I have recorded once more the famous unknown sonata in g by Domenico Scarlatti (Chris' menuet ). No clocks here!

It has no L or Kk number, but is to be found in Henle's edition of Selected Scarlatti Sonatas volume 1 page 86. There is also another recording somewhere (not mine)

You're right - no clock in this one. All in all it's nicely played. One thing you might try is using your soft pedal on some of the repeats to give a little variety.

I know you said there is no K or L number. I don't know how we'd put this up in the big table we have for Scarlatti. Guess it could go on the end or maybe just make it a separate row outside the table. Not sure....

Hi Richard,

You've got fine musicality here with improved sound as well. Very good playing!

On the matter of the clock mentioned above, in my living room there is a Chelsea ship's clock on the fireplace mantle. If the piano is drowning out the room with the strains of Scriabin or Medtner, the clock chimes are undetectable. But in a quiet, lyrical piece they become audible in a recording, plus the chimes occur on the hours and half hours as well. So for poetic repertoire, now I take the clock into an adjoining room and cover it with pillows. Well, it works!

David

Ah, the famous menuet in 2/4 again Or is it in 4/4 ?
I don't really recall the previous version - was it as slow as this ? Then I likely moaned about it there and then. It sounds a bit funereal in this tempo.
Well played though I am not convinced about some of your ornaments. Also you might want to have a bit more variation in the repeats. If the repeat is largely identical to the first time I find it streches patience a bit too much in a none too adventurous piece like this.
One thing you may want to consider is to better shape the recurring sighing motif (the descending second). The second note should always be softer than the first, and I think this already starts with the very first two notes, even though they don't descend. In some places you do this nicely but in many place you don't.

Thank you David and Monica.

I am afraid that you and I
Will here never see eye to eye...

I agree about the sighing motive, though it does not always seem to come out as it should. I shall try to reinforce this in future.

I follow the ornamentation that is suggested, with one minor variation, because it must have been a copyist error. I am not sure I would like any less in the first statement of A and B and I am not sure I would like any more in the repeats, though now there is a passing mordent playing in my mind's ear and it does not sound too bad...

You say it is none too adventurous and I agree there and that is part of its charm, a charm which is reinforced by the shortness of the piece. Were it longer it would stretch my patience too.

I have not unearthed the other recordings of this, but if my memory does not fail me this one is faster. It is marked Largo, you know, not presto furioso!

What are we not seeing eye to eye on?

Anyway, I know you like this piece and I do too. But it is a little long - you took all the repeats. You don't have to, though. Whenever I play a piece where both A and B parts have a repeat, I only repeat the A part and not the B part. This is pretty common. Also, are you saying that the ornaments at the end of each part are written out like that? I thought Scarlatti usually wrote trills with turns.

So, you have the piece in your fingers right now - do you think you can attempt one more recording of this with some of the suggestions entered here? It's nice now, but I believe you can get an even better rendition.

Richard,
I think you're playing this quite well. I agree with Chris regarding the sighing motifs, that you could exagerate more with them. I find your ornaments acceptable. What I don't care for is your sense of time across the silences between sections; you either add extra time or start too soon. This mars the overall structure for me. You might want to listen carefully for this. As regards to the meter -- without a score in front of me -- it seems to be duple not quadruple as revealed by the melodic/harmonic resolutions needing to be on a strong beat (by the character of the composition), which doesn't occur if its in 4/4. I will try later to find it in my collection (not complete) to see if I can identify the catalogue number.

Just a little joke with Chris, Monica: it has to do with his taste and mine and there there is nothing we can do. If he likes red wine and I like white, will I ever convince that white is better or he that red is the thing? Does it really matter in the end?

In any case I want to redo this one with some of the suggestions you (youSE ) have given me.

Some ornaments are written out, but at the particular sections you (Monica) mention there is a descending accacciatura and, over the real note, a mordent. The second time in brackets.

The time signature is C and I shall make sure there is one beat between the sections, as written out in the score.

Maybe I can scan this (at one point I actually did and posted it). Do I still have it? No!

On alcohol: just so you know, the dependable studies indicate that the benefits of alcohol (EtOH= ethanol) come from the EtOH, not the type of drink or color. 12 oz of beer = 5oz of wine = 3.5 oz of 80 proof = 3 oz of 100 proof = 1 drink. Significant health benefits come with no more than 1-2 drinks per day for men and no more than 1 drink/day for women. BTW, per gram of pure EtOH, alcohol has a calorie count in between carbohydrates and protiens (5 kCal) and fats (9kCal), at 7kCal, so don't forget the calories. "Drink responsibly."

@Richard, I too prefer white or rose to red.

I'm not sure what this is all about. But actually I like both.

I gave up on both, at least when it is hock: too many headaches, both physical and financial!

I have tinkered with the sonata, but I am afraid it became even slower, but oh, so florid!

I like how you altered the repeats by adding some ornaments and changing the dynamic level. The only thing that bothers me a little are the gaps between repeats - IMHO, they are a little too long. It's not too bad, though. However, the gap between the A section and B section (2:02) is definitely too long. The way the background noise changes quite clearly there proves that it's a edit/cut and you don't want that to be so noticeable.

I am not too happy with this version either and it was not meant to be the definitive one. Let us see if I can improve it!