piano pieces im playing?

Question

right now, the three pieces in my repetoire are:
rachmaninoff prelude op 23 no. 5
beethoven "waldstein" sonata op 53 no. 21
liszt "la campanella" Etude No. 3

what do you think? is it well balanced? any interpretation or playing tips from any pros? constructive criticism is welcome

Answer 1

You didn't specifically mention this, Chris, but as you directly ask about balance, I have to assume you've been thinking of this as, let's say, a mini-programme, one you might present as a competition short programme, or an audition?

Were I a judge, I think I would have difficulty with it, the way it stands now. I would be inclined, scanning the day's running order, as you do, to mark it mentally with 'TICP', i.e. 'these I can play', by which I mean that the combination of works do nothing for each other within the context of the programme. They don't illuminate each other in any way. They're not each an element in a greater musical argument you're seeking to put forward, or carefully judged foils to the main item. And that's what makes programming such a darn tricky business. :-/

Obviously, if you're due to present these in a matter of weeks time, then that is what you must do, but if there's time to rethink this, then I'd certainly consider doing that if I were you.

The corner stone of your programme is the Waldstein, without question. It's an excellent, if truly ambitious choice, for it shows at a stroke what you can do with a large architecture, with a sustained and complex musical argument, and there are not many elements of your technique not brutally exposed at one point or another. Know that it's just as much a pianistic 'giant killer' as, for example, the final three are, not to mention the Hammerklavier. This has to be the central work. The 'main course'.

To frame that 'in front', you really want something that enables you to shake yourself out, pianistically -- you certainly never want to have to start the Waldstein 'cold'! -- and something that teases your listeners' palates without overwhelming them -- you want them fresh as daisies for the Waldstein -- in which case I would suggest a very pure, fleet-of-foot Scarlatti sonata, perhaps the A-flat major Kk127, or even the B-flat minor Kk128, if you really want to create a strong tonal contrast with which to set the Waldstein's C major in stark relief. There are of course hundreds more to choose from... :-)

To close -- the Waldstein now done & dusted -- neither the Rachmaninoff nor the Liszt are really that wise. Both fare much better in every way when framed by their siblings in their respective cycles. Moreover, we really do need to have something extraordinary to say about them in order not to sound 'me too' when mounting these ever so well-ridden war horses, even more so presenting them one after the other like you proposed. Having performed them within their cycles many times, I would still think twice about presenting them in isolation, unless as a complete spur of the moment encore, of course.

I think I'd be inclined to suggest you offer something like Prokofieff's Toccata -- totally different sound world altogether, and a complete breath of fresh air in all respects -- or, perhaps, something French, maybe Ravel's Alborada del Gracioso? Both set some stiff demands, show off your capability to generate real power, as well as having to project real pianistic wit. If you're feeling really mischievous, take alook at Saint-Saens' Etude en forme de Valse op. 52, or -- a bit of a pocket battleship 'knuckle-breaker', but outrageous good fun to do -- his Allegro Appassionato op. 70.

What you probably could do, come to think of it, is use just one of your 'war horses' as a foil to follow the Waldstein, in which case the Rachmaninoff is probably the more likely to work for you, both as regards tonal contrast and contrast of expression, with the Waldstein itself as a whole setting the Prelude into sharper relief. That might even work quite well actually.

Well, that's my $0.02's worth... Hope something from it, at least, proves useful to you, and the very best of good luck!

Answer 2

I;d make absolutely certain not to put anything in which Beethoven did not spefdfically indicate in his Urtext vertsion of the work. If you have learned it from this edition and your techer has made this clear, you are in good shape. Howerver, there are a few editions which great interpretive pianists have expanded correctly on the urtext. The Peters edition is OK. I have personally found Shirmers editions fro Beethoven not accurate in terms of what correct pianistic interpretation would be. Do not put in rubato and ritardanos which not indicated. It is a huge error for Beethoven players.

Listen to Arthur Rubenstein, Barenboim, Alfred Brendel ( my favorite) , Alicia DeLaRocha versions to hear good performances. Maybe the old man Rudolf Serkin too.

The selections are diverse and interesting. Perhaps a Mozart work might have sufficed

La Campanella is a hugely virtuostic work requiring great technique. Careful to be extremely accurate. These critics are brutal.

Answer 3

For a standard concert program, you need something from the Baroque period. But , what exactly are you looking for? it's rather ridiculous to have anyone criticize your repertoire or playing without even hearing you play. All these pieces are technically difficult, but how are you playing them? I have a feeling your main purpose is to let people know how difficult these pieces can be.

Answer 4

first of all let me say that those are fabulous pieces. so rachmaninoff's music is from the romantic era and i think liszt is too while beethoven is from the classical era. i think u need maybe like a baroque piece (i.e. bach, handel,scarlatti). also i would reccomend including a chopin (he's my fave) but it cud be like one of his really pieces (theyre still very beautiful and expressive). hope this helped and gl w/ piano!!

xoxo

Answer 5

sounds like a toughie, but if you work hard and have faith that you can do it, you'll be fine