My comments are based on the suggestions made to me by Jean Langlais at the lesson I had in Paris in June 1980. This follows the Franck - Tournemire - Langlais tradition. You follow the Franck -Guilmant - Dupre tradition. Both traditions are "valid". Ultimately the "authentic" interpretation is the one based on how the piece "speaks" to the person concerned.!
@gerardbedecarter Fascinating! Thanks for sharing where you were coming from in your comments.
I actually thought that people would critique my manual changes and registration in the middle section, since they certainly deviate from Franck's indications. I instead played that section the way Keith Chapman did. Sometimes I play it as written, but given that this instrument is rather non-French in character, I decided to do it Keith's way.
@gerardbedecarter Have you ever heard Michael Murray's rendition of this piece? He uses way less rubato than I did, and he was a student of Dupré. So I don't think my interpretation is out of line. Along the same lines, he zips right into the section at 6:13 without slowing down a bit. I like the enthusiasm and energy this conveys, but I did slow down somewhat in observance of Franck's "Très largement" indication. I'm not sure what you're referring to at the end.
@gerardbedecarter PS: I just searched through my CD library and found that I have a recording of Dupré himself playing this piece in 1926. His interpretation (unsurprisingly) follows many of the same patterns as Murray's does; not much if any rubato in the middle section, no slowing of tempo at Très largement, and the same type of mix of broken and legato in the final Piu lento section at the end, similar to mine. BTW, Dupré's rendition at St. Thomas is substantially the same.
Pleasant. I'm not sure if it is the recording or your choice of registration but it does seem thin of ranks at some points in this piece. The room certainly seems to lack any reverberation whatsoever. Your "presence" seems lacking, even absent at times for such an emotional work. Execution is too slow a few times. Overall though, I enjoyed listening.
@altpapapi I think most of the "thin" character you notice is due to the nature of the instrument. It has a Phelps-influenced mildly neo-Baroque flavor, so getting anything thick and French out of the instrument was a challenge. The room is quite dead as well, as you noticed. I'm glad you liked listening even despite these drawbacks!
I'm not sure what you mean about legato -- the repeated chords have to be broken, and the French tradition would require that they lose half their written value.
It is a heroic piece, and appropriately named, although it is rather dark at the same time.
Nice playing of a superb peice
MrBoneFixer 1 year ago
My comments are based on the suggestions made to me by Jean Langlais at the lesson I had in Paris in June 1980. This follows the Franck - Tournemire - Langlais tradition. You follow the Franck -Guilmant - Dupre tradition. Both traditions are "valid". Ultimately the "authentic" interpretation is the one based on how the piece "speaks" to the person concerned.!
gerardbedecarter 1 year ago
@gerardbedecarter Fascinating! Thanks for sharing where you were coming from in your comments.
I actually thought that people would critique my manual changes and registration in the middle section, since they certainly deviate from Franck's indications. I instead played that section the way Keith Chapman did. Sometimes I play it as written, but given that this instrument is rather non-French in character, I decided to do it Keith's way.
MDLRX8 1 year ago
A nice performance.
The main subject could be a little faster
3:47 needs a lot of rubato.
6:13 & foll should be slower.
In the final treatment of the chorale the pedal should be legato and the chords staccato.
gerardbedecarter 1 year ago
@gerardbedecarter Have you ever heard Michael Murray's rendition of this piece? He uses way less rubato than I did, and he was a student of Dupré. So I don't think my interpretation is out of line. Along the same lines, he zips right into the section at 6:13 without slowing down a bit. I like the enthusiasm and energy this conveys, but I did slow down somewhat in observance of Franck's "Très largement" indication. I'm not sure what you're referring to at the end.
MDLRX8 1 year ago
@gerardbedecarter PS: I just searched through my CD library and found that I have a recording of Dupré himself playing this piece in 1926. His interpretation (unsurprisingly) follows many of the same patterns as Murray's does; not much if any rubato in the middle section, no slowing of tempo at Très largement, and the same type of mix of broken and legato in the final Piu lento section at the end, similar to mine. BTW, Dupré's rendition at St. Thomas is substantially the same.
MDLRX8 1 year ago
Pleasant. I'm not sure if it is the recording or your choice of registration but it does seem thin of ranks at some points in this piece. The room certainly seems to lack any reverberation whatsoever. Your "presence" seems lacking, even absent at times for such an emotional work. Execution is too slow a few times. Overall though, I enjoyed listening.
altpapapi 2 years ago
@altpapapi I think most of the "thin" character you notice is due to the nature of the instrument. It has a Phelps-influenced mildly neo-Baroque flavor, so getting anything thick and French out of the instrument was a challenge. The room is quite dead as well, as you noticed. I'm glad you liked listening even despite these drawbacks!
MDLRX8 1 year ago
I have feeling that you're gonna stop in very first bar.
What a HEROIC piece!
And LEGATO!!!!!!!!!!!! (it's french music)
nataniel1215 2 years ago
I'm not sure what you mean about legato -- the repeated chords have to be broken, and the French tradition would require that they lose half their written value.
It is a heroic piece, and appropriately named, although it is rather dark at the same time.
MDLRX8 2 years ago
I agree, it's not legato!
RiverblueSkies 2 years ago