# Nocturnes, Field or Chopin?



## beetzart (Dec 30, 2009)

Just listening to Field's nocturnes and I can't split the two composers at this point in time. Can others have a preference that falls more easily one way or the other?


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

For me Chopin's nocturnes inhabit an altogether higher universe. Field's are pleasant, and occasionally more than that, but I find Chopin's pieces vastly more subtle and involving.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Yes, as much as I like Field, I clearly prefer Chopin (and Faure for that matter).


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

when it goes about piano music Chopin *nocturnes* are no.1 and only.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I love Field's nocturnes, but Chopin's elevate me to a higher level.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Well, you can play the Field and happily listen to both.


----------



## Selby (Nov 17, 2012)

Chopin's nocturnes, like others, occupy a special place in my listening life. What recording of Field are you listening to?


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

These days I think I prefer Field's. Chopin's nocturnes remind me of my teenage melancholy, when I was listening to him a lot. It's not Chopin's fault, I just over-listened.

Field's nocturnes have shades of Beethoven (particularly the E minor one) and also C.P.E. Bach (the longer C major nocturne). I imagine these pieces functioning more aptly as night music in a 'courtly love' sort of way.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Miceál O'Rourke playing Field makes me always happy, fond memory's of piano lessons , Chopin is another matter, wouldn't want to be without.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I've listened to Field's Nocturnes a few times - enjoyable. Chopin's are on a much higher level.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

I'll go with Chopin, because his nocturnes move me more deeply than Field's; their range of expression and nuance is greater.

However, I don't deny Field's historical importance: he almost single-handedly invented the Romantic Nocturne as a genre. Before Field, "night pieces" were usually convivial serenades, along the lines of Mozart's Eine Kleine Nachtmusik. Field transformed the genre into something more lyrical and intimate, something which evokes the mysteries of nighttime in a way that the earlier serenades didn't. His reshaping of the genre was instrumental (so to speak!) in paving the way for Chopin's brilliant work in this area.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Bettina said:


> I'll go with Chopin, because his nocturnes move me more deeply than Field's; their range of expression and nuance is greater.
> 
> However, I don't deny Field's historical importance: he almost single-handedly invented the Romantic Nocturne as a genre. Before Field, "night pieces" were usually convivial serenades, along the lines of Mozart's Eine Kleine Nachtmusik. Field transformed the genre into something more lyrical and intimate, something which evokes the mysteries of night-time in a way that the earlier serenades didn't. His reshaping of the genre was instrumental (so to speak!) in paving the way for Chopin's brilliant work in this area.


But easier to learn ( the Field I mean)


----------



## ST4 (Oct 27, 2016)

For Nocturnes I say Field but for Sonatas I say Chopin


----------



## Holden4th (Jul 14, 2017)

Field was a contemporary of Beethoven and his music was in many ways still influenced by other classical composers. The pianists who play his nocturnes need to take this into account. Unfortunately we have the likes of O'Rourke and O'Conor (and others) who think that they have to play them with a romantic era style. A Chopinesque treatment. This simply makes them slow and turgid. Richard Clayderman could probably do a similar job.

Fortunately, the likes of Roberte Mamou, Noel Lee and Benjamin Frith have done their research and produced music more in keeping with the period. I really like the Field Nocturnes but Chopin took the genre to a whole new level.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I greatly prefer the Chopin Nocturnes as works of genius, but still consider the Field Nocturnes worth hearing and of historical interest with regard to Chopin's development.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

Chopin.

For the record, there are other composers who wrote wonderful nocturnes for solo piano:
http://www.talkclassical.com/44245-your-favorite-nocturnes.html

A favorite Nocturne not mentioned in that topic is Scriabin's Nocturne for the Left Hand





But my favorite from all non-Chopin Nocturnes I've heard is probably Stanchinsky's (including the rather unexpected middle section):





Debussy's is also gorgeous:




(that might be my first favorible post about Debussy ever)


----------



## Crystal (Aug 8, 2017)

I've just listened to Field's noctures, but I still prefer Chopin's. Chopin's level is much higher than Field's.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Crystal said:


> I've just listened to Field's noctures, but I still prefer Chopin's. Chopin's level is much higher than Field's.


But they are fun to play.
( the Field ones)


----------

