Chopin - Lento con gran espressione

Yes, I found what you're talking about. The harmony is different, but I think you're right - that's a quote, too. I wish I had scores to these so I could put up the measure numbers for everyone. When I go home for Thanksgiving, I'll analyze both of them and Maiden's Wish as well and see what I can come up with - I should be able to get all of those from Sheet Music Archive. My dad has a scanner so I should be able to post excerpts

 

Hello,

I worked recently this nocturne again for a public performance, a kind of new experience for me. Well, it was not so good... But I tried to get the benefit of my work in the attached recording, made alone at home.
I play the initial version from Chopin's draft mentioned in the preface of the Henle edition:
http://www.henle.de/katalog/Vorwort/0781.pdf



Chopin - Nocturne in C-sharp minor Op. post. No. 20

 

Wow, great playing! That version is definitely different from the one I'm used to. So this is the urtext edition of the nocturne?

 

Thank you for your listening and your kind appreciation.

Not the urtext, only one among others because there are several sources: at least the early autograph kept at Valldemossa, and the two copies by Ludwika, Chopin's sister and the composer Oskar Kolberg, of a second autograph that would be lost. These sources are also mentioned by the urtext editions from Wiener urtext edition and Köneman Music Budapest. The question is whether both copies of the second autograph are accurate, especially regarding the polymetrics discussed above within this topic. Wiener urtext edition, while acknowledging the loss of the second autograph, states that the polymetrics were not incorporated by Chopin, but does not say on what this statement relies. But Ewal Zimmermann, the Henle editor for the Nocturnes states in his preface for the volume of the complete nocturnes that the reason why the polymetrics are not in the copies and first editions are that the copiists and the editors did not understand them:
http://www.henle.de/katalog/Vorwort/0185.pdf.
I got in touch with Dr Bozena Schmid-Adamczyk, who did a PhD thesis on the polymetrics in Chopin's music, especially in this piece, and is now attached to the Valldemossa museum. She told me that there would be some minor errors in the Henle score based on the first autograph, the one that I used, because E. Zimmermann did not work from the original autograph but from a photocopy, what is confirmed in the list of the sources given by Henle.

PS By the way, the links to the scores of both posthumous nocturnes on Pianosociety are inversed. This one is well at the 20th rank but the link title is in C minor instead of C sharp minor.

 

I think you do a good job even though I would like the runs at the end to be a bit faster.

Something that the text does not tell about is that it was composed to Ludwika as a practice for his second piano concerto (which has some similarities). For sure tells something about the skills his sister had at the piano (if she really could play his second concerto of course, but likely, she managed pretty well).

 

Bravo Didier! I liked very much among all three things: phrasing, tempo and sound (on all
sides of your touching, your piano and your recording technique: all these three IMHO at an
excellent level). I have some different ideas about interpretation of "dancing" lines near the finale,
but your choice of uniformity and concentration about one (beautiful) sound of cantabile is
coherent and convincing. Other minor things (but it's only my tastes, I like more free relations
between singing line and accompainment lines), but your playing here is very pleasant and
effective. Congratulations,
Sandro

 

Dear pianomady,
thanks again for your accurate listening, so amazing to me. I think that you wanted to indicate the uneven eigths at LH rather than RH. I agree: I am not yet OK with this polymetrics. I agree also for the too short dotted eighths.

Dear Robert,
thank you for your comment. Well, the 'bit faster' you would like, I would like it also, but my fingers...

Dear Sandro,
I am well happy that you appreciated my interpretation. The "dancing" lines are a problem to me indeed, because of the sudden change of mood. I also think that my recording technique is now better and would be hardly still improved because of the acoustics of my living room, not so bad but anyway limited by the ceiling heigth. I used two microphones pairs, one just above the rig and one sligthly off and at 1.8 m heigth. I equalized separately the two stereo tracks just to removed the room resonances below 200 Hz. I added a bit of digital reverberation to the track from the second microphone pair and mixed it at -6 dB with the track from the closest microphones.
Many thanks again for your so kind comment,

Didier

 

Hello,

I am addicted to this nocturne. Here attached a new recording that I would like replacing the current one available on the site. Thank you,

Didier

PS I have edited my post to fill the tag of the mp3 file.

 

Hi Monica,

I can only agree with your comments. I just recorded again the introduction and checked that the B# is sounding now (not easy for my ears, so I performed a spectral analysis in Wavelab to be ensured that both B# are present :wink: ). The edited recording is here attached. Despite the other niggles, I think this recording is significantly better that my previous ones, both technically on some aspects, the trills especially, and overall musically. I am not keen to record this nocturne before 6 months at least because I would like to spend more time on the Schubert piece that I am currently on. Thank you for accepting this improved, yet non perfect, recording for replacement of the previous one.


Chopin - Nocturne in C-sharp minor, Op. posth.

 

Hi Andreas,

thank you much for listening and commenting this. I agree on the rhythm issues. But it was still worse in my previous recording! I commit that my next recording of this nocturne (with the comments from Monica and your ones, I have enough to work it again) will still be better!

I am not sure of agreeing with you about bar 28, which are bars 30 and 31 in my score because the two first bars and their repetition are counted as 4 bars. These are particular bars of the second version published by Henle, based on an early autograph from Chopin (read the beginning of this post for more details), the only autograph available today. Here the rhythm is at RH two eighths, two quarters at bar 30, then one quarter and one half note at bar 31, that is two 3:4 bar, and at LH eight eighths, that is a 4:4 bar. :roll: While the same part in the version that you are referring to, based on may be inaccurate copies from a later autograph, which was lost, is, like in the first version proposed by Henle, one dotted eighth, one 16th, three eighths, one dotted quarter at RH and eight eighths at LH, that is one 4:4 bar. So, my rhythm is likely inaccurate, because this is difficult to play accurately, but may be not as much inaccurate as you thought. :wink:

I am also rather satisfied with my sound. Facing the financial crisis, I made my citizen duty by spending some money for supporting the economy and by the way getting wonderful microphones... Our government says that our bank system is much more reliable than most of the foreign systems (especially the USA and UK ones). But I don't trust them so much. :roll:

 

Hi Monica,

I'm back again.
My Schubert work is in good progress but should not be ready for submission here before this summer. Yes, I'm slow. :roll:

I worked again this nocturne, looking for a simpler expression, less gravity.

I would like that this new recording replaces my former one. I appreciate the comments from everybody who will spend some time for listening to it.

Chopin - Nocturne in C-sharp minor, Op. posth.

 

Let me say once more that I admire your patient dedication to the pieces you play. This is a very musical and deeply felt performance, and the sound is like that of a professional recording. Of course we expect no less from you ! I don't remember the details of your previous take, but this is probably better.

I think you are a bit careless with the pedal, especially in the opening bars, and your trills (as well as some of the runs, but not all) are not very smooth. You'll need to work on that (have I already recommended playing Bach ? )

But my main critique, as usual, is the erratic rhythm. There are many passages where note values seem to be quite arbitrary. Your rubato is generally fine and tasteful, but this is something different. if you could get your rhythmic pulse under control, you'd be on your way to being a good pianist, and this recording would be on its way to being a very good one ! Maybe you should be practising Bach (oops, sorry, here I go again :lol: )