received Bach in general is in concert, even with "educated" listeners.  I once heard a woman play (brilliantly, btw) the entire work first on harpsichord, then on piano in the same concert.  I was actually completely entranced, however, from what I gathered from the conversations of others (including local piano teachers) they were not so much. 

What do you think, people of the world ?

It's fun working on this work with you all 

m1469

[Bob]

How do the variations tranfer to piano?  I've heard some of the hand positions and crossings becomes difficult.  Is there anything you have to adjust with it being on the piano?

[gouldfischer]

how long have you been working on the Goldberg?

I've been working on them for six weeks, but I have to say that I am only able to sit at the piano for about one hour a day, and there are many days which I am not even at home to practice. (However, when I actually DO sit there, I am almost a hundred percent focused. And I do love the Goldbergs.)

Btw, it's been an absolutely wonderful experience.

[gouldfischer]

Well, he he, I felt guilty after reading your post... very, very guilty, because I had only gotten to that stage you see above us there  .  SO, I went and played through the Aria.  Very beautiful, very beautiful indeed !!  I am on a new kick in my prcatice plan and so I think I will be finding a space for some of the Goldbergs in there. 

Good to hear from you, m1469. No doubt you can finish the whole set one year or two before I could even get past that fifth variation... :-) No surrender!!!

Best,
     Vinicius.

[gouldfischer]

How do the variations tranfer to piano?  I've heard some of the hand positions and crossings becomes difficult.  Is there anything you have to adjust with it being on the piano?

The score that I have already shows the LH / RH separation for the piano. Which does not mean the hand-crossings, albeit doable, are not nearly impossible...

I never saw the original score. Sorry for my ignorance... does it have separate staves for a double keyboard harpsichord? I mean, the only score I have seen is the one I have (G. Henle Verlag edition) and it is a standard piano score, that is, sometimes the LH plays things in the RH stave and vice-versa.

Hmmm... I'm just thinking... what a stupid thing I said... the score can be just the same, of course, no matter if you'll play a single or a double keyboard instrument... :-/  Anyway, the hand-crossings ARE troublesome, yes they are! At least for me... (but, so far so good, as I can do the two only hand-crossings in Variation 1 without problems... the problems are yet about to start, I'm totally sure...)

Cheers.

[gouldfischer]

Sorry, I'd just like very much to know how you're doing... m1469? Whynot? Are you still studying the Goldberg?

I started to take classes with a teacher in early August, and she told me to pause my Goldberg studies for a little while and started to give me Hanon-like stuff (actually Czerny and Beringer). Only after 5 or 6 classes (and a handful of 2-part Inventions) I sort of convinced her that I could get back to my beloved Goldbergs without hindering my technical development - actually, she is even more convinced now, so I hope! :-)

So, how are you doing? I'm (very) satisfied with my Aria and Variations 1 and 2 and have just started Variation 3. (Btw, it's been probably the most difficult, so far - those bass runs!).

 I find it so good to think that there are still 27 such gems to learn!... great time!

Cheers,
    Vinicius.

[whynot]

I am enjoying this project very much!  It's probably the slowest I've ever memorized music.  When I sit down and do it, it doesn't take long, but I'm finding that I don't want to keep hurling myself into new sections, as I ordinarily do.  So much happens in every variation--heck, in every measure--that I guess I've feeling pretty fulfilled along the way and not getting bored.  I've learned about a third at a basic level, fewer that I have played in front of anyone.  And I threw out all my careful plans about the order in which to learn, amount of time to learn etc.  All of the things I usually do don't seem to apply to this piece (for me).  I play it when I want, and do what I want with it.  That sounds really irresponsible, but I am getting it done, just in a quirky way.  I thought I wanted to learn it as quickly as possible so I could go perform it, but it's turning into this whole other experience that is pretty unrelated to performing, although I do want to give the concert eventually.  My teacher has been extremely supportive of my weird pacing on this.   

[gouldfischer]

Cool, whynot! Which variations do you play already? Which ones are your favourite? What about the most difficult to learn, so far? I'm curious! Though I'm still in the beginning of the journey, I know I'll feel the same way (VERY enthusiastic!) until the end.

[whynot]

Well, hmm.  I loved learning #1.  It has so much life, sounds great at virtually any tempo, and has none of the funky turnarounds that happen in later movements, so it's pretty straightforward, memory-wise.  My impressions of other favorites:  #8 is friendly and elegant at the same time, #29 is stately but not stuffy, and #28 is very twirly-feeling, really fun to play. 

The hardest so far has been #3, for two reasons.  One, there seemed to be more decisions to make in this one, somehow--gobs of articulation choices etc., and two, a lot of carryover in one voice with new material or different articulations in another voice in the same hand.  I have to really pay attention, which is sometimes hard to do because I'm just a TINY bit lazy.

Altogether, so far I'm playing 1-8, 13, 16, 28 & 29.  And I'm noticing that #23 has crowded hands, so I should start that soon. 

Since you're really into this piece, you might be interested to hear that I can't bring myself to play the aria!  (Breaking my (firm) rule of always learning basic theme material first.)  I played through it once or twice, ages ago.  But it's too special to just sit down and play it any old time.  I know it's silly, and obviously I have to overcome this at some point!  I think when I've learned everything else, it will feel right.  Anyway, that's where I'm at. 

I'm a little horrified that your teacher took away your Goldberg and replaced it with exercises.  I could see substituting the inventions, but geez, Hanon.  And she thought the variations would hinder your technical development?  Has she played them???  I'm happy for you that your music has been reinstated.  Cheers...     

[ahmedito]

Hi m1469,

Ive been on a plan for the past 2-3 years to learn the Goldberg's, but I find them so breathtaking that I decided to take it as a very long term plan, giving each variation full room to grow and mature by itself. (That means giving them performances out of context). This approach has the advantage of constantly finding new things, and letting each variation come at its proper time.

For the past 2 years. I've been regularly playing in concert the set of cannonical movements, theme and quodlibet, kind of like :

Theme,
Cannon a la octava,
Cannon a la cuarta,
etc. etc.

And each time I play it I find new things, and I feel the I get the hang of following the harmony. (It also makes a very interesting program).

Now I am working on 2 of the more virtuoso Variations and using them as encores for performances in which I also play Bachs G major Partita.

I have plans to to learn the virtuoso variations and to perform them some times until I feel they are sufficiently grown.

By the way, Id recommend playing Bach's Italian Variations and his G major Partita first, to get a feel for the style and tonal colour.

Ahmed

[gouldfischer]

Well, hmm.  I loved learning #1. 

#1 is truly special, everyone seems to agree on that, even my teacher (no, she seems not to have ever played the Goldbergs - she's more keen on romantics, I bet).

The hardest so far has been #3, for two reasons. (...)

I'm very glad to hear! (Working on #3, now! :-) )

I'm a little horrified that your teacher took away your Goldberg and replaced it with exercises. I could see substituting the inventions, but geez, Hanon.

Yes, I sort of convinced her we could forget about Hanon, Beringer et al., after 2 or 3 classes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it was MY PLAY which necessarily convinced her. Actually, I managed to outreason her, using some Chang's and Bernhard's ideas (hehe tx guys!). Then I learned Inventions 1, 4, 8 and 13 (oh and CPE's Solfegietto haha), and played them over and over (3-4 classes) until she gave her ok. Last couple of classes I showed her the Aria and Variation 1, which I already played BEFORE starting to take lessons with her (and which had been in standby mode for two months...) She made some comments here and there and somehow they were really useful, cause I feel I play them better now. In the last two weeks I did not have piano classes because she was in a conference somewhere. I prepared #2 (it's done and I'll show it to her next class) and just started #3 (last weekend).

Best regards to all!
      Vinicius.

[gouldfischer]

Btw, whynot, don't you find #5 more difficult than #3? (I don't know, it just seemed to me, at first sight)...

[whynot]

For me, #5 seems more straightforward.  #3 has so many articulation options (to me), and when you have two voices in one hand with slurs and lifts in the voices overlapping one another, it gives me more maneuvering and remembering to do.  I'm looking right now at a bunch of short slurs I added to #5 and they seem fussy and stupid, so I'm going to drop them and just play it.  Except I woke up holding one of my thumbs with the other hand and it was sort of kinked or something, and it REALLY hurts, which is a little worrisome... so I may not be playing anything today.     

[BoliverAllmon]

this thread is refreshing. I have always wanted to learn the GVs. Don't have time now, but it is inspiring to see other people learning.

[gouldfischer]

Finished first half Variation 3, HT. Now I know what you mean to say, whynot, by "many things to remember". :-) But once you get used to it, it's so much fun to LISTEN to what you are playing! How come, is it ME who's playing that?

The second half, so far, only tried a quick and dirty HS... give me couple of days hehehe (btw, it seems a bit easier than the first half) :-)

[whynot]

m1469!  How's it going?

Cheers, everyone.  Are we all stll ploughing through this marvelous music?  Hopefully.

[gouldfischer]

Btw, forgot to mention, I'll give my first public appearance next December 12th. I'll play the Aria and Variations 1 and 2 in my Conservatoire students' end year presentation... :-/ Hope next year I play the whole set in a recital of my own... working hard on this...

Let me ask you something technical, if you guys don't mind: Variation 2, measure 31: is there a ligature between the two D's in your score? Mine (Springer-Verlag) does not have it, but I've heard many recordings where they play it WITH a ligature there. I myself like the ligature there and play it this way. (On the other hand, there are also some recordings where they detach the two D's. i'd like to know if anybody knows anything about this.)

Cheers,
     Vinicius.

[whynot]

Hmm, this is interesting.  I have two editions, but have only been playing from the Verlag, not checking the other at all.  But my other edition does show this as a tie (are you British? because ligature means something entirely different to me; actually, two things).  AND I just listened to Glenn Gould (whom I don't particularly enjoy listening to but seems extremely likely to be correct), and he uses the tie, and so does Trevor Pinnock, whom I trust very much.  Interesting, because the Verlag says "urtext," which is why I'm using it, but if you follow the alto voice, the tie certainly makes sense.  On the other hand, if you play two D's, you can make a graceful little slur coming down from the A, then shorten and lift before the second D, which is a tiny bit sexy.  What to do???  C'est une catastrophe.  I'll probably add the tie. 

[gouldfischer]

Gould is the one who first caught my attention to that tie.

To my knowledge...

1) who plays as a tie:

Gould (in both his recordings);
Schiff;
Sokolov;
Walcha;
Koopman;
Pinnock;
Sitkovetsky (transcription for violin, viola and cello);
myself :-)

2) who doesn't:

Jarret;
Martins;
our Verlag urtext!
whynot (so far) :-)

Btw, no, I'm not British. I'm Brazilian (from Rio) and perhaps have used an incorrect word. Though I doublechecked it now in Babylon and it seemingly does have that tie meaning.

Oh, and, whynot, as it seems you love the Goldbergs just as much as I do, let me link you to another topic which might interest you:

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,13950.0.html

Regards,
    Vinicius.

[m1469]

m1469!  How's it going?

Cheers, everyone.  Are we all stll ploughing through this marvelous music?  Hopefully.

Oh, well I did not see that this thread had been active some more.  Well, I guess it's not really going  .  I have been swamped with other repertoire at the moment.  I am planning to  be officially moving on to some other stuff, perhaps the Goldberg's (officially), in about 6 months.  I just have some other stuff I want to do first.


But, I am happy to see this thread alive and well    I am taking notes and when I sit down to make plans and play these delights, I will read through all of this again to experience it all over again "with you"  he he.  So, post away !!

m1469 

[whynot]

Howdy, m1469.  Gouldfischer, I didn't mean to hint that ligature was the wrong word for this situation! Hope it didn't sound that way.  Sometimes I don't express myself well, and I accidentally offend.

Thanks for the link--I had missed that conversation on voices.  I see your point exactly, and it's how I tend to interpret these things, too.  I listen to Gould occasionally, because I do think it's important to know what the important people are doing, you know what I mean? but I just don't GET it.  I find myself asking, "Why, WHY???" and eventually have to turn it off.  I don't say this lightly because, of course, he was brilliant and amazing in so many ways, and deservedly has a huge fan club--who I don't mean to offend!  I just can't relate to the playing.

I sorta liked being on the same list as the Urtext, but now that Koopman is on the other list, I am converted to the tie.  Tragic loss of my little slur.  Sigh.
 
m1469, start a thread about your new repertoire... please?

[gouldfischer]

Howdy, m1469.  Gouldfischer, I didn't mean to hint that ligature was the wrong word for this situation! Hope it didn't sound that way.  Sometimes I don't express myself well, and I accidentally offend.

You expressed yourself well and you did not offend anyone. Perhaps *I* did not express myself well, that's what I meant to say (I was just kind of apologizing - and putting the blame on my native language being Portuguese - for having employed an unusual word.)

Good that you liked the post about the voices concern. :-)

[ ]s,
Vinicius.

[m1469]

m1469, start a thread about your new repertoire... please?

Howdy, whynot.  Well, here is my current repertoire project (minus the Haydn) :

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,13418.msg151234.html#msg151234


This will keep the likes of me quite busy, however, I may venture into some other stuff if I am in need of some fresh inspiration.  I am wishing to study the Goldbergs in the next 6 months (listening, looking at the score, developing my plan of approach (that's why this thread is still very helpful for me)), just not actually be officially working on them yet.  I will be doing that with several other works too, to get a better idea of what my next projects are going to be. 

But, right now I feel pretty monogamous with my current repertoire.  Plus those Preludes and Preludes and Fugues tend to be on the jealous side and often threaten to leave me if I develop "acquaintances"  with other pieces... he he.


Thanks for your interest  ,

m1469

[gouldfischer]

And now I found another "different thing" played by Gould.

Variation #3, second part (in D), RH, the first D# should be way longer. And it's simple to see why he halves the duration of that note. That's because he decided to trill on the B (played next by the echo) and then the fingering would be almost impossible, had he kept his finger 1 on the D# key (as he was supposed to)...

I still think Gould's 81 is by far the best GV recording among those I know, but still there are some things I would have played differently if I were him. (As I'm not him, I'm FORCED to play every single note much different, but this is not what I'm talking about... :-) )

I had never noticed this shortening of the D# until this morning when I started to put together the canon of Var 3's second part. I decided I would trill on the B just like Gould (because it's REALLY cool). Then I was a bit surprise that I could not find a suitable fingering. It seemed impossible. I went to hear Gould one more time... and then... surprise! he also found it impossible, it seems, haha.

As a matter of fact, it is possible to keep the 1 on the D#, trill on the B and then use a 3-5 descending on the RH. It is NOT comfortable, by any means, but I guess I'll practice this way, so that I trill on the B AND make justice to the D# duration.

Cheers,
    Vinicius.

[sauergrandson]

I am trying to organize a learning program for the Goldberg variations.  First, in line with trying to learn easier to harder, I have decided that I don't need to learn in order, including the aria.  I am not sure if this is a good idea or not.

I have seperated out the variations by number of voice parts (although there are a couple of questionable ones).  I am attempting to derive a progression that makes sense, but I will say this is taking me ages as I have never done anything like this for complete works.  This is what I have so far, though I think I gave up somewhere along the lines.

27
29
7
28
5
1
8
14
11 
20

Does anyone have any suggestions?  How would you change the progression?  Suggestions are more than welcome (I am getting stuck).

m1469

I THINK THE TWO-PART VARIATIONS ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE EASIEST ONES. SOME TWO-PART ARE harder, by means of other problems (I think 1,  14,  20, 23... In the other hand, if you have somme experience with WTC, you will find that variation 12 is easier...   6, 18,19, 22 seem three-part inventions (symphonies). And no one attempt Goldberg-Variations with a knowledge of inventions and some WTC. 

I hope a rate of GoldVAr according to difficulty, but the number of parts it's not a criterion, I believe.

Truly, Sauergrandson (Emil Sauer, of course)

[gouldfischer]

And no one attempt Goldberg-Variations with a knowledge of inventions and some WTC. 

Sorry? You mean WITHOUT?

[sauergrandson]

YES, OF COURSE. ANY SERIOUS APPROACH TO GOLBERGS, WITHOUT........ INVENTIONS AND WTC. I THINK.  (IT WAS A MISTAKE).

Sorry? You mean WITHOUT?

[gouldfischer]

In this case, I beg to differ slightly.

Take my personal example. I had only played Inventions 1, 4, 8 and 13 and WTC I Prelude in C (same as nothing, as far as WTC goes) before I tackled the mammoth task of learning the Goldbergs. After three months (of unfortunately not more than about 20 weekly hours of piano) I can play the Aria and the first three variations quite well (my teacher even told me to present them in the recital, two weeks from now, but I guess I don't feel completely comfortable with #3 yet, though she claims it's nice enough).

Hence this thing of prerequisite pieces is arguable, in my opinion.

Cheers,
    Vinicius.

[sauergrandson]

Yes, of course. Are  the scales a pre-requisite for playing Mozart of Haydn? Maybe not.

[gouldfischer]

I really don't think knowing scales (that is, to play scales quite automatically and fast) is a pre-requisite for studying Mozart or Haydn. You can learn them WHILE you are studying Mozart or Haydn, that's the beauty of the thing.

[whynot]

You don't have to EXECUTE scales brilliantly before working on scale-ful (?) literature.  But... by the way, I rarely think in shoulds, which suggests that this exception is extremely important to me... I do think everyone should KNOW the scales before playing this stuff.  I mean, know them well enough to be completely at ease in every key that occurs in the piece, including temporary tonalities.  I don't mean fingerings, I mean what notes and chords are used in each key.  I think the lack of understanding scales and chords is a big reason why most classical musicians don't really read fluently, even after reading music for twenty years.  People see very straightforward patterns in the notation, like partial scales and simple chords, and they don't know how to respond to it because they aren't sure about the set of notes to be used.  They have to keep thinking, "Okay, B flats, B flats."  Then there's a temporary change of tonality, and instead of recognizing, "This looks like Eb major," and adjusting their ears and expectations accordingly, they have to chant, "Flat the A's, flat the a's," for half a page.  I see this affecting memorization, as well.  So many people don't know what key they're in, or what chord they're playing.  How can you memorize confidently like that?  It's all by rote, there doesn't seem to be a foundation or context.  This is a real peeve of mine in the teaching profession, that there's such a push on playing the big pieces as young as possible, at breakneck tempi, but the students can't sightread Happy Birthday--or play it by ear.  That's not teaching musicianship or necessary lifelong skills for a classical performer, that's just teaching pieces.     

I haven't practiced in a while.  What a slug.  I'm glad you guys have kept this thread alive.  I'm kind of inspired again-- cheers.
   

[gouldfischer]

Hi, all.

I really don't think knowing scales (that is, to play scales quite automatically and fast) is a pre-requisite (...)

You don't have to EXECUTE scales brilliantly before working on scale-ful (?) literature. (...) I do think everyone should KNOW the scales before playing this stuff.

100% agreed. Knowing to EXECUTE them - that's what I meant.

I mean, know them well enough to be completely at ease in every key that occurs in the piece, including temporary tonalities. I don't mean fingerings, I mean what notes and chords are used in each key. I think the lack of understanding scales and chords is a big reason why most classical musicians don't really read fluently, even after reading music for twenty years. (...)

True. There was a topic somewhere in this forum about the most difficult composers to memorize and, even though many people said Bach is difficult, I think he's not difficult at all (to memorize, that is), IF you are aware of the underlying harmony.


Btw, in order to keep the Golberg Variations discussion alive, I'd like to tell you that I'm completely done with Variation 3. (Now, I can play the Aria and Variations 1, 2 and 3). This has been by far the most difficult TO LEARN, until now. (But the most rewarding, too.) And, once you have learnt it, I don't think it's that hard to play, as far as finger dexterity goes. It's easier than #1, maybe. (No, I don't think it is... but almost.) About that thing you once said, whynot, about "many things to remember", it seems I have just ceased to "have to remember" things in #3. Now that each voice has begun to sing on its own in my head (like three different instruments), I can just play #3 with the same mental effort demanded by, say, the Aria. It's so cool.

Cheers,
     Vinicius.