Hi Luis and Monica,

Thanks for listening to my Scriabin etude. Glad you enjoyed it!

I just returned today from some vacation too! It's nice to get away once in awhile.

David

Hi David,
that´s a wonderful rendition of that well-known piece. (I have played this myself a longer time ago.) I think, you have fine affinity to the russian romantic. Dymnamical very subtle playing, with a plain agogic, that bring out the calm and contemplative spirit of that piece. Bravo!

Hi Andreas,

I'm so glad to see you posting here at PS! I know during the school year how very busy you are.

Thank you for listening to this etude of Scriabin, and for your kind comments too. I very much appreciate it.

David

Hi David,

Sorry to come late to the party here. Thanks for posting this interesting piece. I love these Scriabin etudes, and wish I had more time to grapple with them myself. I like the general sense of forward motion in your recording--I think Scriabin even at his most lyrical always has a turbulent undercurrent--and the overall shape of your interpretation is good.

One thing that didn't convince me is the polyrhythms. In most cases the second quaver of the RH sounds together with the second triplet in the LH, so that the quavers sound uneven. Was this deliberate? You played even quavers in bar 35 (although it's hard to tell because of the syncopation; I had to listen a couple of times to be sure).

Also, I think you can allow a little more flexibility in the tempo at some points. Especially where the composer writes "rubato" in the score--I think he intended this phrase to be a lot broader, then pick up the tempo again afterwards.


I strongly disagree with this. That is, I agree with your good opinion of Scriabin, but you're selling Chopin short by a long way (opus 10 number 3, opus 25 number 7, middle sections of other etudes from opus 25).

Another lyrical Scriabin study that I like is opus 8 number 4, hint hint

Hi Alexander,

The way I play a two-against-three polyrhythm is to play the first 8th notes of both hands precisely together on the beat. Next comes the middle 8th note alone of the triplet in the bass. Then sounds the second 8th note alone of the duplet in the treble. Finally, the last 8th note of the triplet in the base sounds alone taking up the rear. Thus aside from the unison of sound on the the first beat, the other notes are interspersed between notes, i.e., it's a staggering of the notes following the first beat. So the sound is "MY cup of tea".

In my experience (I could be wrong), it's more common to find the triplets in the right hand and the duplets in the left hand. Scriabin has reversed this here. Maybe that's part of why this piece is an etude. For me it took some getting used to it at first. I also played it up to tempo. Not everyone does, choosing adagio rather than andante as indicated. For that reason alone--playing more slowly--they have a far better chance of bringing out the polyrhythms than I gave myself. Still, to my ear they sound satisfactory.

In my score (Dover) there is only one rubato marking at measure 21. I just now listened to Sofronitsky and Horowitz play the piece. Both seemed to make very little of that rubato, especially where it's only a single measure. Of course, Horowitz played the whole piece rubato, so it would have mattered even less. That aside, what I focused on there was that this measure is the only one in the entire piece marked forte--the climax. So I decided to emphasize that aspect.

Yes, I too like the Etude, Op. 8, No. 4 (placevole). The best one Scriabin ever wrote, in my opinion is Op. 42, No. 6 in D flat. A few years ago I attempted it, but had to abandon it. It's a killer! I might go back and try it again sometime.

Thanks for listening and your comments.

David

Listening again carefully, I think the second quaver (8th note) doesn't always line up with a triplet, but it certainly isn't exactly half way in between the second and third triplets as it should be. To my ear it sounds as though the first of each pair of duplet quavers is shorter than the second; the rhythm is a little lopsided. (I know I'm being very fussy here, and it's something a lot of listeners might not notice.)

That's indeed what you should do, David, but Alexander's point is that what's coming out here does not quite match your stated intent, hence his question whether this was deliberate rubato.

Your "of" is coming too soon after your "cup". This asymmetry between the RH 8th notes is most apparent when there is a run of them, such as in bar 8.

Instances where "of" almost completely coincides with "cup" include bar 1, where the RH pair of F#s does seem to be pretty well together with the LH A#.

Hi rainer,

My musical intent was not to create rubato in the polyrhythmic accompaniment. There is only one measure marked rubato in the piece, thus doing so would not be justified by the score. Of course, when playing cantabile, there can be some romantic surges that are spontaneous. Any singer would do likewise. The challenge in playing the piano, a percussive instrument, in solo lyrical music is always to emulate the human voice. I do believe that I played the cantilena line very well, which to me is paramount in this music, withstanding a slight misalignment within some polyrhythms at proper tempo. To me the left hand sounds quite even. Frankly, I'm not inclined to go back to the piece, as I've moved on to other literature. Overall, I believe it's a satisfying rendition.

David

Hi David,
Enjoyed this one too.

Hi Eddy,

Thanks for listening, and I'm glad you found this rendition to your liking. You probably know from personal experience how difficult these Scriabin etudes are. A lot of work!

David