Beautiful! I love Chopin's work, most of it anyway, there's a few boring tunes I don't like much but his preludes and nocturnes are some of my favorites!
What do you mean by "modern music"? Arthur Rubinstein played a wide repertory from the Vienna classics to his contemporaries, however, Romantic works were the backbone of his programs. He was a classical pianist and represented the Romantic style of piano playing. The piano is out of tune, and the slow segments are disjointed and uneven. They lack legato, rounded phrasing and nuanced touch, which was the most pronounced characteristic of his playing. Granted, that's 1924, but this performance is just a sepia image of Rubinstein. To @PiotrBarcz: "few boring tunes" - oh, God.
@gaiusflaminius4861 Bung me the cash and I'll get it tuned specially to spare your precious sensibilties. Most Rubinstein rolls were of music that was a decade or two old, which many at the time might have thought a little on the modern side.
Thank you for this little clarification. I wasn't aware we were talking about different interpretations of the word "modern" and the exact margin of what you think constitutes a threshold between "old" and "modern". You hadn't specified so I assumed the present was a vantage point. In the 1920s, the meaning of "modern" applied to contemporary composers such as Prokofiev, Debussy, Ravel, Poulenc and Schoenberg. One or two decades backwards from 1920 would've brought one to 1900. By that time, the principal Romantic composers, to speak nothing of the preceding ones, became "old" or, better, "standard". In this sense, "modern" is a synonym of "active". As for the tuning, I'm not sure I got your point. "to spare your precious sensibilties" - Have you heard the notion of "fine arts"?
Fascinating seening the note lengths.
Beautiful! I love Chopin's work, most of it anyway, there's a few boring tunes I don't like much but his preludes and nocturnes are some of my favorites!
What do you mean by "modern music"? Arthur Rubinstein played a wide repertory from the Vienna classics to his contemporaries, however, Romantic works were the backbone of his programs. He was a classical pianist and represented the Romantic style of piano playing.
The piano is out of tune, and the slow segments are disjointed and uneven. They lack legato, rounded phrasing and nuanced touch, which was the most pronounced characteristic of his playing. Granted, that's 1924, but this performance is just a sepia image of Rubinstein.
To @PiotrBarcz: "few boring tunes" - oh, God.
@gaiusflaminius4861 Bung me the cash and I'll get it tuned specially to spare your precious sensibilties. Most Rubinstein rolls were of music that was a decade or two old, which many at the time might have thought a little on the modern side.
Thank you for this little clarification. I wasn't aware we were talking about different interpretations of the word "modern" and the exact margin of what you think constitutes a threshold between "old" and "modern". You hadn't specified so I assumed the present was a vantage point.
In the 1920s, the meaning of "modern" applied to contemporary composers such as Prokofiev, Debussy, Ravel, Poulenc and Schoenberg. One or two decades backwards from 1920 would've brought one to 1900. By that time, the principal Romantic composers, to speak nothing of the preceding ones, became "old" or, better, "standard". In this sense, "modern" is a synonym of "active".
As for the tuning, I'm not sure I got your point.
"to spare your precious sensibilties" -
Have you heard the notion of "fine arts"?
Not bad, but (my opinion) it must be prettier if we see the keyboard auto-play in the video. have a nice day :)
I can assure you looking at the keys on this piano wouldn't in any way excite you, because they don't move.
I feel so sad :(
Set them free ! X)