Piano World Home Page Forums Fun Stuff! - Parties, Tours, Projects & More... Member Recordings Chopin - Nocturne Op 48 No 1 in C minor

Bravo! There is really only one way to play Chopin I was taught, and that's with complete melodic fluidity over a rhythmically solid accompaniment.. and you did a wonderful job. The left hand chords were transparent yet light, the melody was full of warmth and passionate..a challenge for me the day I started learning this piece, and that was 2 years ago. And I like the tempo to your performance, some other recordings are much too fast and the semiquaver beats to the crotchets were too jumpy and all.
One question (I hope to improve my knowledge and playing on this pc), on the last semiquaver beat in measure 16, almost all performers play it as G an octave apart. I had mine (the henle edition) written out as B natural. Is it ok if I play it as G? I really think it sounds more intense as the melody comes on again right after.

One more question, I noticed you played the embellishments before the main beats for eg in measure 15..I'm wondering if Chopin had intended it to be played that way or otherwise?

Thanks again for sharing with us your wonderful playing!

That's how I was taught also.


I play it as G. I don't think I have seen any score or heard any pianist plays this last semiquaver as B natural.

I used to play and also prefer to play the first E on the beat and together with the LH just like the embellishments (measure 63) in the doppio movimento section; I can stretch out the time for as long as needed to squeeze in all the RH notes into this last beat because it's the last beat of the measure/phrase. But after listening to Ashkenazy, Rubinstein, and a few other pros, they all played the embellishments before the main beat and G on the beat with the LH, so I changed just to be on the safe side.

I don't have a teacher to check on me so I just follow what most of the pros do.

Thanks for helping me out LisztAddict. As to measure 16, I will ask my teacher if it's ok to play it as G altho my score says otherwise. The reason I asked was for exam purposes as well, as I was made to understand that I should follow strictly to the edition that I would be using (the examiners will be given a copy during the exam) for checking purposes etc..I'd really like to play it as a G instead.

As for the embellishments, I'll check with him again as well, and keep you posted. Am really inspired to polish this pc up soon after listening to you play. Thanks again!

In your case, might you consider writing in a G octave in parentheses and clearly marking the score that you give to the examiner : "All other editions - name them - have G at this point"? (You might even be able to cite other editions than the ones I list that give G instead of B.) That should certainly clear you and justify your not following the score at that point.

Along with the Henle which has a B natural at this point, my three other editions of the Nocturnes (Novello, Peters, Granz) all have G.

Regards,

Yes that I could do. I am working on memorizing the piece now, and playing it as a G feels just right.

Thanks for the advice BruceD.

Man LisztAddict, that recording really made me finally realize the genius of this beautiful piece.

The first time I heard it I just thought of it as a boring piece of garbled melodies and such--what piano did you record that on, the playing was amazing.

I hope it wasn't my recording the first time you heard it.

The piano is Pramberger JP-208. The recording device is portable Zoom H4. It was recorded in MP3 format at 320 kbps. I converted it to MP3 Pro 96 kbps.

Well, the first time I heard it was on a Roland clavanova being practiced by a high school junior....

I prefer the effect of the B, and would play it that way if I could stretch the tenth cleanly. Since I can't (quite) and think a roll would distract from the upper line at that point, I go with the G.

Best wishes,
Matthew

LisztAddict, I sent an e-mail to my piano teacher with links to a few Zoom H4 recordings from members of this forum to give him an idea of the sound improvement he could get over his YouTube clips if he used a Zoom to record the sound, and among the samples was your interpretation of this very nocturne. He then replied "Qui joue le chopin ? c'est bien joué..." which could be translated as "Who's playing the Chopin ? It is well-performed...".

I just thought I'd pass on to you the good words comming from a professional pianist. By the way, I agree with him, your recording is beautiful and inspiring !

I wish to tackle this piece eventually... it is so gorgeous.

Nice playing. You've know the piece well.
A couple of things.
I like the opening. Perhaps you could make more out of the p at measure 14? You crescendo in measure 16-I'm not sure why, as it isn't in MY score (Paderewski).
The Poco piu lento I find is all a little too loud. Measure 29 I would have liked to hear more melody (I know it's difficult).
Great job at measure 34 bringing out the A, A#, B melody!
Your octave section gets too loud to quickly, even 39 is too loud, IMHO. I didn't hear the G in the bass at 43 but this could have been my speakers.
The octaves from 46-48 are all fairly good.
My main issue in your performance was the doppio movimento section. First of all, the melody is NOT in triplets. You play the melody notes as if they are all part of the triplets of the accompanying chords. This is not a correct reading of the score. The melody is the same melody from section A. It is NOT "tripletized" as you play it. For example-there SHOULD be 2 against 3 at measure 63. You instead play the F in the melody with the Ab major chord, the C with the low F octave in the bass, and later the Eb on with the Ab+ chord in the LH.
We are still in 4/4 time here. Chopin clearly wrote the melody here (Measure 63) in simple 8th notes just as he did in measure 15, where the melody is identical.
Look closely at the score. Throughout the doppio movimento section the melody is THE SAME as in section A of the piece. Why do you "tripletize" the melody notes when they are clearly NOT part of the accompanying chords?

Lastly, I felt the that the melody in the doppio movimento section was not voiced enough. This is particularly apparent in measure 65.

This is somewhat hypercritical but... you are obviously playing on a very high level here, so let's not mess around. You play this piece WELL. I want you to understand that.
I'll post my video of this piece-it will help you understand how you misread the score, and hopefully you will fix it.
I would also like to point out that when I first learned this beautiful Nocturne, I misread the score in the doppio movimento section as well. I played it incorrectly for 1 year before someone pointed this out to me.

Your playing is sensitive and creative. Your technique is quite good. I look forward to hearing more from you in the future!
Mr_Kitty

Thanks for listening.

The p at measure 15? yeah, I missed that p

The crescendo at measure 16? - kind of like Dong-Min Lim played, right?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NRuD1L9FPZA
I know most people don't make the crescendo there. But my teacher wanted me to build it up a bit into measure 17.

Anyway, about the 8th notes in the RH melody, believe me, that's how I played it when I first learned this piece - 8th notes of the melody fall in between the triplets; exactly the opposite of what you did. My teacher said NO NO NO! It's written as 8th notes, but it's on top of the third note of the LH triplets. If you listen carefully to Ashkenzy, T'song, Pires, or Lim in that youtube link above, you will hear they all play the way I do. I doubt that you can find any well-known pianist that plays the RH 8th notes in between the LH triplets. If I remember correctly, this 8th note thing is also mentioned in the Cortot's edition.

Measure 65 - yes, I need watch the triplets and put more power into the pinky.

I know there is always room for improvement. Thanks for the feedbacks.

I have a few recordings floating somewhere on the forum. Some are okay, some are a bit crappy.

Beautiful piece. You play very well! Thanks for posting in a format that I can access! I am inspired to learn this piece.

Yeah I don't see a crescendo at measure 16. What edition are you using? I had a teacher that wanted me to build it up for 17 too but... I don't see it in my score and I don't like it anyway but....
Ashkenazy, T'song, Pires, and Lim have evidently misread the score as well. Look closely at your score. You (and aforementioned pianists) are playing it as it is printed. I play it as it was composed.

It was a very common practice in the 19th Century to write - and to play - eighth-note melody-notes over triplets as triplets; this is discussed in some editions, and some editors suggest that this remains a matter of performance choice.

To suggest that Ashkenzy, T'song, and Pires among others "have evidently misread the score" in the same manner that LisztAddict has "misread" the score seems to me somewhat out of line. Surely, this is an aspect of score reading and interpretation that those performers with their extensive training have duly taken into account, and I would certainly take their interpretation as a viable one. I can't imagine the likes of such performers being so uninformed musically and so untrained in performance practice that they would "misread" the score as you have suggested.

You may not agree with their interpretation, and, while I don't think that concert artists with international reputations are infallible and can do no wrong, but to suggest ignorance on their part in this instance I think is inappropriate.

Regards,

You're sounding as arrogant as they come Mr Kitty, you better post your video soon so that we can hear how this piece should be played...

Inappropriate? Out of line? Arrogant?
You'd better post your video soon?
***
Bruce-just look at the score. The melody is not in triplets. End of story.
Ashkenazy, Fou T'song, and Pires can do whatever they want.
So can you, and so can LisztAddict.
I am simply pointing out what's in the score. But I guess that's out of line, arrogant and just plain rude.

Is it too late to take back my comment ? Re-reading it I realize that it is me who was a bit inappropriate and even childish... You have all the rights to disagree with the choices of interpration made by even the best pianists. I guess I didn't like your use of the word "misread", which suggested that these pianists had made a mistake, but it seems like you only meant to say that what they were doing differed from what is strictly written on the score, and that's fine. I hope no offense is taken.

By the way I still look forward to hearing your rendition of this piece, as it's without a doubt my favorite nocturne and overall one of my favorite piece of music, and judging by your Étude Transcendentale posted in the pianist corner it seems like you can play

"These pianists" make mistakes. They misread scores. They don't always get enough sleep the night before. They don't always practice enough while on tour. They sometimes get to the concert and play with fistfulls of wrong notes. They also take their kids to school. They even do laundry.
Great pianists are human.
Just because you have a manager and give 100 performances a year does NOT mean you are the Godly authority on all earthly things. It MEANS that you play the piano to a certain standard, people LIKE your playing and ARE WILLING to pay to hear it.
There are probably 50 or 100 people in the world who make $10000+ per concert. These people may or may not have something special about their abilities to interpret classical music. They DO have a certain sound, a certain image, a certain reputation, that causes people to pay to hear their performances.

THERE ARE FIVE THOUSAND other people in the world who play at the same level OR higher.
THEY DO NOT make $10000 per concert. These people may or may not have something special about their abilities to interpret classical music. I went to a Richard Goode recital last week. It was fantastic. I loved almost every minute of it.
However, I have half a dozen friends who could have played the exact same program much better. NO, they wouldn't have played it with Richard Goode's phrasing, Richard Goode's sound, and Richard Goode's artistry but they would have played it CLOSER to the score with 1/10th the number of mistakes. However, people like Richard Goode and Richard Goode went home that night $20000 richer (not 10... 20). Sorry to single out Richard Goode-he's one of my favourite pianists. I just happened to go to his recital last week, so I used his name as an example.

To assume that famous pianists are simply incapable of misreading a score is foolishness. Vladimir Ashkenazy won second prize at the Chopin Competition in Warsaw in 1955. That does not make him incapable of misreading a score-for God's sake the guy reads TEN THOUSAND SCORES A YEAR. He's probably recorded 4/5ths of the standard repertoire! He is a wonderful pianist. But totally human and therefore prone to making the odd mistake.

I am not saying that famous pianists are not the great artists that they are.
I am not saying that the 5000 of us without $10000 cheques to blow their noses with are in any way superior to Richard Goode, Vladimir Ashkenazy or anyone else.
I'm saying that we're ALL human.