He didn't play the third movement in public or recordings because it was too technically difficult for him. Good thing he composed stuff without really thinking whether he could play them or not!
i think the comment about ravel playing it a bit fast was deleted for all you lads trying to find it. Walk where i have stood do not procrastinate for half an hour trying to find it.
It's not so much the precision of Ravel's playing that interests me, it's the clarity of intent he gives his musical ideas, the eloquent way he characterizes various rhythmic movements of the music, the ebb to flow of emotional tension, how he feels harmonies and communicates the relationships between musical ideas that shape his idea of the piece. The color in his playing shines through in the way the shimmering tremolos give urgency to melody, the particular voicings and in a direct, singing quality.
Just needed to vent my intermittently burning appreciation and devotion to Ravel. It's fascinating how strong an attachment one can form to a composer, especially when fueled with a few biographies. Or to any other creative or powerful figure in history I suppose; a novelist, a choreographer, a tyrant. I heartily recommend the remarkably well-sourced "Ravel" by Roger Nichols for anyone impressed or touched by Ravel's music and person. Nichols honours his subject by keeping the work respectably non-speculative - no conclusions are made regarding Ravel's private life, for example, other than those directly supported by Ravel's own words or those of his closest associates. The result is a clear, and to me, a very touching and relatable image of an eccentric ever-child, a lover of toys, poetry, animals and children, umistakably human in his very eccentricity and puerility. Perhaps not always worthy of admiration in every detail; but much, much more importantly, worthy of sympathy and love in his radiant humanity.
"It's fascinating how strong an attachment one can form to a composer, . . Or to any other creative or powerful figure in history I suppose; a novelist, a choreographer, a tyrant." -- Glad somebody else has noticed this. I've long had a soft and sympathetic spot for "the lame devil" -- that unscrupulous, charming political survivor Prince Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand, (1754 - 1838) , "insufferable, indispensable, irreplaceable'-- a wise and unexpectedly brave sphinx of a Statesman. He was pragmatic, versatile, and brilliant as what is now called "systems analysis" to shrewdly predict outcomes of any policy decision. He also understood economics and how to use insider information from government to make several fortunes on the bourse. A friend observed to him, "Nature suited you to be a snake or a tiger. You became an anaconda." Talleyrand took this as a compliment. An annoyed Napoleon told his Foreign Minister, "You have no principles!" Talleyrand, ever the perfect courtier, replied , "No Sire; you have enough for both of us." One of his numerous political enemies, admiring the charm and wit of his conversation at one of his elegant dinner parties, said, "How can you not love a man with so many vices?" Talleyrand was the soul of ancien- regime courtesy -- just because a man might be a murderer, he thought it no reason to be rude to him. That said, perhaps Talleyrand's greatest diplomatic triumph was in his private life: he kept most of his many former mistresses as cherished and life-long friends. There was a hidden sweetness in his icily inscrutable character that showed in his tenderness to children and fondness for dogs. His house servants adored him for his kindness and consideration. One of his more virtuous friends scolded him saying, "You are a better man than yourself."
Ravel also knew emotional subtleties about this work that no one else had. Even the greatest virtuosos cannot know these. He wrote the work and whoever has created already a work in his life knows what it means. There is no more authentic interpretation than this, and otherwise a beautiful performance.
I prefer Ravel to Debussy, not that I'm ever going to assign a higher level of "greatness" to one or the other. Ravel just resonates with me far more. He is one of the few composers that can just slay me a good percentage of the time I hear a piece by him for the first time. I get transported to a paradise in my imagination for the short while that I'm listening to him.
@@vonsmore5046 I actually need to get my art skills further improved so that I can paint the kinds of things I see in my mind's eye when I listen to Ravel. They're always so unique and otherworldly, and yet so much like our earth. It's like the true beauty of the world is actually expressed in what I see; i.e. people try to escape to fantasy universes like Lord of the Rings and Avatar, but Ravel's music makes me see our world in its own way that is so rich, mystical and organic.
Do remember the technology of the time. Wax rolls were notorious for not playing tempo back first of all, and their short recording time meant the pianist often had to rush. Take debussy's roll recordings for example. His Clair de lune was uncharacteristically rushed because of it. So take these with a grain of salt.
I suggest that If Ravel were to record this piece a second time the tempo would be different. Indeed, every time he were to play his own music there would be significant differences of many kinds.
Puedes ser que muchos interpretes superen técnicamente a un compositor... eso es obvio... mientras el uno escribe el otro estudia... pero, en las interpretaciones del compositor, quien mejor conoce su obra se encuentra su alma, el meollo de su creación...bravo Maestro Maurice
I just leeeeeeerrrrrrrrvvvvvvv Maurice Ravel....he lived at a time when grace and good manners were the norm. He was a man of his time. He , Claude Debussy and Gabriel Fauré ....elevated Music to another dimension in many ways.
You are right their, for the soul is.eternal. But if he chose to separate himself from God, as you have, I will not be meeting me hero. God, who is love, does not force anyone to love him in return. The sweet benefits of mutual love and fellowship cannot be had with slaves or automotons. Separate yourself from him, and you will be left seperate.
And remember, Jesus did not come to condemn the world but that the world might be saved through him. It is we who have chosen to stay away from him, as we choose our own way in sin that is incompatible with his pure holiness, his radiant goodness. Our sin is incompatible with his very presense.
There is no good or bad speed, everyone interprets the piece as they feel the best about it. Old music school was also very different than today's one, not the same period. Thanks for sharing louiu !
I think it's fascinating to see that his composition and arrangement style was not only precise and noble sounding but you can see it relates to his playing too. Fast and flowing are two of the more apparent descriptions which his music can be like jeux d'eau
I just listened to the second movement because I'm going to practise it. Lots of comments below about tempo, but I don't think anyone has mentioned tempo relationships. This movement has: rall., plus lent, reprenez peu à peu 1e mouvement, a tempo, sans ralentir, rall., un peu plu lent au'au début, ralentissez beaucoupt, très lent and rall. All in two pages - in fact all except one on the second page! And Ravel does all those things (except perhaps the final rall. ...). "Interpreters" take note!
There is a very strange increase of speed in 0:16 that suprised my. At first I thought it was a damage in the recording but it is the same in the 2 other repeats (1:08 , 2:47 ).
Tout à fait magique. Oui Oui il y a des variations de tempo. On s'en fiche. Allez voir sa maison à Montfort l'Amaury. C'est énorme tout est dans son jus.
Nothing give you as much of a window on the music as the composer himself playing it. He and the music are one. It's silly to bring up "wrong 'notes. It's totally irrelevant.
Would have liked to have heard Chopin or Beethoven ? Let's be humble, perhaps even grateful for what the evolving technology of that time has gifted us. Hearing these ancient recordings is so insightful and so very beautiful. Alas it leaves many pianists out to dry because they don't listen to the great masters. I perceive that most modern pianists don't really listen to the old timers. When I listen to Michaelowski or Godowsky, I perceive I am looking through a window of time into the 19th century. How do we get younger players to listen ?
Completely biased, unfair, and pseudo intellectual claim lacking evidence. Younger players can play whatever they want, but I am certain every single piano player has heard of ravel of chopin or beethoven
That time they like to change the interpretation dácord with the public, the whether, the feelings. That means he played a bit faster in this record, do not means that he plays every time in this (the same) way.
I do think that it is a bit fast but being a pianist I can understand . Part 2 because it's do easy to get ahead of the crescendo . Just because he wrote it doesn't mean that he plays it the same every time. I tend to play faster when a little nervous . Sonatine 2 is the most beautiful beginning and ending . It's what gershwin stole it's one of my favorite piecea Chopin, Debussey are piano geniuses contemporary and timeless not stoggy or harpsicorpy piano solo brilliance no matter who plays their work. It's feeling it and the performance is never the same twice.
Apparently he didn't play it publicly due to its technical demands, much like Gaspard de la nuit. I am studying it now and can confirm it's quite difficult technically
So I am wondering, is this recording a piano roll or what exactly? It just seems very free and liberal, especially with the very fine and accurate dynamic markings in the score. It would seem logical if that was due to the roll. If this was a wax roll or something like that it would absolutely stun me if those were his dynamics. Very fascinating though how Ravel uses agogical expression. Always great to hear what the composer had to say about his music.
It's a welte mignon, so a roll and not a recording, sometimes there are accidents in them 🤔 plus the playing is conditioned by the technology a little bit.
I'm always skeptical about whether or not a piano roll is an accurate means of determining interpretation. There are some interesting features to it but I wonder how he would have played it on a regular piano at another occasion.
Debussy was a legendarily brilliant and demanding pianist, and he wrote how satisfied he was with the piano roll recording of his performance. And I think Debussy was far more demanding than Ravel.
@@60Singing I think he meant that the roll could accept only so many minutes and seconds of music, and to avoid possibly being cut off before the end of the piece he may have rushed certain passages.
well, the picture is him playing in 1933, so I'm dubious. sound quality is way too good for 1913, which was a time when singers basically had to shout in order to get their voices to record on the wax rolls, which is why recordings from that time have that odd quality about them.
@@stevedavis8329 The picture does not have anything to do with the recording. Piano Rolls recordings aren't the same as nowadays recordings. The picture is there for accompaniment. :)
Ceci est enregistré à l'aide d'un piano pneumatique. N'est-il pas possible, lors de la lecture, que celle-ci puisse être accélérée ? (question de néophyte, je ne connais pas exactement le fonctionnement de ce type d’appareils) Cela répondrait à ceux qui trouvent étrange le rythme de cet enregistrement par Ravel lui-même. :)
Ravel was a GREAT composer. His imaginative use of harmony and unique imagery were second to none, BUT he was a mediore pianist at best. He could never have played Gaspard de la suit, Le tombeau e couperin, or even Jeu d-eaux with anything approaching aplomb if at all. This is certainly not "bad," but neither should it be used as a guide to how the piece UGHt to sound. He eft out the last movement of the Sinatine, probably beause it demands a stronger more facile technique than he had at his command.
I don't think this actually represents the playing of Ravel very accurately, but to all who are saying you're not allowed to critisize his playing because he wrote the piece that's stupid. He was a great composer but there are much better pianists than him and better versions of this piece.
Honestly, you can point out his flaws but if Ravel makes a "mistake" who are we to point it out? Who are we to question the likes of Ravel? What he played was true to him, how could we possible judge an excellent pianist such as Ravel.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe! ... C'mon Ravel, play your own music right! It's funny to read some comments...
I think it's quite likely that this is not Ravel playing at all; it is well known that in some of the recordings where he's allegedly playing, it is in fact his friend Robert Casadesus. Ravel was by no means a bad pianist, but he was no virtuoso, either.
@@tomtriffidNot to be rude, but... I believe his fast tempo might be explained by the fact that they had to use what is titled a piano roll. There are time constraints, and it also explains why the third movement isn't in this set. He played these two, but the third is the most challenging, from what I've found; I've tried learning a bit of all three, and the third seems to be the most difficult. I personally like this recording more than the multiple that I've heard, but that is the beauty of music; that no matter the piece, there shall always be a tempo and dynamic set for anyone.
He didn't play the third movement in public or recordings because it was too technically difficult for him. Good thing he composed stuff without really thinking whether he could play them or not!
So he couldn't play the harder Mirroirs, Gaspard de La Nuite and some other pieces he wrote that is around Sonatine 3rd Mvt level?
ure dumb
@@SCRIABINIST yes, he had a lot of pianist friends who he endowed with the actual playing
I take this back, realised how stupid this sounded
@@andrijanailic4408 wym
This is like stepping into a time machine.
i think the comment about ravel playing it a bit fast was deleted for all you lads trying to find it. Walk where i have stood do not procrastinate for half an hour trying to find it.
Thank you
Nope. It’s at the top
It's not so much the precision of Ravel's playing that interests me, it's the clarity of intent he gives his musical ideas, the eloquent way he characterizes various rhythmic movements of the music, the ebb to flow of emotional tension, how he feels harmonies and communicates the relationships between musical ideas that shape his idea of the piece. The color in his playing shines through in the way the shimmering tremolos give urgency to melody, the particular voicings and in a direct, singing quality.
Just needed to vent my intermittently burning appreciation and devotion to Ravel. It's fascinating how strong an attachment one can form to a composer, especially when fueled with a few biographies. Or to any other creative or powerful figure in history I suppose; a novelist, a choreographer, a tyrant.
I heartily recommend the remarkably well-sourced "Ravel" by Roger Nichols for anyone impressed or touched by Ravel's music and person. Nichols honours his subject by keeping the work respectably non-speculative - no conclusions are made regarding Ravel's private life, for example, other than those directly supported by Ravel's own words or those of his closest associates. The result is a clear, and to me, a very touching and relatable image of an eccentric ever-child, a lover of toys, poetry, animals and children, umistakably human in his very eccentricity and puerility. Perhaps not always worthy of admiration in every detail; but much, much more importantly, worthy of sympathy and love in his radiant humanity.
Adaviri I totally feel the same about Ravel, his music just touches something really deep in me..
This is a beautiful comment. Thank you for the recommendation.
thank you so much for the recommendation!
thank you for the book recommend
"It's fascinating how strong an attachment one can form to a composer, . . Or to any other creative or powerful figure in history I suppose; a novelist, a choreographer, a tyrant." -- Glad somebody else has noticed this.
I've long had a soft and sympathetic spot for "the lame devil" -- that unscrupulous, charming political survivor Prince Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand, (1754 - 1838) , "insufferable, indispensable, irreplaceable'-- a wise and unexpectedly brave sphinx of a Statesman. He was pragmatic, versatile, and brilliant as what is now called "systems analysis" to shrewdly predict outcomes of any policy decision. He also understood economics and how to use insider information from government to make several fortunes on the bourse.
A friend observed to him, "Nature suited you to be a snake or a tiger. You became an anaconda." Talleyrand took this as a compliment. An annoyed Napoleon told his Foreign Minister, "You have no principles!" Talleyrand, ever the perfect courtier, replied , "No Sire; you have enough for both of us."
One of his numerous political enemies, admiring the charm and wit of his conversation at one of his elegant dinner parties, said, "How can you not love a man with so many vices?" Talleyrand was the soul of ancien- regime courtesy -- just because a man might be a murderer, he thought it no reason to be rude to him.
That said, perhaps Talleyrand's greatest diplomatic triumph was in his private life: he kept most of his many former mistresses as cherished and life-long friends.
There was a hidden sweetness in his icily inscrutable character that showed in his tenderness to children and fondness for dogs. His house servants adored him for his kindness and consideration. One of his more virtuous friends scolded him saying, "You are a better man than yourself."
Ravel also knew emotional subtleties about this work that no one else had. Even the greatest virtuosos cannot know these. He wrote the work and whoever has created already a work in his life knows what it means. There is no more authentic interpretation than this, and otherwise a beautiful performance.
Didn't think I can find someone who shares my exact sentiment. There's something about his music that's unlike anything else.
That’s ambiguous harmonies
Dream music... Dream of the sound dream
@@MultiDansk8 Yes.. but beautiful
I prefer Ravel to Debussy, not that I'm ever going to assign a higher level of "greatness" to one or the other.
Ravel just resonates with me far more. He is one of the few composers that can just slay me a good percentage of the time I hear a piece by him for the first time.
I get transported to a paradise in my imagination for the short while that I'm listening to him.
I'm 9 years too late to respond, but never have I read anything more relatable.
@@vonsmore5046 9 years later and it's still true.
: )
@@vonsmore5046 I actually need to get my art skills further improved so that I can paint the kinds of things I see in my mind's eye when I listen to Ravel.
They're always so unique and otherworldly, and yet so much like our earth.
It's like the true beauty of the world is actually expressed in what I see; i.e. people try to escape to fantasy universes like Lord of the Rings and Avatar, but Ravel's music makes me see our world in its own way that is so rich, mystical and organic.
LOL...thats one of the funniest comments i've ever read..Maurice Ravel is playing his own piece a bit fast...Bwaahahah
Scholarship tells us that it isn't rravel playing.
Do remember the technology of the time. Wax rolls were notorious for not playing tempo back first of all, and their short recording time meant the pianist often had to rush. Take debussy's roll recordings for example. His Clair de lune was uncharacteristically rushed because of it. So take these with a grain of salt.
I suggest that If Ravel were to record this piece a second time the tempo would be different. Indeed, every time he were to play his own music there would be significant differences of many kinds.
Puedes ser que muchos interpretes superen técnicamente a un compositor... eso es obvio... mientras el uno escribe el otro estudia... pero, en las interpretaciones del compositor, quien mejor conoce su obra se encuentra su alma, el meollo de su creación...bravo Maestro Maurice
I just leeeeeeerrrrrrrrvvvvvvv Maurice Ravel....he lived at a time when grace and good manners were the norm. He was a man of his time. He , Claude Debussy and Gabriel Fauré ....elevated Music to another dimension in many ways.
First man I wish to meet in heaven, after the Lord.
I almost can't believe it. Say it isn't true. I must meet the man!
+toothless toe A leaf doesn't have to believe in photosynthesis to be green. An atheist doesn't have to believe in an afterlife to have one.
You are right their, for the soul is.eternal. But if he chose to separate himself from God, as you have, I will not be meeting me hero. God, who is love, does not force anyone to love him in return. The sweet benefits of mutual love and fellowship cannot be had with slaves or automotons. Separate yourself from him, and you will be left seperate.
There, not their
And remember, Jesus did not come to condemn the world but that the world might be saved through him. It is we who have chosen to stay away from him, as we choose our own way in sin that is incompatible with his pure holiness, his radiant goodness. Our sin is incompatible with his very presense.
This sound like geniously improvization. Phenomenal
There is no good or bad speed, everyone interprets the piece as they feel the best about it. Old music school was also very different than today's one, not the same period. Thanks for sharing louiu !
God you are so wrong.
@@djmotise isn't it all interpretation from the player to the viewer or the player to them selves
@@notmissunity8240прежде всего- замысел композитора. Он главный.
@@ANITA-cv8cq and he is died
I think it's fascinating to see that his composition and arrangement style was not only precise and noble sounding but you can see it relates to his playing too. Fast and flowing are two of the more apparent descriptions which his music can be like jeux d'eau
I just listened to the second movement because I'm going to practise it. Lots of comments below about tempo, but I don't think anyone has mentioned tempo relationships. This movement has: rall., plus lent, reprenez peu à peu 1e mouvement, a tempo, sans ralentir, rall., un peu plu lent au'au début, ralentissez beaucoupt, très lent and rall. All in two pages - in fact all except one on the second page! And Ravel does all those things (except perhaps the final rall. ...). "Interpreters" take note!
Wow! Thank you so much for putting online this inestimable testimony of Maurice Ravel playing his own music!!! Huge thank you!!
Amazing! Masterful.
Beautiful
I feel in heaven listening to this ❤️❤️❤️
Its amazing the power he uses to remark his own melodic line. Admirable
I wish I can know more abour the way he played. somebody can helpme?
thanks for this piece of history
Ravel is best
Tha Greatness and Wonderfulness of Ravel Is immeasurable and beyond description and an order of magnitude awesome
RAVEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I worship him!!!!
Ouah ... Quelle expressivité, tellement touchant d'entendre ses notes sous ses doigts, dans ses mains.
Wie die Vögel ihre Flügel schwingen,so spielt Herr Ravel seine Musik und lässt auch mal die Flügel hängen ....!
This is music!
Genious
The older is never old, at all.
There is a very strange increase of speed in 0:16 that suprised my. At first I thought it was a damage in the recording but it is the same in the 2 other repeats (1:08 , 2:47 ).
Tout à fait magique. Oui Oui il y a des variations de tempo. On s'en fiche.
Allez voir sa maison à Montfort l'Amaury. C'est énorme tout est dans son jus.
Where I live, my house was built in 1910.
Amazing recording quality for 1913.
Im pretty sure it’s a piano roll
@@thibomeurkens2296 That makes sense.
Nothing give you as much of a window on the music as the composer himself playing it. He and the music are one. It's silly to bring up "wrong 'notes. It's totally irrelevant.
1:18 This would be a sick sample😢
Would have liked to have heard Chopin or Beethoven ?
Let's be humble, perhaps even grateful for what the evolving technology of that time has gifted us. Hearing these ancient recordings is so insightful and so very beautiful. Alas it leaves many pianists out to dry because they don't listen to the great masters. I perceive that most modern pianists don't really listen to the old timers.
When I listen to Michaelowski or Godowsky, I perceive I am looking through a window of time into the 19th century. How do we get younger players to listen ?
Completely biased, unfair, and pseudo intellectual claim lacking evidence. Younger players can play whatever they want, but I am certain every single piano player has heard of ravel of chopin or beethoven
Maybe it's the old recording vibe or the piano being slightly out of tune, but the colors such as at 00:20 just fit this music so well.. ❤
The piano is at 435hz which is what ravel would’ve played at
I think it is out of tune though, even pianolas need tuning
That time they like to change the interpretation dácord with the public, the whether, the feelings. That means he played a bit faster in this record, do not means that he plays every time in this (the same) way.
I do think that it is a bit fast but being a pianist I can understand . Part 2 because it's do easy to get ahead of the crescendo . Just because he wrote it doesn't mean that he plays it the same every time. I tend to play faster when a little nervous . Sonatine 2 is the most beautiful beginning and ending . It's what gershwin stole it's one of my favorite piecea Chopin, Debussey are piano geniuses contemporary and timeless not stoggy or harpsicorpy piano solo brilliance no matter who plays their work. It's feeling it and the performance is never the same twice.
What a treat to hear Ravel by Ravel! This part is great but where is the third?
Apparently he didn't play it publicly due to its technical demands, much like Gaspard de la nuit. I am studying it now and can confirm it's quite difficult technically
He couldn’t play it because his technique was to poor
Splendida registrazione.
Ma ABM ha mai eseguito queste 2 sonatine?
So I am wondering, is this recording a piano roll or what exactly? It just seems very free and liberal, especially with the very fine and accurate dynamic markings in the score. It would seem logical if that was due to the roll. If this was a wax roll or something like that it would absolutely stun me if those were his dynamics. Very fascinating though how Ravel uses agogical expression. Always great to hear what the composer had to say about his music.
Dynamics were not captured accurately by the Welte-Mignon, and it's entirely possible they were manually added by editors after.
It's a welte mignon, so a roll and not a recording, sometimes there are accidents in them 🤔 plus the playing is conditioned by the technology a little bit.
I'm always skeptical about whether or not a piano roll is an accurate means of determining interpretation. There are some interesting features to it but I wonder how he would have played it on a regular piano at another occasion.
Debussy was a legendarily brilliant and demanding pianist, and he wrote how satisfied he was with the piano roll recording of his performance. And I think Debussy was far more demanding than Ravel.
Богу Слава! как прекрасен наш любимый Равель! Мир всем!
Re comment on sound qualyty. Ths is a piano roll recording not an actual recording of the sound at the time
Ravel expresses Ravel's aesthetics .
From chaotic Tokyo of the Land of the Rising Sun .
Which country is your ？
My country is Ohio lol
USA. Washington state. 😁😁😁
@@BenjaminGessel
Thankyou
From
A corner of colorful autumn shining Tokyo
🇯🇵🏮⛩️🍇🍂🍁♨️🍜🍣🍄🍄🌰🌾🍋🍊🌽🎌
How was this even recorded in 1913? Wax rolls?
This was recorded with what they call a piano roll; it might explain his faster tempo, seeing it relies on a curfew that you must follow.
@@fatheroftwo852 What do you mean by it relies on a curfew you must follow?
@@60Singing I think he meant that the roll could accept only so many minutes and seconds of music, and to avoid possibly being cut off before the end of the piece he may have rushed certain passages.
well, the picture is him playing in 1933, so I'm dubious. sound quality is way too good for 1913, which was a time when singers basically had to shout in order to get their voices to record on the wax rolls, which is why recordings from that time have that odd quality about them.
@@stevedavis8329 The picture does not have anything to do with the recording. Piano Rolls recordings aren't the same as nowadays recordings. The picture is there for accompaniment. :)
まるで壊れやすいガラス細工のよう。
ラヴェルの作品は、職人芸が先に立っていて、ドビュッシーの作品ほど繊細ではないように感じていましたが、とんでもない誤解でしたね。
楽譜の譜面づらからは容易に想像できない世界が、作曲家の頭の中には広がっていたのだ、と。
申し訳ありませんが、ドビュッシーについて何を言っているのかわかりませんでした。
Ceci est enregistré à l'aide d'un piano pneumatique. N'est-il pas possible, lors de la lecture, que celle-ci puisse être accélérée ? (question de néophyte, je ne connais pas exactement le fonctionnement de ce type d’appareils) Cela répondrait à ceux qui trouvent étrange le rythme de cet enregistrement par Ravel lui-même. :)
Docom te
Acceleration compensation is part of the recording process (and play back process)
2:52
where is 3rd mov.😢
congrats, he played himself =)))
ruvel
3:58
He didn't give himself enough credit as a pianist. Or maybe he was extremely hard on himself, typical of masters.
Is this piano roll or audio recording ?
piano roll
Ravel was a GREAT composer. His imaginative use of harmony and unique imagery were second to none, BUT he was a mediore pianist at best. He could never have played Gaspard de la suit, Le tombeau e couperin, or even Jeu d-eaux with anything approaching aplomb if at all. This is certainly not "bad," but neither should it be used as a guide to how the piece UGHt to sound. He eft out the last movement of the Sinatine, probably beause it demands a stronger more facile technique than he had at his command.
He left out the last movement because there was no more paper on the piano roll! George Nussbaum, Casselberry, Fl
@@georgenussbaum4486 no, there are reports of him never performing it publicly while performing mov 1 and 2 often (singularly and together).
無料で作曲者の演奏を聴ける時代…
I don't think this actually represents the playing of Ravel very accurately, but to all who are saying you're not allowed to critisize his playing because he wrote the piece that's stupid. He was a great composer but there are much better pianists than him and better versions of this piece.
Honestly, you can point out his flaws but if Ravel makes a "mistake" who are we to point it out? Who are we to question the likes of Ravel? What he played was true to him, how could we possible judge an excellent pianist such as Ravel.
TheOne Spinn A mistake is a mistake - it would be the same whether we pointed it out or not, and it would be the same no matter who was playing it.
3rd......
I love how we can hear him. But it's not the best pianist ability ever...
Who cares? He was composer not concertist. Ravel was unique. For me this record is a present...
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe! ... C'mon Ravel, play your own music right! It's funny to read some comments...
You sure it's really Ravel playing?
This is so strange.
😵😵😵
the playing, the piece, or just to think that its ravel himself playing?
Too fast played.
On lui dira ...que "c'est trop vite" ...et la prochaine fois qu'il écrira quelque chose, il viendra d'abord vous consulter !
If he played it like that, cool. But I'd still rather listen to modern, more conservative recordings.
I think it's quite likely that this is not Ravel playing at all; it is well known that in some of the recordings where he's allegedly playing, it is in fact his friend Robert Casadesus. Ravel was by no means a bad pianist, but he was no virtuoso, either.
@@tomtriffidNot to be rude, but... I believe his fast tempo might be explained by the fact that they had to use what is titled a piano roll.
There are time constraints, and it also explains why the third movement isn't in this set.
He played these two, but the third is the most challenging, from what I've found; I've tried learning a bit of all three, and the third seems to be the most difficult.
I personally like this recording more than the multiple that I've heard, but that is the beauty of music; that no matter the piece, there shall always be a tempo and dynamic set for anyone.
@@fatheroftwo852 Excellent point, thanks.
He like Bartok was infected with the fast playing virus.
3:58