Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Members Recordings - Pianist Corner Chopin - Nocturne Opus 37 No. 1

Gave this my best shot.

http://youtu.be/imD12DMdBCc

From Wikipedia:

"James Friskin commented that the nocturne is "one of the simpler nocturnes" and is similar to the Nocturne in G minor, Op. 15, No. 3 in that it "has similar legato chord passages in the contrasting section" though this nocturne "has a more ornamental melodic line".[8] Dubal also agreed that the nocturne is "of lesser importance."[9] Critics, however, have often pointed to the potential allusion to religion in the middle section. Maurycy Karasowski commented that the middle section has "a church-like atmosphere in chords."[10] Johnson also thought the chords to be "chorale-like" and commented that "some biographers have felt that this music represented Chopin's faith in the consoling power of religion."[2]"

Bottom line: This Nocturne may be "simple" - but I found it to be far from easy.

As always, very good, very mature and balanced.

The only criticism (or personal preference) I would like to make is that, the left hand could be much quieter and the right hand melody could have a more dominant and singing tone.

That said, I enjoyed listening to this.
Thanks for sharing.

Hakki - Thank you for taking the time to listen and comment. I always appreciate your constructive criticism. I agree that the left hand sound could be a bit more subdued. Part (but not all) of the problem with the left hand has to do with the nature of the piano itself. My Mason and Hamlin BB has a very powerful bass and tenor - and it is always a challenge (struggle??) to try to maintain a balance between them and the top range of the keyboard. Not that it can't be done. I actually had a couple of other takes that better achieved the desired balance - but I selected this one primarily because I like the overall pacing.

The arpeggiation is good but it does not balance out with the rest of the interpretation. One has to have an overall logic associated with the playing of any piece.

For those who do not know the past history of this pianist, as I do, this is not a negative criticism. Because, this concert pianist knows how to listen to constructive comments, and then improve upon the performance.

In "Form and Analysis," they refer to a compositional term known as "harmonic tension." This is what keeps a particular work "moving along."

In this playing, the harmomic tension is lost.

That absolutely does not mean metronomic playing. What it does mean is that the ear has to be pushed forward by maintaining a rhythmic cadence, in terms of elasticty, that draws a particular phrase or melody to ones ear.

As always: a beautiful tone, but, in this particular instance, under-recorded, in terms of volume.

As I said before, this will be recorded again incorporating the comments made here, and you will be able to tell the difference. That is why this gentleman can truly be described as a musician.

Phil,

As you know, at your level of musicianship, every performance will have its merits and detractions. It is the blessing and curse equation of playing as well as you do--there is always something you feel you could have done better.

Personally, I believe this performance is meritorious. Even more so when you consider how cleanly this is played.

My impression of your approach to shaping a performance is that you are very, very deliberate in what you do, careful about what you mean to convey, and scrupulously exact in following the score. And then, after all of that respectfulness, you bring your life experience and tender heart to it, which, honestly, is simply another level of respect to the composer, as far as this kind of music-making goes...

Very nicely done.

--Andy

Phil:

A few years back they were interviewing the chief jurist for the Chopin Competition, and they asked him how the composer's music should be played. He paused and then said: "in a highly improvisational manner."

Until I heard the recordings listed in my video, and then read about it in Neal Peres da Costa's book, "Off The Record," which has chapters entitled "Rhythmic Alteration," and "Tempo Modification," I did not know what that meant.

This is quite frankly a gypsy-like folk melody, which in my opinion should be "milked" for all it is worth. Me thinks it should be played with a very wide line.

Finally, enclosed for your listening pleasure is the link to Thierry de Brunoff's recording which starts to enter that realm of rhapsodic playing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKttRXVgSjg

I am quite sure that Carey's nature is a much more charitable and forgiving one than mine, but I find that this response to this thread verges on insulting. It suggests that de Brunoff's recording is a "better" one - which, to some ears it may be ("starts to enter that realm...") - but to juxtapose that against the OP's recording for obvious comparison is discourteous if not callous.

I agree. I think that's putting it mildly. I hope and assume that Carey was unfazed by it. The poster simply isn't close to capable of making judgments like what he was purporting to do, and the details that he talks about seem to have no particular relation to this performance.

Carey: It's good.
I usually refrain from commenting on performances of Chopin because my views are very intense and personal. I would play this still more pleadingly and plaintively, "sighingly," with a lot more mini-shaping within phrases and with more rubato (perhaps the opposite of what Louis indicated about the rhythm!), but this is very good.

Carey, I listened to your recording a couple of days ago; and I just now listened to the Thierry de Brunoff recording posted by Louis Podesta. Comparing the two was fascinating for me: both performances to me are meticulous in their fidelity to the score (as I remember it), but there are certain really quite subtle voicings, certain subtle rhythmic displacements, that make de Brunoff's presentation more compelling -- really much sadder in feel, to be precise. Chopin wrote several Nocturnes as "diptychs": and, in this particular case, the emotional arc seems to me to cry out for the entry into the Italianate 37-2, which "dispels" the pervasive sadness of 37 - 1. Personally, I've always felt the same way about Op 27 -- for me, they make the best sense when played together, but 27 - 2 gets far more attention, and in my experience always independently.

Briefly put -- my request is to play 37 - 1 and 37 - 2 back-to-back -- but this was beautiful, and thanks for sharing this!.

Tim: Interesting post, especially about doing each of those opuses as a unit. But, a couple of things:

-- I think you gave more credence to that post that it deserved by doing what you did on the basis of it.

-- It's not fair -- IMO never really fair -- to compare one of our recordings to that of a high-level professional pianist in such a way. Thierry de Brunhoff (that's how it's spelled) was a prodigy and a master who studied with Cortot. That's just not fair, and I'm not sure why you wanted to do it. Maybe if anything Carey should be flattered that there could be any comparison!

Time for me to jump into the discussion.

For the record, Louis and I studied with the same teacher at UNT back in the early 1970s. After more than 40 years we recently reconnected here on PW. While we didn't know each other well in school (I was a grad student and he an undergrad) he remembers my playing and what (at the time) I was capable of doing. It has been a real pleasure to correspond with Louis through PMs - and I hope to continue to do so.

That said, I can understand how some might construe the tone of Louis' first post on this thread to be harsh - or feel perhaps that his observations might have been more appropriate in a PM. Nevertheless, based on his recollections of my abilities back in the day, Louis believes that I can do a better job with the Nocturne -- and the reality is I believe I can as well.

Interesting little side note: The last teacher I studied with in the mid-1970s was Richard Cass - who, like de Brunhoff - was a student of Cortot. I cherish my copy of Chopin's Nocturne Opus 62 No. 2 with the notations that Richard wrote for me throughout the score. The Opus 62 No. 2 will be one of my next recordings. We'll see how that one goes !!

So to Mark's point - yes, I'm flattered that Louis believes I am capable of playing the Nocturne as well as de Brunhoff. Whether I truly can is another matter ..but then, as Andy states, "every performance has its merits and distractions."

Whether it is considered good form to post a "better" recording as comparison to one of our humble amateur efforts here is open to question. In this instance, however, I believe Mr. Podesta's heart was in the right place.

Thank you gentlemen !!

Hi, Mark -- Well, briefly put, I'll build on the last sentence you posted -- Carey's performance really IS good enough to stand comparison with a professional performance; and, admittedly, an especially beautiful piano and recording were certainly factors in de Brunhoff's IMO outstanding projection of an appropriate atmosphere.

To me, I think it's going a tad far to assert that we ought NEVER to provide an alternative recording -- having said that, though, I can see how it could be construed as implicitly insulting: ("Here is what a GOOD presentation is", or "Here is how an INTELLIGENT person approaches it", in its explicit form) -- and so I certainly wouldn't do it as a general thing. Clearly, both you and BruceD were far more sensitive to this implication than I was; I was more taken by the truly riveting character of de Brunhoff's performance, and so was "seduced", so to speak, into comparing "Excellent" invidiously aginast "Memorable". If there was any misunderstanding regarding this, then I apologize for that.

Indeed it is! That's why I never said it!

What I said:


....meaning, how you had put it.

But no matter. It's all good.
Or most of the stuff on here anyway.

I think that posting another recording is actually one of the best and most appropriate ways to explain what improvements can be made. Much clearer than trying to explain things only with words.

There's another side to this coin: Those of us struggling amateurs who dare to post our recordings here surely are aware - sometimes acutely so - of professional recordings and how much more polished, idiomatic and musical they are than our own attempts. Some of us may even have listened closely to other recordings of great artists, not to copy but to get ideas on details or to get a sense of how to unify those details into one comprehensive and coherent whole. To post other recordings next to ours for A/B comparisons, suggesting "this is how it's done ..." does seem dismissive of our own efforts.

I haven't posted my own recordings - when, in the past, I had the temerity to do so - so someone can "show" me how it should be done by comparison with professional readings, because I'd already done that, in many cases. I posted my own recordings to get intelligent comments on my work based on its own merits.

Regards,

I agree with Bruce... I am sure carey knows how to distinguish good and bad recordings on YouTube himself, so if he wants to listen to good recordings he can do so very easily. He most probably also has good recordings of Chopin in his living room.

But people who post here want to show what they can do and who they are, and carey did a good job!

If one just says "this is how it'd done" or "your octaves are weak" and posted Argerich playing the piece, then IMO it would be inappropriate and of little use. But if one is talking about less specific ideas then I think words are almost always of relatively little use by themself and best understood through a listening experience.

I'm not sure that posting a professional recording should be intimidating because it's obvious that there would be usually be no comparison. If someone told me Roger Federer's forehand was better than mine and posted a video I wouldn't be offended or hurt.

If one gives very specific advice(for example, comparing the performance to what's written in the score which you often do) then I don't think a recording is necessary. But if one said something more general like "your performance needs more rubato", then I think posting a performance that one felt illustrated that would be of help.

One of the reasons many teaching studios have two pianos is so the teacher can illustrate points on a second piano and not just explain them verbally. And, of course, in master classes, two pianos are almost always present.

You can add me to the list of people that think the posting of alternate recordings is extraordinarily rude.

Double +1.

I agree with Tim that we shouldn't say it's never OK to post an "alternate recording," but I think it's almost always dismissive, and deflects the focus from where it should be, which is on the presented recording -- and I think it should rarely be supported when someone does it.

I'll take it a step further, at the risk of being rude myself to people who've occasionally posted such comps.

My impression is that most of the time when people post such comps, truly most of the time, they're doing it as a substitute for making a real and relevant comment on the posted recording because they're not really capable of evaluating and criticizing it meaningfully: "I don't really have anything to say, but just listen to this thing here, this is how to do it" -- while actually having little appreciation of what exactly is different between the two recordings.

When people here post their own recordings, I think we owe them listening to it and discussing it on their own terms -- to the extent we're able, just as they were playing to the extent they were able.

Triple plus one. What are we up to, now? Can someone please do the math?

Carey is a class act to the max. (I just had to say that...)

In my opinion, recordings posted by PW members should be appreciated fully first, and critiqued appropriately second. If that critique must include an example of someone else's recording (and really, that is never imperative), there had better be a compelling reason for it, and it had better be presented with a good deal of sensitivity. Often, they are not. When I see video/audio performance examples of different performances that say, "Try to play it like this," it is always a bummer, and I don't care whose thread it appears in, it always bums me out and makes me feel for the OP. I take it to mean, "Pff. I'd rather listen to this any day than the dreck you just churned out." I almost never listen to them, just because I'm so ticked off about it.

I do remember one time, though, when PL'us posted a video reponse to something I did of something he found on YouTube, and it was interesting. I had the same kind of reaction to it that Tim did here. And threads can and do morph into interesting discussions where multiple recorded examples can help the discussion along. But to simply post a YouTube video and say, "Play it like this," I find that critique practice cheap and annoying, because it doesn't show true appreciation or understanding, and it is bad pedagogy.

Also, add me to the list of people who wish BruceD would start posting recordings, again. And, if there isn't a list somewhere, please consider this the start. Plus ones, anyone?