# Minuet by J.S. Bach Performed by Me



## Captainnumber36

I take some liberties on the dynamics, but hey, he didn't write it for piano anyway!


----------



## Captainnumber36

I'd love to hear thoughts, or links to other versions! 

Thanks.


----------



## ArtMusic

Wonderful, thank you for sharing.


----------



## Captainnumber36

ArtMusic said:


> Wonderful, thank you for sharing.


Thank you! Do you know of other versions I could listen to?


----------



## hpowders

You play well. However it is not a sarabande. It's a minuet.


----------



## Captainnumber36

hpowders said:


> You play well. However it is not a sarabande. It's a minuet.


Thanks, yes I changed it around.


----------



## Nevum

thats very nice!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Nevum said:


> thats very nice!


Thanks, I'm glad you liked it! I'm making Bach romantic. .


----------



## Pugg

Captainnumber36 said:


> Thanks, I'm glad you liked it! I'm making Bach romantic. .


You are a romantic, keep the good work going.


----------



## dzc4627

Congrats, you've managed to get Bach to sound like something from a "TOP 10 SAD PIANO SONGS" on youtube.


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> Congrats, you successfully made Bach sound like something from a "TOP 10 SAD PIANO SONGS" on youtube.


I'll take that as a compliment!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Pugg said:


> You are a romantic, keep the good work going.


Ya, I definitely am a romantic.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I found a more authentic version on youtube, and actually do honestly prefer my take on it. But, I am a romantic at heart! I also didn't honor the repeats in this version. I'll probably do that live though!


----------



## DaveM

It's nicely done. You've got some real talent there. It's okay to do a romantic take on Bach. Stokowski did it all the time.


----------



## Captainnumber36

DaveM said:


> It's nicely done. You've got some real talent there. It's okay to do a romantic take on Bach. Stokowski did it it all the time.


Thanks for the pat on the back, it keeps me motivated! I'll have to check out some Stokowski sometime!


----------



## Captainnumber36

I love how interesting Bach has composed in 3/4 in this tune. It doesn't stick to a rhythmic waltz like left hand part, and is really broken up between the right and left hand parts. Very intriguing and a magnificent result!


----------



## DaveM

Captainnumber36 said:


> Thanks for the pat on the back, it keeps me motivated! I'll have to check out some Stokowski sometime!


----------



## Captainnumber36

DaveM said:


>


Sounds amazing! Tell me a bit about it, is says Stokowski arranged this, what instrumentation is it originally for?


----------



## DaveM

Captainnumber36 said:


> Sounds amazing! Tell me a bit about it, is says Stokowski arranged this, what instrumentation is it originally for?


It's the orchestration of the 2nd movement (Chaconne) of Bach's Partita #2 for violin:


----------



## KenOC

DaveM said:


> It's the orchestration of the 2nd movement (Chaconne) of Bach's Partita #2 for violin:


Not the fifth movement?


----------



## DaveM

KenOC said:


> Not the fifth movement?


Oh drat! Yes 5th. My bad.


----------



## KenOC

Johannes Brahms on Bach's Chaconne for solo violin: "On one stave, for a small instrument, the man writes a whole world of the deepest thoughts and most powerful feelings. If I imagined that I could have created, even conceived the piece, I am quite certain that the excess of excitement and earth-shattering experience would have driven me out of my mind."


----------



## jailhouse

Cant listen. Im assuming itw the famous minuet in g. just as an fyi, its been incorrectly sttributed to bach. The actual composer is christian petzhold.


----------



## Captainnumber36

jailhouse said:


> Cant listen. Im assuming itw the famous minuet in g. just as an fyi, its been incorrectly sttributed to bach. The actual composer is christian petzhold.


It isn't. It's a different one!


----------



## Captainnumber36

But it looks like the one I have may also be by C. Petzhold. But on my sheet music it says JS Bach.


----------



## Mandryka

Captainnumber36 said:


> I take some liberties on the dynamics, but hey, he didn't write it for piano anyway!


Lifeless. The problem is the voice leading. It's as if you have us focus on melody rather than on the drama of the interaction of the parts.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Mandryka said:


> Lifeless. The problem is the voice leading. It's as if you have us focus on melody rather than on the drama of the interaction of the parts.


Thanks for listening. But I think the point you touch on is why someone may like it.


----------



## Captainnumber36

The left hand is taking a backseat as more of a bass line to support the melody rather than becoming a crucial part of the melody which is how I think it was intended to be played. But this is how I wanted to play it, and I do enjoy it this way, it becomes much more romantic than baroque.


----------



## dzc4627

Captainnumber36 said:


> Thanks for listening. But I think the point you touch on is why someone may like it.


But if you want to be a classical musician, you need to realize what Bach is doing in the piece and how to get the most out of it. By avoiding the contrapuntal drama of the piece, you are avoiding Bach.

There are plenty of great piano composers that wrote brilliant works which might be played more "romantically" (you aren't even playing romantically, just slow and heavily), but Bach isn't one of them. For those getting ready to type something along the lines of "SUBJECTIVITY IS GOD," save your breath.


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> But if you want to be a classical musician, you need to realize what Bach is doing in the piece and how to get the most out of it. By avoiding the contrapuntal drama of the piece, you are avoiding Bach.
> 
> There are plenty of great piano composers that wrote brilliant works which might be played more "romantically" (you aren't even playing romantically, just slow and heavily), but Bach isn't one of them. For those getting ready to type something along the lines of "SUBJECTIVITY IS GOD," save your breath.


I humbly disagree on all points.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I like the idea of disregarding the dynamic notations and finding my own way through the written notes. In this way, I make it me and fresh and becomes more of a cover than a replica of the original.

That's how I like to play pieces.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> The left hand is taking a backseat as more of a bass line to support the melody rather than becoming a crucial part of the melody which is how I think it was intended to be played. But this is how I wanted to play it, and I do enjoy it this way, it becomes much more romantic than baroque.


I think you should have said the piece was inspired by Bach's Minuet, or a reimagining. Or else people get infuriated and have all kinds of things to say :lol:


----------



## DaveM

Mandryka said:


> Lifeless. The problem is the voice leading. It's as if you have us focus on melody rather than on the drama of the interaction of the parts.


This work particularly lends itself to accentuating the melody. The counterpoint isn't pronounced and there isn't much potential for drama of interaction of the parts.


----------



## Mandryka

DaveM said:


> This work particularly lends itself to accentuating the melody. The counterpoint isn't pronounced and there isn't much potential for drama of interaction of the parts.


There's a lot more than you hear in the video in question, Michael Behringer is good in it,


----------



## premont

Mandryka said:


> There's a lot more than you hear in the video in question, Michael Behringer is good in it,


Or even here:






and here:






and here:


----------



## DaveM

I'm not sure what the point is in showing the performance of a prodigy. It's like I show my attempt at Beethoven!s Waldstein and then someone posts this:


----------



## premont

DaveM said:


> I'm not sure what the point is in showing the performance of a prodigy.


These were the versions of the minuet which were easiest to find and share for comparison. The piece is technically very easy, and I do not consider the three girls to be obvious prodigies, and if they were, this would not be interesting in this context. My point is that their interpretations are so much more articulate and musically natural than the OP's version. All three display how much "inner life" this little minuet harbours.


----------



## DaveM

premont said:


> These were the versions of the minuet which were easiest to find and share for comparison. The piece is technically very easy, and I do not consider the three girls to be obvious prodigies, and if they were, this would not be interesting in this context. My point is that their interpretations are so much more articulate and musically natural than the OP's version. All three display how much "inner life" this little minuet harbours.


I never understand why someone can post a performance that shows talent and ingenuity, only to have it treated like it's an entry into a piano competition.


----------



## premont

DaveM said:


> I never understand why someone can post a performance that shows talent and ingenuity, only to have it treated like it's an entry into a piano competition.


Sorry, I think the OP's performance is rather inarticulate, so I posted some examples to illustrate my view.

Remember he asked for comments.



Captainnumber36 said:


> I'd love to hear thoughts, or links to other versions!
> 
> Thanks.


----------



## Captainnumber36

premont said:


> Sorry, I think the OP's performance is rather inarticulate, so I posted some examples to illustrate my view.
> 
> Remember he asked for comments.


It's ok, I like that some people don't like it. It's inevitable and makes me stronger to hear the remarks! I do like how I treated the piece though, i'm proud of it and stand by it!


----------



## Captainnumber36

premont said:


> Or even here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and here:


I listened to this and feel that way of playing it would sound better on a harpsichord or by glenn gould on the piano.


----------



## dzc4627

DaveM said:


> I never understand why someone can post a performance that shows talent and ingenuity, only to have it treated like it's an entry into a piano competition.


Talent and ingenuity? Please, he played a Minuet at .50000x speed.


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> Talent and ingenuity? Please, he played a Minuet at .50000x speed.


It's pretty..


----------



## premont

Captainnumber36 said:


> I listened to this and feel that way of playing it would sound better on a harpsichord or by glenn gould on the piano.


Yes, I agree. The best instrument might be clavichord, considering the intimacy of the piece..


----------



## Captainnumber36

I do have a harpsichord sound on my keyboard...just saying!


----------



## DaveM

dzc4627 said:


> Talent and ingenuity? Please, he played a Minuet at .50000x speed.


So who are you? Trifonov?


----------



## Captainnumber36

DaveM said:


> So who are you? Trifonov?


Thanks for your support and appreciation, it means a lot to me.


----------



## quietfire

DaveM said:


> So who are you? Trifonov?


Actually he is....................


----------



## Captainnumber36

quietfire said:


> Actually he is....................


Trifonov romanticized mozart's fantasia in d...so he would support this.


----------



## quietfire

Captainnumber36 said:


> Trifonov romanticized mozart's fantasia in d...so he would support this.


Mind-reader _and _an electronic piano player. Bravo.


----------



## Captainnumber36

quietfire said:


> Mind-reader _and _an electronic piano player. Bravo.


I have an upright baldwin that I've had since I was 3 and took lessons on. But I don't have a proper mic to get as good as sound as I can with my keyboard!


----------



## quietfire

Captainnumber36 said:


> I have an upright baldwin that I've had since I was 3 and took lessons on. But I don't have a proper mic to get as good as sound as I can with my keyboard!


By the way, my dad told me to remind you are two months late in rent. Might want to sell some stuff.


----------



## Captainnumber36

quietfire said:


> By the way, my dad told me to remind you are two months late in rent. Might want to sell some stuff.


So your advice is to give up? Are you so offended by change and a fresh approach that you would advise someone to stop doing what they love? Surely I have played well, at least by my standard, but it just isn't to your taste.


----------



## dzc4627

DaveM said:


> So who are you? Trifonov?


You found me! Alas... you must have known it was me, for any who criticize must themselves be geniuses of the craft. I'm sure someone like yourself has never levied criticism on another, without being a professional. Right?


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> You found me! Alas... you must have known it was me, for any who criticize must themselves be geniuses of the craft. I'm sure someone like yourself has never levied criticism on another, without being a professional. Right?


There is a way to state opinions in a mature and intelligible way. You are not doing this, at all and it makes it harder to take your thoughts to heart. I tend to take condescending statements as a form of insecurity.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> I found a more authentic version on youtube, and actually do honestly prefer my take on it. But, I am a romantic at heart! I also didn't honor the repeats in this version. I'll probably do that live though!


It is ok to romanticize a piece, but my opinion is what you did is more like what I said earlier, turning it into a reimagining, being a very big departure in tempo and character, since it was marked Allegretto. It's no longer a classical piece, but closer to a pop version like what Richard Clayderman does to some classics, nothing wrong with that. But when you prefer your version over a more authentic version, then it becomes your reimagining over Bach's intended piece. Just something to think about.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> It is ok to romanticize a piece, but my opinion is what you did is more like what I said earlier, turning it into a reimagining, being a very big departure in tempo and character, since it was marked Allegretto. It's no longer a classical piece, but closer to a pop version like what Richard Clayderman does to some classics, nothing wrong with that. But when you prefer your version over a more authentic version, then it becomes your reimagining over Bach's intended piece. Just something to think about.


I agree, definitely.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I don't really like Richard Clayderman, though. I'm also not sure I wouldn't call it classical music, but that is the only part of your argument I am not sold on.


----------



## Captainnumber36

But yes, even though I don't like what I heard by Clayderman, I do think my style is closer to his than classical, but perhaps less of the "forced beauty" I feel in his work.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> But yes, even though I don't like what I heard by Clayderman, I do think my style is closer to his than classical, but perhaps less of the "forced beauty" I feel in his work.


Clayderman is probably in a lot of people's minds not a classical artist, as he plays a lot of other poppish stuff, and is more of a crossover guy. He makes Lang Lang sound like Hofmann.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Clayderman is probably in a lot of people's minds not a classical artist, as he plays a lot of other poppish stuff, and is more of a crossover guy. He makes Lang Lang sound like Hofmann.


Lang Lang has his moments, but really, I see my stuff as pop classical. Which is fine, and I'm proud of it, but it's much more emotionally moving than this Clayderman guy, at least in my opinion. I really don't like him, at all.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Lang Lang has his moments, but really, I see my stuff as pop classical. Which is fine, and I'm proud of it, but it's much more emotionally moving than this Clayderman guy, at least in my opinion. I really don't like him, at all.


It's a bit harder for the listener to hear emotion through an electronic keyboard over an acoustic piano.


----------



## DaveM

In 1955 Glenn Gould recorded the opening Aria of the Goldberg Variations at a fairly fast tempo. In 1982, he recorded the Aria at one of the slowest tempos ever. Just sayin'.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> It's a bit harder for the listener to hear emotion through an electronic keyboard over an acoustic piano.


Agreed, but I'm working with what I have. I've always wanted a "portable piano" to play shows with, and it has pretty good sound and action, it's not too bad, but certainly doesn't replace the original. But, I think you can pick up on my dynamic approach well enough here and get the main gist.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I see myself much more like this composer: This is beautiful, but certainly a bit poppier.


----------



## KenOC

Beethoven suggested to his pupil, Archduke Rudolph, that he keep a small "practice piano" by his bedside to play passages that might occur to him after he went to bed. I suspect Ludwig would have been quite happy with an electronic keyboard for this! In fact, many MIDI keyboards are far better than the best pianos Beethoven had to play in his day, even in performance.


----------



## Captainnumber36

KenOC said:


> Beethoven suggested to his pupil, Archduke Rudolph, that he keep a small "practice piano" by his bedside to play passages that might occur to him after he went to bed. I suspect Ludwig would have been quite happy with an electronic keyboard for this! In fact, many MIDI keyboards are far better than the best pianos Beethoven had to play in his day, even in performance.


Ever seen Bill and Ted's Excellent adventures? :lol:


----------



## Captainnumber36




----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> I see myself much more like this composer: This is beautiful, but certainly a bit poppier.


That made me cringe. It is not Classical at all, but pure pop. The right hand plays a corny melody, and the left hand accompanies with chords. No development.


----------



## Phil loves classical

DaveM said:


> In 1955 Glenn Gould recorded the opening Aria of the Goldberg Variations at a fairly fast tempo. In 1982, he recorded the Aria at one of the slowest tempos ever. Just sayin'.


Yes, you can play around with the tempi up to a certain point.


----------



## quietfire

Phil loves classical said:


> That made me cringe. It is not Classical at all, but pure pop. The right hand plays a corny melody, and the left hand accompanies with chords. No development.


Yeah, it is total garbage. That is why the pianist was in tears, lol.


----------



## Phil loves classical

quietfire said:


> Yeah, it is total garbage. That is why the pianist was in tears, lol.


I had to make up piano-only version to some poppish song before. The way I was able to avoid running and screaming was to hide the melody into arpeggios instead of making it sing too much.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> That made me cringe. It is not Classical at all, but pure pop. The right hand plays a corny melody, and the left hand accompanies with chords. No development.


I love this piece, I have no problem with others disliking it or me b/c it does something for me. :tiphat:


----------



## DaveM

That piece was written and played by a blind pianist who tied for the gold medal in the 2009 Van Cliburn Competition. It was an Elegy in memory of the 15,000 people who died in the 2011 Japanese Tsunami. Sometimes context determines the nature of a piece. Do you think the Japanese audience at the time wanted to hear major development of a theme? And maybe a simple, easily accessible touching melody was more appropriate for the people, many of whom might have no Classical music experience, but did have the act of mourning in common.

Yes, it is perhaps more in the category of a 'popular' offshoot of classical that was more prevalent 2 to 4 decades ago (think Mr. Holland 's Opus type of thing) but IMO it's more Classical than some of the *#%* that's perpetrated as Classical these days.


----------



## Phil loves classical

DaveM said:


> That piece was written and played by a blind pianist who tied for the gold medal in the 2009 Van Cliburn Competition. It was an Elegy in memory of the 15,000 people who died in the 2011 Japanese Tsunami. Sometimes context determines the nature of a piece. Do you think the Japanese audience at the time wanted to hear major development of a theme? And maybe a simple, easily accessible touching melody was more appropriate for the people, many of whom might have no Classical music experience, but did have the act of mourning in common.
> 
> Yes, it is perhaps more in the category of a 'popular' offshoot of classical that was more prevalent 2 to 4 decades ago (think Mr. Holland 's Opus type of thing) but IMO it's more Classical than some of the *#%* that's perpetrated as Classical these days.


Oops, did not know the context. I see it now at the beginning.  In this case, I think art can take a back seat.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Captainnumber36 said:


> It's ok, I like that some people don't like it. It's inevitable and makes me stronger to hear the remarks! I do like how I treated the piece though, i'm proud of it and stand by it!


I think that is wonderful - you will always have someone who likes the way you play.


----------



## Captainnumber36

stomanek said:


> I think that is wonderful - you will always have someone who likes the way you play.


Thanks!


----------



## dzc4627

Captainnumber36 said:


> There is a way to state opinions in a mature and intelligible way. You are not doing this, at all and it makes it harder to take your thoughts to heart. I tend to take condescending statements as a form of insecurity.


"So who are you? Trifonov?" is quite the sarcastic statement, which is what I was responding to. I was saying that one does not need to be a professional pianist to criticize someone playing piano.

I've totally expressed my opinions in a mature and intelligible way, but you have just said "I humbly disagree," so I don't know what you are talking about there.

Telling me that I am insecure is quite the condescending statement, which you have just made. However, if you'd like, you can keep believing that I am intimidated by your romantic Bach prowess and we can be on our way.


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> "So who are you? Trifonov?" is quite the sarcastic statement, which is what I was responding to. I was saying that one does not need to be a professional pianist to criticize someone playing piano.
> 
> I've totally expressed my opinions in a mature and intelligible way, but you have just said "I humbly disagree," so I don't know what you are talking about there.
> 
> Telling me that I am insecure is quite the condescending statement, which you have just made. However, if you'd like, you can keep believing that I am intimidated by your romantic Bach prowess and we can be on our way.


Your first statement was something along the lines of a very sarcastic statement saying my take was similar to something likely to be found on a youtube list of top 10 sad piano songs and is the epitome of being condescending, immature, unrefined, and anti-intellectual. It's quite the remark of a bully. I'm not saying you are intimidated of my playing, but I do believe bullies are insecure in general.


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> "So who are you? Trifonov?" is quite the sarcastic statement, which is what I was responding to. I was saying that one does not need to be a professional pianist to criticize someone playing piano.
> 
> I've totally expressed my opinions in a mature and intelligible way, but you have just said "I humbly disagree," so I don't know what you are talking about there.
> 
> Telling me that I am insecure is quite the condescending statement, which you have just made. However, if you'd like, you can keep believing that I am intimidated by your romantic Bach prowess and we can be on our way.


DaveM was only reacting to your initial sarcasm. He stated quite eloquently his opinion on the take. Phillovesclassical also stated mostly eloquent statements that were against my take, and I respected his views.


----------



## quietfire

Captainnumber36 said:


> Your first statement was something along the lines of a very sarcastic statement saying my take was similar to something likely to be found on a youtube list of top 10 sad piano songs and is the epitome of being condescending, immature, unrefined, and anti-intellectual. It's quite the remark of a bully. I'm not saying you are intimidated of my playing, but I do believe bullies are insecure in general.


You know that a very effective way to deal with bullies is to just ignore and not respond to them right?

That is the case if there were any bullies involved.

I feel like the more accurate picture here is that you are an attention seeker and is trying to put this thread on top every single minute when this thread is no longer about your playing, and more about why you are not only accepting (totally undeserved and overrated, in my opinion) praise.


----------



## Captainnumber36

quietfire said:


> You know that a very effective way to deal with bullies is to just ignore and not respond to them right?
> 
> That is the case if there were any bullies involved.
> 
> I feel like the more accurate picture here is that you are an attention seeker and is trying to put this thread on top every single minute when this thread is no longer about your playing, and more about why you are not only accepting (totally undeserved and overrated, in my opinion) praise.


I certainly feel a bully and aggressive nature about you and dzc and there is validity to that. I definitely am not simply toping for the sake of it, definitely not.


----------



## Phil loves classical

It's ok Capt'n. They're just messing with you. Don't take it personal. I think it's been established you were drastically deviating from the tempo of the original, but you can really do anything you like to the piece. There are always purists or more conservative listeners that get upset when music doesn't get done a certain way.


----------



## quietfire

Captainnumber36 said:


> I certainly feel a bully and aggressive nature about you and dzc and there is validity to that. I definitely am not simply toping for the sake of it, definitely not.


The fact that you put your recording in the main, most popular subforum, instead of the more appropriate "Recorded Music and Publications" already shows that this is inherently an attention-seeking post.

In fact, I feel like this is a common theme among posters here too: habitually attention-seeking posts, with seemingly robotic one-after-the-other posts, that have absolutely no discussive value other than to add another count to their post count.


----------



## DaveM

quietfire said:


> The fact that you put your recording in the main, most popular subforum, instead of the more appropriate "Recorded Music and Publications" already shows that this is inherently an attention-seeking post.
> 
> In fact, I feel like this is a common theme among posters here too: habitually attention-seeking posts, with seemingly robotic one-after-the-other posts, that have absolutely no discussive value other than to add another count to their post count.


So what's so discussive about your post?


----------



## quietfire

DaveM said:


> So what's so discussive about your post?


To point out the fact that a lot of threads started including this one, and many posts aren't.

Edit: admin agrees, thread moved.


----------



## mmsbls

Let's please confine your comments to the music rather than other members (unless unambiguously positive).


----------



## Captainnumber36

quietfire said:


> To point out the fact that a lot of threads started including this one, and many posts aren't.
> 
> Edit: admin agrees, thread moved.


In the end I'm glad you told me you didn't like it, it makes me stronger b/c inevitably some will not like it, as I said before.


----------



## quietfire

mmsbls said:


> Let's please confine your comments to the music rather than other members (unless unambiguously positive).


The music, i.e. the composition is fine, but the interpretation is inevitably tied to the musician, so with your restriction I believe there will be not much to comment then.


----------



## Bettina

Nice interpretation, Captainnumber36. I've taught this piece many times - it's a staple of the early intermediate piano repertoire - and over the years I've gotten tired of it. Your interpretation has helped me to hear this minuet with fresh ears, and to renew my interest in it. Thanks for that, Captainnumber36! Anything that breathes new life into the standard repertoire is a good thing in my opinion.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Bettina said:


> Nice interpretation, Captainnumber36. I've taught this piece many times - it's a staple of the early intermediate piano repertoire - and over the years I've gotten tired of it. Your interpretation has helped me to hear this minuet with fresh ears, and to renew my interest in it. Thanks for that, Captainnumber36! Anything that breathes new life into the standard repertoire is a good thing in my opinion.


Thank you so much Bettina!


----------



## dzc4627

Captainnumber36 said:


> Your first statement was something along the lines of a very sarcastic statement saying my take was similar to something likely to be found on a youtube list of top 10 sad piano songs and is the epitome of being condescending, immature, unrefined, and anti-intellectual. It's quite the remark of a bully. I'm not saying you are intimidated of my playing, but I do believe bullies are insecure in general.


You're right, I found the interpretation poor so I made a little joke. However, you've stated that you consider yourself "pop classical" in which case my TOP 10 comment should be pleasing to you.

"The epitome of being condescending, immature, unrefined, and anti-intellectual" is an incredible basket of adjectives which for the most part mean nothing in this context and are way overblown. I further elaborated on why I thought your playing was bad, eloquently if you will.

We all have our insecurities, but be assured that mine have nothing to do with me criticizing your Bach interpretation. I apologize mods if this is off topic, but I needed to respond.


----------



## Pugg

Captainnumber36 said:


> In the end I'm glad you told me you didn't like it, it makes me stronger b/c inevitably some will not like it, as I said before.


I hope we see some more soon.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Pugg said:


> I hope we see some more soon.


Thank you Pugg! I'm trying to think of what I should attempt next, this was my first attempt at sight-reading in several years, I want to do more!

I have the sheet music for Moonlight Sonata first movement, but feel that's just too cliche.

I have been wanting to do Mozart's Fantasia in D Minor in a similar manner as Trifinov does it and really make it my own.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Glenn Gould has my favorite version of Rondo Alla Truka, and boy did he change it drastically from the original. Overall, I really enjoy his takes on Mozart's sonatas...very unique and enjoyable.

I like Lilly Krauss' set for a more authentic take on Mozart. I need to grab hold of both of those!


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> You're right, I found the interpretation poor so I made a little joke. However, you've stated that you consider yourself "pop classical" in which case my TOP 10 comment should be pleasing to you.
> 
> "The epitome of being condescending, immature, unrefined, and anti-intellectual" is an incredible basket of adjectives which for the most part mean nothing in this context and are way overblown. I further elaborated on why I thought your playing was bad, eloquently if you will.
> 
> We all have our insecurities, but be assured that mine have nothing to do with me criticizing your Bach interpretation. I apologize mods if this is off topic, but I needed to respond.


And I responded "I'll take that as a compliment" but that doesn't take away your motivations and intentions with the post, which was to be rude.

I didn't even think for a second you were intimidated by my playing, but you took a very aggressive approach in your retorts. It's just not very classy to speak in this way, letting our emotions override our civility.

So you don't like my version, that's ok, you don't have to make rude and hurtful assertions about it.


----------



## dzc4627

Captainnumber36 said:


> Thank you Pugg! I'm trying to think of what I should attempt next, this was my first attempt at sight-reading in several years, I want to do more!
> 
> I have the sheet music for Moonlight Sonata first movement, but feel that's just too cliche.
> 
> I have been wanting to do Mozart's Fantasia in D Minor in a similar manner as Trifinov does it and really make it my own.


Try Erwin Schulhoff's "In Futurum." It's the 3rd movement from his composition "5 Pittoresken." The tempo is really flexible.


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> Try Erwin Schulhoff's "In Futurum." It's the 3rd movement from his composition "5 Pittoresken." The tempo is really flexible.


I'll take a listen.


----------



## PlaySalieri

I think you armchair critics should lighten up - when an amateur musician posts a performance on TC you either say nice things or not at all. 

Now if a conservatoire student wanted some evaluation before an exam - that would be another matter.


----------



## Captainnumber36

stomanek said:


> I think you armchair critics should lighten up - when an amateur musician posts a performance on TC you either say nice things or not at all.
> 
> Now if a conservatoire student wanted some evaluation before an exam - that would be another matter.


I like good criticism, but told in a constructive manner. I certainly don't want to be seen as amateur, but definitely some always will. Some think Lang Lang is amateur, but sometimes he is great imo!

Just putting it out there, I certainly want to be taken seriously, but naturally and genuinely. And I acknowledge that with great appreciation comes great disapproval, it's how it will always be.


----------



## Captainnumber36

In fact, I think that this rendition caused quite a stir and mixed reactions is a good sign.

I'm trying to express myself through another composer's work and make it my own, much in the way rock and roll "covers" are done. They aren't replicas of the original, but rather, highly personalized takes that are complete re-imaginings of the original. (Hendrix's Watchtower is a great example).


----------



## Phil loves classical

Hey Capt'n, i asked if you were self-taught on another thread, because if you went to a Conservatory like the one I went to, they would beat you for taking those kinds of liberties. I see you want to be taken seriously, and fully admire that. You already acheived what you wanted with doing a reimagining. But to be respected as a Classical performer, I think you need to appreciate the value in restraint. There is art in subtlety, and if you can stick closer to the form but still be original in interpretation is a much higher achievement than just being more radically different.

I already complained of modern pianists trying to stretch the music, and losing the magic and communication like in the old days. Arrau was the last of the old school pianists that came down from the generations of tradition that was passed down in schools from the composers themselves. I find Kovacevich is a very imaginative modern pianist that still was able to stick to the tradition and play the rules. Listen to his Mozart and Berthoven.


----------



## Myriadi

I don't understand the OP's comments on "romanticizing" the minuet. I think there's nothing particularly romantic in playing slowly, or accentuating the top line. A romantic reading, in my view, would be one with a lot of subtle rubato, a sudden pause after a period is over, dynamics going hand in hand with the harmonic motion. It could get to forte in first beat of the fourth bar, for instance, and suddenly drop to mezzo piano for the bass part in the same bar. A heart yearning, longing for something, or someone, the pain of separation and the bliss of togetherness, dreams and feelings in full bloom and on display, the artist's spirit soaring to the skies, their emotions and ephemeral visions almost palpable... That sort of thing. All I'm hearing in the OP's version is sentimentality and a desire to play slowly to show how pretty the melody is in their opinion.

I'd also side with Mandryka in saying that there's more counterpoint here than meets the eye. Even if it's probably a Petzold piece, or by someone else from Bach's circle, people were so used to contrapuntal thinking back then. Here's a version from Youtube which is a bit sloppy, but I think the player very clearly understands how the parts interact:


----------



## Phil loves classical

Any more comments in Round 1? :lol:


----------



## PlaySalieri

Captainnumber36 said:


> In fact, I think that this rendition caused quite a stir and mixed reactions is a good sign.
> 
> *I'm trying to express myself through another composer's work and make it my own*, much in the way rock and roll "covers" are done. They aren't replicas of the original, but rather, highly personalized takes that are complete re-imaginings of the original. (Hendrix's Watchtower is a great example).


That's fine. It means effectively you can do whatever you want with the piece and be judged on that basis. So saying - you dont understand the counterpoint in this piece - is clearly not a valid criticicism.


----------



## dzc4627

Myriadi said:


> I don't understand the OP's comments on "romanticizing" the minuet. I think there's nothing particularly romantic in playing slowly, or accentuating the top line. A romantic reading, in my view, would be one with a lot of subtle rubato, a sudden pause after a period is over, dynamics going hand in hand with the harmonic motion. It could get to forte in first beat of the fourth bar, for instance, and suddenly drop to mezzo piano for the bass part in the same bar. A heart yearning, longing for something, or someone, the pain of separation and the bliss of togetherness, dreams and feelings in full bloom and on display, the artist's spirit soaring to the skies, their emotions and ephemeral visions almost palpable... That sort of thing. All I'm hearing in the OP's version is sentimentality and a desire to play slowly to show how pretty the melody is in their opinion.
> 
> I'd also side with Mandryka in saying that there's more counterpoint here than meets the eye. Even if it's probably a Petzold piece, or by someone else from Bach's circle, people were so used to contrapuntal thinking back then. Here's a version from Youtube which is a bit sloppy, but I think the player very clearly understands how the parts interact:


I couldn't agree more. If our friend doesn't take_ this_ "to heart," I don't know what he will.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Captainnumber36 said:


> I like good criticism, but told in a constructive manner. I certainly don't want to be seen as amateur, but definitely some always will. Some think Lang Lang is amateur, but sometimes he is great imo!
> 
> Just putting it out there, I certainly want to be taken seriously, but naturally and genuinely. And I acknowledge that with great appreciation comes great disapproval, it's how it will always be.


If you want to be taken seriously - you should first prove before the board that you can play Bach.


----------



## dzc4627

Some, many even, dislike the way Lang Lang plays.

_None_ question his above-amateur technical ability... to say they do is a ridiculous assertion for sure.


----------



## PlaySalieri

dzc4627 said:


> Some, many even, dislike the way Lang Lang plays.
> 
> _None_ question his above-amateur technical ability... to say they do is a ridiculous assertion for sure.


He does have virtuoso technique - that is not in question. And he is probably the highest earning concert pianist. I certainly dont think any serious listener would say he is an amateur. He deserves his success - I understand he practiced 8 hours a day (and probably still does) from 6 y/o with a strict father towering above him.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alright, here is a more authentic take on the tune. See what you think, it still has a bit of me in there!


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Alright, here is a more authentic take on the tune. See what you think, it still has a bit of me in there!


Much better Capt'n. How do feel? You like it more that way?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Much better Capt'n. How do feel? You like it more that way?


Thanks, glad you liked it and I could show a more authentic version. But, I actually don't like it as much this way. It doesn't have as much me in there! I've always gravitated towards slower tempos, it's where I shine the best. I just did this to show I can do a more authentic take on it!

I'll be taking this version down after all the purists in this thread have had a chance to hear it and evaluate.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Myriadi said:


> I don't understand the OP's comments on "romanticizing" the minuet. I think there's nothing particularly romantic in playing slowly, or accentuating the top line. A romantic reading, in my view, would be one with a lot of subtle rubato, a sudden pause after a period is over, dynamics going hand in hand with the harmonic motion. It could get to forte in first beat of the fourth bar, for instance, and suddenly drop to mezzo piano for the bass part in the same bar. A heart yearning, longing for something, or someone, the pain of separation and the bliss of togetherness, dreams and feelings in full bloom and on display, the artist's spirit soaring to the skies, their emotions and ephemeral visions almost palpable... That sort of thing. All I'm hearing in the OP's version is sentimentality and a desire to play slowly to show how pretty the melody is in their opinion.
> 
> I'd also side with Mandryka in saying that there's more counterpoint here than meets the eye. Even if it's probably a Petzold piece, or by someone else from Bach's circle, people were so used to contrapuntal thinking back then. Here's a version from Youtube which is a bit sloppy, but I think the player very clearly understands how the parts interact:


Perhaps it isn't romantic in the sense of being reminiscent of techniques utilized in the era, but my version certainly sounds more lush and lovely which are associated with romantic modern music. I agree I have more focused on accentuating the melody and slowing down the tempo rather than making it a piece of the romantic era.

I do like what I did to it though, in fact I love it!


----------



## Captainnumber36

I just printed out the music for Mozart's Fantasia in D Minor, it'll be a good challenge with some of the presto runs in the piece. Very excited about this!


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Thanks, glad you liked it and I could show a more authentic version. But, I actually don't like it as much this way. It doesn't have as much me in there! I've always gravitated towards slower tempos, it's where I shine the best. I just did this to show I can do a more authentic take on it!
> 
> I'll be taking this version down after all the purists in this thread have had a chance to hear it and evaluate.


I figured you probably didn't, it may take time. I used to like pounding pieces hard and fast, it felt good to me that way and wanted to hear it that way, but eventually came to like the more conservative approach.


----------



## Pugg

Captainnumber36 said:


> Alright, here is a more authentic take on the tune. See what you think, it still has a bit of me in there!


This video is not available in your area .....


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I figured you probably didn't, it may take time. I used to like pounding pieces hard and fast, it felt good to me that way and wanted to hear it that way, but eventually came to like the more conservative approach.


Perhaps!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Pugg said:


> This video is not available in your area .....


Here you go, but I'll be taking it back down again, I'm not as proud of it:


----------



## premont

Captainnumber36 said:


> Here you go, but I'll be taking it back down again, I'm not as proud of it:


The video is still unavailable in my area.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I'll put it up one last time for a bit.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Perhaps it isn't romantic in the sense of being reminiscent of techniques utilized in the era, but my version certainly sounds more lush and lovely which are associated with romantic modern music. I agree I have more focused on accentuating the melody and slowing down the tempo rather than making it a piece of the romantic era.
> 
> I do like what I did to it though, in fact I love it!


Myriadi has some very good points. You can explore other ways of expression without slowing the tempo down too much. Tempo is relative, but within the same tempo and without changing the overall character, you can add some rubato. Lush isn't quite the word I would use for slow. But at least I hear Bach more in the 2nd version.


----------



## dzc4627

Captainnumber36 said:


> I'll put it up one last time for a bit.


Sounds so much better and less corny/cheesy. The music can actually be _heard_ in this one. Good job.


----------



## Pugg

I agree with dzc4627, for what it's worth.


----------



## Captainnumber36

dzc4627 said:


> Sounds so much better and less corny/cheesy. The music can actually be _heard_ in this one. Good job.


Thanks!


----------



## premont

Captainnumber36 said:


> I'll put it up one last time for a bit.


Much better. Now you play in tempo di menuetto as you should, and the interplay between the two hands is more obvious. In parts of the piece the articulation seems more considered, but there are still parts with inarticulate standard legato.


----------



## Captainnumber36

premont said:


> Much better. Now you play in tempo di menuetto as you should, and the interplay between the two hands is more obvious. In parts of the piece the articulation seems more considered, but there are still parts with inarticulate standard legato.


And I know exactly what parts they are! I forgot to change those parts and only realized it after I posted it, but now you all know I can play it "correctly", or I hope! :lol::tiphat:


----------



## premont

Captainnumber36 said:


> And I know exactly what parts they are! I forgot to change those parts and only realized it after I posted it, but now you all know I can play it "correctly", or I hope! :lol::tiphat:


Yes, now we know. But I think the word "informed" fits better than the word "correctly".


----------



## Captainnumber36

premont said:


> Yes, now we know. But I think the word "informed" fits better than the word "correctly".


"HIP" . lol!


----------



## Phil loves classical

Goes to show a more individual performance may not necessarily be better. The performer is only a channel, and let the music do the talking. Of course there is a bit of room to tweak a few things, but shouldn't drastically change the character of the piece, or it becomes a totally different piece of music. I used to find Horowitz dull, but later appreciated he let the music do the talking.

In Debussy's Claire de Lune, there is already a lot of improvisation written into the sheet music already. I heard that one pianist once asked Debussy if he should play it freely, Debussy looked down at the carpet and was thinking that was the last time that pianist will set foot on it :lol:


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Goes to show a more individual performance may not necessarily be better. The performer is only a channel, and let the music do the talking. Of course there is a bit of room to tweak a few things, but shouldn't drastically change the character of the piece, or it becomes a totally different piece of music. I used to find Horowitz dull, but later appreciated he let the music do the talking.
> 
> In Debussy's Claire de Lune, there is already a lot of improvisation written into the sheet music already. I heard that one pianist once asked Debussy if he should play it freely, Debussy looked down at the carpet and was thinking that was the last time that pianist will set foot on it :lol:


It's really quite interesting, I couldn't stand my second version, I hated the way I sounded on it. I really do much prefer my first one, and have taken down the second one and kept the first version.

Some people may prefer authenticity, but some may like the individuality, Gould would't have a job if people weren't open to drastically changing the piece of music.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> It's really quite interesting, I couldn't stand my second version, I hated the way I sounded on it. I really do much prefer my first one, and have taken down the second one and kept the first version.
> 
> Some people may prefer authenticity, but some may like the individuality, Gould would't have a job if people weren't open to drastically changing the piece of music.


Yes, but Gould didn't turn a minuet into a slow aria. And there was great nuance in his slow pieces. Slow doesn't necessarily mean greater nuance.


----------



## dzc4627

premont said:


> Much better. Now you play in tempo di menuetto as you should, and the interplay between the two hands is more obvious. In parts of the piece the articulation seems more considered, but there are still parts with inarticulate standard legato.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Yes, but Gould didn't turn a minuet into a slow aria. And there was great nuance in his slow pieces. Slow doesn't necessarily mean greater nuance.


No, but perhaps largo brings out more nuance in my playing.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Yes, but Gould didn't turn a minuet into a slow aria. And there was great nuance in his slow pieces. Slow doesn't necessarily mean greater nuance.


I think making the first movement of moonlight presto is quite the change.


----------



## Captainnumber36

He also completely changed the character of Mozart's Rondo Alla Turka.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> He also completely changed the character of Mozart's Rondo Alla Turka.


How bout making a recording of a fast piece next time?


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> No, but perhaps largo brings out more nuance in my playing.


I agree. When you played the Minuet at more of the proper speed you did seem to put less into it in a way. Can you play it the proper speed and have more nuance?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I agree. When you played the Minuet at more of the proper speed you did seem to put less into it in a way. Can you play it the proper speed and have more nuance?


I Probably could, but I'd have to try a bit harder at it, right now I naturally gravitate towards slower tempos, it comes very naturally to me. I'm not sure if that is innate, or just nurture through my upbringing as a pianist, but I can say confidently I naturally play better slower.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> I Probably could, but I'd have to try a bit harder at it, right now I naturally gravitate towards slower tempos, it comes very naturally to me. I'm not sure if that is innate, or just nurture through my upbringing as a pianist, but I can say confidently I naturally play better slower.


I understand what you mean. I naturally play faster than the correct speed. It is a speed I feel comfortable with, get the feel at, and can branch out from. Then I adjust my speed afterwards while keeping everything in the same place relatively, but slower. You may be the opposite.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I understand what you mean. I naturally play faster than the correct speed. It is a speed I feel comfortable with, get the feel at, and can branch out from. Then I adjust my speed afterwards while keeping everything in the same place relatively, but slower. You may be the opposite.


Now that I think about it, when I was playing in rock bands, I went through a period where I was playing everything fast, I couldn't get my heart set on the tempo to utilize. I went back and forth between all sorts of tempos! Then I realized, all through piano lessons, I always excelled at the slower movements and is where I shined the best. The first person I ever played music with, a drummer, told me all this herbie funk stuff I was doing a lot of wasn't nearly as good as the chopin/debussy influenced music I was making.

So I don't know, I can play fast and articulate too. Maybe I'll post one of my originals that I used to play faster and show you my skills at faster tempos.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Here I am playing an original titled "Mellow D" at a faster tempo than I usually take it these days. See what you think of the nuance in the playing:


----------



## quietfire

stomanek said:


> If you want to be taken seriously - you should first prove before the board that you can play Bach.


You can scrap the last word in that sentence.


----------



## quietfire

stomanek said:


> I think you armchair critics should lighten up - when an amateur musician posts a performance on TC you either say nice things or not at all.
> 
> Now if a conservatoire student wanted some evaluation before an exam - that would be another matter.


Amateurs should not post at all then.


----------



## PlaySalieri

quietfire said:


> Amateurs should not post at all then.


maybe. I would have thought rather than posting on a classical music forum - better to arrange a concert. of course - you might be playing to an empty hall.
most musicians want to be heard - they want to know how well they play.

until you get into the serious world of music - you will never know how well you can play. even top level teachers wont tell you.

but enter a serious level piano competition - and you will find out! see if you can get past the first round. or if it's a one round competition - see where you finish. Then you will see.


----------



## Pugg

quietfire said:


> Amateurs should not post at all then.


How rude ............................


----------



## Captainnumber36

stomanek said:


> maybe. I would have thought rather than posting on a classical music forum - better to arrange a concert. of course - you might be playing to an empty hall.
> most musicians want to be heard - they want to know how well they play.
> 
> until you get into the serious world of music - you will never know how well you can play. even top level teachers wont tell you.
> 
> but enter a serious level piano competition - and you will find out! see if you can get past the first round. or if it's a one round competition - see where you finish. Then you will see.


I won first place in a concerto competition. The reward was playing the piece with a quartet on tv.

Not that I agree competitions are what dictate value. Fans are what dictate value. Period.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Pugg said:


> How rude ............................


Some people think they have it all figured out and know what others SHOULD be listening to and what IS good.


----------



## Tchaikov6

Captainnumber36 said:


> I won first place in a concerto competition. The reward was playing the piece with a quartet on tv.
> 
> Not that I agree competitions are what dictate value. Fans are what dictate value. Period.


Which concerto, just wondering?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Tchaikov6 said:


> Which concerto, just wondering?


It was modern, I know Alexander was part of the composers name, but I'm not sure if that was the first or last name.


----------



## laurie

Captainnumber36 said:


> It was modern, I know Alexander was part of the composers name, but I'm not sure if that was the first or last name.


You don't rememder what you played?


----------



## Captainnumber36

laurie said:


> You don't rememder what you played?


It was a long time ago.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I found it, I played it with a quartet, but this is the piece. I won for the second movement which starts at 3:55.


----------

