Thank you pianolady. Yes there is a little slip there and another in the 4:th Invention near the end...or I rather miss a key in the last trill. However, ornaments in Bach are interpreted very differently between pianists and can be done so as little proof exist on how Bach intended them to be played. (Unless if you check this site out:
http://www.iment.com/maida/familytree/h ... tation.htm)
So it is possible that people will believe I intended to play it that way .

The sound is much nicer now (I found it a bit metallic in the first recordings) and so is the interpretation. Both inventions are much more fluent and dance-like, and especially the nr.4 is considerably faster than before, if I remember well. To me this is a huge improvement

It's just the ornaments that I'm still not convinced about. As you say it can't be known how Bach played them, but it seems clear from his famous ornaments table that the trillo should start on the upper note. Isn't that what most performers do, or is there another school of interpretation ?
Actually, you play some the trillos as mordents, others as inverted mordents. What edition are you using ?

Sorry to be such a nitpicker

Great that you found time for playing and recording again!

So far I listened only to the Bachs and Rach.

Bach:
Solid playing, 1 and 4 are not too slow for my taste, 8 sounds a bit tenacious, that is my first impression. In invention 8 it is so that the melody switches between right and left hand. The melody comes out well in the right hand, but not so in the left hand. You could try to take the right hand more back in those bars at which the left hand has the melody. It sounds not to me that it is only a matter of your Edirol placement.
In invention 1 I would not play the left hand that staccato here and there, but that is more a matter of taste.

Rach:
To be honest, I do not like much your recording. Since you said that you will rerecord it anyhow, let me tell some things what could be improved without too much effort. In the first A part it would be nice if the melody (right hand pinky) stands better out regarding the pp !! played notes with other right hand and left hand fingers, with a proper melody bow.
The middle part is labeled "agitato". In my opinion this is a high romantic piece, and Rachmaninoff himself let no doubt that he meant it to play accordingly (I have 3 recordings of Rach plays Rach 3/2, if you don't have, pmail me, it sounds interesting). That means, playing with lots of passion. So let it sound more agitato, both from speed and volume (with increasing intensity, so that it explodes before the A-part comes again with force.

The fulminant second a-part - you wrote yourself that you recognized the wrong notes here, you are right, you should work on that.

Somewhere near the end a chord sounds as if beeing played twice as if you would have put the piece together from two takes and forgot to remove the additional chord. But I can be wrong, have listened only once to your recording.

Don't treat this as offend, I played and recorded this piece too, it is on my homepage. I decided for myself too, to not let it get to the PianoSociety recordings in this fashion, because
a) there is a VERY good live recording already there, and I know my take will never be that good and
b) in my take there are flaws too, like the alternating chords coming before the second A-part did not come very well.
So don't throw paper balls on me for that comments on Rach, I have to polish on that piece too.

I hope it is a consistant state .

So far I listened only to the Bachs and Rach.

No it is not only a matter of Edirol . Much more of weak playing. I will re-record it soon again but have a better plan for it. I am very aware of the staccato playing in no.1 and it was not unplanned. A matter of taste as you say.


Well, I should be old enough to take an honest answer and I agree more or less to everything you have to say about it. Not very good and there is already a very good competing version up. Also, I prefer an honest answer so really, I did not get upset at all so do not worry about that.

The middle part is what troubles me most with this prelude. Not because it is difficult to play, rather I am not really sure how to play it. I try to accent and legato first key of each triplet while playing short [i]p[/p] staccatos for key 2, 3. But I accent the first key to little and play 2,3 too loud and un-staccato. I have a rather untuned Schimmel at work and by some reason, I play this part better on this. Feels easier but I do not why. Anyway, you suggest a good plan and I will try it out.

The repeating A-part is as I have already said not at all good. I must not have so many wrong notes there. But I do not understand what you mean by that same chord played twice in the end. It is a single take so nothing copied/paste there but I am not really famous for my careful score reading so I will check again.

Yepp a lot better actually. Did put some Reverb at it with Audacity. Did that last time as well after running it through a FFT-filter. I think the noice (but from clips) originated from the filter and was amplified with the reverb.

About the ornaments and score versions. Well, for no.1, I use some kind of school collection book with a lot different scores in it. Perhaps not very reliable. For no.4, I use Czerny's. But, not 100% I play like it.

Robert, I am very glad that you act not angry on me, and treats it as constructive critique. With this prelude we sit in the same boat, so to say - that means I know that I have myself too lots to do to make my thing better...

Sorry with that same chord played twice comment - I should call my ear doctor. After listening again, with score, I heard it not more. So excuse my critique regarding this, I was wrong.
Concerning wrong notes (not slips) I meant the A-part after the B-part, 3rd bar 2nd half (probably only right hand notes), and the simliar place near the end, I think the 10th last bar, second half.

I like your strong volume in the second A-part, but maybe it could be speed-up too (even if it is labeled as primo tempo in my score, but Rach itself plays the second A-part faster than the first one). That sound even more "angry".

You played it from memory after a long time again? I cannot do that! After memorizing a half year ago, I tried to play it lately again, and I not only needed the score again, I had also trouble to find the right notes with score (crazy those coding with 2 systems per hand, 4 systems together, isn't it?).

Rachmaninov himself plays it increidble fast and I have one of his recordings too. Many others do not as for example Ashkenazy who's version is the slowest I have heard.

I did not play it entirely from memory but used the score for the B-part as support. I have refreshed this piece a couple of weeks and am not in any way a magic memorizer . My brain needs to be refreshed from time to time.

Just replaced Invention no.8. Kind of happy with it .

Yes, definitely better, much more supple, relaxed and coordinated.

The sound is very clear and transparent, compared to my recordings which always sound rather muffled. Do you have the lid open or closed ? Where do you place the Edirol ? I wonder if the R-9 has has better mics than the R1.

That one really sounds perfect. Good job!

Thanks.

Lid closed. I place mr. Edirol about 5-6 meters behind my back and sample directly to mp in 224 kbps (pretty damped living room). Make sure it does not clip. No idea about the mics. Some tricks with Audacity as below:
- Apply the FFT filter to take away the bass about -6 db, cut at about 12 kHz.
- Gain to have everything - 3db from clip
- Apply GVerb with room size of about 150 meters, reverb time of 3 seconds, damping at about 0.75, Input bandwidth 0.75, Dry signal at 0 db, Early reflection at about -15 db and Tail level at about -19 db.

Rats, can't do that. I'm with my back against the music book case. Actually haven't got that much space on any side

Hm, taking out bass. Worth a try though in my case I fear it might diminish the character.

Whoa, 224 kbps sampling ! I wonder if that makes it sound clearer too, need to try that out. But did we not lay down a rule that it should be between 128 and 190 ?

But to get back on topic, yes that Invention 8 is well-nigh perfect now.

Have the same opinion on Invention 8 - much better now, relaxed and good tone.

The Inventions can be seen as 2voice fugues, and Bach gives both voices the same importance. So one can do alot if one tries to let the melody flow sound the same way (regarding dynamics AND articulation), regardless in which hand the melody is. I think this is a life long task to get better in that, for everyone, not only for the multivoiced fugues, but too for those 2-voice Inventions.

Yes and it is a very good exercise to vary the articulation between hands. Rather difficult even in these rather easy Inventions.

I just put up a new version of the Ravel prelude. So now Chris, I think I got everything right. Did I?

Yessir. After close listening, I think I was mistaken about bar 6.

It sounds far more poised now and this time reminded me much of Ma Mere l'Oye.
You start beautifully with the Ralenti but again the last two chords are too assertive and literal. I think they should sort of dissolve in the air.

Apart from that minor detail, it would be quite perfect.