 We are very happy to have with us today the pianist Marc-André Amelain. Welcome to the Hineverlag. You've just given a concert here in Munich last night and we'll play in Belgium tomorrow, so thank you very much for taking the time to visit our publishing house for this interview. It's a pleasure. It's wonderful to see the offices, you know, what your facility looks like here. It's wonderful. Up to now, I mean, and for I think any pianist, you know, all you are are blue covers. That's what identifies you, you know, but now I can see where you are. It's great. We at Hine have just published three Urtext edition of works by Rachmaninoff, the 24 Preludes, the Attu Tableau and the Coralli variations, and the fingerings for these volumes have been provided by none other than you, Marc-André Amelain. I remember when we met in December 2012 to discuss this project, you were at first a bit hesitant to take on the job. Were you skeptical about the idea of adding fingerings in general, or maybe was it because of Rachmaninoff in particular? For example, how well did you know the works that I mentioned before? Well, I think at first I was hesitant because I didn't know whether editions really needed fingerings because, and I still think that there are quite a few passages and sections of works which are so obvious that they really don't need any commentary or fingering elucidation from anyone, really. But there are actually, after examining these works closely, I can say that there are indeed suggestions that are possible to be made. Above and beyond what Rachmaninoff has already provided. So that's what I set out to do. In a few places Rachmaninoff added fingerings himself, and they are very original sometimes. Have these fingerings been illuminating to you in some way? Does it tell you something about the way he wanted his pieces to be performed? Well, first of all, when I saw that he provided some fingerings, of course I wasn't going to change them. I don't think, I mean this is a little bit long ago that I did these fingerings, but as far as I remember I did not suggest any alternates when he provided his own because I figured that he had specific results in mind. In one particular case which I think is one of your questions, it's very, very clear that the fingering that he indicates, it's in the 4th etude tableau, opus 39, really has an influence on the musical result. And it's a very, very simple thing. So it's a simple descending scalar passage. But it's sort of a very marcato sort of style of music. So what he indicates is thumb and second finger. Even with a thumb on the black key, which in music of the classical period is considered taboo, but here it's perfectly acceptable and there's an accent at the end of the scale. So it helps the rhythmic contour of the piece. And I think that is better than if you just fingered it to the conventional way, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3. It wouldn't be quite as effective. So that's a very, very intelligent suggestion and I wasn't about to change it. So that's just one example. He did not provide a lot of fingerings overall, only when he felt it was absolutely necessary. My role in there was to supplement these suggestions. Not with anything terribly personal, although I was thinking that there are places which perhaps need clarification, depending on your level of pianistic ability in order to tackle these things. Another interesting question, of course, is what kind of hand do you write fingerings for? Because Rachmaninoff had very large hands. I think he could span a 12th. I myself can span an 11th, so just from C to F. And generally I try to stick to fingerings which would benefit a large hand, even though there are many pianists who tackle these things, who happily tackle these pieces, who have very, very small hands. But I've found that pianists who do have small hands somehow find a way to get around the writing and find solutions through creative peddling or whatnot or certain other devices that I'm not aware of, because I have a large hand and I don't have to worry about these things. But I decided to really stick to the large hand philosophy, the large hand sort of canvas in writing these fingerings. So with regard to your own fingerings that you have provided, maybe you could show us an example of a passage where you felt it was necessary to give a hint to the pianist? I think in most cases the solution, when there was no fingering, was so obvious that I didn't feel that I could add any fingerings without making the performer feel like an idiot for not thinking of it themselves. But in certain cases, I guess there's more personal things such as this little passage here in Opus 39, No. 902 Tablo. It's a simple pattern in thirds and it's within a D major sort of scale, a diatonic scale. If you would follow the sort of accepted concept that you shouldn't have too many thumbs on the black keys, then you would finger it taking care to put second fingers on black keys. But personally I find that it helps to have as much of the same movement as possible with each of these thirds. So I put a thumb and third finger on every eighth note. It helps establish the rhythm, the regularity of the rhythm and also the regularity of the accents. Instead of... is pretty much how you would finger a scale in thirds. So that's just one example really. Are there pieces that you got to know better while working on the fingerings and perhaps would consider playing them now more often in your concerts or maybe for the first time? I have to say that I haven't played all of these pieces, but working on these fingerings would definitely encourage me to explore this literature further. I don't think I would necessarily play all of them, but there are some which I hadn't been as attentive to as I should and which would make a perfect addition to some of the programs that I offer. And to answer another possible question, I think it is perfectly possible to offer fingerings for things that you haven't played before. You approach this sort of thing in the same way as you would when you were learning a piece. Finding fingerings is part of that process, whether you are playing the piece or not. What would you say? Which place does Rachmaninoff occupy in a repertoire in general? I think I'm very likely to play more Rachmaninoff in the future. I added a few preludes in my repertoire a couple of years ago and I'd definitely be interested in looking at more of the etude tableau. I can't tell you how many people have actually said that you should look at the first sonata, because they really, really love it. The couple of times I've heard it, I have to say that it did not make an immediate impression, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything because I can think of other composers, Metna, for example, which don't make an immediate impression at first hearing, but then gradually the music takes hold of you. And I'm sure that in some of Rachmaninoff's works it's the case as well. On the other hand, I think that something like Rachmaninoff's Chopin variations is a very appealing piece, but it hasn't really received its due. Pianists are much more readily tackling the Corelli variations, but I think the Chopin variations, even though it's an early work, is very, very worthy of anyone's attention. In a concert setting it might be a little hard to digest having all 24 preludes. I used to play all of Iberia in one concert and I thought it was a marvelous idea, but some people told me it's a lot of Spanish music in one recital, and in a rather long recital too, because I also used to add Navarra. I think there is a case to be made that there will be never enough Rachmaninoff recordings, because he's such a vital presence and continues to be, and I think his presence in our lives is really growing, and it's especially amusing to consider past critical opinions of his music. If you look at the 1954 Grove, there was an article, the entry on Rachmaninoff, written by Eric Blum, who was the editor, said that on the whole the music doesn't have much future, if you can imagine that. But at the time Rachmaninoff really wasn't to us what he is now. He's become a necessity. So do you think there are differences perhaps between America, Europe and Asia with respect to Rachmaninoff's reputation or to the popularity of his works? I think Rachmaninoff's reputation is growing everywhere. I think he's really essential for all of us. The immediacy, the wonderful melodiousness of the music, and the way he just plunges directly into our hearts and all of that, we finally realized what a great musician he was. And as I said, one is what an essential ingredient he is to our lives. You've also played in Russia, in Moscow. Do you think there's a special feeling about it? To play maybe in the same venues as Rachmaninoff did in front of a Russian public? Oh, I think definitely. And I remember one of the last concerts I gave there was... I did the second Sonata, the 1931 version, also with a couple of preludes before. And I have to say that for one reason or another, there was a special warm feeling and perhaps an added sense of occasion when playing these for an audience who just lives, breathes and talks Rachmaninoff and eats Rachmaninoff. Apart from Rachmaninoff, you have recorded many pieces from the Russian repertoire. You have recorded the complete Scriabin Sonatas, the Sonatas by Nikolai Metner. You've recorded an album with music by Nikolai Roslavitz. Is there something special that is appealing to you in Russian music that you wouldn't find in a different repertoire, even if you have recorded many other pieces from French or American composers? Well, I think I've always been attracted to the richness of it. I mean, that's the word that really comes to my mind the most, is that there is an incredible richness and there's an unbelievable melding of craft and true inspiration. Of course you could say that in Bach and Beethoven, but there is something special in Russian music that I find that separates it from the rest, but I'm still really trying to identify exactly what it is. Of course, even Russian music varies in interest, of course, but the best is among the very greatest that I think there is, and sometimes in very many different ways. And there's quite a few Russian composers which are, while they clearly deserve more of our attention, I'm thinking of Lyapunov and his transcendental etudes, which are really masterpieces of their kind, marvelously conceived for the piano with some wonderful ideas, and a composer named Georgy Katoir, who was in really complete obscurity for most of the 20th century because he's mostly remembered as a composition teacher at the Moscow Conservatory. But his miniatures are really marvelous and I think surpass a lot of what, for example, Lyadov or Ruskiy Korsakov wrote. They really surpass him in interest. So, I mean, these are just examples, but the font of Russian literature is very vast and very worthy of further exploration. It's not always easy to get access to the printed music, of course, but at least now in this day and age, it's easier than ever. So you're not only a world-class pianist, but also a researcher or a musicologist in a way? Well, I wouldn't elevate myself to your position, of course, but let's say I'm a great, great, great enthusiast. In conclusion, it should be mentioned that Marc-André Amellin not only provided the fingerings, but also gave us valuable advice with regard to possible mistakes in the historical editions, especially missing accidentials. So, we are convinced that a lot of Urtext editions offer you the most reliable musical text there is today. And of course, we're looking forward to our upcoming joint projects that will be certainly more Rachmaninoff in the future. Marc-André Amellin, thank you very much for joining us today. It's my pleasure.