It's true though, that Feinberg brings emotional despair to the next level, but that wasn't the intention of Scriabin, after all, aside from some pieces here and there. They just have different goals: despite the similarities, Scriabin is a search of transcendence, while Feinberg is about transferring existential pain to music sheets. Therefore you like one more than the other depending on what music you want to listen to.
From measure 8 ff.: How are the quintolas played correctly? For instance, in m. 8, if the duolas in the soprano are played evenly, the c#'' should be played 2 times quickly (and through the following beats and measures, this should be the pattern) - which I don't hear here (which would mean that the duolas are to be played unevenly: the second of them always *on* the 3rd 16th note of the quintolas, not *after* it).
I would assume that the duplets are more guidelines than actual strict note values, and that the articulation should be done according to the quintuplets - i.e. there's only one c#, and it happens when the quintuplet says it happens. If he wanted two notes at different times, I don't think he'd have them sharing a notehead.
@@EggMCMUFFIN-e4l You didn't understand my question: I didn't criticize how he plays it, but instead I wanted to know what's the correct way of executing/interpreting the sheet music.
Interesting interpretation. Sirodeau's one is more melancholic and it makes sense, but I do not know what to imagine here, behind this interpretation, perhaps grotesque nostalgia.
No I think this pianist just does not understand the composer. I actually find this performance less horrifying than his readings of the 1st and 4th sonatas but he still manages to bungle the main theme. In the first measures he unexplainably makes it sound like there are polyrhythms between the hands when they are supposed to be playing in unison rhythm. In a piece where polyrhythms are so important to character and ambiance, he neglects to give the unison rhythm passages their due significance. It is like he is being careless. I do not understand it. But yeah basically i don’t know if I can discern in good conscience an intelligent *reading* of this work here in the way that you can hear when people like Nehaus play
@@samuel723 It even says "leggero and cantabile", lol, which you don't hear at all, here. But Hamelin plays anything like it's the ultimate étude, nothing unusual. It still gets across anyway because with Feinberg, a lot is about the harmony. Even if you smash the keys, the opening is still outstanding in its sound.
It’s a romantic technique, disaligning the hands. Listen to Scriabins piano rolls you hear a lot of this. Same with with Cortot. It’s just an emotive technique
I have to say that feinberg is definitely growing on me
At first I thought these were 'notey" but that is their beauty. You're drawn into the kaleidoscopic world.
Same here. Its like watching a whole bunch of abstract shapes dance around a disco ball, hich reflects a whole bunch of abstract reflrctions
Feinburg is a criminally underrated composer. These sonatas are incredible, I like them more than even Scriabin’s
Now just you wait a sec before throwin out scriabin like that. Don't be sacrilegious
are you deaf
@@__414.88b_ Yeah, after reflecting on these for a bit, might not have been the best take... Feinburg is still really cool, though!
It's true though, that Feinberg brings emotional despair to the next level, but that wasn't the intention of Scriabin, after all, aside from some pieces here and there. They just have different goals: despite the similarities, Scriabin is a search of transcendence, while Feinberg is about transferring existential pain to music sheets. Therefore you like one more than the other depending on what music you want to listen to.
It’s ok to be honest about your preferences
4:25 happy birthday to you!
Hahahaha
LMAO
Man I almost cried. Thanks.
Very beautiful, Feinberg's sonatas deserve more recognition
wow the main theme is amazing. So haunting
I know kiwi
bootleg scriabin
Absolutelly amazing sonata! 0:55 reminds me of Medtner.
What a stunning work!
THANK YOU
A very intriguing hybrid of simplicity and complexity. I hear more Chopin in this piece than Scriabn.
Its a mix for me, with hints of Roslavets
It's Scriabin but with a functional right-hand !
Love playing this
1:53 - 2:10 reminds me of Barry Harris, the harmonies and voicings
Morceau plus joyeux de l'istoire de la musique
From measure 8 ff.: How are the quintolas played correctly? For instance, in m. 8, if the duolas in the soprano are played evenly, the c#'' should be played 2 times quickly (and through the following beats and measures, this should be the pattern) - which I don't hear here (which would mean that the duolas are to be played unevenly: the second of them always *on* the 3rd 16th note of the quintolas, not *after* it).
I would assume that the duplets are more guidelines than actual strict note values, and that the articulation should be done according to the quintuplets - i.e. there's only one c#, and it happens when the quintuplet says it happens. If he wanted two notes at different times, I don't think he'd have them sharing a notehead.
@@granthicks2030 Thanks for your answer. I thought omething similar - and the duolas sound a tiny bit uneven (because of their 2:3 ratio).
Bro just enjoy the music. Nitpicking one small seduction of this great work is quite child like
@@EggMCMUFFIN-e4l You didn't understand my question: I didn't criticize how he plays it, but instead I wanted to know what's the correct way of executing/interpreting the sheet music.
Preciosa
Interesting interpretation. Sirodeau's one is more melancholic and it makes sense, but I do not know what to imagine here, behind this interpretation, perhaps grotesque nostalgia.
No I think this pianist just does not understand the composer. I actually find this performance less horrifying than his readings of the 1st and 4th sonatas but he still manages to bungle the main theme. In the first measures he unexplainably makes it sound like there are polyrhythms between the hands when they are supposed to be playing in unison rhythm. In a piece where polyrhythms are so important to character and ambiance, he neglects to give the unison rhythm passages their due significance. It is like he is being careless. I do not understand it. But yeah basically i don’t know if I can discern in good conscience an intelligent *reading* of this work here in the way that you can hear when people like Nehaus play
@@samuel723 It even says "leggero and cantabile", lol, which you don't hear at all, here. But Hamelin plays anything like it's the ultimate étude, nothing unusual. It still gets across anyway because with Feinberg, a lot is about the harmony. Even if you smash the keys, the opening is still outstanding in its sound.
It’s a romantic technique, disaligning the hands. Listen to Scriabins piano rolls you hear a lot of this. Same with with Cortot. It’s just an emotive technique
Something from Scriabin
first theme is reminiscent of scriabin's 4th sonata to my ear
Something from feinberg
I am also a Samuil