Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Beginner who can play Op 9 No 2, need a new piece to play!

Don't invite hateful remarks; they shouldn't be necessary.

First : it's a pity the piano is so badly out of tune and in such a poor state of repair - I've heard honky-tonk pianos that sound better - but you have to work with what you have got. It was a challenge, however, just listening through most of the Nocturne.

There are some serious timing issues throughout the work, but particularly in the poco piu lento section beginning at measure 29. You give some of your eighth-note chords the same value as your quarter-note chords; I know the timing is complicated by the large rolled chords, but if you plan to work on this Nocturne, you'll need to sort out your timing issues.

The triplets in measure 23 are the equivalent of one eighth-note for each triplet; you play them much too quickly.

There are other timing issues throughout which suggest that you need to brush up on your understanding of note values - or you just need to pay more attention to observing them.

Of course, given the extremely poor condition of the piano, it's impossible to even hazard a guess if you have any sense of voicing, of balance, of phrasing, of pedaling, all of which are crucial to interpreting Chopin.

That said, however, if you have had as little experience playing the piano as you say you have, this attempt is impressive - but only impressive if your claim is an honest one. No one would mistake this for a good - nor even a mediocre performance - but I think few of us would have been able to do this with as little experience as you say you have had. In that respect, and in that respect alone, this is an accomplishment.

One has to wonder, however, why - in spite of your love for this work - you would attempt playing it and offering it for public comment with so little foundation and when so much of the necessary technique to play this work is lacking.

I guess, though, you may have proved a point.

Regards,

Impressive given that you've played for less than a year. It just seems that you're just hitting the notes without expression. The recording quality is poor so it's difficult to judge the dynamics. Playing Chopin, is not just only about hitting the right notes. Once you have total control of the piece and play by making every note count, get better recording equipment and you will be surprised by the difference. Recording yourself is a good thing, once you get better you will look back and might get embarrassed of yourself but will show how far you've gone. It's happened to me. It's a great start, most people are stuck playing chopsticks and merry had a little lamb before a year.

You've been playing for a month, yes? May I ask your age?

Since we have recordings of Argerich and Kissin as children (of course they were incredible), I would agree with you on those claims. Although I'm not sure if Horowitz was as good or better when he was 13. Horowitz claimed that he wasn't a prodigy, that his sister was better than he was when he was a child, and that he even had significant technical problems at some points.

He must have been quite good, since only a few years later at 15 he performed Rach 3 at his graduation from the Kiev Conservatory.

Horowitz did learn the Rachmaninov Third Concerto at 15, but it may be difficult to know what level he was at a few years earlier. Of course, a lot of progress can be made in just a few years.

I think I'm glad I didn't notice this thread before.

Looking through it, I'm surprised that this thing from 31425 didn't get said sooner:

Part of the confusion is that "playing a piece" can mean different things.

Seeing an OP like this one, I would pretty much assume that he doesn't mean "play the piece" in the way that I would mean it (I figure he just means getting most of the notes and giving some semblance of 'how it goes'), and I wouldn't think of suggesting any piece that is the slightest iota harder than this nocturne. But (I think) almost all the pieces that have been mentioned are.

To xphotographer: Don't get me wrong -- I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with what you're doing, and I wouldn't say you need to go about it differently or get a teacher. I don't think what you're doing is the 'best' way to learn piano, but I also don't think people need to do things in the 'best' way. If what you feel like doing is to 'sort of play' some pretty advanced pieces like this, go for it.

But I don't think we should be sending someone like him further into the abyss by suggesting harder pieces either.

I didn't say he LEARNED Rach 3 at 15...I said he performed it at his graduation when he was 15. Rach 3 isn't something you pick up and learn overnight. My point being that the odds are very good that he'd already been playing at a high level for a while, by the time he gave that particular performance.

In his biographies, Horowitz said that he learned Rach 3 at 15 under Tarnowsky and then performed the concerto at 16 (in May 1920) for his graduation recital. In any event, I would agree with you that he must have been at a very advanced level for a while. The only question is exactly how advanced he was. Judging by Horowitz's remarks about his childhood playing that I referenced, how advanced would you think he was around 12-13? Do you think that he was better than twelve-year-old prodigies who could play Chopin Etudes and other advanced works?

Unknowable, and/or splitting hairs.

They were/are perhaps equally "advanced," give or take.

But there are differences in how good they were/are. We wouldn't know the answer about this either, but we could make a good guess.

Are you presuming that prodigies are as advanced as Horowitz probably was as a child, in the sense that they could play the same repertoire? When you refer to differences in how good they were, are you assuming that Horowitz must have been better than prodigies who were as advanced as him (simply because he's Horowitz, which is an understandable assumption)?

The only problem with that line of reasoning is that Horowitz claimed that he wasn't a prodigy, which implies that he wasn't as good (as a child) as children who are/were prodigies.

As BruceD suggests ... an impressive rendition of the Chopin Nocturne 48-1 on a beaten-up piano ... amazingly mastered by a young chappie in 6 months ... and without a teacher.

We can all throw in our twopence-worth of “hack” on the tempo and a few bad notes ... but nit-picking aside, the feat is unparalleled ... and deserves the strongest support.

The Lento tempo and C minor key might have been obvious bait to grab a newcomer ... but the later crush of parallel octaves has been handled with dynamic purpose ... inviting the pp agitato of the Doppio movimento and return to the C minor key ... and tailing off with those closing whispered chords ... well done!!

Noting with approval the OP’s comment of having studied the score in great detail before playing ... my question is ... has the score been memorized ?

First Bold: My piano is horrible and I'm currently trying to find a more decent upright on criagslist or something...Over then that I liked your comment

ABout the timing issues...I never learned time signatures or note values....I just taught myself the basics of reading sheet music and did the rest by ear..I will eventually get around to learning those things.
and the third bold: When you have been playing as long as you have you pick out and hear many things that will just pass over my head..Stuff I can't really learn but that will just come to me so all that stuff you said about my timing, I thought it was fine but I'll work on it. And to that guy yeah I memorize everything I play. and what do you mean by "The Lento tempo and C minor key might have been obvious bait to grab a newcomer"

...why would you EVENTUALLY get around to learning them? And when?

You're sure not going to learn them tackling only pieces like this.

But if all you ever want to do is play pieces poorly, I suppose you're on the right path.

It would do you much better if you chose one piece like this, WORKED ON IT SUPER HARD A FEW MEASURES AT A TIME UNTIL THEY ARE POLISHED AND *THEN* MOVE ON, and also had MANY other pieces at your actual level, which I would assume it at the very beginning of piano repertoire if you don't even know time signatures or note values...

Which, honestly, you do know. You just don't know how to control them. It's not as if you thought a triplet was the same as an eighth or whatnot.

Our two cents. You can continue on, never really improving, if you want.

Might I ask (once again) your age, tail?

Why? Because this is a hobby. I'm not training to be some concert pianist. I like to play the piano and I like to play pieces I enjoy. And I do know other simpler pieces that I play(which are enjoyable, the only reason I play them, not because I'm worried about improving my technique) And you're wrong anyways. 2 weeks ago I couldn't play that piece as well as I could this morning. Playing anything helps and eventually I will have this song down. And to the guy who asked my age, I'm 21

You don't have to be a concert pianist in order to want to learn how to play the pieces correctly.

2 weeks ago, you couldn't play it. Now, you can barely play it -and poorly at that. I don't see much improvement in that type of learning.

Like I said, it's of course up to you. But you're not fooling anyone with "I can play it!" I'm not wrong. There's nothing to be wrong about. I didn't say you couldn't learn those pieces. I just said you won't learn them as well or efficiently, that it would do you better to learn pieces that are actually at your level.

I'll be blunt. You're not special. You're not a prodigy who's cranking out perfect renditions of these compositions. And that's okay. You don't have to be, or need to be. But you're trying to claim that it's the same thing for you to learn them, but you can't. You're just not ready for those pieces yet at the pace you'd want to be.

Either way, whatever you want to do, you'll do. But don't come around here and claim something, or try to push something, when it's unfounded and unhelpful.

You don't have to be worried about improving your technique. You don't have any to begin with. That's what you should be worried about.

I should add I'm not saying this to be mean or discouraging. In fact, I think it shows that someone REALLY loves the piano and music when they're doing this just as a hobby. Just for fun.

However, I'm not going to lie and say you played it well when you just aren't ready to.

And trust me, I speak from experience. I've been 'learning' the Classical Guitar for years, and in the beginning I tried to play all the big stuff... but I wouldn't be able to do that now until I started learning the easier stuff.

Let your fingers, brain, hands, arms, torso, body... everything... have time to learn and build up. It'll be much more worth it, I promise you.

Returning to the original question:

Bach: Any French Suite; skim through WTC I and see what fits you - try at least to work on a fugue, why not try the first one in C major...; 3-part inventions

Haydn : Any Sonata from vol. 2, Universal Edition

Mozart: Most Sonatas with a K lower than 300

Beethoven: Sonatas Op. 2, No. 1; Op. 10, No. 1; Op. 14, Nos 1 & 2; Op. 79

Schubert: Moments Musicaux

Mendelssohn: Lieder Ohne Worte (several)

Schumann: Arabeske, Blumenstück, Waldszenen (most but not all pieces)

Chopin: Most Mazurkas; Polonaise Op. 26, No. 1; several Preludes, Waltzes; Berceuse

Brahms: Ballads, Op. 10; Waltzes, Op. 39; Intermezzi from Op. 76; Rhapsody Op. 79, No. 2; Intermezzi from Op. 116; 3 Intermezzi Op. 117; Intermezzo, Op. 119, No. 1

Debussy: Reverie; Children's Corner; Deux Arabesques

Bartok: Romanian Folk Dances; Sonatina; Suite, Op. 14 (3rd movement perhaps too difficult)

Of course, there is much more, especially of 20th Century origin - however, these items I find worthwhile and a sufficient challenge at your level.

I'm definitely not a prodigy and I'm 13 and learning the Rach 2 to play at my concerto debut.