Indeed, her communication skill is as good as her piano skill, both world class

absolutely wrong statement...i could see where people would go without correct directions introduced by a good teacher. man, are u serious?

@@druntopronto7598 interesting perspective. Thank you for weighing in

Google is watching your every move obviously

Yes! It’s quite bright, almost like a harpsichord.

Only Glenn Gould performs Bach with no pedal lol...pretty much all teachers nowadays encourage at least *some use of pedal as a coloring device in Baroque music. :)

@@lflagr That’s interesting, I think my teacher was old school then😀 But then I started learning 45 years ago!

Thanks! Corrected.

If only Bach had left us some video tapes. One clue is his instruments. He didn't have the modern piano, but he did have the organ and orchestral instruments, not to mention the human voice. Clearly the harpsichord is less expressive than the piano, which in turn has fewer tonal possibilities than an orchestra or a chorus. In line with his keyboard writing, he also wrote very difficult violin sonatas, so he must have been a very accomplished violinist as well. On the organ, he had stops to change moods and colors. Much of his music is 'motoric' and lends itself to very tight metronomic pacing. On the other hand, even within the motoric music there are opportunities, as Ms McDeremott so eloquently demonstrated, to 'shape' the music in almost infinite ways. Since Bach's genius is so 'off the chart', we must assume that he was as aware of the interpretive possibilities in his music as the great performers of later centuries. Ms McDermott convinces us of this inevitability.

Too fast, imo. To each his own, I guess.

Has absolutely Nothing to do with IQ. It is a simple decision, a promise, that you will make to yourself to practice every day until you run out of your life.

@@pluutoop if I have a bird's brain on me, I think it's an impossible to hit the narrow each piano keys precisely and timingly without seeing them even though I'm practicing in my whole life. I'm admitting and respecting the extraordinary talent of the pianists and orchestra members.

if I have a bird's brain on me, I think it's an impossible to hit the narrow each piano keys precisely and timingly without seeing them even though I'm practicing in my whole life. I'm admitting and respecting the extraordinary talent of the pianists and orchestra members.

Just found it on Spotify, thanks for the tip!

@@chutton988 👦🙌

It's a clip from a much longer video, you can see the whole thing on their website - this is only part of it.

@@tompianohotmail ok.

@@jfpary7336 they're really interesting and worth looking up

Agreed, I play this suite too, ridiculous tempo choice.

She literally says at the start she will be talking about shape and voicing...are you aware that this is a clip from a much longer video? Aside from the fact that choosing a tempo that suits how you play is blindingly obvious and she mentions "try playing it 5 different ways", from which it's no great leap to try varying speed - it's not the focus of this video!! I'm assuming she discusses tempo in the full lesson given how interesting it is in relation to Bach's music. I really don't see the point of comments like this, doesn't add anything. Any musician knows that you can play at different speeds, so it just feels like criticism for the sake of criticism. Incidentally her tempo isn't so fast if you think about the tempo of the harmonic progressions, rather than just "she's playing fast notes". Nobody's fault but your own if you can't manage to play it this fast and with such clarity and energy - practise more!

I agree that it does sound fast, but she also talks very fast, so me it sounds like her goal was to convey the words and the performance in a condensed format - the video is 20 minutes long and would be even longer if things were slowed down. I tried slowing it to 0.75 on playback and it seems listenable - just an observation.

The tempo is completely within the realm of reason; this particular choice lends itself well to feeling half note pulses as opposed to quarter note, which can lend a lot of large scale structure and dancelike feeling to a performance.

Why? Every note is clear and interesting, shapes become very obvious, imitation is easier to hear and it's exciting? So what are the reasons it's too fast here? It might not be to your taste, but if that's what you mean, then who cares? You can play it slowly if you want. She is playing excellently.

@@tompianohotmail Exactly. And when people are claiming certain tempi are “incorrect” when the composer never indicated anything whatsoever with regards to tempo, it’s nothing more than a personal preference presented as objective fact.

Kindly upload a video of you performing this prelude at the right tempo so we can learn from you.

@@eugenephillips481 you're completely missing the point - that there is no "correct" tempo!! The whole idea here is to experiment and see what works and what changes and what effects can be created. Just don't try and state "this is too fast" if it's only an opinion and you're not going to give reasons why - if the person had suggested why they thought that it was too fast, that would open up opportunities for interesting discussions about what effects different speeds have etc. Instead we just get endless boring comments from people which are as irrelevant as saying, "good teaching but her lipstick is much too red"...

@@tompianohotmail In this case, yes, I would prefer the piece to be played more slowly and I am sure that Bach did not conceive it to be played as quickly! But the problem that needs to be pointed out is that the music of past centuries is usually played too fast. One of the experts in metronomic indications given by composers is Wim Winters. I strongly recommend visiting his youtube site: kzfaq.info?search_query=wim+winters . Winters considers that too often, the indications of tempo wanted by composers are not taken into account which can distort their music. Here is an example that will put you in shock... kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sNaWl7CE0duWn4k.html . Personally, I prefer this "étude" to be played faster but is it because we are used to hearing it play very quickly, pianists competing in speed? What should be preferred? Our taste or what the composer wanted?

The idea and taste behind are very good though could be done through more contrasts in articulations (portato, staccato, legato) while she prefers the more vocal "messa di voce" inner volume contrasts. The feeling and musical understanding are authentic and logical. I prefer her approach than Glenn Gould's trying to invent a new style, often with no logics behind it. In the end she does play more Legato due to the harmonic tension. This approach could be applied also in the first part. But she does speak rightly so about inner miniature phrasing. Over all a great musician, teacher and personality full of charm. She encourages everyone to explore their individual voice while keeping the logics of the style that are not one dimensional. Strangley enough it has recently become more fashionable among period instrumentalists to play Bach's music in a very fast sometimes overly expressive and manieristic Italian style, but she on the other hand is not falling into bravura ego energy. I think it is part of her vivid personality. What also explains her passion for Prokofiev while attaching both of them in her recitals as she herself mentioned in another video. A great lesson the opens an interesting discussion.

I too much preferred the "light and fluffy" approach (which sounded nothing like a harpsichord). The rest was all so aggressive. What is strange is that she makes as though her primary version is obviously better and the other is simply wrong. Is it so obvious how this piece goes?

I enjoyed the fluffy. The aggressive style of playing has been in vogue for a while but I have heard a change in young pianists coming through. I feel there is room for the butterfly as well as the eagle.

I wonder what relevance your remarks have to do with this music and its performance by human beings. Everything you wrote after the first sentence is also unevidenced, and an assertion of your opinions and beliefs, to which you are of course entitled. Btw, I practise both piano and atheism.

@Arturo’s Michelangeli When Bach or Anne-Marie McDermott giving glass of water to some other person, they are giving water, created and gifted to them, by someone else ie God.

@@bruce_c_in_nzI was raised to believe life is meaningless, purposeless, in pursuit of nothingness, we are random bag of molecules, complex chemical dust. Found the above deficit. No reason for being, no meaning of life, no morality to espouse, no truth to trust, no hope beyond grave. This a form of violence forced to believe leading to rebellion, disrespect, hatred, destruction of social fabric of family and patriotism, infanticide in wombs, depression, suicide. Raised to believe it is lese-majesta to scrutinize atheism with sceptical mind. Tabula rasa, introspect, I see evil in me pre-existing. What is origin of evil, I did not want it, I did not ask it, what is remedy? Why are we on earth for? Is history merely a series of events whose sum is meaningless? Or is there a providential plan? And atheism is found naked. Atheism never produced a line that is comforting on a death bed. Made me to think. When rearranged furniture in mind, the perspective is different outside non-god box. If there is no sin/evil, I don't need to know it's origins, I don't need to know the remedy. I don't need God if there is no sin/evil. Police, judiciary, jails, passwords, media etc prove there is evil. Found Jesus Christ very enigmatic, being God still humbled to die on cross for remissions of pre-existing sins for every single person to save from eternity in hell. BTW I left atheism, but enjoy piano.