Haha I am with you all the way! I too listened to Fur Elise to see if I get the dynamics etc right. Then I found that some world famous pianist plays it differently.... he played a D which sounded odd to me.
It was only then that I saw the small print ^_^ I think I'll stick to E, that's how I remember learning it (too many) decades ago....
Ok sorry, that was a little off topic haha!
Sophia And yes as Bart said, even when playing solo there is very little more grating than a jazz (or any) musician who doesn't have a steady pulse... I can barely get myself to listen to such a performance.
When playing a jazz ballad solo, rubato is common so I would disagree with your comment about requiring a steady pulse.
pianoloverus Oh I agree with you there 
What I meant was a musician needs to be able to keep a steady pulse - which does not mean that they would need to religiously follow a steady pulse at all times 
I'm pretty sure that even your jazz ballad solos (would LOVE to hear one!) sound absolutely marvelous... because there is a huge difference between erratic playing and a gorgeously executed rubato... You know... 
vs 
I am preparing to take on a boogie woogie version of Baby Elephant Walk. This would be a big departure from my usual musical preferences so it is going to take some work.
I have been working on my first piece of “real music” (as my teacher says) for a month. This is the first time I play through the 2nd movement of this Clementi Sonata without major mistakes. Next step is to get it secure and polished.
Great playing of the "Andante" so far. Interesting video showing 2 camera angles... the top as the audience would see it and the bottom to show the finger sequences in real time.
The only comment is keep the LH light to let the melody come through. It's probably the first piece you're playing that is the original by the composer than a version arranged for easy piano in an Alfred's or Faber Adult piano book. As your teacher said the first "real" piece of music.
I'm re-learning a set of pieces that I discovered a few years earlier. In the "First Lessons in Bach" book is the "Bourrée" from the Lute Suite #1 in Em which many students would perform. It's a keyboard piece from a suite. I was curious what the other movements sound like starting from the Prelude and then Alemande, Courante, Sarabande and after the Bourrée comes the Gigue. After doing an online search, found that the 4 Lute Suites are commonly performed as guitar arrangements than piano (keyboard) pieces like the 6 English & French Suites. Today few people play lute so guitar is a convenient substitute.
The reason the pieces are labelled as "Lute Suites" because many of the melody notes are in the bass than in the treble sounding like a lute. The other possibility is an old harpsichord made to sound like a lute.
Right now I'm doing the "Gigue" from Suite #1 (BWV996). Just finished learning the top part and made a recording. I like the piece with note runs alternating between the LH & RH. Like other typical Bach pieces you can hear melodic lines on both hands. I'm sure the piece can be played at a faster tempo. Connected the portable (travel) keyboard to a computer and used Pianoteq 8 for a Classical Guitar sound. I do practice the Bourrée occasionally but the Gigue not for a while.
Beethoven Op 109
I am mostly working on the 3rd movement, because, you know, HARD
My teacher yelled at me yesterday for
When is the next recital?
Schubertian2 It must be quite thrilling to work on such a masterpiece. Bravo!
I think> thepianoplayer416 The only comment is keep the LH light to let the melody come through.
I think the balance between the two hands is fine.
pianoloverus
It is a whole world in itself - a world that is so fascinating you never want to leave
TheBoringPianist
hm since my last post half a year ago, I shelved the Messiaen but got through the Scriabin Fantasie (currently letting it marinate before revisiting because I feel like my vision for it is missing something) and learned a bunch of other random stuff:
More recently, I recently learned Dutilleux's Choral et variations and am currently cleaning/speeding it up along with attempting to learn/memorize/polish Debussy's Clair de lune in the next 9 days to perform for a half recital (along with the Franck, Boulanger, and Dutilleux). What's that? You can't believe I've never learned Clair de lune before? Neither could my teacher 
"You're a smart kid. But your playing is terribly dull."
TheBoringPianist What's that? You can't believe I've never learned Clair de lune before? Neither could my teacher
Understandable. I forgot the exact wording, but if I remember right, you got an award at a competition for your unique program.
Claire de lune doesn't interest me probably because of ifs popularity. Passedied, mvt. 4 of the same Suite Bergamasque is somewhat familiar sounding also, but I love it and it's on my bucket list about 5 grades up for where I am now.
Player1 Claire de lune doesn't interest me probably because of ifs popularity.
I have this exact same issue with many pieces.
Popularity is often due to a piece being very good or even great. Although I've seen this thinking before I've never understood why a piece should be rejected because lots of other people play it. Much of the piano music played by great pianists is a relatively small selection of very popular pieces. Should no pianist perform Beethoven's Appassionata anymore just because it's so popular? Avoid all performances of Beethoven's 9th Symphony, the Messiah, or Mozart's Requiem? Much of Chopin's music is wildly popular but that doesn't stop pianists both professional and amateur from playing it a lot.
Why does being popular makes a piece undesirable for you?
pianoloverus Why does being popular makes a piece undesirable for you?
At risk of oversimplifying, I present this highly (un)scientific framework I follow when deciding whether to learn a piece:
I guess if you think of pieces as falling into a 2x2 where one axis is popularity with the public and the other axis is how much I like it, by definition I'd want to play either pieces that are (popular with public, I like) or (unknown by public, I like).
If it's a super popular piece, plenty of people are playing it already so it doesn't need me to be an advocate for the piece, so unless I also love it I'm not going to go out of my way to learn it. Also, just by virtue of being so popular, something that's reached normie-level popularity has a higher chance of being overrated in my book because honestly, what are the chances that piece also landed in my own top 10? Of course, that won't stop me from enjoying listening to other people play it, but I think we've all got pieces that we think don't deserve nearly the level of popularity they enjoy — for me, it's Chopin's Fantaisie-Impromptu.
"You're a smart kid. But your playing is terribly dull."
TheBoringPianist I like your selection process. I think mine is just a list pieces that I hear and want to play.
lilypad Claire de lune doesn't interest me probably because of ifs popularity. Passedied, mvt. 4 of the same Suite Bergamasque is somewhat familiar sounding also, but I love it and it's on my bucket list about 5 grades up for where I am now.
I got to thinking about the Passepied yesterday and it probably wouldn't make a good recital piece unless the recital theme was "parts of larger works". It sounds 'unstarted" as opposed to "unfinished". I think Claire de lune would stand on its own.
It's not the popularity, it's that there are particular pieces considered a "rite of passage" and if you don't play them, then you're not a "real" pianist.
Fur Elise for example. It's overdone because everyone "has to learn it" to show that they're accomplished intermediate players. The whole notion is false.
There are other pieces with the same false veneration, many of them popular tunes like Amalie, A River Flows Through You, and so on. You can disagree with that but my position on the subject is that I'm not interested in playing what everyone else plays merely because everyone is playing it. That's called a fad and I'm definitely not into anything of the sort. If I was I wouldn't be sitting in a tiny room screaming to myself in frustration on a daily basis.
And there's a difference between playing a classical piece which has been around for centuries and playing the latest arrangement of a showtune. It's not that music isn't "good" it's that I choose to separate myself from the herd of people all playing the same thing to showcase my own talents and skills in a way that uniquely highlights those talents and skills.
TheBoringPianist
Interesting view but I'd like to understand your thought process for selecting Clair de lune. If there is one piece in that ballpark difficulty level that is overplayed it's definitely this one.
BTW, I don't blame you. I love the piece and am playing it too. 
BartK Interesting view but I'd like to understand your thought process for selecting Clair de lune.
My teacher suggested it haha. I have a half-recital coming up in about a week and my program idea was all French music. Of course, being me, this looked like:
He took one look and was like "You're playing at a retirement home. No one will know anything you're playing." So after suggesting some pieces that audiences would enjoy and that he assumed I had learned and could bring back on short notice (Clair de lune, Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, 2nd mvmt of Beethoven's Pathétique), I chose to learn the one that keeps the French music theme, and also serves as a nice dessert after the main course that the Dutilleux is.
"You're a smart kid. But your playing is terribly dull."
TheBoringPianist
Sometimes you have to play to the crowd at least a little.
