Hi guys, we here meet again.

I was inspired by someone who can transcripe the famous piano works into there hands by means of adding trills, arpegios and other sorts of improvizations.

I was thinking to do one concert for the church(15 miniutes) at end of year by twistings chopins impromtu, nocturnes, etude. Since its easier to play "your own" improvisations than learning the originals. Do you agree on that??

So Do you think this is acceptable in music world or its no respect to the originals?


Ps, I know the examers will fail me if I do improvazations..

Any feed backs are welcome and highly apprecieated.

Oh dear... tell me this is a joke


What do you think ?


The church examers ? Better not do it then

I have spoken to my musical friends...if just playing chopin, I SHALL not add any my own improvazations. But if just playing JOHN MAR...and you can do what ever you like.

So i think, i shall stick to its original form not to alter it? What you guys think....



To Chris: the exams I am talking about is , as if i were doing my diplomas again with an extra improvazations on all pieces i played. That wont impress the examer but he/she rather to fail me for not following the rules and regulations. What you think??

As the one with artistic license, you should feel free to add anything you want. How your audience will take it, I don't know. I do this sort of thing all the time in the privacy of my own soundproof practice room. Although I personally wouldn't recommend it for the stage, it's really up to you, the performer, to make that decision.

PF

thank Pete, I considered only add the music with a big improvised introduction and perhaps an extened finale. But keep the music untouched. Just the begining and the ending.....what you you think???

I think jon mar you could do it but maybe it's cooler to make your own pieces Maybe it's difficulter but you could.

Btw why don't you write a symphonie of a famous composer for 2 hands?