Я НАДЕЮСЬ, ЧТО НАЙДУ ВСЕ СИЛЫ,
ЧТОБЫ ЖИТЬ БЕЗ СТРАХА И БЕЗ СБОЯ.
Я НЕ СДАМ ПОЗИЦИЙ ДО МОГИЛЫ:
ВЕДЬ ДЕРЕВЬЯ УМИРАЮТ СТОЯ. И если зло появляется в моей жизни, я говорю: “Это факт не моей, а их биографии, ко мне это не имеет никакого отношения. Зло меня не касается».
суббота, 24 июня 2023 г.
24.06.23 Произведения для фоно с НОТАМИ. Рlay list составлен из объемной программы классической фортепианной музыки с нотами и без нот...
If there is one defining feature of Scriabin’s output, whether at its most voluptuous or neurotic, it’s probably this: freedom. (And if there were two I’d probably nominate an obsessive attention to sonority as the second.) So many of Scriabin’s defining tendencies – polyrhythms, trills, vibrating arpeggios, grace notes, misplaced accents, dominant 7ths, extended or synthetic chordal harmony as substitute for tonality – are all designed to erase the sense of music as a deliberate, performative act, and to turn it into a kind of spontaneous, refulgent, sensory experience, whether that experience is expressive or (especially in his later years) mystical.
In this early set of preludes, encompassing all 24 keys, you can already see lots of Scriabinisms at work: notes arranged in groups of 5, with tuplets crossing barlines and accents placed such that that it’s basically impossible to hear the downbeats (Nos.1, 19), uneven or mixed meter (Nos.16, 21, 24), counterpoint of a particularly lush and exultant kind (Nos.7, 11), the use of quartal textures (No.1, No.24), polyrhythmic playfulness (No.1’s 5-against-3, Nos.3, 18, 24), dramatic melodies played entirely in octaves (Nos. 6, 14, 20) or fragmentary motifs arranged into winding, wistful two- or three-voice contrapuntal shapes (Nos. 2, 3, 5, 9, 13, 21-23). It’s a real shame this group of preludes is often gently dismissed as too unoriginal (Chopinesque), because It’s a gorgeous set, beautifully written, with not a single wasted or misplaced note, and which contains many wonderful moments. It’s nowhere near as radical as Scriabin’s later work, true, but its works perfectly on its own terms. (And originality is only a measure of historical importance, not musical quality.)
Both recordings here (in the unknown-but-really-excellent class) have the headily luminous quality of the best Scriabin playing, but are markedly different. Lettberg has a relaxed, languorous approach, focusing more on establishing a certain tone or mood than strictly maintaining the melodic line. Stanev’s playing is charged with excitement: he plays as freely as Lettberg, but more readily veers towards the impetuous end of the expressive spectrum, and also has a pretty nice way of handling the long lines in the slower preludes.
Lettberg:00:00 – No.1, Vivace00:54 – No.2, Allegretto
03:05 – No.3, Vivo
03:59 – No.4, Lento
06:06 – No.5, Andante cantabile
08:03 – No.6, Allegro
08:53 – No.7, Allegro assai
09:50 – No.8, Allegro agitato
11:20 – No.9, Andantino
13:09 – No.10, Andante
14:31 – No.11, Allegro assai
15:56 – No.12, Andante
17:41 – No.13, Lento
19:33 – No.14, Presto
20:31 – No.15, Lento
22:52 – No.16, Misterioso
25:15 – No.17, Allegretto
26:08 – No.18, Allegro agitato
27:00 – No.19, Affettuoso
28:06 – No.20, Appassionato
29:12 – No.21, Andante
30:46 – No.22, Lento
32:17 – No.23, Vivo
32:52 – No.24, Presto
Stanev:33:46 – No.1, Vivace
34:39 – No.2, Allegretto
36:32 – No.3, Vivo
37:29 – No.4, Lento
38:58 – No.5, Andante cantabile
40:28 – No.6, Allegro
41:23 – No.7, Allegro assai
42:26 – No.8, Allegro agitato
44:20 – No.9, Andantino
45:37 – No.10, Andante
46:47 – No.11, Allegro assai
48:28 – No.12, Andante
49:49 – No.13, Lento
51:05 – No.14, Presto
52:05 – No.15, Lento
53:48 – No.16, Misterioso
55:45 – No.17, Allegretto
56:29 – No.18, Allegro agitato
57:28 – No.19, Affettuoso
58:39 –No.20, Appassionato
59:42 – No.21, Andante
1:01:28 – No.22, Lento
1:02:35 – No.23, Vivo
1:03:15 – No.24, Presto
Chopin’s ballades are written to such a pitch of harmonic innovation, expressive power and structural novelty that they sort of exist in a valley of their own making. Nothing any other composer wrote (even other ballades, to be sure) really compares to them. The most immediately striking feature about them is their narrative musicality: transitionary passages are extraordinarily beautiful, and really do not need to be justified by what they are moving to or from; and a small digression might open up a whole new harmonic or developmental vista, a trait especially evident in the last ballade.
Each ballade offers radical new treatment of (or engagement with) sonata form. #1 and #3 superimpose on the goal-oriented sonata form an arch-like symmetry (both have a mirror reprise and a striking central episode with new material that serves as pivot), #2 imposes a two-key scheme upon what initially looks like a simple alternation between two themes but really is not, and #4, the most structurally rich of the set, fuses sonata form with the more static form of the theme and variations.
BALLADE 1
00:00 – INTRODUCTION in Neapolitan harmony [Note minor 9th motif in LH at 0:34, wrongly indicated in this edition as D-G-D; it should be D-G-Eb]
EXPOSITION
00:42 – Theme 1
02:20 – Transition
03:19 – Theme 2, limb 1 [Note its harmonization in 4ths, mirroring the horn calls which introduce it, and the use of subtle hemiola in the LH]
03:59 – Theme 2, limb 2 [Really a diminished version of Theme 1]
DEVELOPMENT [This section puts both Themes in direct and violent contact with each other: there is no transition bridging the two, only a section where Theme 1 tries desperately and almost fails to reach the high B which begins Theme 2 (5:07). The themes’ tonalities (G min/Eb maj) are also brought into unstable alignment (A min/maj)]
04:48 – Theme 1, opening with a minor 9th descent
05:15 – Theme 2, climax
05:49 – Transition
06:05 – Theme 3 [A brilliant waltz much like Chopin’s waltzes of this period]
06:20 – Transition
RECAPITULATION/REPRISE [Note the arch-like symmetry: Theme 2 is presented before Theme 1, in its original key]
06:40 – Theme 2, limb 1
07:09 – Theme 2, limb 2
07:44 – Theme 1, again heralded by a falling minor 9th
CODA – 08:30. Note the profusion of falling minor 9ths in RH figuration, as well as the Neapolitan harmony from the introduction,
BALLADE 2
EXPOSITION
10:00 – Theme 1, F maj, a siciliano/pastoral
12:20 – Theme 2, A min
DEVELOPMENT/FALSE REPRISE
13:13 – Theme 1, F maj. Looks like a reprise, but –
13:52 – veers off course, into harmonically complex modulatory territory. This section is where the heavy lifting that shifts the entire tonal centre of the work takes place.
15:33 – Theme 2 [In D min, which is revealed to be a suspension that resolves to A min. This section substitutes for a reprise proper.]
CODA/CLOSING SECTION – 16:15 [References to Themes 1/2]
BALLADE 3
EXPOSITION
17:33 – Theme 1, lyrical
19:40 – Theme 2, dancelike, developed in F maj/F min/C maj.
21:47 – Theme 3
DEVELOPMENT/ REPRISE [As with Ballade 1, note how the themes are presented in reverse order]
22:36 – Theme 2, Ab maj
23:02 – Theme 2, C# min, developed with LH counterpoint. Note that the LH figuration is based on a diminished version of a section of Theme 2 (heard most clearly in the LH at 23:25)
23:27 – Theme 2, developed with RH figuration, climax.
23:42 – onset of harmonic instability
24:29 – Theme 1, now triumphant
CODA/REPRISE – 24:58, Theme 3
BALLADE 425:19 – INTRODUCTION in dominant (C maj)
EXPOSITION
25:50 – Theme 1 [Note how the theme itself is sequential/variational in character, being made of a short phrase repeated in different keys]
26:51 – Theme 1 VAR.1 [very slight decoration]
27:46 – Episode 1 [Based on Theme 1]
28:53 – Theme 1 VAR.2
29:29 – Transition
29:49 – Theme 2, a chorale/barcarolle
DEVELOPMENT/EXTENDED BRIDGE [in contrast to the typical development, while there is harmonic exploration there is no buildup of tension, and the material comprises the only lighthearted passages in the entire piece]
30:57 – Modulating sequential passages
31:45 – Strands of Theme 1 combined in three contrapuntal lines. One of the lines turns into –
32:08 – The magical return of the INTRODUCTION, whose distant A maj harmony functions as dominant to –
RECAPITULATION/REPRISE
32:48 – D min, where Theme 1 returns in VAR.3, a striking canonic variation that fully exploits the theme’s sequential qualities to modulate back to F min
33:51 – Theme 1, VAR 4. It’s extraordinary how Chopin places a Bachian variation (No.3) right beside a full-blooded romantic one (the cantabile-decorative treatment of no.4).
34:33 – Theme 2, in Db maj, climax. [Note how beautiful the writing is: see e.g., 34:50, with the overlay of notes in groups of 4/6/9]
35:44 – Extended pause on dominant [structurally mirroring the introduction]
CODA: 36:14
Chopin Piano Concerto No. 2 in f minor, Op. 21 (Zimerman)
Chopin’s second piano concerto is more conventional than his first. The opening Maestoso movement of the piece is modeled on the concertos of Mozart's pupil, Hummel. The central Larghetto is similarly inspired by the Piano Concerto in G minor composed in 1820 by Ignaz Moscheles, but the closing Allegro vivace is original, a stylized Polish folk song. Within the movements, all the standard concerto principles are obeyed: an orchestra exposition of the main themes before a piano exposition of the same material, the usual contrast between the tonic minor and the relative major for the principal and subordinate themes, a lyrical slow movement in the relative minor, and a rondo-form finale in the tonic major. Despite its conventional structure, Chopin's piano writing is idiomatic and highly personal – the lyrical melodies and their ornamentations could have been composed by no one else. Chopin’s piano concertos are often criticized for orchestral writing that is at best competent. This, however, is less a fault than a decision: Chopin, the greatest composer for the piano of his age, would never let anything obscure the brilliance of his piano writing.
The second piano concerto was actually written before the first, but was designated “No. 2” as it was published second.
0:00 - Maestoso
15:37 - Larghetto
26:42 - Allegro vivace
Performed with the Polish Festival Orchestra, conducted by Zimerman
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий