Balakirev - Oriental Fantasie "Islamey" (Read 11724 times)

e60m5 · « on: May 14, 2005, 04:32:40 PM »

From my conservatory screening tape. Was paired with Schubert - Fantasie in C D.760

From a while back, hope you enjoy!

Thoughts, comments, suggestions?

Thank you for listening.

Dazzer · «Reply #1 on: May 14, 2005, 04:43:31 PM »

too good

watch your back!!! mwahahahahahah!!!!!

just kidding.

tds · «Reply #2 on: May 14, 2005, 06:03:21 PM »

paul wee is crazy!! tds

tds · «Reply #3 on: May 14, 2005, 06:04:26 PM »

that was a compliment, btw...

Mozartian · «Reply #4 on: May 14, 2005, 10:58:10 PM »

The force is strong in this one.
Paul... that is tooooooooo good!

rohansahai · «Reply #5 on: May 15, 2005, 01:31:57 AM »

I almost fell off my chair listening to it. Too good !!!!

. Wow, we're indeed having fun with this board.

Alde · «Reply #6 on: May 17, 2005, 03:37:13 AM »

Wow!

Out of curiosity, was the piano a Mason and Hamblin?

rob47 · «Reply #7 on: May 17, 2005, 06:00:13 AM »

Wow. I really like the fury, and it's really enjoyable to listen to.

jlh · «Reply #8 on: May 17, 2005, 03:24:23 PM »

Well, you play Islamey better (and faster) than Lang Lang. I heard a recorded live performance of this played by him once.

Great job!

Bouter Boogie · «Reply #9 on: May 18, 2005, 12:52:45 PM »

This piece is absolutely amazing, I think I'm going to play it too in the future!
At least I hope so

I think you've done a great job, it sounds very exciting.. Well done

Btw, have you got more records of you playing other pieces of Islamey? I luv the music but I haven't heard so much of it yet.. $:-\$

Dazzer · «Reply #10 on: May 18, 2005, 01:52:40 PM »

ha... haha ... hahaha

i'm only slightly amused

i think you mean "balakirev", and not Islamey. Islamey is the name of the piece. Balakirev is the composer. correct me if i'm wrong... haha

edit: checked out your little site. Nice playing. what are you playing in that video?

Bouter Boogie · «Reply #11 on: May 19, 2005, 04:22:17 AM »

Yeah, I meant Balakirev instead of Islamey $:-\$ After turning off the computer I knew I made a mistake

Hoped to correct it before someone would respond my message, hehe.. Too late

I knew it though, because my teacher wanted to let me play the piece some time..

Btw, is Islamey very hard to play? With what other piece can you compare this one if you think of technically level? I really luv this kind of music! Have you guys heard of Suggestion Diabolique op. 4 of Prokofiev? I played it a while ago, it's very cool!

At my video I play L'Isle Joyeuse of Debussy. Actually it's not that good (the piece didn't really fit with me $:-\$ ) but they needed a record of me for the site.. Hehe.. It's a few months ago though, I play lotsa other pieces at the moment.. Much more fun.. Hehe..

jlh · «Reply #12 on: May 19, 2005, 07:37:42 AM »

I played Suggestion Diabolique last year... I love it!

Dazzer · «Reply #13 on: May 19, 2005, 11:46:49 AM »

yeh its a cool piece. i used it to vent my frustrations whenever i was pissed off with life. very good.

Bouter Boogie · «Reply #14 on: May 19, 2005, 05:34:18 PM »

Hehe.. Indeed, Suggestion Diabolique is excellent when you're feeling pissed off

I think the piece is great, there's so much power in it, just like Islamey

ted · «Reply #15 on: May 19, 2005, 10:53:50 PM »

Thank you for sharing your accomplished playing with us, Paul. Islamey has borne the brunt of much disparagement on forums and elsewhere lately, but I still find it a beautiful piece of music. The only reservation I have - certainly more an expression of preference than a criticism of actual playing, my level of technique and knowledge would not justify the latter - concerns a general musical phenomenon. Once a certain velocity is reached, the nature of rhythm changes. This is most obvious in stride, ragtime and related jazz idioms, where the sensuous nature of the syncopations highlight it, but it also true, I think, of much classical and romantic music. As speed increases, the perception of individual rhythmic cells becomes flattened, as it were, into a uniform pulse. If a uniform pulse is the desired effect, as well it might be for you here, then all well and good, but if rhythmic sublety of phrasing is preferred, then it seems to me an upper limit of velocity exists for it.

In any case, a beautiful recording.

Derek · «Reply #16 on: May 19, 2005, 11:11:49 PM »

Wow this piece rocks! I've never heard it before!

e60m5 · «Reply #17 on: May 20, 2005, 08:24:40 PM »

Thank you all for your kind words!

Alde, the piano is not a Mason, but a 2002 NY Model B.

As for being compared to LL - I'm honoured to be compared to such a technician in this piece, heh. Even if musically I may prefer my own approach

I also find it unfair that Islamey is often disparaged on internet forums by pianists who do not truly understand its importance. I also find it amusing to see so many people claiming its comparative ease in light of its history and reputation as a technical tour-de-force. It's far from the "hardest piece in the world" that it was once touted to be, sure. But it is unfairly denigrated and looked down upon for some reason by many pianists (especially in online communities). So that's one of the reasons that I posted it

To give it some of the worthwhile attention it deserves.

I don't have any other Balakirev recordings, but maybe one of these days I'll take a look at the Sonata...

Ted, I agree about the sense of the rhythm changing with velocity. Often the scale of rhythm has to be halved to retain any sense of musical coherence (or quartered) with works; some players tend to see this work to have a scale of one pulse per beat, but I see this more as a one pulse per two beats piece; this is probably the most overt way in which my chosen velocity affects the rhythmic pulse. I happen to prefer this pulse musically, but I know that others might not

I definitely see what you're saying though, and thank you for your criticism!

Technically, Islamey is not easy. It may not be as hard technically as the Clavicembalisticum (but what work wants to be?

, but it is not exactly very easy (or some might say even moderately manageable). One thing, though; anybody who says you need big hands for it doesn't really know what they're talking about.

Thank you all again for your comments though! If anyone has questions about the piece or anything I'm more than happy to answer. Hope you enjoy it

nomis · «Reply #18 on: May 20, 2005, 09:16:49 PM »

Nice stuff. Do you still have the video of it anywhere? I had to format my HD the other day.

thracozaag · «Reply #19 on: May 21, 2005, 11:31:50 AM »

Quote from: e60m5 on May 20, 2005, 08:24:40 PM

I don't have any other Balakirev recordings, but maybe one of these days I'll take a look at the Sonata...

DO IT!!!!

koji (STSD)

chopinetta · «Reply #20 on: May 22, 2005, 12:56:42 AM »

i know this is off-topic but i just took that darn SAT may 7 this year and i had fever for 4 days after that.

but men, you've gotta be kidding me!? 1590 for the old SAT??!? are you a genius??

simaaili · «Reply #21 on: May 26, 2005, 09:00:11 PM »

Technic...there is a great distance between you and LL^_^,but I like your music more(mostly at andantino).
If you solved the skill problems in the end and octaves,it would be a excellent performance!
One of my friends have played this piece,would you like to view his video(with feux follets)?

e60m5 · «Reply #22 on: June 06, 2005, 03:03:53 AM »

Heh, about the 1590? Nah, no genius required. Just focus and mental preparation.

Thank you for your kind comments, all. Yeah, this wasn't and wasn't supposed to be an absolutely perfect recording; it was just for a conservatory screening tape, so all I was thinking while doing it was "Just get it good enough...". One of these days I might try to put together a real solid recording of this piece and see how it turns out, but that's definitely not what this is.

mikeyg · «Reply #23 on: June 07, 2005, 01:16:34 AM »

Quote from: e60m5 on June 06, 2005, 03:03:53 AM

Heh, about the 1590?

I didn't know you could get a 1590. When I took the old one, I got 800 math and 760 verbal, and I only got 3 wrong. I thoungt one wrong dropped you to 775 almost automatically.

edit: and don't worry, I'm not doubting you or calling you a liar.

e60m5 · «Reply #24 on: June 07, 2005, 02:05:17 AM »

Well, there's no such thing as a 775; all SAT scores are in increments of 10. And it depends on the curve for the individual test also.

No worries about doubting or anything, it's all good. In case you want proof, http://e60m5.ath.cx/sat.jpg if you want it. Although you can see my less than perfect SAT II scores =/

robert · «Reply #25 on: June 09, 2005, 08:50:52 PM »

Quote from: e60m5 on June 06, 2005, 03:03:53 AM

Thank you for your kind comments, all. Yeah, this wasn't and wasn't supposed to be an absolutely perfect recording; it was just for a conservatory screening tape, so all I was thinking while doing it was "Just get it good enough...". One of these days I might try to put together a real solid recording of this piece and see how it turns out, but that's definitely not what this is.

As humble as always

. Everything can always be improved but I don't agree with this not being enough solid. The recording is in my opinion splendid when it comes to the very intelligent use of phrasing and dynamics which is so important for this work. I have listened to your interpretation many many times by now and it is more interesting than several CD recordings from famous (well you are a bit famous yourself

) pianists.
I look forward to follow your career inte the future.

lostinidlewonder · «Reply #26 on: June 10, 2005, 02:45:28 AM »

Two thumbs up. Weeeely good work! pardon the pun please dont throw anything.

Bouter Boogie · «Reply #27 on: June 12, 2005, 06:42:19 AM »

How long did it took you to practice this piece?

It's totally great!

g_flat · «Reply #28 on: June 12, 2005, 08:55:14 AM »

Oh, you people are amazing! If only I had started piano lessons earlier. Well, I'm not really familiar with this piece so I can't make any comparisons, but it doesn't matter. I think everything has pretty much already been said. Technically, it sounds extraordinarily demanding, yet you pull it off. So what... you had a few tumbles.... (and by tumbles, I mean parts where you played musically, and still hit seemingly the correct notes but lacked a bit of clarity). Is a technically flawless performance really your aim? Besides the obvious technique, your musicality and dynamic shading is tremendous.

maul · «Reply #29 on: June 13, 2005, 12:12:09 AM »

Great job man. Just need to chop off those fingernails. I assume that's what that annoying sound was.

nanabush · «Reply #30 on: June 13, 2005, 08:14:39 PM »

Ur profile says ur 18, are you actually 18? If so, then ur absolutely insane...in a good way, that recording sounded better than any other I have heard...

e60m5 · «Reply #31 on: September 19, 2005, 08:09:44 PM »

Noticed some unanswered questions...

Yup, I'm 18. I was 17 though when this was recorded, if that makes any difference...

As for how long I worked on it - I didn't work on it continuously in one go; learnt it many years back, revisited it for a concert, and revisited it again for auditions, stuff like that. So I can't give a definite time length.

Technical perfection is never my primary aim. Nice to have, but I'd rather bring through a powerful effect in my playing than hit all the notes and have it sound rather empty. If I wanted to, I could slow down many places in a piece such as this, and hit all the notes, but it would sound pretty.. hmm... stagnant?

Unfortunately (unfortunately from my point of view only, of course) this isn't the view held by most pianists nowadays.

stevie · «Reply #32 on: September 20, 2005, 12:44:00 AM »

technically the only signifigant improvement that could be made is stamina in the second fast section.

when performances are this technically good, the interpretation now comes into question, and i think this is a genuinely good one...if not my favourite.

my favourite is berezovsky live, chekc it out if you havent already.

lombardian · «Reply #33 on: September 30, 2005, 09:26:37 PM »

two words: Holy sh*t

jehangircama · «Reply #34 on: October 01, 2005, 07:29:06 AM »

u're 18??!! good gracious man u must be some sort of prodigy . this one's outta my league for quite a few years. and 1590 SAT!!. congrats (i presume u're at Yale or Harvard or Princeton)

jehangircama · «Reply #35 on: October 01, 2005, 07:58:38 AM »

(or Julliard, of course, i forgot)

btw, i tried to get this recording off pianosociety but the link's been down. lovely playing though.

randmc · «Reply #36 on: October 30, 2005, 12:29:25 AM »

kreso · «Reply #37 on: November 21, 2005, 10:06:25 AM »

O MY LORD!!! You are some kind of genius!! It's one of my favourite pieces, and I really enyojed in your performance! You have technik, everything is so beatifully done with music and the public have nothing to do than to enyoj!! If you have some more records of you I'm very interesting to listen them!!

Good luck!!

btw.I like more your performance than Lang Lang's; you have more FIRE!

I Love Xenakis · «Reply #38 on: November 27, 2005, 06:28:28 PM »

Paul, Paul, Paul... dry. Don't take that as an insult- take it as a pointer.

Less dry.

crazy for ivan moravec · «Reply #39 on: November 29, 2005, 02:09:35 AM »

whew! great fire! i bow down to u!

skeptolotapus · «Reply #40 on: November 29, 2005, 12:16:52 PM »

WOW BRO! This is awesome! I mean really amazing stuff! I can only dream of playing like this *sighs*

.

e60m5 · «Reply #41 on: December 12, 2005, 03:59:14 AM »

I noticed too that the download link for this is broken on pianosociety. Wonder if they'll ever get round to fixing it.

Oh, and nope, I'm not at Harvard, Yale, Princeton or Juilliard.

Glad to see people have been enjoying the recording! I must admit that part of the reason that I'm bumping this is to keep a spot on the internet from where I can download this recording, since PS seems to have pulled it.

chopet · «Reply #42 on: December 13, 2005, 12:51:29 AM »

The link on piano society works fine for me. Had to wait a bit though. Brilliant work by the way!!!

Ive played that piece before but you play it better that I do.Sorry if youve been asked this before but How long have you been playing? And great work again by the way