The editing in that video is amazing, too. Some of the best piano footage I've seen.
Wow, that's a rare thing. Is this Dukas' own transcription?
It is!
In fact, orchestral transcriptions (whether it be from your own work or someone else's) were very common back in the day, even after recordings became a thing, and they came to be for a variety of reasons. Being able to play orchestral works at home when most households had at least one piano, in a room unfit for orchestras during a concert...
The number of results for 4-hand and 2-piano arrangements displayed in the IMSLP website go by the hundreds.
Now I remember I have a Famitracker arrangement of the Rite of Spring somewhere in my hard disk... WIP obviously
The editing in that video is amazing, too. Some of the best piano footage I've seen.
Wow, that's a rare thing. Is this Dukas' own transcription?
It is!
In fact, orchestral transcriptions (whether it be from your own work or someone else's) were very common back in the day, even after recordings became a thing, and they came to be for a variety of reasons. Being able to play orchestral works at home when most households had at least one piano, in a room unfit for orchestras during a concert...
The number of results for 4-hand and 2-piano arrangements displayed in the IMSLP website go by the hundreds.
Now I remember I have a Famitracker arrangement of the Rite of Spring somewhere in my hard disk... WIP obviously
Oh, I'm sure it was somewhat standard practice to do this for orchestral works back then; I just haven't personally been exposed to many performances of these transcriptions. Might be because the piano has such a rich repertoire of its own and the orchestral works are better served in their original forms anyway.
I also don't think the transcriptions work particularly well in most cases because the diverse sounds and capabilities of the orchestra's many instruments is lost. Like, even for composers with such strong pianistic sensibilities like Brahms, the lack of sustaining power on the piano is problematic. I once read through his 2-piano transcription of the e minor Symphony with a friend, and it just wasn't the same. So much drawn-out lyricism that doesn't quite carry over.
Haha, Rite of Spring would be quite an undertaking on Famitracker. Thinking about it makes me slightly dizzy.
If you think piano transcriptions of orchestral works are inferior, I invite you to listen to Liszt's complete (and I do mean complete) set of transcriptions of Beethoven's symphonies for the solo piano. These are all (in my opinion, anyway) at least as well written and enjoyable to listen to as the original material, sometimes even more so. (EDIT: I guess what I'm trying to say is, while the piano version is not as "impressive" as the orchestral version, it's as good a piano piece as the original is a good orchestral piece - in other words, it's written as brilliantly for the piano as Beethoven wrote the original for the orchestra).
But then again I'm probably biased; as I said earlier, I'm much more of a piano person, having been raised in a family of pianists - although that doesn't mean I can't appreciate orchestral music.
If you want a quick example of Liszt's masterful work, here's his piano transcription of the scherzo from Beethoven's Eroica.
If you were to make a piano transcription, the first thing you should have in mind is to make sure the writing falls under the fingers and keeps a natural flow. No 12th or other such crazy intervals in a same chord in anything not slow, for instance. I'm going to play an orchestral reduction of Mozart's 21th piano concerto, and sometimes it's as if the arranger wanted to cram every single instrument into the score. And it doesn't always work.
My accompaniment teacher and I have deciphered one or two movements from 4-hand arrangements of Beethoven's 6th and 7th symphony. It was really hard to pull it off because of all the things going on at the same time, but boy was it fun.
If you think piano transcriptions of orchestral works are inferior, I invite you to listen to Liszt's complete (and I do mean complete) set of transcriptions of Beethoven's symphonies for the solo piano. These are all (in my opinion, anyway) at least as well written and enjoyable to listen to as the original material, sometimes even more so. (EDIT: I guess what I'm trying to say is, while the piano version is not as "impressive" as the orchestral version, it's as good a piano piece as the original is a good orchestral piece - in other words, it's written as brilliantly for the piano as Beethoven wrote the original for the orchestra).
But then again I'm probably biased; as I said earlier, I'm much more of a piano person, having been raised in a family of pianists - although that doesn't mean I can't appreciate orchestral music.
If you want a quick example of Liszt's masterful work, here's his piano transcription of the scherzo from Beethoven's Eroica.
Hmm, I'd certainly agree that such transcriptions can be "impressive," even amazing in some cases. I'm not familiar with the whole set, but I do know the Liszt versions of Beet 5 and 6 through my love for Glenn Gould (he recorded only those two Symphonies to my knowledge, marvelous playing) and they certainly are remarkably pianistic.
And yet I'm still left wanting much of the time. Liszt did fantastic work on these pieces to be sure, and yet it seems like there's so much "shenanigans" involved to just make it possible for two hands on a keyboard to play the stuff... and even then I can't help but compare to the original orchestra and notice how much counterpoint, doubling, etc. must be moved or omitted or otherwise compromised on for it to work. In the hands of a great pianist it can be convincing for sure, but I have trouble comparing it favorably to the source.
Of course I'm certainly biased as well, as I take more naturally to string instruments and orchestral playing despite starting with and maintaining piano early on. Best account for that honestly.
.png){kind=tracking}
.png)
