Well...I believe my piano teacher is after me doing a piano recital...but I feel that I don't have enough balancing repertoire to do any justice at all. The only pieces I can really do in public are

Debussy - Pour le Piano 2nd movement (Sarabande) + La Cathederale Englouite (Preludes Bk 1 No.10) (possibly Canope, Preludes Bk2 No.10?)
Schubert - Impromptu No.4 in A flat Op.90
Chopin - Preludes No.4 in E minor, 7 in A and 20 in C minor
Beethoven - (heaven forbid me doing this) Sonata No.14 in C# minor "Moonlight" 1st movement
CPE Bach - Solfegietto in C minor
Rachmaninov - Prelude in C#minor Op.3 No.2 (if I tidy up the middle section...)
could possibly learn a few movements from some Bach French/English Suites
If my music teacher is available...4 hand version of the Brahms Hungarian Dance No.5


Balance? I somehow doubt it.

Any ideas/thoughts/opinions?

If it's not an exam I see no reason why you shouldn't just stick to Romantic! I went to a concert once that was nothing but Chopin from beginning to end - I must say I found it all a bit much (apologies to La Chopiniste ) but why not stick to the Romantic composers in your list and compare and contrast in your introductions? And whatever you say, I'm quite sure you could add something else that would fit in!

P.S. That Hungarian Dance would be a great climax!

If you were going to play all those Chopin preludes maybe you could think of including some other contrasting preludes? Only because two of those three are slow, short minor key preludes. You need some more 'happy' music to balance out all the stormy minor keys!

Hmmm. Suppose I could try do some more Brahms Hungarian Dances for 4 hands between a couple of pieces...*shrugs*

I agree that as it is for a conert and not an exam your programme can consist of pieces that you enjoy and are confident about playing well. This has the makings of a perfectly good recital. Can I be nosey and ask what it is for, and also ask how you find enough hours in the day to practise all of these instruments? I don't think that I could have done it at your age. Do you ever sleep?

I thought you only had 2 hands - or is there something you're not telling us?????

petrat, to be honest I don't really practise anything much except recorder. I practise piano a lot in school though.

Sorry, Fred! Apologies to you as well! I enjoyed the ballade that he played at the end, but I had the feeling that the performer was a little bored with most of his repertoire.

The purpose of the recital? Who said there was going to be one? My teacher just said "Get some pieces together like you were going to do a recital"

Though I suppose I could do one in my local church! and a recorder recital

You, from what I can understand! If it is actually going to be a recital, then find out for how long and what sort of pieces would be expected. If it's just for fun and for something a bit different to do in lessons then surely you can play whatever pieces you like?
I'm supposed to be doing the first movement of Moonlight Sonata for part of my A2 piano recital....*groan*...not sure the audience will still be awake by the end of it!

You've gotta give it your own touch, little flourishes, something they're not expecting.

I'm confused that you say this, followed by 'who said I was doing a recital .



Is this a general problem in your piano playing? I rarely, if ever, hear you talking about playing baroque or early Classical repertoire (one exception here). Maybe it would help your piano playing in general to learn a bit more of the earlier repertoire, for the tricky intricate finger work, rather than the loud impressive-sounding romantic pieces . I think your teacher has pointed out something rather interesting to you....

AP, it turns out I actually am doing something in a concert soon Either the Debussy Sarabande from Pour le Piano or the Brahms Hungarian Dance No.5 (possibly another one to go with it if it's ready?)

But anyway, I did think that my repertoire was too Romantic/post Romantic based, but saying that...it's what I do best. Classical era music doesn't appeal to me as much and Baroque just annoys me in the sense that I can't interpret it myself...but instead have to follow what teacher says.

Let's think logically here. You like Romantic music the most, so you played that the most initially, then you since you've practised playing Romantic music more you're better at it. The more you play only romantic music the more difference there becomes between the standard to which you play Romantic music and the standard to which you play other music (assuming you play it well, of course). The more you're better at it the more you like it better and so the cycle goes on. Maybe the reason you're better at Romantic music is simply that you do it more. Play more music from other periods and you'll become better at that and maybe like that more.

Romantic music is generally 'easier' to interpret anyway. Not from the point of view of doing it to very high standards, but at a low level the 'anything goes, make it mushy' thing is easier to get hold of than what to do in other periods. The key to Baroque interpretation is articulation, after all that's all that is available on harpsichords, pick some articulation for frequently occurring 'subjects' (I don't mean specifically subject as in fugues) and then mirror it wherever the 'subject' reappears. That goes a long way to making a piece sound a lot better. As a general rule passages of shorter faster notes (e.g. semiquavers) make legato, and the longer ones can stand out as staccato. That is of course a very general rule and not a great one, read the articulation on the score if there's some there. What you need to do is, instead of being independent straight away, study some with your teacher, observe what interpretation she suggests and why, then gradually you'll be able to come up with your own . You don't have to be good at it straight away, you have to learn.

I've just seen your post Dulciana...
No need for apologies.
Although I'm a Chopin freak fan , yet I do believe that you should play other stuff too.
Even in my recitals , I don't fill the program with Chopin pieces ; balance is required.

* Presses "ADD REPLY" with a heavy heart *

Sorry to butt in, IL, but can anyone explain what is the difference between an "exam recital" and the kind of recitals we normally go to in concert halls? Do you HAVE to play CERTAIN compulsory classical pieces like Bach or Mozart? How long is it for? It must be scary to play so much for so long before some critical eyes/ears?

Apologies for the ignorance - just curious.

It depends on the exam being taken, but usually there are lists of set pieces from which to choose, and the general idea is to put together a well balanced programme that will show off your strengths and ability to play pieces of different musical periods. A concert recital might consist of the works of a certain composer or by composers of the same nationality only, or pieces chosen from one period, or even pieces that were all written in the same year!

Thanks, Petrat, no wonder I was confused. In recitals, it has been for me always either the works of one composer or pieces from the same country like Romania or those from the same period. No contrast.

It's a concert recital I'm on about...