Piano Society
Free Classical Keyboard Recordings
It is currently Sun Oct 26, 2014 6:26 am

All times are UTC - 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Cheating? My 20 minutes with WAVE PAD
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 8:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:38 am
Posts: 647
Location: Sydney, Australia
Ok, i did this just for fun and would like you guys to be the judge to see how well I master my op10/1 with 30% tempo increse using wave pad..

By all means, I think I allowed to use the hiss/reverb functions but not sure about other BS functions.

Second recording is original with 70% tempo played .
The first one is the cheats version .

Meanwhile, i am back to practice room doing mine slow speed training on op10/1. Ladies and gentelman do you want to be glory or a cheater :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 3:14 pm 
the sound decays much faster when you speed it up.. so we can hear the weird piano sound... but we also hear less mistakes when its speed is up 30%


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:51 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9576
Location: Netherlands
The sped-up version sounds quite horrible, though less so than I had expected. Insanely fast - would you want to play it that fast if you could ? Seems to be around mm=160. The non-cheat seems to be around mm=100 which is not so slow, considered my Peters score says mm=104 (with the footnote this comes from a great Polish Chopin-tradition).

So, it does not really need to be so much faster than you play it. You better get it just right in this tempo and then perhaps speed up just a little. It is quite stable, though I must point out you omit the LH C in bar 49 (hope I counted correctly).

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 7:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:38 am
Posts: 647
Location: Sydney, Australia
techneut wrote:
The sped-up version sounds quite horrible, though less so than I had expected. Insanely fast - would you want to play it that fast if you could ? Seems to be around mm=160. The non-cheat seems to be around mm=100 which is not so slow, considered my Peters score says mm=104 (with the footnote this comes from a great Polish Chopin-tradition).

So, it does not really need to be so much faster than you play it. You better get it just right in this tempo and then perhaps speed up just a little. It is quite stable, though I must point out you omit the LH C in bar 49 (hope I counted correctly).


Dammmm. bar 49 again. Thanks for pointing out. Harder is better. Woh, your score says mm=104, and mine is 100..Thanks for checking my tempo. So, I am almost there ehhhhh. Huray.......I am using the schimers version(yellow book)-cheap version. But thanks again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 12:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:34 pm
Posts: 1278
What edition are you guys using? The 10/1 tempo is very clearly indicated @1/4note = 176.

The sped up version (besides being hilariously manic) shows something very significant, slow tempo accuracy will serve as the foundation of a full tempo performance. To go fast, all that is needed is the easy motion of a slow tempo, and speedwork to get the muscles to turn over faster. There's no middle ground, IMO. Artistry is another story.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 12:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:34 pm
Posts: 1278
OMG!!!

I'm majorly impressed in your improvement, JM. The real-time recording is far and away better than your last submission, which I believe I said was a 'mess'. Technically, you actually played the notes that Chopin wrote (except for that low B, listen to Pollini's recording, he nails it). Artistically, I'm beginning to get that sense of narrative in the bass.

Continue the slow, careful practice. Without pedal, and then with pedal. I've noticed that practicing without the pedal fine tunes coordination and helps to make a nice, smooth legato by eliminating the tendency to apply too much downward force. In small doses, 'gravity playing' will help you attain a powerful legato. Just a little weight is needed, constant, shifting, gentle weight. John Browning said something about the issue of weight, but I can't remember what it was.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 1:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:38 am
Posts: 647
Location: Sydney, Australia
thanks Pete, slow practicing is my agenta as IMPORTANT as performance...So I did tear down that wall. Who is John bowing??/.

That recording was done yesterday afternoon before submision..I know I changed my mind again..so there is no such thing as my LAST 2006 recording....

Meanwhile, I am enjoying snail pasting relaxed playing X5.

Thanks to you all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:34 pm
Posts: 1278
American-born John Browning (1933-2003) was one of the Twentieth Century's greatest pianists. His Chopin Etudes are mind-bogglingly fast. His interpretations of Bach and Scarlatti are of the greatest magnitude.

PF


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 4:55 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9576
Location: Netherlands
Quote:
What edition are you guys using? The 10/1 tempo is very clearly indicated @1/4note = 176.

I have the Peters Edition (Scholtz - v. Pozniak). Not sure how authoritative that is, bit it says 1/4 = 104. It is pretty slow, I must admit. 176 though seems insane. Which edition says that PJF ?

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:38 am
Posts: 647
Location: Sydney, Australia
Chris I have checked my cheap version Schmirs version it marked one corchet =176.

And the commericial recording are generally PLAYED WAY too fast- some of them -not because I played slow. I have heard between 1min .45 to 1.53 to 2.20

Some how There is a compromise between speed and clarity.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:23 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9576
Location: Netherlands
Quote:
Chris I have checked my cheap version Schmirs version it marked one corchet =176.

Hm... I wonder if that 104 is a misprint then. It suits me just fine :D but seems on the slow side. But 176... that is even faster than your cheat version. Can't be right either can it ? Unless all that one wants is to show off......

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:38 am
Posts: 647
Location: Sydney, Australia
Chris,
easy to check the tempo vs actual playing time. Some professinals played around 2.20. Check that time vs mine Cheated version. I think mine cheated version(ingore the time 3.17 thast wrong. --during the conversion(editing) it did not change the time) And I just physically checked with my watch it did 1 m.40... 20 sec too fast. as compared to 2 m version played by the professionals.


So my cheated version is a bit too fast, just imaging slow it down by 10%.

Have you heard my latest playing on op10/1 and tell me what you think about the tempo?

Therefore, 176 is quite reasonable, but again must starts from slow playing.....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:49 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9576
Location: Netherlands
Yes the second half of your file was empty, I noticed that. I still think 176 or even 160 is way too fast but that is just an old geezer's opinion. I'd probably go for something between 120-130 if I had the ability (and the patience to practice on piece for months on end).

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 9:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:38 am
Posts: 647
Location: Sydney, Australia
thanks for telling me that. I will download myself to double check.

I just did, its working 100%, I am the only person ACtually did the download.(one times).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:34 pm
Posts: 1278
techneut wrote:
Quote:
What edition are you guys using? The 10/1 tempo is very clearly indicated @1/4note = 176.

I have the Peters Edition (Scholtz - v. Pozniak). Not sure how authoritative that is, bit it says 1/4 = 104. It is pretty slow, I must admit. 176 though seems insane. Which edition says that PJF ?


The Urtext and Paderewski editions are marked @176.

That tempo seems impossible, it's not. Call me crazy, I play it at @176, but my brain thinks of it as whole note = mm44. I think the 'secret' to playing it at full tempo is to somehow count 16 notes as one beat. Playing 4 notes per beat slows it down. Eight notes per beat is OK, 16 or even 32 per beat would be better. This takes an awfully long time. It took me four years, alot of effort for a two minute piece, it was an obsession of mine.


PJF


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group