OK, so here it is:

   http://download.orphi.me.uk/Music/G3/WidorToccata.ogg

The toccata from Widor's Symphonie No. 5 in F major. As played by *me*.

What you're hearing here is literally me sitting at my keyboard, playing 
in realtime. No editing, no corrections, no dubbing, just recorded live. 
(Hence the dropped notes, dud timing and embarrasing pauses as I attempt 
to remember which notes come next, and snap bones and tendons to fit my 
fingers into the required positions!)

The sound is provided by Native Instrument's Kontakt 3 product, which 
has a vast ( = 3 DVDs! ) sample library which includes (amoung many 
other things) a pipe organ. It has 3 settings: "Fonds + Quint", "Vox 
Humaine 8'" and "Pos-Scharff", which is the one I'm using here. For no 
particular reason. It just has a faster attack to it, that's all. I have 
no idea which organ stops you're actually *supposed* to use for this work...

My synthesizer does in fact have a fairly good pipe organ simulation, 
but it doesn't really compare to recordings of the real thing. I think 
you'll agree, this sounds pretty damned impressive! Somehow, playing 
with a sound like this, I find myself taking the playing that much more 
seriously... as if it really were a giant pipe organ or something.

Anyway, enough of that - what do you guys thing of my playing skills?

(Yes, I admit it, I'm only playing two thirds of the toccata. And yes, 
some of the bass notes are in the wrong octave. My keyboard is quite 
small compared to a real organ, and I don't have any pedals!)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>   http://download.orphi.me.uk/Music/G3/WidorToccata.ogg

...so clearly you're going to need something capable of decoding and 
playing Ogg Vorbis audio files. If you're on Linux, good luck finding a 
music player that *can't* do this! ;-) If you're on Windoze, either 
install WinAmp, or go here

   http://www.xiph.org/dshow/

and grab the latest DirectShow filters. That should make Windows Media 
Player play it without issue.



> Anyway, enough of that - what do you guys thing of my playing skills?

Hey, c'mon - 2:30 of continuous playing with hardly any wrong notes, 
missed notes or even pauses. It's one thing to be able to play a tune. 
It's another thing to actually sit down and play a complex piece of 
music for several minutes without stopping or lifting. Anybody who's 
tried to do this for real will tell you that! ;-) This is about the 12th 
take or something. All the prior takes I made a mistake somewhere in the 
tune. This was the most flawless take I could manage.

(Now if I *wanted* to edit, I could take several imperfect takes and 
merge the best bits. But I wanted to present something "live".)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

That sounds good!

It's noticeable that you are reading though,
especially the pauses. It probably would
sound better to keep the rhythm going even
if you hit the wrong chords.

Post a reply to this message

Tim Attwood wrote:
> That sounds good!

Yay! Recognition! :-D

> It's noticeable that you are reading though,
> especially the pauses.

Um... no. Didn't even have the sheet music out while I was playing. I 
can't read anywhere near that fast. It takes me a minute or two to 
decode each note by counting up or down from the A-line.

As an aside, the top line alone has 32 notes per bar. Surely no human 
being can actually *read* that fast. Indeed, just glancing at your 
fingers to check they're in the right place would take several notes' 
duration. So I'm not sure how it's physically possible to read this 
music at the same time as playing it.

In fact, I'd go as far as to say that this piece of music is only 
playable at all because it's quite repetative and structured...

> It probably would
> sound better to keep the rhythm going even
> if you hit the wrong chords. 

You're probably right about that.

There are some amazing key changes in the latter parts of the tune; I 
just wish I hadn't got such big pauses in there. (It's HARD though!) On 
some of the takes, those pauses are almost non-existent (but I stuffed 
up somewhere else instead). Ho hum!

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> and grab the latest DirectShow filters. That should make Windows Media 
> Player play it without issue.

Weirdly enough, my Windows doesn't recognise the .ogg extension, but if 
I rename it to .mp3, it plays. Clearly I have a codec set up that didn't 
put the right extensions on or something. Good to know.

> Hey, c'mon - 2:30 of continuous playing with hardly any wrong notes, 
> missed notes or even pauses. 

If that was 12 takes, I'm quite impressed.

> As an aside, the top line alone has 32 notes per bar. Surely no human being can
actually *read* that fast. 

Well, if you've been a professional musician for a dozen years, yes, you 
can do that. I heard (on a CD) the very first take of the Star Wars 
theme music. It sounded perfect to me. Of course, the conductor refined 
it repeatedly, but *I* couldn't hear any flaws in the first time it was 
played. It's kind of like reading out loud, or typing what you're 
reading without looking - once you've done it enough, it goes right from 
eyes to fingers without conscious interpretation.

But for someone who doesn't practice at least 3 hours a day for several 
years, it's pretty impressive what you've got there with that little bit 
of work.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Weirdly enough, my Windows doesn't recognise the .ogg extension, but if 
> I rename it to .mp3, it plays. Clearly I have a codec set up that didn't 
> put the right extensions on or something. Good to know.

Oh...kay then, that's pretty random!

>> Hey, c'mon - 2:30 of continuous playing with hardly any wrong notes, 
>> missed notes or even pauses. 
> 
> If that was 12 takes, I'm quite impressed.

This was roughly the 12th take or so, yes. (I deleted all of the 
previous ones.)

It's strange - I can sit down and play the music endlessly for 2 days 
straight, but as soon as I hit the record button, I start making 
mistakes all over the place. :-S Most irritating!

>> As an aside, the top line alone has 32 notes per bar. Surely no human 
>> being can actually *read* that fast. 
> 
> It's kind of like reading out loud, or typing what you're 
> reading without looking - once you've done it enough, it goes right from 
> eyes to fingers without conscious interpretation.

Heh. When I was at school, one night I was in the chappel playing Bach's 
Toccata & Fugue in D minor. Some twat decided to run past and turn off 
the lights. Everybody was astonished when I continued playing without so 
much as missing a beat.

However... this only works if one note is near another. My hands "know" 
how wide the keys are. But if I need to move my whole hand to a 
different part of the keyboard, I still need to be able to see where I'm 
going. If that makes sense...

> But for someone who doesn't practice at least 3 hours a day for several 
> years, it's pretty impressive what you've got there with that little bit 
> of work.

Thanks! I spent literally *days* decoding the score and rehersing the 
playing. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
48d73e98$1@news.povray.org...
>
> It's strange - I can sit down and play the music endlessly for 2 days 
> straight, but as soon as I hit the record button, I start making mistakes 
> all over the place. :-S Most irritating!

Common it is .Stress and adrenalin, to deal with you'll have. ;-)
Sometimes in studio, the sound engineer lets the performer play as if it was 
rehearsal or a level check but actually recording.
Of course you need a partner for that... oh and you can't tell him "please 
record but don't let me know"


> However... this only works if one note is near another. My hands "know" 
> how wide the keys are. But if I need to move my whole hand to a different 
> part of the keyboard, I still need to be able to see where I'm going. If 
> that makes sense...

That makes sense but with further practice (I mean without looking at your 
hands at all) your arms and shoulders can learn the keyboard span as if they 
came with a GPS (oh err bad example).

>
>> But for someone who doesn't practice at least 3 hours a day for several 
>> years, it's pretty impressive what you've got there with that little bit 
>> of work.
>
> Thanks! I spent literally *days* decoding the score and rehersing the 
> playing. ;-)

That's a pretty good result :-)
Next stage the 16th notes arpeggio? >:-)

Marc

Post a reply to this message

m_a_r_c wrote:

> Common it is .Stress and adrenalin, to deal with you'll have. ;-)

Wise words from Master Coda. (Get it??)

> Sometimes in studio, the sound engineer lets the performer play as if it was 
> rehearsal or a level check but actually recording.
> Of course you need a partner for that... oh and you can't tell him "please 
> record but don't let me know"

Heh. That's just mean!

Mind you, I'm recording a MIDI file. It would be fairly trivial to go 
back and edit it to make it sound perfect. But all that really does is 
demonstrate that *the machine* can play it OK, which we already know! ;-)

>> However... this only works if one note is near another. My hands "know" 
>> how wide the keys are. But if I need to move my whole hand to a different 
>> part of the keyboard, I still need to be able to see where I'm going. If 
>> that makes sense...
> 
> That makes sense but with further practice (I mean without looking at your 
> hands at all) your arms and shoulders can learn the keyboard span as if they 
> came with a GPS (oh err bad example).

When I'm giving a recital, I like to stare the audience in the eye, and 
optionally gave them my best psychotic smile. It usually makes an 
impression.

>>> But for someone who doesn't practice at least 3 hours a day for several 
>>> years, it's pretty impressive what you've got there with that little bit 
>>> of work.
>> Thanks! I spent literally *days* decoding the score and rehersing the 
>> playing. ;-)
> 
> That's a pretty good result :-)

Why thank you. :-)

> Next stage the 16th notes arpeggio? >:-)

Hey, I can do that too... just... not at the same time! :-}

The music you heard is already using both of my hands! (Remember, I 
don't have a set of pedals to use.) I could try using my computer to 
composite the parts together, but I rather suspect I'm going to run out 
of octaves.

(Regardless of how many octaves my keyboard has, the computer only has 
samples for 5 octaves. It seems silly to speak of "only" 5 octaves, but 
this *is* organ music...)

Anybody have any bright ideas about how I get my hands on a real pipe 
organ to try this stuff out?

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 09:05:07 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

>
>Anybody have any bright ideas about how I get my hands on a real pipe 
>organ to try this stuff out?

Join a church. A neighbour of mine used to play in the Sunday service just to
keep his hand in. He was not religious at all but it gave him the opportunity to
practice whilst still remaining a good neighbour ;)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

> (Regardless of how many octaves my keyboard has, the computer only has 
> samples for 5 octaves. It seems silly to speak of "only" 5 octaves, but 
> this *is* organ music...)

Write some code to generate the organ sounds algorithmically ;-)

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> (Regardless of how many octaves my keyboard has, the computer only has 
>> samples for 5 octaves. It seems silly to speak of "only" 5 octaves, 
>> but this *is* organ music...)
> 
> Write some code to generate the organ sounds algorithmically ;-)

Bah, my synthesizer already *does* that! ;-) It just doesn't sound as good.

Mind you, it's only subtractive synthesis. Reaktor's Steam Pipe engine 
could probably get closer. But ya know, every single note of a real 
organ is very slightly different. It would be kinda hard to simulate 
that with a computer. Worth a try though, just for a giggle...

It *might* be easier to just tell Kontakt to change the sample playback 
speed a little. :-P

Post a reply to this message

>> Anybody have any bright ideas about how I get my hands on a real pipe 
>> organ to try this stuff out?
> 
> Join a church.

Brrrrrhhh!! A whole room full of people telling me I'm a sinner and that 
I deserve to be miserable and I'm going to hell? No thanks!

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
48d751b4$1@news.povray.org...
>
> Wise words from Master Coda. (Get it??)
May the Fourth be with you ;-)
>
>
> Mind you, I'm recording a MIDI file. It would be fairly trivial to go back 
> and edit it to make it sound perfect. But all that really does is 
> demonstrate that *the machine* can play it OK, which we already know! ;-)
As this one?
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=NGKRu-3zvEU

Better by Marie-Claire Alain though :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvPgKecORl8

>
> The music you heard is already using both of my hands! (Remember, I don't 
> have a set of pedals to use.) I could try using my computer to composite 
> the parts together, but I rather suspect I'm going to run out of octaves.

There are separate MIDI foot keyboards but usually only one octave range.

>
> (Regardless of how many octaves my keyboard has, the computer only has 
> samples for 5 octaves. It seems silly to speak of "only" 5 octaves, but 
> this *is* organ music...)

Don't you have 32 feet stop samples?
>
> Anybody have any bright ideas about how I get my hands on a real pipe 
> organ to try this stuff out?

Make friend with the closest church organist or check if there are organ 
classes in your area maybe

Marc

Post a reply to this message

>> Wise words from Master Coda. (Get it??)

> May the Fourth be with you ;-)

Hahaha! Oh GOD! :-S

And yet, somehow I feel compelled to augment this line further...

>> Mind you, I'm recording a MIDI file. It would be fairly trivial to go back 
>> and edit it to make it sound perfect. But all that really does is 
>> demonstrate that *the machine* can play it OK, which we already know! ;-)

> As this one?
> http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=NGKRu-3zvEU
> 
> Better by Marie-Claire Alain though :-)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvPgKecORl8

I'm at work; I don't have any sound. (And playing video cripples my PC.)

>> The music you heard is already using both of my hands! (Remember, I don't 
>> have a set of pedals to use.) I could try using my computer to composite 
>> the parts together, but I rather suspect I'm going to run out of octaves.
> 
> There are separate MIDI foot keyboards but usually only one octave range.

I don't have the floor space anyway...

>> (Regardless of how many octaves my keyboard has, the computer only has 
>> samples for 5 octaves. It seems silly to speak of "only" 5 octaves, but 
>> this *is* organ music...)
> 
> Don't you have 32 feet stop samples?

Weirdly no. The range of notes covered just happens to exactly match the 
keys on my particular keyboard. You would have thought, given that it's 
an organ, there'd be a wider range. Go figure!

>> Anybody have any bright ideas about how I get my hands on a real pipe 
>> organ to try this stuff out?
> 
> Make friend with the closest church organist or check if there are organ 
> classes in your area maybe.

Yeah, I guess so...

Heh, if I'm nervous sitting in my locked bedroom with headphones on, 
just imagine playing an instrument that people in the next village can 
hear! ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Oh...kay then, that's pretty random!

Nah. Just a muss-up of the file extension mappings.

> It's strange - I can sit down and play the music endlessly for 2 days 
> straight, but as soon as I hit the record button, I start making 
> mistakes all over the place. :-S Most irritating!

It's called "choke". How many times do you think professional basketball 
players miss foul shots in practice? :-)

> Everybody was astonished when I continued playing without so 
> much as missing a beat.

Yeah. I amazed friends by programming on a VDT in a dark room, knowing 
where all the keys were.  Um, guys? Don't you program for a living, and 
you can't touch-type? :-)

> However... this only works if one note is near another. My hands "know" 
> how wide the keys are. But if I need to move my whole hand to a 
> different part of the keyboard, I still need to be able to see where I'm 
> going. If that makes sense...

Yes, it certainly does. I've heard interviews with professional pianists 
who say they can just put their hands in front of them and hear the 
notes their fingers are touching.

>> But for someone who doesn't practice at least 3 hours a day for 
>> several years, it's pretty impressive what you've got there with that 
>> little bit of work.
> 
> Thanks! I spent literally *days* decoding the score and rehersing the 
> playing. ;-)

Yep. That's not a lot of time for something like that, tho. That's my 
point. Even in high-school band, memorizing the music for the year was 
probably two weeks to a month of an hour every day before school. Doing 
that in just days is pretty impressive, especially given that it's a 
piano (with concurrent notes) and not a trumpet or something.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

>> It's strange - I can sit down and play the music endlessly for 2 days 
>> straight, but as soon as I hit the record button, I start making 
>> mistakes all over the place. :-S Most irritating!
> 
> It's called "choke". How many times do you think professional basketball 
> players miss foul shots in practice? :-)

Uh... I have no idea, but "sure".

>> However... this only works if one note is near another. My hands 
>> "know" how wide the keys are. But if I need to move my whole hand to a 
>> different part of the keyboard, I still need to be able to see where 
>> I'm going. If that makes sense...
> 
> Yes, it certainly does. I've heard interviews with professional pianists 
> who say they can just put their hands in front of them and hear the 
> notes their fingers are touching.

As an aside... before I got my shiny new soundcard, there used to be an 
80 ms delay between pressing a key and hearing some sound.

Do you have ANY IDEA how off-putting that is??!?

It made it virtually impossible to play anything faster than a 
slow-dance without totally screwing up. Seriously, you wouldn't believe 
what a huge problem such a tiny little split-second delay is!

>> Thanks! I spent literally *days* decoding the score and rehersing the 
>> playing. ;-)
> 
> Yep. That's not a lot of time for something like that, tho. That's my 
> point. Even in high-school band, memorizing the music for the year was 
> probably two weeks to a month of an hour every day before school. Doing 
> that in just days is pretty impressive, especially given that it's a 
> piano (with concurrent notes) and not a trumpet or something.

In fairness, I learned the first two pages a couple of weeks back. It's 
only the second half of the passage I played which is new to me. I 
learned that this weekend. It was hard work! o_O

As somebody who used to play the violin, let me tell you: a violin 
[usually] only plays one note at a time, but you still need two hands to 
do the correct thing [in a *coordinated* mannar] to produce that note, 
so it's still just as hard.

Indeed, you don't even need complex chords. I have a lot of trouble 
trying to play "Dance of the Snowmen" from The Snowman, and that doesn't 
have any chords at all. Even playing with one hand, it's hard just to 
hit the notes fast enough and not miss the keys and remember which note 
comes next fast enough to play the thing. There aren't even any key 
changes and it's hard! ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> It's strange - I can sit down and play the music endlessly for 2 days 
>>> straight, but as soon as I hit the record button, I start making 
>>> mistakes all over the place. :-S Most irritating!
>>
>> It's called "choke". How many times do you think professional 
>> basketball players miss foul shots in practice? :-)
> 
> Uh... I have no idea, but "sure".

Almost never, is the point. :-)

> Do you have ANY IDEA how off-putting that is??!?

Definitely. I understand that's part of what causes stuttering when 
speaking: that there's something delaying the processing of your own 
speech, and every time you start to talk, it feels like someone is 
interrupting you.

> It was hard work! o_O

Feels good, tho, doesn't it? :-)

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

>>> It's called "choke". How many times do you think professional 
>>> basketball players miss foul shots in practice? :-)
>>
>> Uh... I have no idea, but "sure".
> 
> Almost never, is the point. :-)

I have no idea what a "foul shot" is, but I'll take your word for it...

>> Do you have ANY IDEA how off-putting that is??!?
> 
> Definitely. I understand that's part of what causes stuttering when 
> speaking: that there's something delaying the processing of your own 
> speech, and every time you start to talk, it feels like someone is 
> interrupting you.

My problem is changing my mind about which word I'm going to say, half 
way through saying it.

And just the fact that I talk at a rate of about 6 words per hour anyway 
and sound completely retarded...

>> It was hard work! o_O
> 
> Feels good, tho, doesn't it? :-)

To quote Team America, "**** yeah!"

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> I have no idea what a "foul shot" is, but I'll take your word for it...

Aka a "free throw"?  You stand at the line with nobody trying to stop 
you and try to throw the ball thru the hoop?

> My problem is changing my mind about which word I'm going to say, half 
> way through saying it.

Don't do that. You need more practice. :-)  When I was young, I remember 
never correcting anything I said. If I got tangled up, I'd think up some 
other way of phrasing the sentence given what I'd already said. I don't 
know why I did it, but on more than one occasion, the person I was 
talking to said "I wondered how you were going to finish that."

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Definitely. I understand that's part of what causes stuttering when 
> speaking: that there's something delaying the processing of your own 
> speech, and every time you start to talk, it feels like someone is 
> interrupting you.

Fun thing to try at home:

Use headphones, set up a fractional second delay, if your soundcard has 
a DSP that can do things like this and try to speak.. Try different 
delays. A delay that's in the "sweet spot" will give you all sorts of 
fits when speaking.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:

> Fun thing to try at home:
> 
> Use headphones, set up a fractional second delay, if your soundcard has 
> a DSP that can do things like this and try to speak.. Try different 
> delays. A delay that's in the "sweet spot" will give you all sorts of 
> fits when speaking.

Already tried that. Add lots of echo for extra laughs...

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 20:20:12 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Surely no human
> being can actually *read* that fast

Why?  I played violin for years, and I was able to keep up.  It takes 
practice is all...

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 20:20:12 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> 
>> Surely no human
>> being can actually *read* that fast
> 
> Why?  I played violin for years, and I was able to keep up.  It takes 
> practice is all...

And exactly how many violin pieces have 32 notes per bar, and 6-note 
chords spread over 3 staffs?

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:42:58 +0100, Invisible wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 20:20:12 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> 
>>> Surely no human
>>> being can actually *read* that fast
>> 
>> Why?  I played violin for years, and I was able to keep up.  It takes
>> practice is all...
> 
> And exactly how many violin pieces have 32 notes per bar, and 6-note
> chords spread over 3 staffs?

32 notes per bar is not uncommon.  Triple-stops are about the extent, but 
if you look at any of the Bach Partidas & Sonatas, you'll see some pretty 
nasty stuff that's hard to keep up with.

Like I said, it just takes practice.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 nous illumina en ce 2008-09-21 15:20 -->
> Tim Attwood wrote:
>> That sounds good!
> 
> Yay! Recognition! :-D
> 
>> It's noticeable that you are reading though,
>> especially the pauses.
> 
> Um... no. Didn't even have the sheet music out while I was playing. I 
> can't read anywhere near that fast. It takes me a minute or two to 
> decode each note by counting up or down from the A-line.
> 
> As an aside, the top line alone has 32 notes per bar. Surely no human 
> being can actually *read* that fast. Indeed, just glancing at your 
Actualy, many can and do. With time, practice and dedication, even you can 
acheive that.
> fingers to check they're in the right place would take several notes' 
And you won't even need to check where your fingers are...
> duration. So I'm not sure how it's physically possible to read this 
> music at the same time as playing it.
Think about touch typists, they never look at the keyboard. Think about when you 
read some text.
> 
> In fact, I'd go as far as to say that this piece of music is only 
> playable at all because it's quite repetative and structured...
> 
>> It probably would
>> sound better to keep the rhythm going even
>> if you hit the wrong chords. 
> 
> You're probably right about that.
> 
> There are some amazing key changes in the latter parts of the tune; I 
> just wish I hadn't got such big pauses in there. (It's HARD though!) On 
> some of the takes, those pauses are almost non-existent (but I stuffed 
> up somewhere else instead). Ho hum!
> 
You only need parctice. When reading a partition as you play it, you need to 
read about 1 bar ahead of time.
With time, you'll be able to know what a given note is without "climbing" up/down.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind.
Thomas Jefferson

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> m_a_r_c wrote:
>> Next stage the 16th notes arpeggio? >:-)
> 
> Hey, I can do that too... just... not at the same time! :-}
> 
> The music you heard is already using both of my hands! (Remember, I 
> don't have a set of pedals to use.) I could try using my computer to 
> composite the parts together, but I rather suspect I'm going to run out 
> of octaves.
> 
> (Regardless of how many octaves my keyboard has, the computer only has 
> samples for 5 octaves. It seems silly to speak of "only" 5 octaves, but 
> this *is* organ music...)
> 
> Anybody have any bright ideas about how I get my hands on a real pipe 
> organ to try this stuff out?

I have seen a piano reduction of this score that had the left hand doing 
both the pedal and left hand parts from the organ score, and it didn't 
look like it was too much more difficult than the left hand would be 
from the pure organ score.  With a bit of work you should probably be 
able to figure out how to achieve a similar effect.

Post a reply to this message

Alain wrote:

> Think about touch typists, they never look at the keyboard. Think about 
> when you read some text.

Yeah, but a QWERTY keyboard has roughly 100 keys right next to each 
other. A piano keyboard as about 100 keys, some several feet away from 
others! ;-)

> You only need parctice. When reading a partition as you play it, you 
> need to read about 1 bar ahead of time.
> With time, you'll be able to know what a given note is without 
> "climbing" up/down.

Yeah, I really can't read music very well any more. I used to, but not 
now. I'm far too slow at it to even think about reading music in 
near-realtime. :-(

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Tonight, I sat down and played that *other* great Toccata. Namely, 
Bach's Toccata & Fugue in D minor.

I can't believe how well I'm playing this puppy. Damn, I am on *fire* 
tonight!! :-D :-D

And as for Widor, I've suddenly started hitting those big magor 12th 
chords with multiple sharps like they were *nothing*! I mean, I'm 
playing it like it's a walk in the park. I have no friggin' idea how 
that's physically possible, but it sounds great...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message