@CSKA_Moscou said in #16:
I apologize for the great confusion I have caused between the two works. And thank for the clarification!
I'm afraid the confusion persists
I sometimes confuse Clara Wieck Piano Concerto with the one from Robert Schumann (same tonality in A minor, very similar structure
I cannot agree with that statement. What structure? I remember R. Schumann well enough, and I even downloaded Clara's score because I couldn't figure out what you could possibly have meant by "similiar structure", and I still can't after 2 minutes of staring at it.
Clara 1st mvt: the brilliant style, classical approach to tempo, pianistically reminiscent of very young Chopin, simpler than Hummel, denser than Moscheles, Kalkbrenner comes to mind, or Henselt... Working with a simple motivic cell, embelishing rather than developing... Conventional orchestral accompaniment...
Robert 1st: a romantic fantasy, 10 or so tempo changes, contrasting sections, long melodies, a big cadenza, more ambitious, symphonic writing, both as tutti and in mixing orchestral textures with solo. Piano writing in his own style, although surprisingly user-friendly compared to his other pieces
Clara 2nd: operatic aria for piano, later switch to cello
Robert 2nd: goofy intermezzo, exchanging short phrases between solo and orchestra, then the most wonderful dreamy bit...
Bottom line: they have nothing in common. There are no corresponding sections between the two pieces. Different motivic material, different compositional techniques and general construction ideas.
but now the interesting part:
a criticism particularly regarding the handling of tempi, which are rather fast for my taste, and the relationship to the work, since they choose to emphasize the virtuosic and technical aspects in a headlong rush that is more reminiscent of Florestan than Eusebius, while Robert Schumann probably hoped that his work will be performed and understood with this duality.
This resulted in some certainly memorable versions, but ones lacking a bit that historical, almost mystical musicality in relation to the Schumanns' connection with literature (which is also true for the Clara concerto).
I'm very curious about all that, because I've heard both Yuja Wang and Khatia Buniatishvili play Schumann, and I think they produce beautiful, lyrical, and exciting performances and maintain extremely high artistic standards. I did not find anything that might be even remotely controversial or questionable in terms of interpretation, academic correctness, or historical considerations. I very much agree with their tempi, although these may vary significantly in different acoustics. To the best of my understanding, they follow the sheet music to the letter and tastefully bring the score to life with their personalities and skills.
Exactly, which tempi do you consider too fast? What fragments lack "mystical musicality", because of the technical aspects or a headlong rush? How would you play instead? Which bars are particularly deficient in appreciation of "Schumann's connection with literature"?
Here is the full score and reduction, whichever you prefer https://imslp.org/wiki/Piano_Concerto,Op.54(Schumann,_Robert)
I await your expertise
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jbHbDena_U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWDrJT0s1s8&list=RDfWDrJT0s1s8&start_radio=1
@CSKA_Moscou said in #16:
> I apologize for the great confusion I have caused between the two works. And thank for the clarification!
I'm afraid the confusion persists
> I sometimes confuse Clara Wieck Piano Concerto with the one from Robert Schumann (same tonality in A minor, very similar structure
I cannot agree with that statement. What structure? I remember R. Schumann well enough, and I even downloaded Clara's score because I couldn't figure out what you could possibly have meant by "similiar structure", and I still can't after 2 minutes of staring at it.
Clara 1st mvt: the brilliant style, classical approach to tempo, pianistically reminiscent of very young Chopin, simpler than Hummel, denser than Moscheles, Kalkbrenner comes to mind, or Henselt... Working with a simple motivic cell, embelishing rather than developing... Conventional orchestral accompaniment...
Robert 1st: a romantic fantasy, 10 or so tempo changes, contrasting sections, long melodies, a big cadenza, more ambitious, symphonic writing, both as tutti and in mixing orchestral textures with solo. Piano writing in his own style, although surprisingly user-friendly compared to his other pieces
Clara 2nd: operatic aria for piano, later switch to cello
Robert 2nd: goofy intermezzo, exchanging short phrases between solo and orchestra, then the most wonderful dreamy bit...
Bottom line: they have nothing in common. There are no corresponding sections between the two pieces. Different motivic material, different compositional techniques and general construction ideas.
but now the interesting part:
> a criticism particularly regarding the handling of tempi, which are rather fast for my taste, and the relationship to the work, since they choose to emphasize the virtuosic and technical aspects in a headlong rush that is more reminiscent of Florestan than Eusebius, while Robert Schumann probably hoped that his work will be performed and understood with this duality.
>
> This resulted in some certainly memorable versions, but ones lacking a bit that historical, almost mystical musicality in relation to the Schumanns' connection with literature (which is also true for the Clara concerto).
I'm very curious about all that, because I've heard both Yuja Wang and Khatia Buniatishvili play Schumann, and I think they produce beautiful, lyrical, and exciting performances and maintain extremely high artistic standards. I did not find anything that might be even remotely controversial or questionable in terms of interpretation, academic correctness, or historical considerations. I very much agree with their tempi, although these may vary significantly in different acoustics. To the best of my understanding, they follow the sheet music to the letter and tastefully bring the score to life with their personalities and skills.
Exactly, which tempi do you consider too fast? What fragments lack "mystical musicality", because of the technical aspects or a headlong rush? How would you play instead? Which bars are particularly deficient in appreciation of "Schumann's connection with literature"?
Here is the full score and reduction, whichever you prefer https://imslp.org/wiki/Piano_Concerto,_Op.54_(Schumann,_Robert)
I await your expertise
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jbHbDena_U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWDrJT0s1s8&list=RDfWDrJT0s1s8&start_radio=1