Hi I just started my diploma lesson last month and planning to sit for Dip next year.
Do you guys play as many repertoire in the list as you can before really choosing them out for you programme?
My programme is
Bach Toccata in E minor BWV 914
Beethoven Sonata in C minor Op 13 Pathetique
Debussy La Cathedrale Engloutie / Brahms Intermezzo Op 118 No 2

Thinking that Brahms and Beethoven's period is quite near and their style, should i choose Debussy over Brahms?

I think it would be great if you did both the Brahms and the Debussy, but I don't know if you would have time in the recital for both - would this take you over the time limit?

Nice works, but the programme strikes me as a bit safe - you've picked one of the best-known Beethoven sonatas as well as a well-known Debussy work. Try venturing just a little off the beaten track.

killua1219,

I agree with Deborah: it seems balanced as a programme, but combining Bach, Beethoven and Brahms is certainly packing it with the 'expected' heavyweights (and if no Debussy, then an all German programme too I see...), while leaving little space for something less well known, or lighter.

Try swapping one of these for a twentieth century choice of rarer pedigree, something you really like. Personally, I can't wait to take my diploma, as I am so fond of the 24 Shostakovich Preludes, and there are two pairs to choose from in the DipABRSM list.

denmark

Yes

and Yes

yes


I am currently working on these four pieces Only Bach's toccata is confirmed



Haha all pieces except the toccata are heavy weighted espicially Beethoven and Debussy.
I have tried Shostakovich's prelude and I remember that book was the most expensive 1



Thank you so much for your advices
I am searching for other works and will try working on them
Any suggestions?

Er, reading the diploma repertoire list and syllabus?

the programme is good, but i think it's slightly heavy. personally, as much as i love this beethoven sonata (i played it myself), i would not put it in the programme. some examiners (my god-mother is an ABRSM diploma examiner) groan when they hear it, becasue most people have the same approach (technical well-played, but lack of character).

Ah, but she hasn't heard my interpretation - the one Beethoven intended!

liebe_klavier> yes it is heavy

Mad Tom> I'd very like to hear that

Thanks for all you advices. After a deep discussion with my teacher, due to the heaviness of the programme, I'll get really tired at the end Now i have swapped Beethoven with Mozart

New Programme List
Bach Toccata in E minor BWV 914
Mozart Sonata in D, K.311
Debussy La Cathedrale Engloutie / Brahms Intermezzo Op 118 No 2

If play all Bach, Mozart, Debussy and Brahms, will that exceed the prescribed duration?

Until you can play them up to speed you cannot know for sure, but you can make a reasonable estimate like this: For each piece (or each section if the tempo changes) use a metronome to decide how fast you want to take it, and how long each bar will last. Then count up the bars and do a quick calculation to see how many seconds the piece will take. Add on 5 or 6 seconds between pieces for change of mood, and 10 seconds or so at the start for settling down, and you should have a fairly accurate timing.

If you are anything like me you will change your mind ten times about the content of your program before you get to the exam!

That doesn't sound like your usual modest self, Mad Tom!

On a more serious note, do you think it's ever possible to know exactly what a composer intended once they've shuffled off this mortal coil and are no longer there to tell us? And to what extent do other people's interpretations of his work change what the composer intends?

It may be possible to figure out just what the composer intended, but if you did you'd never know that you'd achieved it if the composer was no longer around to confirm it. And that knowledge might not lead to a great performance anyway.

I think the whole idea that a classical performer "ought" to aim for as "authentic" a performance as possible is just more of the moralizing that the world is full of and would probably be "better" (whoops more moralizing) without. It is also unattainable. Even if we could be sure that we had ... say ... genuine-sounding 18th Century instruments and that we played them in authentic 18th Century style the audience would still not be able to bring along their 18th Century ears and 18th Century minds. It is an era and quality of experience that is gone. It can never be re-created.

If there is anything you "ought" to do as a performer it is to enrich the lives of your audience, and if that means some interpretation that is going to upset the preachy puritans - then too bad for them.

My personal belief is that you should put yourself completely at the service of the composer - so it is the music that is the core of the performance, not your personal style and idiosyncracies. That is why from thinking that Glenn Gould was fantastic when I was 18 I now can hardly stand to listen to most his recordings. But it is just another moral view. I can't prove that it is true or correct in the way that I can prove that the Earth is Not Flat, or that a Tumbler can never be deformed into a Teacup.

I also happen to agree that if you know something about the composer's other works, his contemporaries, the customs of his society, the instruments of those times, ... then you stand a better chance of coming up with something that will send your listeners away thinking "Wow" and wanting more.

You don't even have to play it the same way every time. I can think of at least half a dozen ways to present one particular composition by Bach. Why should I not play it a different way at each performance. When you play a piece of music you are not laying down some marble monument to eternity. You are communicating something to whoever is going to listen. Does it need to be written on the music stand that you have to consider the audience. Where does this belief come from that we "ought" to be in search of the ONE TRUE INTERPRETATION.

(This can have serious effects though. What happens if you lose marks in an exam, not because you lack the skill to create whatever sound-image you want, but because you have chosen an interpretation that conventional wisdom deems to be incorrect.).

Getting back on-topic though, I have lost count of the number of versions I have heard of Beethoven's Pathetique, and I still have not found one that communicates what I think the piece is about. In my very humble opinion - which no-one is under any obligation to share - everyone either plays it boringly conventionally, or goes over the top in one way or another. Sometimes it might as well be a robot playing. Other times you can't hear the Beethoven for the famous virtuoso that is in the way. Hence the tongue-in-cheek comment that prompted your question and this typical MT rant in response.

But it is all just fine. There is room for all kinds in the world of music.

Times change. Instruments change. Acoustics change. Our education, experience, expectations change. Music itself changes. Recordings become dated ...

A classical score is incomplete. It is the job of the interpreter to complete it in a way that makes sense to each new generation, and even to each new audience.

Well - that is what I think.

I actually agree with most of what you wrote, but the bits I've quoted here are for me the most important.

I'm not a great one for trying to recreate an "authentic" performance, and hope I didn't give that impression through my questions. It's been great to hear your thoughts on this and to realise that our opinions are very similar.

can further explain please?

Exactly what it says:

Getting on for a year ago, after much thought, and many rejected attempts (too long, too easy, too hard, too many short pieces, not enough different styles, ...) I decided on a programme, learned the pieces that were new to me, and set about improving the others:

Bach, Prelude and Fugue in Fm (WTC book 1 No 12)
Beethoven, Sonata in Cm Op 13 "Pathetique"
Chopin, Berceuse Op 57
Debussy, Dr Graduss ad Parnassum
Rachmaninoff, Prelude in G Op 32 No 5

Then I thought that the Bach fugue was too difficult to interpret well, so switched to No 14 from Book 1. Decided also that Bach followed by Beethoven was too heavy so switched the Beethoven Sonata for a set of variations. Still not balanced, so replaced it with a Mozart Sonata. But then I thought I played Beethoven better than Mozart, so replaced it with a different Beethoven Sonata, but realised that it would need a lot more work to get it to the same standard as the Pathetique - so went back to my original choice. But to avoid the sustained heaviness of the first two pieces, replaced the Bach Prelude and Fugue with a couple of Scarlatti Sonatas. (At one point I considered covering the counterpoint angle by using as an own choice piece something much older by Orlando Gibbons).

Meanwhile I had "discovered" Scriabin, so I replaced the closing Rachmaninoff prelude with a pair of Scriabin Preludes. The own choice Dr Gradus ad Parnassum had been criticized by a friend as "too easy", and it also sounded out of place with the rest of the program - like jelly and custard on a gourmet menu - so I replaced it with Seville from Albeniz's Spanish Suite. Then someone else pointed out that the programme was probably too long, so I dropped Chopin's Berceuse (which had followed the Beethoven) completely. Finally ending up with:

Scarlatti, 2 sonatas in A K208/209
Beethoven, Sonata in Cm Op 13 "Pathetique"
Albeniz, Suite Espanola: Seville
Scriabin, Preludes Op 11, Nos 11 and 21

Which got approval from my teacher, and that I plan to present late this year or early next.

But maybe I should play a Bach Prelude and Fugue after all? It would show off some skills that the Scarlatti does not. And though I personally prefer to listen to Scarlatti than to Bach people tell me that I play Bach better. The Prelude of No 12 is quite lovely, but the fugue is rather difficult to interpret ... and No 14 is also a bit strange ... but No 16 is more straightforward. I very much like the Scriabin, and I like the idea of ending a short recital with the gentle beauty of Op 11 No 21 rather than some keyboard fireworks - which is what most people do. But it is a very easy piece to play. Perhaps the Szymanowski etude (Op 4 No 3) would be a better choice? It is equally gentle and lovely at the close, but with more technical difficulties in those fast left hand runs and trills, and with the RH and LH trying to occupy the same space half of the time! ... and a Haydn sonata might be a refreshing change from Beethoven for the examiner, even though I am arrogant enough to think that I play the "Pathetique" as well as anyone ...

is that any clearer?

"Indecisive" Tom

p.s. I just know that my friend Robodoc is not going to have this problem. After he picks up his Grade 8 next week (probably a distinction) he will choose three or four pieces in a well balanced programme, stick with them, set to work in a resolute and disciplined manner to master them - and probably have his DipABRSM in his pocket while I am still vacillating between Bach and Scarlatti!

Out of interest, why do you feel the need to gain approval from your teacher? As far as I understand it, Diplomas are all about standing on your own two feet (or sitting down, if you are a pianist) - since you will have to explain eloquently in your viva why you chose to build your programme that way, the answer "because my teacher approved it" is not going to do you any favours, is it?

Didn't need to or have to but as we will be working on them together it helps that she is happy with the choices

i get what you mean
anyway let's work hard together

Don't bet on anything; At todays lesson I played awfully and my teacher gave me rather a fore-handed criticism (the opposite of a back-handed complement) when she said, in disgust, "If you play like that you will only get a merit". I was surprised it was that good, but at least it was today, not next Wednesday!!

As for picking a program for a Diploma recital I hope I have the chance to vacillate a little too, for a while: I don't regard it as a problem - the original thread was about exploring the choices before settling on a program and that strikes me as a very good thing to do. We (my teacher and I, see MT's comments about teacher approval) are not even going to sit and think about diploma until September.

In the meantime, what to play over the summer? Schumann Papillons (or at least some of it), a couple of Scarlatti sonatas, the 2 Gershwin diploma pieces and the Chopin nouvelles etudes. Perhaps Debussy's Cathedral Engoutie, maybe a classical sonata - my teacher was talking about Haydn, I wondered about a Schubert. Of course that's far too much for one summer, and even too much for a diploma recital, but what does that matter? I play for the love of the music, not the pursuit of bits of paper. Bits of paper like grade 8 or Diplomas are merely a useful way of maintaining an intermediate term goal to guide the process of learning.

Which brings me back to the original quote: Even if I do manage to get a diploma or even an LRSM while MadTom is still fiddling with his diploma program he will, I suspect, still be a better pianist than me for many years to come.

Well I can't resist offering some unsolicited advice.

A Scarlatti sonata and a Haydn Sonata will do more to develop your skills than any of the other stuff (and I am not saying that because they are two of my favourite composers).

For a Scarlatti sonata you could do worse than learn the famous F minor sonata (K.466) It is very creative and original, unshowy, unpretentious, but crafted with precision and great skill. The end result is both beautiful and moving. I have been working on it for a few months and am just about beginning to do it justice (though not yet up to the standard of Horowitz's astoundingly fine recording of it).

For Haydn, an easy one to start with would be No 15 in E (Hob XVI/13). This has the advantage of sounding far more difficult to play than it actually is. The very attractive Minuet and Trio is probably playable by someone at about Grade 4 level.

For something rather more challenging the late sonatas are of course his most famous - with good reason - but No 47 in B minor (Hob XVI/32) is a neglected masterpiece.

I have been working on No 38 in F (Hob XVI/23) for what seems forever. It took me about two weeks to learn the notes and it has taken the best part of a year to not get it sounding how I want!)

p.s. thanks for the compliment! (But I think you might always play Gershwin's Lisa better than me). And best wishes for Wednesday.

Rachmaninoff's preludes are nice too