There are two recital critiques to submit via Canvas during the semester This is the second one Each should be 750–1000 words long. (This assignment description, for example has 867 words)
Critiques should be based on Youtube recital performances selected by your instructor
Your critique should include the following elements:
· The date, time and location of the recital–or the date and time you watched the performance on youtube.
· The name of the performer
· The names and dates of the pieces performed, and the names of the composers who wrote those pieces.
· Did any of the pieces have individual movements (smaller sections) listed on the program?
· What are the meanings of any titles of pieces or titles of movements?
· Compare the styles of the different pieces on the program. How do pieces written earlier in time sound different from pieces written later in time? You should talk about dynamics, tempo, and the ways in which the piano is used. Is the piano used to make song-like melodies, or is it being used for rhythmic effect? Are lots of notes used at the same time, or just a few? Are both rhythm and melody happening at the same time? Be sure to talk about all the pieces on the program.
· From your own knowledge of piano playing so far, describe the physical approach that the performer had to the piano. Describe the performer’s posture, movement, and overall use of their body.
· What parts of the recital did you really like? Why? Be sure to talk about aspects of the music here—talk about the pieces in terms of melody, rhythm, tempo, dynamics and so on. You can also talk about the performer’s interpretation.
· What parts of the recital did you enjoy less? Why? Again, be sure to give details about the music and the performer.
· One of the main jobs of a pianist is to make sure that the audience can hear the melody (when there is one)—even when there are lots of other things happening in the music. How did this pianist succeed in the pieces on this program?
These critiques will be graded as follows:
Clarity of writing: 5 points
Details of recital and performer: 5 points
Discussion of compositional style
(critique of the music): 10 points
Discussion of the performance
(critique of the performer): 10 points
This is about your ideas, and your reaction to the recital. Everything that appears in your critique should be in your own words. This is a critique, not a research paper—you should really not need to borrow (even with attribution) from anywhere. If you use a music dictionary or website to provide translations or meanings for piece or movement titles, be sure to give this information in a footnote. Stealing words from anywhere is plagiarism.
Daniil Trifinov plays Liszt’s Transcendental Etudes in Lyon, France (listen to the encore of this concert as well to hear a contrasting piece by Claude Debussy)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kD4T-rNklsY
Critiques should be based on Youtube recital performances selected by your instructor
Your critique should include the following elements:
· The date, time and location of the recital–or the date and time you watched the performance on youtube.
· The name of the performer
· The names and dates of the pieces performed, and the names of the composers who wrote those pieces.
· Did any of the pieces have individual movements (smaller sections) listed on the program?
· What are the meanings of any titles of pieces or titles of movements?
· Compare the styles of the different pieces on the program. How do pieces written earlier in time sound different from pieces written later in time? You should talk about dynamics, tempo, and the ways in which the piano is used. Is the piano used to make song-like melodies, or is it being used for rhythmic effect? Are lots of notes used at the same time, or just a few? Are both rhythm and melody happening at the same time? Be sure to talk about all the pieces on the program.
· From your own knowledge of piano playing so far, describe the physical approach that the performer had to the piano. Describe the performer’s posture, movement, and overall use of their body.
· What parts of the recital did you really like? Why? Be sure to talk about aspects of the music here—talk about the pieces in terms of melody, rhythm, tempo, dynamics and so on. You can also talk about the performer’s interpretation.
· What parts of the recital did you enjoy less? Why? Again, be sure to give details about the music and the performer.
· One of the main jobs of a pianist is to make sure that the audience can hear the melody (when there is one)—even when there are lots of other things happening in the music. How did this pianist succeed in the pieces on this program?
These critiques will be graded as follows:
Clarity of writing: 5 points
Details of recital and performer: 5 points
Discussion of compositional style
(critique of the music): 10 points
Discussion of the performance
(critique of the performer): 10 points
This is about your ideas, and your reaction to the recital. Everything that appears in your critique should be in your own words. This is a critique, not a research paper—you should really not need to borrow (even with attribution) from anywhere. If you use a music dictionary or website to provide translations or meanings for piece or movement titles, be sure to give this information in a footnote. Stealing words from anywhere is plagiarism.
Daniil Trifinov plays Liszt’s Transcendental Etudes in Lyon, France (listen to the encore of this concert as well to hear a contrasting piece by Claude Debussy)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kD4T-rNklsY
