Wow! Im doing my 4th Grade exam soon but my teacher has thrown this one at me as a test! ive just learnt the first 4 bars at a slow tempo, guess i have a lot of work to do! Your tone, dexterity and speed is beautiful well played hopefully by the end of the year i can play like that!
most welcome and another thing i will listen to your interpretation of the peice so i can play it better ! I am just a lowly bricklayer but my passion is guitar ! Thanks again .
To be honest, I like both version...though we feel the chord progression a bit more here, but on the 'long' version, we have the time to love each chords.
@Pajarillo57 It's not the same thing. In Chaccona by Bach, it's a solo, the pattern isn't the same at all ( like here). Also, don't forget that, at first, it's named Etude.
OK, then try to play each bar twice in Etudes by Chopin or Rakhmaninov - they are also named Etudes...
You see friend, I'm really tired of discussing these stupid repeats. If you don't want to believe me - then read articles in Guitar magazines written by very famous guitarists and compare manuscripts by Lobos with this distorted edition.
@Pajarillo57 lol We've just start arguing ! Don't be tired now... What I mean is:
1) It's an etude
2) It's the same pattern over and over, so playing it once or twice or even 4times would sounds great, it's not a melody itself as Chopin or Rakhmaninov.
3) Yes it sounds great with 1 measure each, but it ALSO sounds good with twice of it.
Well, playing each bar twice you turn a beautiful piece of music into exercise. Nicely sounding, but EXERCISE. It is sad to hear that you didn't recognize the melody here. Yes, it is not too complicated but it is here. If you want I can reveal this secter to you. By the way, many guitarists think that the melody here is absent and consequently, play it like an exercise, without melody. In this case repeats don't spoil it so much.
You overstate the case for the 1928 manuscript. They are neither the "original" nor in Villa-Lobos handwriting. An earlier manuscripts of #1 has the repeats, so does a later version given to Calervaro in the 40's. The 1928 manuscript has defenders from a musical stand point, but all scholarly opinions I've seen side with the published version as HVL's official. Here is a must-read reference (in Portuguese): worldcat.org/title/heitor-villa-lobos-e-o-violao/oclc/529433612
I read TWO great articles about Lobos' manuscripts in the most famous Classical Guitar magazines - Classical Guitar and Guitar Review. They are really scientific works - not just a sketches. If you want I'll find them in my piles of magazines and tell you the numbers of the issues in order you could also read them...
Can you post the references for these articles? The 1928 Max Eschig manuscript and others in the HVL Museum generated a stream of dissertations since they appeared in 1992. They take into consideration more than the 1928 and published versions. There are manuscripts donated to the museum by the Guimaraes family (HVL's first wife), Calevaro's copies, Segovia letters and pianist TomásTeran recollections. There is a new edition coming out from ME make the story clear. Or not!
I reccomend you to read David Leisner's article from Classical Guitar Magazine, December 2003-January 2004, Eduardo Fernandez-Guitar Review, Fall 1996, Stanly Yates - Soundboard, Summer 1997 and also M.Ophee- Classical Guitar -May 1995. In my opinion EMS is the most rliable source accurately written by Lobos' own hand.
Wow I really like that you played it without repeats, I never saw that before. But, to me it sounds much more spanish like this, which I like. Is there someplace I can get this original score? I'm learning this piece right now, but it is the version with repeats.
I appreciate your desire to play the original manuscript and I acknowledge your skill; however, the piece needs to breathe. You say that Segovia turned it into a boring exercise, yet in the comments you say you use it to warm up with. Those of you who want to play this fast.....dont worry about it, in fact, slow it down, double it and let it breathe.
Friend, you are free to play it slow and double or triple or whatever...I just recorded it 2 years ago and posted here. If you want I may rerecord it in double or merely twice in a row (that actually is better than double bars). I think it would be better to show your own version instead of critisizing...
@Pajarillo57 I apologize....I meant no criticism....I am currently learning the piece and I am still between the beginner and intermediate stages, as far as skill. I must say your challenge to post my own version is a good motivation for me. Thanks for the response and God Bless you as you continue to inspire others.
I love Villa-Lobos' music very much and have played practically all the guitar pieces by him including Concerto with Orchestra (BTW, you may watch it here on Youtube). So I know his music quite well from inside. The Study #1 (and also #2) must be played without repeats!!! This was the author's intention and repeats destroy the idea of the music. That is not only my personal opinion. There are quite many articles about Lobos manuscripts and analising them. Just read them! Good luck!
Friend, despite I am tired of explaining, as I said before, I do it one more time especially for you, because, as I see, you have no patient to read ALL the correspondence where I thousand times explained why I play it without repeats. So what I play is THE ORIGINAL version by HVL himself - his manuscript. Repeats were put by Segovia - not by Lobos. They distorted the whole idea of the piece and made it a stupid exersise. To get some more knowledge about Villa-Lobos music you haver to
...read some articles abouit his manuscripts. You my find them on the Internet or in Classical guitar magazines. So get more knowledge before critisizing!
@00sven00sven00 But I learned it about 40 years ago and use it as a warming up study together with other studies, of course. If you do this you'll get this tempo too. Good luck~!!!
Please read the description and comments. I'm tired of explanations why I played it without repeats. If you like Segovia's distorted version that is your choice. I like Lobos' original version. Try to play, let say, Etude by Chopin repeating each of the bars twice - maybe it will stay better in the brain then?
I didn't want to be the faster player of this Study in the world. I just performed the piece as it should be played. I wonder how can it be that I, living in Ukraine, know much more about Brazilian music than you Brazilian...It has no second part. It just must be played without repeats, as Lobos composed it.
Cuidado com a acentuação e com o objetivo do estudo, que não é só técnico. Ele bem tocado retrata o mar aberto do Brasil, como falou Manoel S Macos(grande mestre do violão no Br) aBRAÇOS
Pajarrillo, Thanks for the revelation. Thought rpts were too many. Sounded too exercisey. Without rpts the etude is more melodic, shorter not monotonous and better to play. Had just finished an altered shorter version of my own. Be glad to play Villa-Lobos version now instead of Segovia's.
I'm tired of repeating why I don't play repeats. Please read all the comments. I can play this Study 100 times in a row without stopping. So for me to play repeats is not a problem at all. I played it with repeats untill I got the manuscript and read several articles about it. I just prefer the author's version.
You see friend what I play is not my own "invention". I just play the original version by Lobos who was a brilliant guitarist. He was the first who premiered his 12 Etudes in the French Ambassy. He played the guitar wonderfully - not as Segovia mentioned in his memories. Now we have an access to the truth. So why should we play distorted version by Segovia when we have original version by the great composer and guitarist???BTW, Etude#2 is also without any repeats! I'll post it too.
Chill Dude! All the man is saying is the repeated version has grown on him, and that a man with your technique could really do his ear a treat if the repeats were there too. its a compliment.
I won't argue whether you should play the repeats or not. It your musical decision. However, part of your reasoning is flawed. Labeling the published version as Segovia's and the 1928 manuscript as Villa's is completely inaccurate. For starters, there is the problem of authenticity of the manuscripts - Only a copies exists and there is no evidence it it Villa's writing. Segovia never particularly cared for the 12 Etudes, he said so in his letters to Ponce -- He only performed 1, 7, 8.
My friend, you have to have some more knowledges on the subject before writing such things. You should know that afrer death of Lobos' first wife his archives became accsessible. And there were found HIS OWN manuscripts of the 12 Styudies. Who will now believe Segovia if he said that Lobos played guitar dreadfully??? Even if he said something in a letter addressed to Ponce...
Maybe I need some clarification of which manuscripts you are referring to. The complete copy that led to David Leiner's recording (#1 without repeats!!) is from a 1928 manuscript belonging to Max Eschig.
There are also the "Guimarães archives" donates to the HVL museum by the first wife's estate. In this collection there is an incomplete manuscript o the Etudes.
Anyway, the 1928 manuscript was considered as a potential final version.
I've played ALL the guitar compositions by Villa-Lobos including Concerto with Orchestra (which you may watch here on YouTube). So I know well his "writing", his hand. It means I know his style of writing. Usually composers have something you can recognise as the thing belonging by this or another author because you find the same or similar thing in different pieces. There is no stupidly repeated bars in any of the Maestro's compositions. That's Segovia's hand...And also read the Magazines.
It is hard to believe Segovia made substantial changes. After the excitement of the discovery of the 1928 version, experts (Zanon, Zigante, Gilardino) accept the 1953 published version as Villa Lobos'.
Another thing to confirm what I said. Please read the arcitles published in "Classical Guitar" December 2003 and in "Soundboard" Summer 1997. It also wouldn't be bad for you to have a look at the manuscript itself. It's well known that Segovia disliked modern music and critisized Lobos. On this reason TOO many great compositions dedicated to Segovia haven't seen light until now. Angelo Gillardino publishes them. God bless him for that!
Villa-Lobos was a competent guitarist. There are two known recordings of his released as 78s playing Choros 1 and Prelude 1. But sorry, he was not capable of playing the etudes. Actually, no one was. The first complete performance only took place in 1963 by Turibio Santos. Villa-Lobos (this is related by Carlevaro) used to ask pianist Tomáz Terán to show the pieces to guitarists. He never heard the Etudes played properly.
And finally, I remind you that the first person who performed ALL 12 Studies was Villa-Lobos. It was in 1929 at the French Embassy. Unfortunately, there is no record of that premiere... He was a brilliant guitarist having enormous technique. Moreover, he composed them which wouldn't be possible without knowing the instrument very well and having brilliant technique.
I know this is not the Wikipedia, but it would fall into the category of "citation needed". It is a major revelation. You mean he gave a concert at the French embassy in Rio?
Yes. He brilliantly premiered his 12 Studies there. Try to read some books and articles about Lobos and his Studies. And surely read those two articles from Guitar Magazines I mentioned.
Interesting. You're the first person I've heard play it without the repeats and whilst I don't actually dislike them I can see how they can make for monotony. I wonder if everyone will soon start omitting them. You could have started something here.
working on this piece right now. nice etude, but i enjoy the preludes as well.. im not playing it on this speed by the way.. very nicely done this one!
haha sounds better without the repeats, especially the chromatic descent section . lol can't believe i've been stupidly playing each bar twice all these years.
Yes, my friend, Segovia made it worse and all the guitarists including Williams, Bream etc.,etc. played it in Segovia reduction. But Lobos didn't accept his changes. Because of that they were published 24 years after composing!!! I'm glad I helped you to understand how they should be played.
I don't speak Spanish but I know what my nick means! i see no sence in repeating each bar. It destroys the music and turns it into a stupid exercise.BTW, the same with the Study#2. Without repeats it becomes understandable and beautiful. Try to play, let say, Etude by Chopin repeating each of the bars twice...What will you get then?
If you are working on some technique you have to play EXERVCISES. And then you may repeat them as many times as you want. But a Study is a musical piece - not only technical exercise, but a piee of music. So it has a form, a musical idea and image. Repeating each bar twice just destroys all this. Try to play, let say, a similar technical Study of Barrios called BEES repeating each bar twice. What will you get then??? Think of it, my friend.
Carlevaro is not the truth in last instance. I looked through his "masterclasses" and found many things that are not true. He didn't know about the manuscripts, however, nobody knew at the time. And he was under strong Segovia influence. Read the book he wrote. If you love Lobos - play as he wrote it!!! Good luck!
I'm tired of saying: THERE ARE NO ANY REPEATS IN THE MOST AUTHORITATIVE EDITION OF THE ETUDES - MANUSCRIPT !!!! Those stupid repeats are the invention of Segovia. Lobos didn't accept Segovia's changes so Etudes were published 24 years after composing. However,Thanks for estimating.
Yes, my friend, you are completely right! Everyone knows now about some Segovia's features. Just to mention so called SEGOVIA ARCHIVE in which too many wonderful pieces were frozen for many years. Manuscript is the most precise document of the author himself, the most authoritative. Thanks!
Segovia would regularly change notes or even chop whole measures he didn't like. As witness: the new edition of Capriccio Diabolico that restores the measures that he left out. He was a great musician, but he was also full of himself.
Thank you. I've played the Segovia version almost all my life until I discovered the manuscript. I always was in doubt about logic in those stupid repeats. When I read some articles about the manuscript and got it all jmy doubts disappeared.
I think this is well played. The entire sense of this study is coming out. Etude means nothing else than what it is; a study. Check Wikipedia for that term.
The only two things not really corresponding to my personal taste are the hard attacks on the bass notes and some little time fluctuations. But those tiny fluctuations seem normal in classical music, Segovia does it as well but he played it smoother soundwise but the recording is professional (4000$ mic?) and more edited and compressed.
Thanks very much!My friend, "hard attaks on the bass notes" as you said I make intentionally because that's the melody which too many of the guitar players who play this study can't find. The same concerning "some little time fluctuations" as you say.I make it intentionally otherwise it would be like a metronom.
Probably you can do it better than me??? So, go on!!! Instead of your stupid criticism that has no base under it you'd better show your THE BEST interpretation...
Of course, as one song of DEEP PURPLE says "You fool no one". Don't be offended but it's funny when a man is told true and discovered information but refusing to accept it having no real arguments. You play even 4 or 5 times each of the bars it will never be better than Lobos wrote.Finally who are you?You have played ALL Guitar music by Lobos???You have teaching experience of 35 years?You have read Guitar magazines? I DID...
Opinions of the people who don't respect the author (Villa-Lobos) are not of any interest for me. I always played it with repeats.But when I discovered the Manuscript I understood that that's Lobos wanted.
good job, you have great technique, and I heard no flaws. I personally think that you might like it more if you tried to add a bit more expression, like vary your dynamics, tempo, and maybe tonal colors.
I apreciate your advices, but it seems you haven't catch the idea of this Study. I bet you can't say where is the melody here and is it present here at all. If you knew this you'd never fought for these stupid repeats that destroy the Idea. And this is a reason of not publishing for almost 25 years after composing.
Those repeats in no way add depth or something like that! They only make AN EXERSISE from this wonderful study. They stop melody!!!If you like to play an arpegio exersise - so go on! Play each bar even three times. But if you want to play Lobos' music that the study #1 obviously IS than be so kind to follow the author's idea and SCORE!!! This is my opinion. I don't insist everyone should share my attitude to this piece.
Thanks very much my friend! I agree with you. Threir name is RETROGRADS. The Lobos Manuscript is the most precise and reliable source. Unfortunately, many guitarists, including the world stars play his Etudes from Segovia reduction. But that's because the manuscript was revealed just some years ago. It is clear and logical. Segovia very much changed it not in a good direction. Thanks again! Best regards!
Segovia was a master guitarist and I believe he was the best. I am sure he had a reason for putting in the repeats. It might add clarity to each repeat and add a depth that can be felt more with more time spent playing certain notes.
Yes, Segovia was the great master and ONE the best in his time. Don't forget about Sainz de la Maza, Oyanguren, Gomez, Llobet, Salinas, Anido and many others.There is a set of CD's called Segovia & his Contemporaries. It was compelled in a way to show that there were figures equal and even better than Master Segovia. Repeats make this beautiful Study (as well as #2) just arpegio exersise - nothing more. Lobos played the guitar wonderfully!
if you listen to Segovia's recording on youtube, it certainly doesn't sound like an exercise. Mozna ale myslis trochu jinak, a tvoje perspectiva se tezko zmeni.
My friend, let's stop this discussion. Everyone has his rights and is free to show his/her efforts. I keep the Manuscript and play the author's version because I've played ALL GUITAR MUSIC by Lobos including the Concerto and it makes me think I know something about it. I don't forbid you to play each bar twice (or 3,4,5,etc. times).Viva LOBOS!!!
I don't really understand the issue here in this thread comparing this work with Segovias playing. Or, on the other hand, it might be quite a honor to be compared with Segovia.
Yes, I agree with you. At last, everyone who doesn't like this my version may show us his own version that is,in his opinion, RIGHT, CORRECT, THE BEST etc. Thanks for understanding!
If you don't care the manuscript of the author himself (Lobos) that was discussed a lot in the most famous Guitar Magazines then I can't argue with you. You prefer Segovia's version that it really awful. He cut some parts from the Etides, put stupid repeats there making the music more like exercises. Think, why it was published 25 years after composing.Because Lobos didn't approve Segovia's changes. Finally, who forbids you to play what you like???
I had always played it each bar twice until I found a manuscript by Lobos which is hundred times better than Segovia edition. There are no repeat signs there as in the Etude #1 as in the Etude #2.And in the other Etudes there aren't so many mistakes as in the Segovia version. IT IS BETTER!!!Thanks.
maybe my sarcasm was to cryptic for you. the translation would be: you can't play it at this speed because you are making to many mistakes and you can't play the middle part. and I think repeats make it better (but that is is personal I guess)
Well janjohandealgenman, you don't play bad for sure. I'm not really impressed though... You will probably always be better at talking!!! Cheers buddy
Nice version Pajarillo, thanks for having done the research to be able to play this for us.
Repeats I don't play intentionally because there are not any repeat signs in the MANUSCRIPT. Without them the music became more clear and fluent, understandable.Read articles about the Manuscript in guitar magazines!
Wow! Im doing my 4th Grade exam soon but my teacher has thrown this one at me as a test! ive just learnt the first 4 bars at a slow tempo, guess i have a lot of work to do! Your tone, dexterity and speed is beautiful well played hopefully by the end of the year i can play like that!
Wishiwasinthe70s 1 day ago
@Wishiwasinthe70s
Thank you friend! I wish you good luck with it!
Pajarillo57 1 day ago
you my friend are a very good person you have just made a friend in canada , and i a friend in the ukraine cool !
Arriscraft 1 month ago
@Arriscraft
:) I am glad to have good friends. Unfortunately, the best friends are abroad...
Pajarillo57 1 month ago
how can i try and and use your guitar playing as a model to follow if i don;t subscribed to your channel .There i will thanks comrade !
Arriscraft 1 month ago
@Arriscraft
Thak you friend! I wish you all the best. Feel free if you need some advice from me.
Pajarillo57 1 month ago
most welcome and another thing i will listen to your interpretation of the peice so i can play it better ! I am just a lowly bricklayer but my passion is guitar ! Thanks again .
Arriscraft 1 month ago
@Arriscraft
Good luck to you!!!
Pajarillo57 1 month ago
in my humble opinion this is the best interpretation i have heard so far !
Arriscraft 1 month ago
@Arriscraft
Thank you very much friend!!!
Pajarillo57 1 month ago
i agree with your my friend ( not repeats )!
Arriscraft 1 month ago
@Arriscraft
Yes friend!
Pajarillo57 1 month ago
You should smile.
vidsofmykids 2 months ago
Отправил глупый комментарий, потом удалил.
BugrovAndrey 3 months ago
I don't think people know how much talent this takes..... I had to play this for my jury in college. And i had to practice A TON
jaredthegreat911 7 months ago
To be honest, I like both version...though we feel the chord progression a bit more here, but on the 'long' version, we have the time to love each chords.
AzafreakSM 8 months ago
@AzafreakSM
If you play each bar twice, let say, in Chaccona by Bach, you will have much more time to enjoy chords and harmonies too...
Pajarillo57 8 months ago
@Pajarillo57 It's not the same thing. In Chaccona by Bach, it's a solo, the pattern isn't the same at all ( like here). Also, don't forget that, at first, it's named Etude.
AzafreakSM 8 months ago
@AzafreakSM
OK, then try to play each bar twice in Etudes by Chopin or Rakhmaninov - they are also named Etudes...
You see friend, I'm really tired of discussing these stupid repeats. If you don't want to believe me - then read articles in Guitar magazines written by very famous guitarists and compare manuscripts by Lobos with this distorted edition.
Pajarillo57 8 months ago
@Pajarillo57 lol We've just start arguing ! Don't be tired now... What I mean is:
1) It's an etude
2) It's the same pattern over and over, so playing it once or twice or even 4times would sounds great, it's not a melody itself as Chopin or Rakhmaninov.
3) Yes it sounds great with 1 measure each, but it ALSO sounds good with twice of it.
Peace and continue playing guitar so well.
AzafreakSM 8 months ago
@AzafreakSM
Well, playing each bar twice you turn a beautiful piece of music into exercise. Nicely sounding, but EXERCISE. It is sad to hear that you didn't recognize the melody here. Yes, it is not too complicated but it is here. If you want I can reveal this secter to you. By the way, many guitarists think that the melody here is absent and consequently, play it like an exercise, without melody. In this case repeats don't spoil it so much.
Pajarillo57 8 months ago
This is how Villa Lobos wrote the piece AND also etude 2. No repeats. I've got a copy of the original 1928 manuscript in HVL's own handwriting.
keto6789 1 year ago
@keto6789
Exactly.
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
@keto6789
You overstate the case for the 1928 manuscript. They are neither the "original" nor in Villa-Lobos handwriting. An earlier manuscripts of #1 has the repeats, so does a later version given to Calervaro in the 40's. The 1928 manuscript has defenders from a musical stand point, but all scholarly opinions I've seen side with the published version as HVL's official. Here is a must-read reference (in Portuguese): worldcat.org/title/heitor-villa-lobos-e-o-violao/oclc/529433612
ITubeSheTubes 1 year ago
@ITubeSheTubes
I read TWO great articles about Lobos' manuscripts in the most famous Classical Guitar magazines - Classical Guitar and Guitar Review. They are really scientific works - not just a sketches. If you want I'll find them in my piles of magazines and tell you the numbers of the issues in order you could also read them...
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
@Pajarillo57
Can you post the references for these articles? The 1928 Max Eschig manuscript and others in the HVL Museum generated a stream of dissertations since they appeared in 1992. They take into consideration more than the 1928 and published versions. There are manuscripts donated to the museum by the Guimaraes family (HVL's first wife), Calevaro's copies, Segovia letters and pianist TomásTeran recollections. There is a new edition coming out from ME make the story clear. Or not!
ITubeSheTubes 1 year ago
@ITubeSheTubes
I reccomend you to read David Leisner's article from Classical Guitar Magazine, December 2003-January 2004, Eduardo Fernandez-Guitar Review, Fall 1996, Stanly Yates - Soundboard, Summer 1997 and also M.Ophee- Classical Guitar -May 1995. In my opinion EMS is the most rliable source accurately written by Lobos' own hand.
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
Wow I really like that you played it without repeats, I never saw that before. But, to me it sounds much more spanish like this, which I like. Is there someplace I can get this original score? I'm learning this piece right now, but it is the version with repeats.
yoyodunno 1 year ago
@yoyodunno
Just don't repeat each bar twice...
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
@Pajarillo57 lol ok good point, I wasn't sure if there was something else different in the score.
yoyodunno 1 year ago
I appreciate your desire to play the original manuscript and I acknowledge your skill; however, the piece needs to breathe. You say that Segovia turned it into a boring exercise, yet in the comments you say you use it to warm up with. Those of you who want to play this fast.....dont worry about it, in fact, slow it down, double it and let it breathe.
jaydaily3 1 year ago
@jaydaily3
Friend, you are free to play it slow and double or triple or whatever...I just recorded it 2 years ago and posted here. If you want I may rerecord it in double or merely twice in a row (that actually is better than double bars). I think it would be better to show your own version instead of critisizing...
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
@Pajarillo57 I apologize....I meant no criticism....I am currently learning the piece and I am still between the beginner and intermediate stages, as far as skill. I must say your challenge to post my own version is a good motivation for me. Thanks for the response and God Bless you as you continue to inspire others.
jaydaily3 1 year ago
@jaydaily3
I love Villa-Lobos' music very much and have played practically all the guitar pieces by him including Concerto with Orchestra (BTW, you may watch it here on Youtube). So I know his music quite well from inside. The Study #1 (and also #2) must be played without repeats!!! This was the author's intention and repeats destroy the idea of the music. That is not only my personal opinion. There are quite many articles about Lobos manuscripts and analising them. Just read them! Good luck!
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
Thank you :)
SeTorsken 1 year ago
sorry ...this version is mess it up...You have to double this chordes....
papisNY 1 year ago
@papisNY
I'm tired of explaining... please read all the comments first. Especially mine.
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
@papisNY
Friend, despite I am tired of explaining, as I said before, I do it one more time especially for you, because, as I see, you have no patient to read ALL the correspondence where I thousand times explained why I play it without repeats. So what I play is THE ORIGINAL version by HVL himself - his manuscript. Repeats were put by Segovia - not by Lobos. They distorted the whole idea of the piece and made it a stupid exersise. To get some more knowledge about Villa-Lobos music you haver to
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
Ответить на это видео...
...read some articles abouit his manuscripts. You my find them on the Internet or in Classical guitar magazines. So get more knowledge before critisizing!
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
man i cant even get half that tempo...
00sven00sven00 1 year ago
@00sven00sven00 But I learned it about 40 years ago and use it as a warming up study together with other studies, of course. If you do this you'll get this tempo too. Good luck~!!!
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
@Pajarillo57 cool, ill post up my version in....37 years. sigh...
00sven00sven00 1 year ago
@MrRenessance Спасибо! Да, вещь, действительно, потрясающая. Лобос был большим мастером гитары и замечательного таланта композитором.
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
@MrRenessance Thank you friend!
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
amazing--thx for the inspiration!
orinlouis 1 year ago
i prefer w/out repeats...and love the speed.
orinlouis 1 year ago
@orinlouis Thanks Orin! This is was Lobos wanted.
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
@Pajarillo57 i've no right to weigh in on this debate, but whoever wanted it was right to.
orinlouis 1 year ago
@orinlouis Thanks very much friend!
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
i love this song!!! im playing at the moment and its so special!....but ur speed..dmn..XD i can only dream for that..
lukthere2 1 year ago
@lukthere2 Thanks friend! I wish you good luck!
Pajarillo57 1 year ago
excellent
bramgila 2 years ago
Thanks!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Good luck!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Thank you friend!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
As a listener I think, with the repeats ,the musical content is emphasized more thus it's impact is greater-it stays in your brain.
Without the repeats the music flaws faster and smaller.
However thank you for bringing this issue as well as playing for us.
potrodsas 2 years ago
Please read the description and comments. I'm tired of explanations why I played it without repeats. If you like Segovia's distorted version that is your choice. I like Lobos' original version. Try to play, let say, Etude by Chopin repeating each of the bars twice - maybe it will stay better in the brain then?
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
você queria ser o mais rápido do mundo?
Conseguiu, agora já pode tocar a outra metade do estudo. beijos
lixeromau 2 years ago
I didn't want to be the faster player of this Study in the world. I just performed the piece as it should be played. I wonder how can it be that I, living in Ukraine, know much more about Brazilian music than you Brazilian...It has no second part. It just must be played without repeats, as Lobos composed it.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Porque fazer esta besteira, está péssimo, aonde vc quer chegar!!!!
meamaral3 2 years ago
Cuidado com a acentuação e com o objetivo do estudo, que não é só técnico. Ele bem tocado retrata o mar aberto do Brasil, como falou Manoel S Macos(grande mestre do violão no Br) aBRAÇOS
meamaral3 2 years ago
Thanks friend!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
desculpas, mas este é o estudo 1. Vc tem uma técnica ótima e uma interpretação maravilhosa.
meamaral3 2 years ago
So, you like it?
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
C'est évident que le tempo est bon, mais ça manque vraiment de nuances.
UnforgivenOwn 2 years ago
So show your version with nuances.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
beautiful.5+++
OLIVERA1961 2 years ago
Thanks friend!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Pajarrillo, Thanks for the revelation. Thought rpts were too many. Sounded too exercisey. Without rpts the etude is more melodic, shorter not monotonous and better to play. Had just finished an altered shorter version of my own. Be glad to play Villa-Lobos version now instead of Segovia's.
ruluca3 2 years ago
Yes friend!!!
Congratulations! It's better to play the author's version than a distorted one...
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
What about the repeat at 0:50 - 0:58 , was that in the original?
Nietopyrz360 2 years ago
Lovely speed ! Would love to hear it with the repeats!
cardaloravefa 2 years ago
Hi friend!
I'm tired of repeating why I don't play repeats. Please read all the comments. I can play this Study 100 times in a row without stopping. So for me to play repeats is not a problem at all. I played it with repeats untill I got the manuscript and read several articles about it. I just prefer the author's version.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Hello! I did read your comments; I just like your playing and would love to hear the repeats played by you, that's all!
cardaloravefa 2 years ago
You see friend what I play is not my own "invention". I just play the original version by Lobos who was a brilliant guitarist. He was the first who premiered his 12 Etudes in the French Ambassy. He played the guitar wonderfully - not as Segovia mentioned in his memories. Now we have an access to the truth. So why should we play distorted version by Segovia when we have original version by the great composer and guitarist???BTW, Etude#2 is also without any repeats! I'll post it too.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Chill Dude! All the man is saying is the repeated version has grown on him, and that a man with your technique could really do his ear a treat if the repeats were there too. its a compliment.
Elevatormusicmaker 2 years ago
I won't argue whether you should play the repeats or not. It your musical decision. However, part of your reasoning is flawed. Labeling the published version as Segovia's and the 1928 manuscript as Villa's is completely inaccurate. For starters, there is the problem of authenticity of the manuscripts - Only a copies exists and there is no evidence it it Villa's writing. Segovia never particularly cared for the 12 Etudes, he said so in his letters to Ponce -- He only performed 1, 7, 8.
ITubeSheTubes 2 years ago
My friend, you have to have some more knowledges on the subject before writing such things. You should know that afrer death of Lobos' first wife his archives became accsessible. And there were found HIS OWN manuscripts of the 12 Styudies. Who will now believe Segovia if he said that Lobos played guitar dreadfully??? Even if he said something in a letter addressed to Ponce...
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Maybe I need some clarification of which manuscripts you are referring to. The complete copy that led to David Leiner's recording (#1 without repeats!!) is from a 1928 manuscript belonging to Max Eschig.
There are also the "Guimarães archives" donates to the HVL museum by the first wife's estate. In this collection there is an incomplete manuscript o the Etudes.
Anyway, the 1928 manuscript was considered as a potential final version.
ITubeSheTubes 2 years ago
I've played ALL the guitar compositions by Villa-Lobos including Concerto with Orchestra (which you may watch here on YouTube). So I know well his "writing", his hand. It means I know his style of writing. Usually composers have something you can recognise as the thing belonging by this or another author because you find the same or similar thing in different pieces. There is no stupidly repeated bars in any of the Maestro's compositions. That's Segovia's hand...And also read the Magazines.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
It is hard to believe Segovia made substantial changes. After the excitement of the discovery of the 1928 version, experts (Zanon, Zigante, Gilardino) accept the 1953 published version as Villa Lobos'.
ITubeSheTubes 2 years ago
Another thing to confirm what I said. Please read the arcitles published in "Classical Guitar" December 2003 and in "Soundboard" Summer 1997. It also wouldn't be bad for you to have a look at the manuscript itself. It's well known that Segovia disliked modern music and critisized Lobos. On this reason TOO many great compositions dedicated to Segovia haven't seen light until now. Angelo Gillardino publishes them. God bless him for that!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Villa-Lobos was a competent guitarist. There are two known recordings of his released as 78s playing Choros 1 and Prelude 1. But sorry, he was not capable of playing the etudes. Actually, no one was. The first complete performance only took place in 1963 by Turibio Santos. Villa-Lobos (this is related by Carlevaro) used to ask pianist Tomáz Terán to show the pieces to guitarists. He never heard the Etudes played properly.
ITubeSheTubes 2 years ago
And finally, I remind you that the first person who performed ALL 12 Studies was Villa-Lobos. It was in 1929 at the French Embassy. Unfortunately, there is no record of that premiere... He was a brilliant guitarist having enormous technique. Moreover, he composed them which wouldn't be possible without knowing the instrument very well and having brilliant technique.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
I know this is not the Wikipedia, but it would fall into the category of "citation needed". It is a major revelation. You mean he gave a concert at the French embassy in Rio?
ITubeSheTubes 2 years ago
Yes. He brilliantly premiered his 12 Studies there. Try to read some books and articles about Lobos and his Studies. And surely read those two articles from Guitar Magazines I mentioned.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Look also to the "Guitar Review" Fall 1996. There is another article about the Manuscripts by Lobos.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Interesting. You're the first person I've heard play it without the repeats and whilst I don't actually dislike them I can see how they can make for monotony. I wonder if everyone will soon start omitting them. You could have started something here.
stephenyatesacoustic 2 years ago
Wow wonderful just wonderful, the writing and the playing! Bravo!
drydyboy 2 years ago
Thanks very much friend!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
There are a lot of Guitar Experts on here , but you are the only one I would choose to go on my Favourites Playlist. *
shela2 2 years ago
Thanks very much dear Shela!
Kiss you!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
so cold playing...as robot
zirokl 2 years ago
Show me yours....
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
working on this piece right now. nice etude, but i enjoy the preludes as well.. im not playing it on this speed by the way.. very nicely done this one!
basbreda 2 years ago
I posted some of trhe Preludes too.
Thanks for the comment!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
It depends only of you. I learned this Study in 10 minutes, but have been playing it all my life. There is always something to improve though...
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
How many years of classical training would it take to master this song?
Flipflops9t2 2 years ago
i always knew the repeats seemed too robotic for villa-lobos! thank you for confirming my feelings :)
velspir 2 years ago
haha sounds better without the repeats, especially the chromatic descent section . lol can't believe i've been stupidly playing each bar twice all these years.
SingHouse 2 years ago
Yes, my friend, Segovia made it worse and all the guitarists including Williams, Bream etc.,etc. played it in Segovia reduction. But Lobos didn't accept his changes. Because of that they were published 24 years after composing!!! I'm glad I helped you to understand how they should be played.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
I don't speak Spanish but I know what my nick means! i see no sence in repeating each bar. It destroys the music and turns it into a stupid exercise.BTW, the same with the Study#2. Without repeats it becomes understandable and beautiful. Try to play, let say, Etude by Chopin repeating each of the bars twice...What will you get then?
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
To be fair, it IS a study, so it would probably be best for people who are just learning the piece (like me!) to do it with the repeats.
Flipflops9t2 2 years ago
If you are working on some technique you have to play EXERVCISES. And then you may repeat them as many times as you want. But a Study is a musical piece - not only technical exercise, but a piee of music. So it has a form, a musical idea and image. Repeating each bar twice just destroys all this. Try to play, let say, a similar technical Study of Barrios called BEES repeating each bar twice. What will you get then??? Think of it, my friend.
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Carlevaro is not the truth in last instance. I looked through his "masterclasses" and found many things that are not true. He didn't know about the manuscripts, however, nobody knew at the time. And he was under strong Segovia influence. Read the book he wrote. If you love Lobos - play as he wrote it!!! Good luck!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
Thanks for sharing the information, I was not aware that the repeat was not included in the original. Excellent playing as well.
SUNNYD3322 2 years ago
Thank you!
Pajarillo57 2 years ago
I'm tired of saying: THERE ARE NO ANY REPEATS IN THE MOST AUTHORITATIVE EDITION OF THE ETUDES - MANUSCRIPT !!!! Those stupid repeats are the invention of Segovia. Lobos didn't accept Segovia's changes so Etudes were published 24 years after composing. However,Thanks for estimating.
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
you have to repeat the parts... i don't like this version.
but you have the speed!! bravo!
sokolata18 3 years ago
Yes, my friend, you are completely right! Everyone knows now about some Segovia's features. Just to mention so called SEGOVIA ARCHIVE in which too many wonderful pieces were frozen for many years. Manuscript is the most precise document of the author himself, the most authoritative. Thanks!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Segovia would regularly change notes or even chop whole measures he didn't like. As witness: the new edition of Capriccio Diabolico that restores the measures that he left out. He was a great musician, but he was also full of himself.
carystrings 2 years ago
I prefer the original version of the piece but nice performance !
VFAClo 3 years ago
Thank you. I've played the Segovia version almost all my life until I discovered the manuscript. I always was in doubt about logic in those stupid repeats. When I read some articles about the manuscript and got it all jmy doubts disappeared.
Best regards!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Hmm I like many of your ideas in this piece, and I didnt know the real thing had no repeats. Thanks for sharing.
broknsaint 3 years ago
You are welcome!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Hi:
Nice idea, and you play very well.
Wish you the best:
Aarash
Aarashguitar 3 years ago
Thanks! That is not my idea - that's Lobos' idea. He wrote thus in the manuscript. I just follow his idea.
Regards!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Perfect!!!VERY GOOD MATE!!!
edrods 3 years ago
Thanks very much!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
I think this is well played. The entire sense of this study is coming out. Etude means nothing else than what it is; a study. Check Wikipedia for that term.
The only two things not really corresponding to my personal taste are the hard attacks on the bass notes and some little time fluctuations. But those tiny fluctuations seem normal in classical music, Segovia does it as well but he played it smoother soundwise but the recording is professional (4000$ mic?) and more edited and compressed.
qminusis 3 years ago
Thanks very much!My friend, "hard attaks on the bass notes" as you said I make intentionally because that's the melody which too many of the guitar players who play this study can't find. The same concerning "some little time fluctuations" as you say.I make it intentionally otherwise it would be like a metronom.
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
and .. .i forgot to say: the way you're playing right now it sounds like an exercise !
davidzaagsma 3 years ago
Probably you can do it better than me??? So, go on!!! Instead of your stupid criticism that has no base under it you'd better show your THE BEST interpretation...
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
still sounds like an exercise to me... whatever you say. and i'm not the only one who thinks so.
davidzaagsma 3 years ago
Of course, as one song of DEEP PURPLE says "You fool no one". Don't be offended but it's funny when a man is told true and discovered information but refusing to accept it having no real arguments. You play even 4 or 5 times each of the bars it will never be better than Lobos wrote.Finally who are you?You have played ALL Guitar music by Lobos???You have teaching experience of 35 years?You have read Guitar magazines? I DID...
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
when you think that the repeats transform the piece into an exercise- then you simply aren't able to play it in a musical matter.
davidzaagsma 3 years ago
Opinions of the people who don't respect the author (Villa-Lobos) are not of any interest for me. I always played it with repeats.But when I discovered the Manuscript I understood that that's Lobos wanted.
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
good job, you have great technique, and I heard no flaws. I personally think that you might like it more if you tried to add a bit more expression, like vary your dynamics, tempo, and maybe tonal colors.
MatthewWSmith 3 years ago
I apreciate your advices, but it seems you haven't catch the idea of this Study. I bet you can't say where is the melody here and is it present here at all. If you knew this you'd never fought for these stupid repeats that destroy the Idea. And this is a reason of not publishing for almost 25 years after composing.
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
would not you agree, though, that the repeats truly add more thought to each chord, which consequently makes the piece have greater depth altogether?
MatthewWSmith 3 years ago
Those repeats in no way add depth or something like that! They only make AN EXERSISE from this wonderful study. They stop melody!!!If you like to play an arpegio exersise - so go on! Play each bar even three times. But if you want to play Lobos' music that the study #1 obviously IS than be so kind to follow the author's idea and SCORE!!! This is my opinion. I don't insist everyone should share my attitude to this piece.
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
You are free to do whatever you want and put your version here. I just put mine and exlpained why I play like I did.
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
vielen Dank, aber Segovia ist der beste gitarrenspieler. tag
MatthewWSmith 3 years ago
I agree with you. Yes, he was the GREAT guitar player. But Lobos was too...
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Thanks very much my friend! I agree with you. Threir name is RETROGRADS. The Lobos Manuscript is the most precise and reliable source. Unfortunately, many guitarists, including the world stars play his Etudes from Segovia reduction. But that's because the manuscript was revealed just some years ago. It is clear and logical. Segovia very much changed it not in a good direction. Thanks again! Best regards!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Segovia was a master guitarist and I believe he was the best. I am sure he had a reason for putting in the repeats. It might add clarity to each repeat and add a depth that can be felt more with more time spent playing certain notes.
MatthewWSmith 3 years ago
Yes, Segovia was the great master and ONE the best in his time. Don't forget about Sainz de la Maza, Oyanguren, Gomez, Llobet, Salinas, Anido and many others.There is a set of CD's called Segovia & his Contemporaries. It was compelled in a way to show that there were figures equal and even better than Master Segovia. Repeats make this beautiful Study (as well as #2) just arpegio exersise - nothing more. Lobos played the guitar wonderfully!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
if you listen to Segovia's recording on youtube, it certainly doesn't sound like an exercise. Mozna ale myslis trochu jinak, a tvoje perspectiva se tezko zmeni.
MatthewWSmith 3 years ago
My friend, let's stop this discussion. Everyone has his rights and is free to show his/her efforts. I keep the Manuscript and play the author's version because I've played ALL GUITAR MUSIC by Lobos including the Concerto and it makes me think I know something about it. I don't forbid you to play each bar twice (or 3,4,5,etc. times).Viva LOBOS!!!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
I don't really understand the issue here in this thread comparing this work with Segovias playing. Or, on the other hand, it might be quite a honor to be compared with Segovia.
qminusis 3 years ago
Yes, I agree with you. At last, everyone who doesn't like this my version may show us his own version that is,in his opinion, RIGHT, CORRECT, THE BEST etc. Thanks for understanding!
Regards!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Thank you very much!!!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Your interpretation is awful! I don't care what manuscrip you have. I still think you have great tecnique !
choppin1173 3 years ago
If you don't care the manuscript of the author himself (Lobos) that was discussed a lot in the most famous Guitar Magazines then I can't argue with you. You prefer Segovia's version that it really awful. He cut some parts from the Etides, put stupid repeats there making the music more like exercises. Think, why it was published 25 years after composing.Because Lobos didn't approve Segovia's changes. Finally, who forbids you to play what you like???
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Play them bars twice men! You got very good technique but you're wasting it with this interpretation.
choppin1173 3 years ago
Why are you playing each bar only one time? It supposed to be 2 times each bar... But nice finger work :)
tamiron2000 3 years ago
I had always played it each bar twice until I found a manuscript by Lobos which is hundred times better than Segovia edition. There are no repeat signs there as in the Etude #1 as in the Etude #2.And in the other Etudes there aren't so many mistakes as in the Segovia version. IT IS BETTER!!!Thanks.
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Muy buena interpetacion.cinco estrella y a mis favoritos.
Saludos, Irving
irvingtarrega 3 years ago
Thanks very much, my friend!!!
Best regards!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
It would have been very nice if you could've actually played it that fast.
janjohandealgenman 3 years ago
Did you understand what you have said yourself?
Cheer up!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
maybe my sarcasm was to cryptic for you. the translation would be: you can't play it at this speed because you are making to many mistakes and you can't play the middle part. and I think repeats make it better (but that is is personal I guess)
janjohandealgenman 3 years ago
Probably you CAN do it better... So, congratulations then, generous man.
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Thank you very much, I think I am beter then you. see my video of me playing and judge for yourself.
janjohandealgenman 3 years ago
Well janjohandealgenman, you don't play bad for sure. I'm not really impressed though... You will probably always be better at talking!!! Cheers buddy
Nice version Pajarillo, thanks for having done the research to be able to play this for us.
kriniere323 3 years ago
wow dude i have to say that's some fast fingering...haha.
hooladan 3 years ago
What do you mean saying "fast fingering"???
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Nothing I was just joking, but you're a good guitar player.
hooladan 3 years ago
Thanks!
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
squeak!
jojomellon 3 years ago
Guitar is not mine and newest strings...
Pajarillo57 3 years ago
Repeats are missing. Maybe due to the difficulty of holding the bars. Can be cleaner too. Good pace and power.
AkiraBergman 4 years ago
Repeats I don't play intentionally because there are not any repeat signs in the MANUSCRIPT. Without them the music became more clear and fluent, understandable.Read articles about the Manuscript in guitar magazines!
Pajarillo57 4 years ago
the repeats are optional the original manuscript made by villalobos didnt have any repeats but i agree that it needs to be cleaner.
horgamastron 4 years ago