|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 15, 2018 18:28:26 GMT
Sorry for posting this in public, but I'm really frustrated and just need to vent. Feel free to delete.
So this morning I vowed to no more put off recording my own playing of my Fantasia Sonata, and got up early to avoid the disturbance and distractions that happen when the little boy wakes up, and set about to record. But... an hour and a half later, I'm still struggling to get through the piece without making huge (very audible) errors. I think it's a combination of the pressure from knowing I'm recording for posterity, and my perfectionism getting the better of me, wanting to put in all the nuances I can hear in my head but my fingers aren't at the level to actually execute them.
I was trying to record on my electronic keyboard (not a bad one, it's an old Clavinova with pretty decent instrument sounds, only downside is its ancient age meant it only records to floppy disks, and kids these days don't even know what that is), and found an old disk I use for this purpose dating from years ago, only to find I had already attempted to record this exact same piece before. There were 7-8 takes on the disk, all fatally flawed in some way. Of course, my new attempts this morning (about 4-5 takes) didn't do much better.
I know the standard advice is to do it in multiple takes and cut-and-paste the result together... but I have trouble with that because my non-existent piano skills means I never stick to a constant tempo, and I never play at the same tempo twice, so pasting snippets from different takes will just sound jarring at the seams.
I did think of copying the midi off the disk and editing that on the PC with a midi editor, but who even owns a PC that has a floppy drive anymore... And the last time I tried to buy a midi cable to hook it up to the PC directly, I bought the wrong cable and never bothered going back to find the right one. Besides, the PC is in a different room and it would take a 30-foot midi cable to connect the two, and I don't think midi cables of that length exist!
So anyway, I'm all frustrated, angry at my (lack of) piano skills, and generally unhappy with myself, and the only positive thing I can think of right now is how Mike managed to play this piece so well when my own bungling has failed to produce anything worthy of public consumption so far. Argghh!!
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Aug 15, 2018 19:15:55 GMT
Don't get too downhearted Teoh, I'm pretty sure everyone feels inadequate at something, mine ironically enough actually is piano playing, I never went as far as I should have with it. You have a much more desirable and far more useful ability with your compositional technique imv.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 15, 2018 19:38:20 GMT
The ironic thing is that I composed this darned piece by playing it on the piano myself! And I can't even give a proper performance of it, in spite of composing it that way!
Of course, I only have myself to blame, since from youth I have decided that my interest lay in composition rather than performance, so I have not put very much effort into piano technique at all, basically just enough to play accompaniment in church meetings where I volunteer, but the standard isn't very high since music isn't the focus there, and playing accompaniment lets you get away with things you can't get away with in a concert performance (like skipping notes or fudging chords as long as it doesn't distract the singers). And my recent compositions have boldly gone where my piano skills can't go, since I have not felt that I should limit my compositional technique to what I can play. The frustrating thing, however, is that I can't even properly play this piece, which was composed subject to the limitations of my own playing!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 15, 2018 21:26:32 GMT
I can appreciate your frustration, but the music now exists forever unless the internet burns down. Even if your burning desire is to play it yourself, the more important thing is the music. As Mike proved, any award-winning composer/pianist can pick it up and play it. Maybe awards aren't even a pre-requisite - I have none of my own to be certain.
There are workarounds to many of these technical issues - I've become quite adept at cutting and splicing recordings, either of myself or others, to fix imperfections. Encountering a perfect storm of failed tech and fingers can be very dispiriting and leaves a sour taste in the brain, but with a clearer head it can be dealt with.
If you're happy to splice takes for the required result, or manipulate the midi, is it too big of a step to entirely input as midi and just tweak it in the DAW or whatever until it's right? Get a cheap, basic midi keyboard to input the rough strokes and then fiddle with it like Nero?
Also: you can buy usb floppy drives.
Would you mind us hearing some of your playing? Whether it's yourself or someone else interpreting your music, you must eventually let go of a few preconceptions and accept it for what it is to other ears. I'm often unhappy on some level with renditions of my pieces, but I know few others would ever spot the issues in 99% of cases. Where you hear clunkers, I might well hear a perfectly good pianist who just needs a few sustained weeks of practice, as I do on guitar right now :/
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 15, 2018 22:42:48 GMT
This helps point out that composing and performing are different skills. And they need each other. Being able to play each note perfectly(whatever that is) is over rated. I believe it was Rubinstein that was notorious for slopping notes all over the place. Leaving out some, adding others (and wrong notes), and most people never noticed. It was the energy of the performance that people remembered. He brought music alive. That's what people want to hear.
Most audio recording software will slow down or speed up spliced sections without changing the pitch. Plus, you could be disciplined in your multi-takes.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 15, 2018 23:40:26 GMT
Now that I've had all day to clear my head, I'm thinking I should take Bob's advice to just barge through it all, and pay attention to the "energy" or emotion of it, and leave the wrong notes either for posterity or to be edited retroactively if I can figure out how to copy the MIDI off the floppy disk.
(The most frustrating thing about this whole floppy business is that I have a perfectly functional floppy drive, so I'm not about to shell out any more money to buy yet another floppy drive, but it just can't be used because modern PCs no longer come with a lousy floppy controller on the motherboard, so there's nowhere to actually plug it into. Now, I do have an older motherboard that does have a floppy controller, but it doesn't have any other peripherals attached, so to actually use it would mean I have to disassemble my current PC, borrow the hard drive(s)/monitor/keyboard/etc., somehow install an older OS that will actually boot on the old mobo, then boot it up, copy the files, then shutdown and detach everything and reassemble everything. That's wayyyy too much work just to copy a couple o' miserable MIDI files, darn it!!! Maybe if somebody pays me to do it... but even then!)
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Aug 16, 2018 7:57:05 GMT
And they need each other. Being able to play each note perfectly(whatever that is) is over rated. I believe it was Rubinstein that was notorious for slopping notes all over the place. Leaving out some, adding others (and wrong notes), and most people never noticed. It was the energy of the performance that people remembered. He brought music alive. That's what people want to hear. Have to disagree there Bob. Rubinstein did take liberties occasionally but he had a phenomenal technique and one that is merely 'entry level' for classical/concert piano playing. The most complex of pieces have to be mastered before the performer imposes their interpretation. The energy you speak of only happens because it is liberated from technical constraint and in an area of performance where everybody can play anything equally well, this energy (interpretation) along with a cult of personality are often the only distinguishing factors. Maybe you didn't mean to imply that technique is less important than musicality (regarding concert pianism), but regardless, felt it worth pointing out that musicality can't exist at a level powerful enough to move one until the technical side of the music is overcome by the performer.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 16, 2018 11:52:05 GMT
And they need each other. Being able to play each note perfectly(whatever that is) is over rated. I believe it was Rubinstein that was notorious for slopping notes all over the place. Leaving out some, adding others (and wrong notes), and most people never noticed. It was the energy of the performance that people remembered. He brought music alive. That's what people want to hear. Have to disagree there Bob. Rubinstein did take liberties occasionally but he had a phenomenal technique and one that is merely 'entry level' for classical/concert piano playing. The most complex of pieces have to be mastered before the performer imposes their interpretation. The energy you speak of only happens because it is liberated from technical constraint and in an area of performance where everybody can play anything equally well, this energy (interpretation) along with a cult of personality are often the only distinguishing factors. Maybe you didn't mean to imply that technique is less important than musicality (regarding concert pianism), but regardless, felt it worth pointing out that musicality can't exist at a level powerful enough to move one until the technical side of the music is overcome by the performer. Hey Mike, no problem. Nope, I never meant that technique was less important than musicality. What I said was that he was so good that when he made a "mistake", it didn't matter because the performance was so good. But now that you mention it, I ask it. All else being equal, would you rather hear a performance that is technically perfect? Or one that has beautiful soul? They are not mutually exclusive, I know. But we've all heard soloists that have flawless technique, but not any soul. Not very interesting to listen to, I only use this example because being frustrated with playing ability is not uncommon, of course. But at some point you have to inject some emotion into what you are doing so that you aren't just going through the motions.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 16, 2018 15:01:04 GMT
(The most frustrating thing about this whole floppy business is that I have a perfectly functional floppy drive, so I'm not about to shell out any more money to buy yet another floppy drive, but it just can't be used because modern PCs no longer come with a lousy floppy controller on the motherboard, so there's nowhere to actually plug it into. Now, I do have an older motherboard that does have a floppy controller, but it doesn't have any other peripherals attached, so to actually use it would mean I have to disassemble my current PC, borrow the hard drive(s)/monitor/keyboard/etc., somehow install an older OS that will actually boot on the old mobo, then boot it up, copy the files, then shutdown and detach everything and reassemble everything. That's wayyyy too much work just to copy a couple o' miserable MIDI files, darn it!!! Maybe if somebody pays me to do it... but even then!) Oh, HS! Upgrade! A USB floppy is about $15 (or 3 billion pounds, in my realm). I'm aware of the irony in exhorting your upgrading to a superceded storage format, but a modern, basic midi keyboard would surely come in useful?
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 16, 2018 17:24:16 GMT
Dave Dexter: It certainly makes more sense now that I've calmed down and can think about it rationally. A mere $15 for a USB floppy drive that can simply be plugged in and used, vs. $0 and 50 hours of immeasurable frustration and hair-pulling. It's certainly a tempting offer. I'm not sure a midi keyboard is justifiable at this point, though. I'm so often away from the keyboard (in both senses of the word ) and/or accessing my PC remotely from a remote shell connection that it probably wouldn't see much use, since the only times when I would be there to use it would be those times when I would be playing the Clavinova anyway. The $15 USB floppy drive makes much more sense.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 16, 2018 19:32:25 GMT
Dave Dexter: It certainly makes more sense now that I've calmed down and can think about it rationally. A mere $15 for a USB floppy drive that can simply be plugged in and used, vs. $0 and 50 hours of immeasurable frustration and hair-pulling. It's certainly a tempting offer. Plus it's hipster as hell, without being fake. I really wish there were more, or any, professional facets to a floppy (hur, dur). Nice and neat, there's your 2-3 minutes of music on a bit of magnetic stuff that goes CHUNK when you eject it. Like a business card, and I'm tempted by flash business cards that I could load a few good pieces onto and double as a usb stick. But no-one has a floppy drive.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 16, 2018 19:53:14 GMT
Yes, it would appear that floppy disk technology has ... flopped. *rimshot*
*ducks rotten tomato*
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Aug 18, 2018 6:56:33 GMT
hi Bob, I'd go for the "soul" every time. I wonder how much a cult of personality plays in our perception and acceptance of a performance, quite apart from our musical preferences. I saw a prom concert on the BBC last night with a female pianist who played the Grieg piano concerto ( link). I did not like her tempos, especially the last movement, but was still taken with her performance which was rather unique given the piece has been done to death - she managed to "make it her own" as they say. For an encore she played another well worn standard, Clair de lune and again, somehow managed to make it sound new with an almost intolerable slowness in the outer sections that still created a unique atmosphere. Her "soul" was not in doubt at all, but would have been impossible without her phenomenal technique.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 18, 2018 20:27:19 GMT
hi Bob, I'd go for the "soul" every time. I wonder how much a cult of personality plays in our perception and acceptance of a performance, quite apart from our musical preferences. I saw a prom concert on the BBC last night with a female pianist who played the Grieg piano concerto ( link). I did not like her tempos, especially the last movement, but was still taken with her performance which was rather unique given the piece has been done to death - she managed to "make it her own" as they say. For an encore she played another well worn standard, Clair de lune and again, somehow managed to make it sound new with an almost intolerable slowness in the outer sections that still created a unique atmosphere. Her "soul" was not in doubt at all, but would have been impossible without her phenomenal technique. I really do understand. I guess my problem stems from seeing (live) too many performances that were technically perfect. But the players looked like they weren't having a good time. They never smiled, never looked at the audience,and never showed any emotion. No hint that they understood the musicalness of what they were doing. Inversely, I don't enjoy players that bob and weave all over the place. It just seems to me that performing music should be a joy. Not every performance can be technically perfect, but it should be musical. Otherwise, why bother.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 18, 2018 22:09:15 GMT
In a large orchestral work, I can sympathize if some players aren't really engaged when their parts are just some scattered notes here and there. Ideally, of course, they should be "in" the music even when they aren't playing, but not every player has that kind of attitude. Conversely, it's hard when composing for an ensemble to give the players interesting parts to play all the time. Understandably, it's not desirable to write a continuous tutti from start to end, even if that might engage the players more, but even given the occasional pause in a part, it's still challenging to write in such a way that in every piece each player has at least one interesting passage to play. If the work calls for only a single note from the trombone at the very end,* it's understandable that the trombonist will look thoroughly bored and disengaged.
* Sibelius actually wrote a piece like this, so it's entirely within the realm of possibility. One could argue whether or not it was a good idea to orchestrate in such a way, but still, the challenge remains.
|
|