These are re-recordings. My old recordings from 2006/2007 were rather indifferent, sloppy, and in bad sound. This time, I think I am doing them right.

Liadov - Op.10 - Trois Morceaux - 1: Prelude in D flat major (1:36)
Liadov - Op.10 - Trois Morceaux - 2: Mazurka in C major (2:12)
Liadov - Op.10 - Trois Morceaux - 3: Mazurka in D major (3:15)

Hi Chris, since I like the first one very much (I remember, you helped me identifying the opus number of it ), I'd like to say about it. You could improve two points, otherwise a beautiful performance: (1) The first bass notes at every bar sound too prominent. (2) The pedaling is not ideally clean. Some spots are blurred.
I had great pleasure from listening to the other pieces of this set, thank you

Hi Chris,

It's great to see more of Liadov's music being added to his section. Thanks for posting them.

I like the prelude a lot, although it sounds like a tricky number to play. The two mazukas sound very nice too.

David

Thank you, Hye-Jin and David. I knew you two were then ones who were going to comment

The Prelude sure is a tricky thing, it took me awfully long to get right. The LH part is very difficult and I found it helped to concentrate on the bass notes, giving them weight and prominence. They carry a pedal point so I do not agree they are too loud. As for the pedaling, I have already cut that down a lot here. Maybe it could be clearer yet, but I certainly don't want this one to sound too dry and toccata-like. Russian music can stand a bit of blurring, I believe

I must say that in No. 1 I don't find it overpedalled, and other than the bass Ab in bar 4, I don't find the bass pedal points obtrusively loud. In any case, better loud than not heard. The only thing awry that I spotted was the r.h. sixths in bar 18 - there seems to be something wrong here. (I picked it up without the score, but downloaded the score to get the bar number). Other than that, it's a very enjoyable performance of what looks like a deceptively tricky piece.

I'm not so keen on the Mazurkas, which appear to lack Chopin's harmonic inspiration and sound a bit twee on first listening. Nothing to do with your playing, which is sharp and precise (the dotted rhythms in particular are handled attentively).

It is exactly that Yes these sixths, some thing or another always goes wrong there. Lack of technique ! Not sure where the slip was this time, but it was very minor and I thought I'd get away with it


Russian mazurkas should IMO not be compared to Chopin's. They are a different breed, usually vigorous and simple, sometimes indeed a bit bland.
I've come across Russian mazurkas which are rather twee, indeed (Tchaikovsky's for example) but I think these two are exciting and well written.

Anyway thanks also for the feedback !

Hi Chris,

Regarding the long time learning that prelude, I can sympathize. I had a Catoire piece that every time I sat at the piano, I thought I was reading it for the first time! Now I have an undisclosed Medtner piece that is likewise taking more time than I had anticipated. I was thinking of applying for a "get out of jail free card", but I know Medtner would refuse me, being the hard task master he is. So I soldier on with it.

David

To no. 1: Bravo, a fine performance with the right gesture for this music. The only thing I could criticize is, that there could be a bit more clearness in the arpeggios here and there (may be by using a bit less pedal) and the break in the left hand before the accelerando you didn´t consider.
To no. 2: Very good. Bravo, Chris!
To no. 3: I´m enthused also by this performance. Fine and subtle playing.

(I´m also quite touched, because the last pieces Franz played to me have been some by Liadov. I think, Liadov has written very good music and I like his compositions!)

@David: I really like your sentence "Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities" and I agree at hundred percent to it!

Less pedal Never

I was surprised by Franz's adventurous exploring of new repertoire in his old day. He had recently discovered Liadov as well as a nice piece by Rimsky-Korsakov, and was working on other new things also, IIRC. It shows how perceptive a musician he was.

Hi Andreas,

I'm glad you like my "signature" here. Yes, I do believe that to be the case. The score is the paper map, but it takes the pianist to reveal the territory represented by that map. And sometimes he has to read between the lines of the score or even outside of the score to discover the necessary insights for understanding it. And there come times too that the pianist must even interpret himself in order to find the emotional connections with the composer's music in order to form the musical intents and the resulting execution in the moment. I believe interpretation is musical notation, analysis, biography, historical anecdotes, psychology, and artistic precedents along with a bit of the pianist's own individuality. It's all very complex when you consider it actually.

David

Heck, no, it isn't really. You just sit down and play the notes !

Playing the piano is a lofty pursuit, but it's good to be able to laugh at ourselves now and then too.

David

Rachfan wrote:


Yes, David, you are right. Interpretation is a very complex process. But usually there are a lot of possibilities and it needs exploring them and that means to experiment with the work in several ways. I often play a piece in several different interpretations to find out, what possibility I find the most convincing. Thank you for your valuable thoughts and metaphors.

Techneut wrote:


Yes, that´s absolutely right!

Hi Chris,

I had a listen to your three recordings. Nice playing, I have not heard these before. They seem a lot more cheery than the Liadov preludes David submitted early and late last summer. The runs really flowed well in the first piece starting after :50 I'll say as I do not have the score were pedaled well, and the long pauses at the end caught me off guard

For the 2nd morceaux, I personally would have liked a slower tempo in parts and more of a toccata like sound. The pedal was nice but I think the phrases could have had more impact with less pedal.

For the third morceaux I liked this one a lot, the snappy perfect 4th interval in the melody at :24 repeated came off nice.

Enjoyed listening to these,

~Riley

These pause are as indicated, but I decided to take the first completely dry, a sort of surprise effect and it seems it worked


Maybe so, maybe so.... But for all my Bach playing I'm still a pedal pusher

Thanks for the comments.