Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner My performance of Islamey

Hi everyone, here is a recording of me playing Islamey: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkbRI6aobKU&feature=youtu.be

Any thoughts/critiques?

First of all, this should be in a Members Recordings forum and not here.

I'm seeing that you take 9 and a half minutes; another Pogorelich?

I'm concerned about your technique. Your wrists are very tight; I wonder you haven't injured yourself already. Your octaves are very choppy; your legato thirds are not legato at all.

Listening to the middle section, I don't hear you shaping the phrases or conveying the emotional arc of that section. Your technical shortcomings are interfering with your ability to interpret the music satisfactorily. The episode from 5:12 to 5:22 in your video is particularly alarming; is this a musical decision, or did you just forget what the chords were, or what? You tend to rush in easy sections and go painfully slowly when the going gets tough.

Now I'm listening to the coda. Again, your octave technique needs some serious work. Doing the repeated notes/chords with your wrists as tight as they are is sure to lead to injury. You need to practice slowly and release the tension in your forearms/wrists. Do you have a teacher? If you do, ask him/her to help you with this.

The episode beginning at 9:11 is particularly labored; you are missing so many notes in the final section that it could be Schoenberg for all I know. The grace notes before the Db octave at 9:31: what in the world happened?

To sum it up, the entire thing lacks rhythmic and melodic continuity. You need some serious slow practice and you need to refine almost every aspect of your technique. I recommend getting a teacher, if you don't have one, to work on these things with you. You need to play easier pieces that you can handle, and work your way up to monstrosities like Islamey.

So that's what I have to say; take it or leave it. Sorry if any of this sounded overly harsh; I tend to have a very direct style when critiquing musical performances (or anything, for that matter).

I don't think you sound overly harsh as much as you sound overly misinformed -- a harsh critique is more than fine but the things you said are altogether incorrect and show that you don't really know the piece -- or piano -- at all.

Legato thirds? There is one measure in the entire piece with legato thirds. Shows that you aren't too familiar with it.

My technical shortcomings are stopping me from interpreting the middle section correctly? The middle section is the difficulty of a Chopin Nocturne -- I had one brief memory slip. I can assure you I do not have insufficient technical ability to play the middle section.

And did you actually listen to it? I play the coda -- the hardest part -- as fast as almost any recording I've heard, and most of the rest around the speed of most recordings. I take the slow parts quite slow and a couple random segments a bit under tempo, but what you said is literally the opposite of what is true.

Are you joking about the coda? I'm happy to take critique but my octave technique is far from bad. My wrists are extremely loose and I can practice the coda for hours without getting tired.

I'm not one to refute harsh critique but you really have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm going to let other posters weigh in on this issue. I think you'll find that the ones that know what they're talking about will tend to agree with me.

As I said, take it or leave it. I don't really care how well you play this piece, and I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to get you to see what you're doing wrong.

If you can't hear the difference between a master playing this piece and your performance, you are indeed a sad case.

I agree with Polyphonist that there is a fair amount of rhythmic and melodic discontinuity. I don't agree that your technique looks stiff or deficient. I think you have plenty of technique to work with, it just seems that where one phrase begins and where the next one starts, not enough work has gone into the transitions and the rhythmic stability of them. A lot of the basic phrasal units are very nice and effective. I have no doubt that with some more work and attention to detail (particularly on transitions between phrases/sections), you will eventually have a very fine performance of this piece. Congrats on what you have achieved with it so far.

Kay, remind me to never post a recording on this forum again...

I mean, I might disagree with is phrasing, but I'm enjoying his playing...all despite the fact that I'm hardly a fan of Islamey

...of which section?

Thank you guys, I'll take a look at my phrasing and fix it up. I just did what felt natural and didn't realize that it would seem unstable

What is your problem? You already proved that you have no idea what you are talking about. This isn't a question of whether I have the technique or not to play this piece -- I've played Scarbo,Triana, Prok 8, and many other pieces of that caliber and and do not struggle with the techniques in Islamey. I wanted critiques on musicality and got some helpful ones. You, however, seem to have a stick up your ass and like to prove further that you are ignorant. It's really easy to try to write things off and put things down over the internet -- let's hear a recording of you playing -- playing anything even remotely in the ballpark of Islamey -- before you can keep giving ignorant comments. You are no more than an idiot that sits behind a computer and rips on others to make up for the insecurity that you are a poor pianist. I'm not saying this as a baseless comment -- I have never in my life met someone that is very good at what they do that get excited to attack others. It's always the ones that are insecure about themselves that do. So, let's hear you play something?

Oh no, here we go again with the fallacy that you have to be better than someone to criticize them-I call it the "Let's see you do it better" fallacy.

"I've played Scarbo, Triana, Prok 8, etc" -does playing hard repertoire mean that you are an excellent pianist? No, not if you don't play it well.

I still don't see exactly what I've said that you think is ignorant. I know you're embarrassed that I saw through to your inherent technical and musical weaknesses, but that doesn't give you license to call me "ignorant".

"You already proved that you have no idea what you are talking about"-I think you have us confused, my friend.

While there are some things I can say (and will, later), about phrasing and tonal coloring - I completely disagree with Polyphonist and really have no idea where he is coming from - I don't see any shortcomings technically, nor do I think anything is overly stiff. His technique is fine. As for the section from 5:12 to 5:22, I think it is very obviously a musical decision. A quirky one, yes - but not so extreme from the type of thing that is done by certain slavic/russian pianists - a certain alteration of timing for agogic effect.

Because what you said about my weaknesses is not true. I do not have weak octaves -- I play the octave passages up or above tempo and they are clean. I do not slow down in the hard passages. Almost everything you criticized stemmed from your lack of knowledge of pianism. I'm not saying the piece doesn't need work -- I posted it for the sole reason that I wanted opinions on it. However, your opinion remains vehemently mean and unhelpful and altogether stems from your ignorance.

So you admit that you are not as a good a pianist as I am, yet still relish in how you "saw through to inherent technical and musical weaknesses?" You are pathetic.

It's really a waste of my time to argue with someone this dense. No, I don't admit that I am not as good a pianist as you are, and even if I weren't it would not be relevant. Let's just isolate one of your brilliant decisions in this piece-the passage from 5:12-5:22. Justify your distortion of the rhythm and destruction of the passage's continuity.

Can be a rough playground, can't it, Kuan? Suffice to say to xcvbnml, "welcome to PW," and that anyone who asks for thoughts or critiques of one's performance here will get them, sometimes in droves, often unvarnished, and often set against the highest standards. My experience is that most people who critique a performance do so with best interests and good intentions in mind. It can be a helpful community, but not everyone will sugar coat things for you. This will test many things in you if you let it, and may well cause some growth in unexpected places of your heart and soul, as well as your intellect and temperament! (If you are so inclined.)

Tell me, xc, have you been lurking here a while? Do you know the general pattern of posted performances and critiques? The online personalities of regular contributors? How long have you been working on this piece? Was it prepared "for" something in particular? What's the back story? Do you consider this piece "finished"? Have you been able to detatch from the (considerable) technical acheivement to listen objectively to your playing? What do you hear that you like? What do you hear that you want to do better? Does this piece "speak" to you any certain way?

I can't say that I really know this piece, as Polyphonist recently introduced it to my awareness the other day as he stopped by my tip jar to make the request... I enjoyed watching your performance and would say that there were a few things, musically, that might unfold for you as this piece ripens with you. Conjecture on my part. I suppose it would be safer for me to not offer any critique at this time.

--Andy

I feel like a little kid again arguing with a stranger over the internet so I'm going to stop getting involved with this but sure I will justify it. At that point in the piece we are reaching three things -- a three chord climax, a modulation to a new key, and the end of a significant section. When I listen to recordings I often feel like two measures of sixteenth notes to achieve all of this feels rushed to immediately head back into the opening melody, so I decided to take some time and give space to those chords and that progression before reaching the new key and heading back into the toccata like figure.

You're welcome to disagree with it and it seems like several people do so I may go back and reconsider but I thought a lot about the passage and tried many things and liked taking some time there.

I've lurked around some on and off and have a decent feel for it. I've worked on the piece for a little under 3 months and am playing it for juries soon. I go to a top music school majoring in composition but have put a lot of work into piano lately. The piece is certainly not finished, but I am pretty satisfied with how it's going. I know some people see it as a shallow technical showpiece but I have always loved the piece and have no intention of playing it to show off and am trying to do everything i can to make it musical (which is much harder than some may think).

That passage is part of a gradual buildup into the new section, which is marked accelerando. By taking time there you effectively negate the intention of the composer.

And it's possible to take a little bit of time there, without doing it to the extent you did. I could have driven to work and back in the time it took you to play those 3 bars.

...and, unfortunately, than some are capable of.

I remember when working on a Scott Joplin rag ("Weeping Willow" (sorry, Poly! )) I was captivated by the "C" part (of AABBACCDD), which made sense to me at a very relaxed tempo. The rest of the rag could have taken a faster clip, but not the C part. I decided to scale the tempo of the rag to fit what I thought needed to be conveyed in that C part, and the meaning of the whole rag fell right into place. Perhaps this concept applies in some way. (I am not saying you should consider a sentimental pacing. I am suggesting you might want to examine the scope of your tempo--that is, since you felt you were rushing through something right there (the passage in question), that ought to be a red flag to you that perhaps you are missing something regarding the arc and drive of the piece. ?)

Let me start by saying I read the previous comments, but I am giving this a fresh perspective and will not mention them, either to agree or disagree. I will also say that I have played this piece in the past, so I am intimately familiar with it.

Before I begin, let me also say that my comments will tend towards constructive and objective, and I will completely ignore what I consider to be finger slips (if any occur). I'll provide time marks where possible. And my comments will be a running commentary of the piece as I listen to it, not something compiled after listening. I will also listen at least twice. I hope this is not objectionable.

I like the tempo at the beginning. This tempo would bring you in around 8:00, which is approximately where I like to hear it (somewhere between Berezovsky and Ogden). The length of your performance indicates to me (prior to listening) that some passages will be drawn out, so I will attempt to point out where you may want to consider a different artistic choice.

At 1:20-- I consider this one of the easier passages, yet you take it remarkably slower. Was this a conscious decision? As you get into 1:35, I tend to think it was because of your choice in rubato. You may want to consider a stricter tempo, or if you do intend to ebb/swell as you do, consider a slightly faster base tempo.

2:24-- consider the brief rit. you put in. With the end of phrase that comes up just a few beats later, it may be excessive. I would probably suggest plowing on to rit into the final big chord at 2:29

2:30-- I think you take this section a hair too slow, and use too much rubato. It might be possible to hear this as rhythmic inconsistencies, but it's a stretch.

2:57-- watch your pinky. The melody is underneath, and your pinky interjects a little too strongly.

3:22-- it says "poco riten" where you chose a much more noticeable change in tempo. Consider rubato (note: I'll use this phrase now when I hear such differences, so you're aware, but I won't belabor the point. I think you have more than enough musical sense to "hear" it.)

3:37-- do you not have the additional grace notes marked in your score, or was it an omission? I've heard it played both ways, so just curious. I understand the artistic choice is driving the tempo by omitting grace notes in this section.

4:08-- consider rubato (in terms of how much "poco riten" to apply)

4:17-- a little stiff on these triplets. You're next grouping was much better, but I think you hit these a little too evenly so they sound mechanical. Take a second look at it.

4:36-- love the arpeggios

4:44-- consider holding the top notes just a hair longer to give some phrasing to these arpeggios as you crescendo into the big poco piu mosso. And in the poco piu mosso, if you can bring out the top melody line even more, great. I can hear the LH nicely, but the top note is a little too soft to ring out.

5:13-- I think your immediate choice of tempo change here is inconsistent with the passage you just played and it bogs down the section. Consider keeping the tempo consistent, or, as written, consider an accelerando. (Your tempo at 5:20, on the contrary, seems too fast given how you played the previous measure.)

5:53-- where you switch to C-natural(? -- I'm going on memory; I think that was the note change). I like the initial strike where you bring out the change, but consider a pedal change, because the subsequent strikings detract a little from the trill.

6:09-- great lead into the sotto voce, and I'm really liking how you play this section. Very well done.

6:36-- excellent Tranquillo, especially bringing out the middle line. There are professional pianists whose performance of this section I can't stand. So, bravo there.

6:45-- sounds like you take the ossia. If you can jump to the chord change a little quicker, it may take away some of the perceived hesitation. You play it very well, but a little less hesitation on those leaps may join it together as well as the previous section.

7:33-- given the crispness and speed of the previous sections, can you take this up a notch? I know it's consistent with your tempo choice in the beginning, but now, after all the development, it sounds a hair slow.

7:53-- tempo choice (this had to be conscious). I disagree with it. If you want a very slight rit, I can see the case for it, but I think you lose the line with the extreme choice.

8:20-- obvious memory slip. It happens. The whole section leading into the presto furioso was either the result of the slip, or it could use a little work, but I'm sure you don't need it hounded on. You know what to do.

8:35-- can you go a hair faster at the presto furioso? You don't have to--virtually no one does--but it does sound better if you can manage it. (I'm talking somewhere around 180-184 bpm. It sounds amazing if played crisply.)

**Bravo on not taking the optional cut. I don't agree with it, either.**

On the last grace note-- can you 'rip' this, and hit the last note faster? I hear a "rip-boom" rather than a "dah-dah-dah-dah........dah".


That's it (unless there's a second movement.. lol). Thank you very much for posting this recording. I enjoyed it very much. I do wish to reiterate that my running commentary are just momentary suggestions in places, and nothing to indicate how well I thought you played. I do think you played very well. If you cleared up those little slips, I'd probably place this in my top ten recordings of the piece. You had some absolutely great sections, better than anyone else I've heard play it, but you also had some areas where I thought the rubato/tempo choices didn't really match. Overall, I would have to say this was very well done.