I don't know if I have to say, so I'm sorry if I don't, but: there are some several mistakes here and there in the accompainiment, you should check your lecture.
But it's a brave interpretation, and it's a nice video (considering my last comment with respect to the angle).
precisely speaking, that ain't even mirrored view. If it were a mirrored view, still which is true, it's gotta be still from left to right direction as normally as it is when viewed from the normal head position. Although I do find that this view is twisted left to right, not up and down mirror view.
i would love to see you play the piano transcription of passacaglia by handel, it's a very technically easy piece, but still very beautiful and underappreciated.
i also agree with hongzai katchaturian is incredible.
I'd personally like to see a non-romantic work. There are so many great works out there that weren't written by Chopin and Rachmaninoff. How about the Bach d minor Chaconne? A work that isn't done much.
no offence directed to you if only you are saying that this piece was not written by Chipin and Rach based on your comment. If you are saying, however, thinking that this song is written by one of those two, you are wrong. this is A. Scriabin's song, and he's not even a romanticism, Scriabin is between the late Romanticism and early modern composers, which specifically they had their own name called "mysterism", although I may be wrong with spellings, for I haven't learnt in English word.
yeah, but while technique can be easily improved, i believe he should check out the kissin and horowitz versions of the piece to get the "feel" of the piece...he hasn't quite captured the meaning of this song
I do have an opinion of that he's technically not so well done, however, "technique can be easily improved" that was a f-ing so subjective line there, for some people have hard time improving the skills, and checking out on kissin's, or horowitz's won't make any "feel" because the only background of this song is that A. Scriabin was a Mysterism, although I don't know the exact spelling because I didn't learn that in english, but if you know quite capturing the meaning of this song, y don cha ?
technique can be easily improved is an english phrase which means he has a lot of room for improvement. i would at least spend around 20-30 hours maybe just on technique here. and this isn't a song, it's a musical piece.
Dude, of course I know that expression is English ! Dah, it's like we're all talking/writing in English. You didn't get my point that what you said about technique is very subjective and could be very wrong. Some find it really difficult to improve techniques, some others find "feelings" very difficult to improve. My second point was that Scriabin wasn't a Romantic composer, albeit some do include him into, yet song or piece, just try to understand by figure of speech. u wrote song a.w.a I did.
Everything is easy to improve, if you take hours and hours and hours and hours and hours of listening and practicing. The only major difference between people then is talent and time.
There, there. That's my point you just brought up, which you look like still not get my point, albeit. You said the only major difference between people then is talent and time. Consider everyone can put as much as time available they can put into one's effort, but you can't put your talent into it in order to improve your technique no matter how many hours you put into. Do you see my point ? It's the talent that whether you say it's easy or difficult to improve in technique aspect, and that
means you can't say everything is easy to improve when especially you realize you can't improve your technique no matter how many hours you practice. It's false to say everything is easy to improve, despite the fact that it could be depending on some other factors, such as what you've mentioned here, time and effort. No matter how much effort and many hours you put into, some pieces won't get better and that's your limit when to say it's difficult to improve the piece technically.
you misread my reply. everything can be improved with time. it's not difficult, its just a matter of time. i seriously don't believe if you spent more time you can't get better on something.
I do get your point but you're just not accepting my point in which I presumably have to understand maybe you just want to rationalize or whatsoever, no offence albeit. Of course something can get better if you put time into it, but just face it, even if you put time and effort, it won't bring you to certain levels of performing something like Prokofiev Sonata, or Rachmaninoff's concerto with possibly no mistakes of technique by putting more and more time into it. I won't buy even if you say so.
Mistakes and technique are two entirely different things that have nothing to do with each other. Mistakes are always acceptable but technique problems simply mean you haven't practiced enough or you practice too much and developed issues such as finger pain, tendonitis, etc. seriously how do you think people like Yakov Kasman play all Prokofiev Sonatas perfectly or how Ashkenazy and Horowitz and many other great pianists play Rachmaninoff Concertos perfectly?practice and maturity
Wow. mistakes and techniques are two entirely different things ? They are 200% related as inversely proportional. No such great level of technique brings you so many mistakes and such great levels of technique bring you quite few mistakes. Such levels of technique can, then, be achieved by talent and time (practice), not by maturity and mistakes, as what you said, mistake is an entirely different thing from technique ?, which I am saying that's the wrong sentence. Don't change your subject.
also, you're keep missing my point, which is, when you face up your limitation of your skills (technique), then you don't see any improvement of your maturity of the piece because that's your limit of your technique. Time doesn't make you to play like Evgeny Kissin or Berezovsky. There is the talent between you and the so called 1 % elite performers. You will never be the same level as 1 % elite performers as long as you don't have such talents. If you do have, then time can give you such level.
lol if you think i'm being harsh on this kid because he can't play this etude like kissin you're wrong. first of all i'm not being harsh on this guy, he did a great job. all i'm saying is that he should practice more. how can anybody have anything against that? its ridiculous to argue that he doesn't have the ability to improve. I believe in him, I believe that he can improve, and I believe that he probably already has improved. Our points therefore coexist and we aren't even debating anymore
yeah with respect to physics, mistake is a kinetic energy while technique is potential energy. and you think that horowitz, who has one of the best technique, doesn't make mistakes? better listen to more of his recordings then.
For some ideas
Scriabin Etudes Op 2 No 1, Op 42 No 5
Chopin Sonata no 2 mov 3
Chopin Etude OP 10 No 6
Hope it helps
liszt141 9 months ago
it' pretty good, but in the last page for example, the internal voices sound too loud...i suggest
cs1995johm 2 years ago
zu viele fehler alter.
anfaltair 2 years ago
I don't know if I have to say, so I'm sorry if I don't, but: there are some several mistakes here and there in the accompainiment, you should check your lecture.
But it's a brave interpretation, and it's a nice video (considering my last comment with respect to the angle).
leomulder 2 years ago
Why not filming it by the real perspective of the pianist, instead of this mirrored view?
leomulder 2 years ago
precisely speaking, that ain't even mirrored view. If it were a mirrored view, still which is true, it's gotta be still from left to right direction as normally as it is when viewed from the normal head position. Although I do find that this view is twisted left to right, not up and down mirror view.
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
You're right. It was not a good expression, "mirrored". But it would be interesting to watch from the "pianist view" in fact.
leomulder 2 years ago
I would be pleased if you post Chopin's Etude op.25 n.12 :)
COCOONFABULA 3 years ago
i would love to see you play the piano transcription of passacaglia by handel, it's a very technically easy piece, but still very beautiful and underappreciated.
i also agree with hongzai katchaturian is incredible.
MrMiyagi11 3 years ago
I'd personally like to see a non-romantic work. There are so many great works out there that weren't written by Chopin and Rachmaninoff. How about the Bach d minor Chaconne? A work that isn't done much.
Rachmaninoffobsessio 3 years ago
I agree with your request. He should do the Brahms transcription for left hand. That would look awesome from this view.
Marcomedina 3 years ago
no offence directed to you if only you are saying that this piece was not written by Chipin and Rach based on your comment. If you are saying, however, thinking that this song is written by one of those two, you are wrong. this is A. Scriabin's song, and he's not even a romanticism, Scriabin is between the late Romanticism and early modern composers, which specifically they had their own name called "mysterism", although I may be wrong with spellings, for I haven't learnt in English word.
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
Good technique but more pratice please... there's too many mistakes.
pierolivier111 3 years ago 4
yeah, but while technique can be easily improved, i believe he should check out the kissin and horowitz versions of the piece to get the "feel" of the piece...he hasn't quite captured the meaning of this song
JZS713 2 years ago
I do have an opinion of that he's technically not so well done, however, "technique can be easily improved" that was a f-ing so subjective line there, for some people have hard time improving the skills, and checking out on kissin's, or horowitz's won't make any "feel" because the only background of this song is that A. Scriabin was a Mysterism, although I don't know the exact spelling because I didn't learn that in english, but if you know quite capturing the meaning of this song, y don cha ?
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
technique can be easily improved is an english phrase which means he has a lot of room for improvement. i would at least spend around 20-30 hours maybe just on technique here. and this isn't a song, it's a musical piece.
JZS713 2 years ago
Dude, of course I know that expression is English ! Dah, it's like we're all talking/writing in English. You didn't get my point that what you said about technique is very subjective and could be very wrong. Some find it really difficult to improve techniques, some others find "feelings" very difficult to improve. My second point was that Scriabin wasn't a Romantic composer, albeit some do include him into, yet song or piece, just try to understand by figure of speech. u wrote song a.w.a I did.
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
Everything is easy to improve, if you take hours and hours and hours and hours and hours of listening and practicing. The only major difference between people then is talent and time.
JZS713 2 years ago
There, there. That's my point you just brought up, which you look like still not get my point, albeit. You said the only major difference between people then is talent and time. Consider everyone can put as much as time available they can put into one's effort, but you can't put your talent into it in order to improve your technique no matter how many hours you put into. Do you see my point ? It's the talent that whether you say it's easy or difficult to improve in technique aspect, and that
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
means you can't say everything is easy to improve when especially you realize you can't improve your technique no matter how many hours you practice. It's false to say everything is easy to improve, despite the fact that it could be depending on some other factors, such as what you've mentioned here, time and effort. No matter how much effort and many hours you put into, some pieces won't get better and that's your limit when to say it's difficult to improve the piece technically.
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
you misread my reply. everything can be improved with time. it's not difficult, its just a matter of time. i seriously don't believe if you spent more time you can't get better on something.
JZS713 2 years ago
I do get your point but you're just not accepting my point in which I presumably have to understand maybe you just want to rationalize or whatsoever, no offence albeit. Of course something can get better if you put time into it, but just face it, even if you put time and effort, it won't bring you to certain levels of performing something like Prokofiev Sonata, or Rachmaninoff's concerto with possibly no mistakes of technique by putting more and more time into it. I won't buy even if you say so.
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
@mrkwonsony
Mistakes and technique are two entirely different things that have nothing to do with each other. Mistakes are always acceptable but technique problems simply mean you haven't practiced enough or you practice too much and developed issues such as finger pain, tendonitis, etc. seriously how do you think people like Yakov Kasman play all Prokofiev Sonatas perfectly or how Ashkenazy and Horowitz and many other great pianists play Rachmaninoff Concertos perfectly?practice and maturity
JZS713 2 years ago
Wow. mistakes and techniques are two entirely different things ? They are 200% related as inversely proportional. No such great level of technique brings you so many mistakes and such great levels of technique bring you quite few mistakes. Such levels of technique can, then, be achieved by talent and time (practice), not by maturity and mistakes, as what you said, mistake is an entirely different thing from technique ?, which I am saying that's the wrong sentence. Don't change your subject.
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
also, you're keep missing my point, which is, when you face up your limitation of your skills (technique), then you don't see any improvement of your maturity of the piece because that's your limit of your technique. Time doesn't make you to play like Evgeny Kissin or Berezovsky. There is the talent between you and the so called 1 % elite performers. You will never be the same level as 1 % elite performers as long as you don't have such talents. If you do have, then time can give you such level.
mrkwonsony 2 years ago
lol if you think i'm being harsh on this kid because he can't play this etude like kissin you're wrong. first of all i'm not being harsh on this guy, he did a great job. all i'm saying is that he should practice more. how can anybody have anything against that? its ridiculous to argue that he doesn't have the ability to improve. I believe in him, I believe that he can improve, and I believe that he probably already has improved. Our points therefore coexist and we aren't even debating anymore
JZS713 2 years ago
yeah with respect to physics, mistake is a kinetic energy while technique is potential energy. and you think that horowitz, who has one of the best technique, doesn't make mistakes? better listen to more of his recordings then.
JZS713 2 years ago
I like Rachmaninoff's etude op 39 no 6. and Katchaturian-cziffra sabre dance.
hongzai1993 3 years ago