this is also done right, with a proper amount of key force.

i'm done with rachmaninov for the night....

actually, rachmaninov and angst go well together. under 15, and it's just notes on a screen. but a little older than that is probably the ideal age to get this right.

she's hitting the keys with sufficient force. that's the big thing. and it's a russian thing, consistently. her western counterparts want to over-intellectualize and turn it into some dainty prance, rather than the noisy protopunk classic that it is.

i'm mildly relieved. i suppose that if we end up on the other side of some curtain, we can still rely on the former soviet states (and satellites) to play the russian classics for us properly, without having to endure westerners butchering them.

i have a moderately recent american version and a modded russian version designed for smashing pumpkins fans (creamy dreamer) and what i've found is that the russian muff seems to be designed for better sound at lower volumes. the russian version does sound clearer and more usable here, but that's why. it has to do with the way a muff works. it's supposed to be plugged directly into a tube amp at high volume levels. this test is consequently largely useless.

deathtokoalas
the orchestra sounds good, but she's just not hitting the piano hard enough.

Eleanor Gay
Does she need to pound the keys to mke the music? Maybe for you to hear the music.

deathtokoalas
this particular piece needs to be pounded, yes. bourgeois westerners that want to focus on masturbatory techniques have consistently failed to understand that for close to a hundred years. the russians grasp it properly...

go find a russian recording to hear it bashed out the way it's supposed to be, then come back.

shantihealer
Your right, my friend, she not only underhits the piano but kind of smacks it.

SugarTomAppleRoger
You are joking of course. Few can play with such power as she does.

deathtokoalas
i've pointed out a few performances that have the proper level of aggression. she just doesn't sustain the smashing throughout.

Ricardo Macayo
y tú muerte a los koalas si que sabes de música!

deathtokoalas
i apologize if i've mistranslated, but i think you're asking me why i hate koalas.

the answer is that they're revoltingly cute.

valkhorn
I hear nothing wrong with it. The notes are clear enough, and she plays with finesse - which is very hard to do on this piece, esp. the last movement.

deathtokoalas
see, that's the problem - the finesse. this isn't a technical, subtle piece. it's a banger, meant to be played with all the bourgeois sophistication of "tutti frutti".

anyways, i'm repeating myself. thread closed.

ok, this sounds like a solid version. it's likely not coincidental that it's russian, but it does look like the whole concerto is up here.

so i was able to find a proper russian version on youtube, after all.

this is better, it seems to get the point better, but the playing is a little blurry (it sounds like he's using the sustain pedal to blur some of the notes he can't hit in the same way that electric guitarists use a distortion pedal), and the mix is pretty piano-heavy.

busted? lol...

no grit. and, look at 3:23: he's catching his breath? maybe his suit is too tight, and it's restricting his breathing. then he prances through the rest of it like it's some kind of gentle ballet...

this should be beaten down with every ounce of emotional and physical force that can be gathered, as though the police have shown up to steal your last ounce of vodka at 4:53 am and there's nothing you can do about it....

deathtokoalas
his is worse, he sounds bored through half of it. yeesh...

i have a version by the soviet symphony orchestra that owns everything i've seen online so far, but my discs are packed. i can't even find info online. fucking cold war, getting in the way of what really matters...

Concertos n°2 and n°3 (USSR Symphony Orchestra, feat. conductor: Gennady Provatorov, piano: Victor Eresko).

find that one if you want to hear somebody just bash this out.

XaverScharwenka
Or simply enjoy one of the best versions ever, by Earl Wild... but then again, we all like things differently.

deathtokoalas
earl wild does not sound like a very russian name.

perhaps, you'd like to suggest a wonderful slavic folk version of 'the entertainer' while you're at it? grigorii does gershwin? on balalaika?

fucking hipsters.

1231CarrieCheuk
your profile pic is so frightening

deathtokoalas
that's only because you can't see the muppets dancing around me.

South Texas Piano
Please tell them to save you

deathtokoalas
i believe that request ought to be formed in terms of a question, but you forget that the average muppet is a monster!

12x12surface
Can you post it on YT?? 

deathtokoalas
i don't have muppet copyright access.

deathtokoalas
i agree with those arguing that she's butchering this. i've always interacted with the piece as a blaring romp, written by an emotionally insecure male that is releasing all of his anger and frustration. she's playing it in a soft and sensuous manner that invites a sultry lounge singer.

the notes are flawless, but there's just no rage or sadness or frustration in it.

deathtokoalas
i mean, maybe she's trying to sex it up. fine.

...but this really needs to be played by 40 year old virgins (ok, i'm exaggerating) to get the maximum feel out of it.

Tim
your understanding of the composer's work is clearly limited if you think anything he wrote is devoid of lust or passion. also, wang's artistic conviction and integrity are what make her performance so remarkable. interpreting a piece in a way that deviates from the norm (or, in this case, your personal preference) is not indicative of poor musicianship.

deathtokoalas
did i not point out that she played the piece flawlessly? but if you understand where the piece is coming from, and all the self-doubt and insecurity attached to it, you'll realize she's completely missing the point.

i mean, if i want to listen to shmaltzy, upper class nonsense i'll go listen to mozart or shostakovich or something. what makes rachmaninov special is the social anxiety in the writing. you take that away, and it's just another delve into aristocratic masturbation. there's plenty of that for those that want it, without needing to ruin that which stands away from it.

i kind of held back a little bit initially, but does she look to you like somebody that has ever experienced the kind of shit rachmaninov went through? young, beautiful, rich. she'd need a brain transplant to get her mind around this. it would be remarkable if she did understand this emotionally, that is as something more than notes on a page - which she does clearly understand quite well.

Vlad
eugh...welcome to music, blessed art it is, where each comes with their own interpretation.

deathtokoalas
this is scored music, not jazz. personal contributions should be kept to an absolute minimum. the performer is a worthless intermediary between my ears and the composer's mind - a necessary evil. i don't care what she thinks.

Vlad
Scored music is still subject to interpretation (not talking about improvisation). Any two people will feel to play the same piece differently

deathtokoalas
completely wrong liberal bullshit. if i want to listen to yuja wang, i'll listen to one of her compositions. i'm here to listen to rachmaninov. the moment she brings her individuality into the process is the moment she completely fucks up. you need to get your head out of this relativistic gallow before it comes down. there are correct and incorrect ways to play a piece.

i don't want to continue this into perpetuity, so i'm just going to be clear about the non-relativistic reality of things before i close off further comments.

there are two ways to perform a scored piece of music:

1) the way it was written
2) incorrectly

this slutty performance is not capturing the piece the way it was written. it's a "modern interpretation" that replaces the tortured soul of the piece with vapid and gratuitous sexuality. therefore, it's wrong. there's no further worthwhile debate on the point, unless you want to resort to the idiocy of "it's just your opinion".

it's not. and that decadent attitude is destroying our culture and our civilization.

out.

benchmark disc.

benchmark disc.

benchmark disc.

i realize i'm interpreting something in translation, but what strikes me as more interesting is the way the dude is pandering to her. it wouldn't happen if she were running things? he won't argue with the idea of nuking russia? there's a few sections where it seems like he should insert "your highness". he knows he'd better not piss her off, and seems to be aware that she's temperamental.....

oil princess, indeed.

there's been some suggestions that this is so outlandish that it could only be something she leaked to boost her popularity with the crazies.

....but those that have been following things since the orange revolution know that this woman is the precise stereotype of the mentally unstable upper class daddy's girl, who will do whatever absurd thing is necessary to get her own way.

cray-cray.

that's why they jailed her.

that's right. it's about preventing democracy.

that's right. the conflict between qatar and the saudis is a consequence of saudi support for the egyptian military, rather than the cause of events in egypt (excluding the coup itself, of course). and with the ruling we see why emotions are so high.

you want to know why we can't have another cold war? because i can't find any decent recordings of rachmaninov. no, i don't want to listen to some asian child prodigy that can hit the notes but has no emotional investment because she lacks the maturity. i don't want to compete over who can do it better, either.

the best version i've heard of the second piano concerto (by far) is by the soviet orchestra, which i found as an import from france (you can keep your freedom fries) in a second hand store several years ago. it's nowhere to be found online. and, it's not hard to guess why. instead, we have versions by west germans, koreans, jews from chicago...WESTERN VERSIONS....

none of them compare to the soviet version.

what is important in life is not which set of bankers controls which oil rig. what is important is the ability to listen to high quality renditions of universally recognized russian classics. likewise, russians have an inalienable right to access american renditions of american jazz.

"we have bitches brew, too. dmitri play trumpet through superior delay system. better quality big muff for vladimir's guitar."

it's not the same, dammit.

we need to put this into perspective before we revert back to that fucking bullshit all over again.

i couldn't condemn the russians for moving into poland or the baltics to dismantle that offensive weapons system before it comes up. the world might not really understand, but that falls under the rubric of self-defense in my estimation. it could actually prevent a catastrophe.

nato has a mutual defense clause, though. so, any invasion would have to be engineered to appear to be a local revolution, so as to not invoke the clause. crimea may be something of a model. it was so fast and smooth that it seemed to be a contingency plan. so, that's something to keep an eye out for.

one of the reasons the neo-con propaganda in iraq was effective was that the idea of preemptive war is indeed justifiable as self-defense. the problem was that the rhetoric didn't meet the reality. saddam wasn't building weapons. he wasn't a threat to anybody. russia, on the other hand, is coming up against the possible necessity to truly move preemptively. the united states is building weapons, and is a threat to the existence of russia.

that being said, i'm having a hard time taking the reports of an imminent russian invasion of eastern ukraine seriously. i'm just having a hard time imagining it, after so many years of russian complicity.

but i was speaking before about a pandora's box. the base in crimea is so strategically imperative that it is tempting to think of it exceptionally. eastern ukraine? not at all. there's some factories, but factories can be built elsewhere. if they move into ukraine, it will dispel all questions as to whether this box has opened, and it will signal russia's intent to shift strategies and aggressively move deep into europe.

...and it *is* america's fault. all of this militarization has created a situation where seeming russian acts of aggression are entirely rational, as they are rooted not in aggression but in defense.

americans do understand this, even if they don't immediately realize it. it's the same logic as the cuban missile crisis. again, people don't know about turkey, so for the sake of the example let's forget about it. how many americans would argue that kennedy should have just shrugged off missiles in cuba? how many would condemn preemptive action against cuba? so, how can they expect putin to just ignore this provocation?

i'm not trying to draw attention to the double standard. that much is obvious. i'm pointing out that if the americans don't change their policy, they are going to be held responsible by history for provoking the russians into a major conflict. at this point, abandoning the missile shield may be the only way to prevent that conflict.

but that will be determined by the severity of russia's next move.

we've all been watching american presidents produce this speech for so long, that maybe it's easy to forget that beyond the rhetoric lies the basis of american foreign policy.

what he's doing is waving around the benefits of american empire and hitting them over the head with it like an anvil. never forget, indeed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVZWLqkBtf0

his history is largely propaganda, though. well, he's marketing the empire.

you don't believe the advertisements you see on tv, do you?

the doublethink is also impressive.

he talks like this, and then rejects a cold war immediately after. it's remarkable.