WEBVTT 00:00:20.199 --> 00:00:24.519 That was Alcon's Nocturne No. 1, Op. 22, and 00:00:24.519 --> 00:00:28.280 it was performed by Mark Viner on Volume 8 of 00:00:28.280 --> 00:00:31.760 the Complete Piano Music by Alcon, which has 00:00:31.760 --> 00:00:34.020 just been released on the Piano Classics label. 00:00:34.960 --> 00:00:37.320 Mark, it's lovely to have you on the Pianist 00:00:37.320 --> 00:00:40.340 Podcast today. Thank you. It's lovely to be here. 00:00:40.899 --> 00:00:43.780 Great. Well, we are here to talk about your latest 00:00:43.780 --> 00:00:47.539 album, Alcon's Complete Piano Music, which is 00:00:47.539 --> 00:00:52.850 Volume 8. on the Piano Classics label. It's called 00:00:52.850 --> 00:00:56.350 Nocturnes Impromptus and Xorquicos. Firstly, 00:00:56.429 --> 00:01:00.030 can you tell us what the Xorquicos are? Well, 00:01:00.229 --> 00:01:04.230 it's a Spanish Basque dance which is in five 00:01:04.230 --> 00:01:10.030 time and this interested him on and off for some 00:01:10.030 --> 00:01:13.189 years from about the mid -1840s until the 1860s 00:01:13.189 --> 00:01:17.409 and he wrote a few pieces in this vein. Of course, 00:01:17.409 --> 00:01:22.250 there are famous examples by Albéniz, but I don't 00:01:22.250 --> 00:01:25.430 think there are so many by French composers from 00:01:25.430 --> 00:01:30.890 this period of time. OK, interesting. And so 00:01:30.890 --> 00:01:33.549 in this volume number eight, you've also included 00:01:33.549 --> 00:01:36.370 nocturnes and impromptus. I mean, most listeners 00:01:36.370 --> 00:01:39.750 may be quite unfamiliar with the music of Alcan 00:01:39.750 --> 00:01:45.079 in general, don't you think? Yes, I've... Well, 00:01:45.140 --> 00:01:49.260 it was interesting. When this whole project began 00:01:49.260 --> 00:01:52.659 to take flight, I had to think very quickly about 00:01:52.659 --> 00:01:55.480 how all of these pieces would be organised. And 00:01:55.480 --> 00:01:57.459 really, there are only two ways of doing it. 00:01:57.500 --> 00:02:00.140 You can either jumble things up, which is quite 00:02:00.140 --> 00:02:03.239 attractive with, say, a composer like Gottschalk, 00:02:03.420 --> 00:02:07.019 but with someone a bit more serious like Alcan, 00:02:07.120 --> 00:02:09.280 I felt it was really better to have lots of genres. 00:02:09.849 --> 00:02:12.969 confined to single categories. So I just felt 00:02:12.969 --> 00:02:16.789 really when I was looking through everything 00:02:16.789 --> 00:02:19.330 and really pondering it that all of these pieces 00:02:19.330 --> 00:02:21.770 fitted very well and would of course make up 00:02:21.770 --> 00:02:25.289 the requisite time for a CD without being too 00:02:25.289 --> 00:02:27.069 long or without people being short -changed. 00:02:27.370 --> 00:02:30.509 So that's why, and of course some of the pieces 00:02:30.509 --> 00:02:33.409 which were impromptus double up as Thorcicos 00:02:33.409 --> 00:02:36.500 in a certain way. You probably might have heard 00:02:36.500 --> 00:02:39.740 that from the third one of the set of Opus 32. 00:02:40.159 --> 00:02:44.000 Yes. And well, in fact, all of those pieces are 00:02:44.000 --> 00:02:46.319 in, well, all three of those pieces are in five 00:02:46.319 --> 00:02:51.159 and one is in seven. So that's how, why that 00:02:51.159 --> 00:02:53.939 decision was made in terms of how things fit 00:02:53.939 --> 00:02:56.740 together. I also try to make each one of these 00:02:56.740 --> 00:03:02.360 discs as accessible as possible in terms of how 00:03:02.360 --> 00:03:05.050 I arrange the repertoire. A lot of it is much 00:03:05.050 --> 00:03:08.189 more presentable on CD rather than in public. 00:03:08.310 --> 00:03:12.250 And I'm fully aware that not all of it is top 00:03:12.250 --> 00:03:16.409 draw. So it's just finding the best way to bolster 00:03:16.409 --> 00:03:19.289 it up and make sure that each instalment does 00:03:19.289 --> 00:03:22.370 appeal to the novice, as it were. That's very, 00:03:22.409 --> 00:03:24.590 very interesting. So when you started on this 00:03:24.590 --> 00:03:28.409 epic journey of recording all of Alcon's piano 00:03:28.409 --> 00:03:31.389 music, I think there's how many albums do you 00:03:31.389 --> 00:03:34.590 think there will be in total? including the transcriptions 00:03:34.590 --> 00:03:38.050 it's projected 18 18 okay so when you started 00:03:38.050 --> 00:03:40.650 these you know looking at them all did you have 00:03:40.650 --> 00:03:45.770 to program 18 like on a big sheet of paper sort 00:03:45.770 --> 00:03:49.509 of um of course when i when i did the first volume 00:03:49.509 --> 00:03:52.009 um i i didn't have this in my mind at all that 00:03:52.009 --> 00:03:53.949 wasn't planned so the first volume was all the 00:03:53.949 --> 00:03:57.469 all the etude in the in the major keys um and 00:03:57.469 --> 00:04:01.270 that was done i think back in 2016 or so now 00:04:02.090 --> 00:04:06.430 But no, I didn't have that plan then. Then when 00:04:06.430 --> 00:04:09.509 I did have the idea of doing it, I quickly recorded 00:04:09.509 --> 00:04:11.969 the complete preludes. And of course, I didn't 00:04:11.969 --> 00:04:14.210 actually have to plan anything by that point. 00:04:14.469 --> 00:04:16.290 And even by the third installment, I didn't have 00:04:16.290 --> 00:04:19.290 to plan because I was doing the grand sonata 00:04:19.290 --> 00:04:22.389 and the trois morceaux dans le genre pathétique 00:04:22.389 --> 00:04:24.550 and they were fitted together. It was really 00:04:24.550 --> 00:04:26.990 after that that I had to start to think, OK, 00:04:27.149 --> 00:04:29.670 now you have to make decisions about where things 00:04:29.670 --> 00:04:33.360 are going to go. So there were certain things 00:04:33.360 --> 00:04:35.839 I wanted to keep all the transcriptions together. 00:04:36.420 --> 00:04:39.399 And at the end of the series, I was thinking 00:04:39.399 --> 00:04:43.800 that would be best. So that's how it's sort of 00:04:43.800 --> 00:04:47.439 taken flight. And it's, you know, once you have 00:04:47.439 --> 00:04:50.139 a sort of framework like that within which to 00:04:50.139 --> 00:04:52.579 work, things sort of take flight by themselves, 00:04:52.819 --> 00:04:55.680 I find. That's so interesting. So was it your 00:04:55.680 --> 00:04:58.279 idea or your record company's idea that you would 00:04:58.279 --> 00:05:04.310 record the complete? It wasn't really something 00:05:04.310 --> 00:05:07.529 that occurred to me until much later on and it 00:05:07.529 --> 00:05:09.790 wasn't my idea at all it was actually a friend's 00:05:09.790 --> 00:05:14.009 idea and it was a pianist whose name is Tyler 00:05:14.009 --> 00:05:17.930 Hay who was a towering pianist of the first order 00:05:17.930 --> 00:05:21.029 and not only that he happens to be a very good 00:05:21.029 --> 00:05:24.610 friend indeed and he simply suggested it one 00:05:24.610 --> 00:05:27.709 evening when we were talking about projects and 00:05:27.709 --> 00:05:30.009 things we were doing he just said well why don't 00:05:30.009 --> 00:05:31.889 you just get on and do the lot? I mean, you want 00:05:31.889 --> 00:05:33.810 to record other stuff of his, don't you? This 00:05:33.810 --> 00:05:36.730 was after I'd done, I think I'd done volume one 00:05:36.730 --> 00:05:39.189 by that point. And I said, well, yes. And he 00:05:39.189 --> 00:05:41.149 said, well, if you're not going to do it, who 00:05:41.149 --> 00:05:42.790 else is going to do it? And will they do it as 00:05:42.790 --> 00:05:49.209 well as you? So, yes, I thought, well, of course, 00:05:49.230 --> 00:05:51.449 the other thing at the back of my mind and the 00:05:51.449 --> 00:05:53.529 reason why I was a little bit wary of doing this 00:05:53.529 --> 00:05:59.060 is, you know, I was sort of. eight years younger 00:05:59.060 --> 00:06:01.980 at that point i suppose or maybe a little less 00:06:01.980 --> 00:06:05.639 and you know you you have certain aspirations 00:06:05.639 --> 00:06:08.100 and ideas of where where you ought to be at certain 00:06:08.100 --> 00:06:11.540 points and i was warned by a a very prominent 00:06:11.540 --> 00:06:13.660 pianist who did a similar thing for another composer 00:06:13.660 --> 00:06:17.360 that it wrecked his career um to a degree and 00:06:17.360 --> 00:06:21.439 um one has to be aware of that but in my thinking 00:06:21.439 --> 00:06:24.170 really um i thought well there's not much of 00:06:24.170 --> 00:06:28.110 a career to really wreck actually um perhaps 00:06:28.110 --> 00:06:30.410 that there's something that might be gained in 00:06:30.410 --> 00:06:33.250 doing this rather than something to be lost that 00:06:33.250 --> 00:06:35.790 was my philosophy then and it still is to a large 00:06:35.790 --> 00:06:38.709 oh very much so because as i've gone through 00:06:38.709 --> 00:06:41.689 the series it seems as though the public at large 00:06:41.689 --> 00:06:44.389 has and the critics have actually realized yes 00:06:44.389 --> 00:06:47.410 it is happening and now he's this far through 00:06:48.639 --> 00:06:51.279 That is so funny because when we do think of 00:06:51.279 --> 00:06:55.660 you, Mark Viner, we do seem to think of, I guess, 00:06:55.720 --> 00:07:00.519 Alcan and then maybe Blumenfeld, Talberg. We 00:07:00.519 --> 00:07:04.060 don't think of you as Beethoven and Mozart and 00:07:04.060 --> 00:07:08.959 Schubert. Yes, yes, that's true. And that's something 00:07:08.959 --> 00:07:15.819 I have been trying to offset in my actual programs, 00:07:15.899 --> 00:07:19.079 of course. my my my recital programs don't at 00:07:19.079 --> 00:07:23.060 all they really don't mirror my discography it's 00:07:23.060 --> 00:07:26.620 not really possible to to present much of this 00:07:26.620 --> 00:07:30.040 music on stage even if i would like to because 00:07:30.040 --> 00:07:34.519 tickets have to sell um so i i do i mean you 00:07:34.519 --> 00:07:36.500 know i play a lot of this out the way stuff but 00:07:36.500 --> 00:07:39.560 that that's never precluded me from playing beethoven 00:07:39.560 --> 00:07:41.680 i play a great deal of beethoven then i couldn't 00:07:41.680 --> 00:07:45.769 live without him and i've uh i've recently started 00:07:45.769 --> 00:07:48.230 filling in many of the sort of blanks in my repertoire 00:07:48.230 --> 00:07:51.790 um there were certain composers where where i 00:07:51.790 --> 00:07:54.389 i just felt i didn't play enough of them and 00:07:54.389 --> 00:07:58.910 i've been gradually just you know much of my 00:07:58.910 --> 00:08:01.850 own program making is is up to me and i i've 00:08:01.850 --> 00:08:03.810 been trying to remedy that and that's been a 00:08:03.810 --> 00:08:06.209 wonderful journey as well and of course playing 00:08:06.209 --> 00:08:09.589 all this out the way stuff um um in order to 00:08:09.589 --> 00:08:12.069 do so and to make sense of it musically you have 00:08:12.069 --> 00:08:14.660 to know your Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, 00:08:14.699 --> 00:08:17.160 Mozart, I mean, because these were the gods of 00:08:17.160 --> 00:08:20.540 all these 19th century pianist composers who 00:08:20.540 --> 00:08:23.019 wrote this stuff, and it's much of the nuts and 00:08:23.019 --> 00:08:26.420 bolts of their musical vocabulary. Yes, no, I 00:08:26.420 --> 00:08:29.480 get it. But maybe I should have asked you this 00:08:29.480 --> 00:08:32.379 at the start, what actually drew you to his music, 00:08:32.399 --> 00:08:34.840 music which is often misunderstood even today, 00:08:34.980 --> 00:08:38.700 what drew you to Alcan? It's hard to really give 00:08:38.700 --> 00:08:42.860 you a definite answer, it's like asking... somebody 00:08:42.860 --> 00:08:47.200 why do you like the color blue um do you have 00:08:47.200 --> 00:08:50.820 a first memory yes i do i do it's all very clear 00:08:50.820 --> 00:08:52.559 to me well when i was at the personal school 00:08:52.559 --> 00:08:56.559 um there was um a and there still is i believe 00:08:56.559 --> 00:09:01.340 a spring um piano department sort of festival 00:09:01.340 --> 00:09:06.820 um as it were and it's it's where um a certain 00:09:06.820 --> 00:09:10.360 area of the repertoire is focused on Back then, 00:09:10.399 --> 00:09:14.539 when I was about 13, it was the Chopin Op. 25 00:09:14.539 --> 00:09:18.860 Etudes and the Alcan Op. 35s, which of course 00:09:18.860 --> 00:09:21.159 I later on recorded, and miscellaneous pieces 00:09:21.159 --> 00:09:23.600 by both composers. And of course, the Chopin 00:09:23.600 --> 00:09:27.000 I was largely familiar with. What you've got 00:09:27.000 --> 00:09:28.580 to remember is that I'd only started playing 00:09:28.580 --> 00:09:30.799 the piano at the age of 11, so all of this was 00:09:30.799 --> 00:09:33.019 very, very new to me. So I'd only been playing 00:09:33.019 --> 00:09:37.220 two years by that point. And I was given a piece 00:09:37.220 --> 00:09:40.799 of Alcan at the beginning. In fact, it was the 00:09:40.799 --> 00:09:43.080 La chanson de la folle au bord de la mer, which 00:09:43.080 --> 00:09:44.899 is the eighth prelude, the song of the madwoman 00:09:44.899 --> 00:09:49.100 on the seashore. And then my teacher at the time, 00:09:49.120 --> 00:09:50.919 Tessa Nicholson, felt that I needed something 00:09:50.919 --> 00:09:53.379 to sort of get my teeth into a bit more. And 00:09:53.379 --> 00:09:56.960 it was changed for the Tocatina of the 75, which 00:09:56.960 --> 00:10:00.559 I really had found tremendously difficult at 00:10:00.559 --> 00:10:02.419 the time because I didn't really have fingers 00:10:02.419 --> 00:10:06.559 at all. Yet, in retrospect, it... did me a lot 00:10:06.559 --> 00:10:09.100 of good um and i must say at the beginning i 00:10:09.100 --> 00:10:11.639 did not like this music at all from those two 00:10:11.639 --> 00:10:13.659 pieces i couldn't make sense of it i didn't find 00:10:13.659 --> 00:10:16.539 it attractive in any way and then i heard the 00:10:16.539 --> 00:10:20.539 major key studies and i just felt completely 00:10:20.539 --> 00:10:25.919 blown away um it was the the sheer eccentricity 00:10:25.919 --> 00:10:30.799 of the music the single -minded um trajectory 00:10:30.799 --> 00:10:35.490 that the music takes the originality of the harmonies, 00:10:35.490 --> 00:10:39.049 the verve, the obsessiveness, the sheer magic, 00:10:39.190 --> 00:10:43.669 the overwhelming majesty and power in some passages. 00:10:44.789 --> 00:10:50.330 It didn't pay heed to any airs and graces. There 00:10:50.330 --> 00:10:52.610 are a few composers like that, in fact, that 00:10:52.610 --> 00:10:56.090 are quite comfortable to write things that are... 00:10:56.759 --> 00:10:58.919 perfectly acceptable to the general public and 00:10:58.919 --> 00:11:00.639 then the next second write something which is 00:11:00.639 --> 00:11:03.279 completely puzzling. Eric Satie was a bit like 00:11:03.279 --> 00:11:07.940 that and Alcon was such an original, pre -thinking, 00:11:08.179 --> 00:11:13.399 imaginative composer and of course the other 00:11:13.399 --> 00:11:17.200 thing is I didn't really have much to compare 00:11:17.200 --> 00:11:20.659 this to at the time so I suppose in retrospect 00:11:20.659 --> 00:11:26.080 my aesthetic criteria with which I was discerning 00:11:26.080 --> 00:11:30.399 this music wasn't as great as it as it could 00:11:30.399 --> 00:11:32.379 have been if I'd started playing the piano at 00:11:32.379 --> 00:11:35.019 five you know so I just took I just accepted 00:11:35.019 --> 00:11:38.000 it on its own ground on its own terms I could 00:11:38.000 --> 00:11:40.679 tell some pieces were were better than others 00:11:40.679 --> 00:11:43.620 let's put it but it was just from the word from 00:11:43.620 --> 00:11:45.919 that moment I thought I was I was just completely 00:11:45.919 --> 00:11:49.139 convinced I mean it is phenomenal music in fact 00:11:49.500 --> 00:11:52.120 in our magazine i'm putting a little little alcon 00:11:52.120 --> 00:11:56.419 barker role the opus 38 number six um in in our 00:11:56.419 --> 00:11:59.639 scores and i've heard you play that on youtube 00:11:59.639 --> 00:12:04.679 um as an encore what was it yeah the barcarolle 00:12:04.679 --> 00:12:09.019 from book one of office 38. oh my goodness there 00:12:09.019 --> 00:12:11.679 are two books in office 38. i've just come back 00:12:11.679 --> 00:12:15.279 from recording them all so it's the one that 00:12:15.279 --> 00:12:19.500 begins with the grace note yes It's a magical 00:12:19.500 --> 00:12:22.620 little thing. Magical piece. And as I decided 00:12:22.620 --> 00:12:25.039 I was going to put it in Pianist Magazine, I 00:12:25.039 --> 00:12:28.120 looked it up on YouTube and there you were playing 00:12:28.120 --> 00:12:31.460 it as an encore somewhere. I shall have to check 00:12:31.460 --> 00:12:34.120 where that was. And you played it so amazingly. 00:12:34.179 --> 00:12:37.580 And you brought out that magic right through 00:12:37.580 --> 00:12:41.519 to the end. What an amazing piece. And the harmonies, 00:12:41.519 --> 00:12:44.460 you think, that's wrong. But then actually, it's 00:12:44.460 --> 00:12:47.350 right. You know, it's just remarkable. Absolutely, 00:12:47.570 --> 00:12:53.289 yes. And I find that something which is so magical. 00:12:53.590 --> 00:12:56.389 There was a composer called John White who died 00:12:56.389 --> 00:13:00.649 recently. And he termed this sort of thing as 00:13:00.649 --> 00:13:03.629 the exposition of the mysterious order, whereby 00:13:03.629 --> 00:13:07.490 certain rules in music making were followed through 00:13:07.490 --> 00:13:10.210 to their conclusions. And as a result, you would 00:13:10.210 --> 00:13:13.309 get those strange dissonances and clashes. Yes. 00:13:13.350 --> 00:13:15.309 And that's another attribute of Alcon's music 00:13:15.309 --> 00:13:17.909 that I find so irresistible. Yes. Particularly 00:13:17.909 --> 00:13:21.730 in his sort of vintage later years, where he 00:13:21.730 --> 00:13:24.429 starts doing strange things harmonically. Yes. 00:13:24.429 --> 00:13:27.730 And the music, you know, begins very, very unassumingly 00:13:27.730 --> 00:13:31.309 and sort of leads you up a garden path and things, 00:13:31.509 --> 00:13:34.049 and then the temperature drops a few degrees 00:13:34.049 --> 00:13:37.000 and it becomes really strange. Yes. And then 00:13:37.000 --> 00:13:38.779 suddenly we're out of it again at the reprise. 00:13:39.000 --> 00:13:41.620 It's that sort of stuff. There's something beneath 00:13:41.620 --> 00:13:45.340 the surface, something undisclosed in so much 00:13:45.340 --> 00:13:48.320 of this music that I find truly irresistible. 00:13:50.139 --> 00:13:53.820 Totally. I mean, he was a contemporary of Liszt 00:13:53.820 --> 00:13:58.440 and Chopin. Do you think they knew what an amazing 00:13:58.440 --> 00:14:01.740 talent, unusual, remarkable talent he was? I 00:14:01.740 --> 00:14:05.870 think, you know. Yes, I think they did. Liszt 00:14:05.870 --> 00:14:09.009 certainly, I mean, we know that, you know, he 00:14:09.009 --> 00:14:13.049 taught, well, one pupil brought him Le Festin 00:14:13.049 --> 00:14:16.750 des Hommes in his later years, which is the 12th 00:14:16.750 --> 00:14:19.190 study from all the etudes in the minor keys. 00:14:19.450 --> 00:14:23.289 And he commented that he was a composer far too 00:14:23.289 --> 00:14:25.470 little known who has some very fine things indeed. 00:14:26.690 --> 00:14:29.429 I don't think, I think we know less from Chopin, 00:14:29.429 --> 00:14:33.929 his views on his music. Despite that, they were 00:14:33.929 --> 00:14:37.110 very close and respected him hugely, enough to 00:14:37.110 --> 00:14:41.490 entrust him with his sketch for a method. Okay. 00:14:41.809 --> 00:14:43.830 Probably for completion, but of course he never 00:14:43.830 --> 00:14:48.110 completed it. That's very interesting. I believe 00:14:48.110 --> 00:14:50.330 at first maybe Liszt was a little bit cool with 00:14:50.330 --> 00:14:52.629 him. Do you think there was some rivalry there? 00:14:52.929 --> 00:14:56.289 Yes, there was rivalry since they were in their 00:14:56.289 --> 00:15:02.009 teenage years. Alcan was playing a soiree. um 00:15:02.009 --> 00:15:06.129 i think at the age of about 11 or 12 in the home 00:15:06.129 --> 00:15:08.269 of a um i think it was a russian emigre princess 00:15:08.269 --> 00:15:11.870 i'll have to check the source but um the the 00:15:11.870 --> 00:15:16.029 young franz list who was two years his senior 00:15:16.029 --> 00:15:20.250 attended this and um decided to get up in the 00:15:20.250 --> 00:15:22.889 interval and play the piano for everybody present 00:15:22.889 --> 00:15:26.070 and of course by then he was already something 00:15:26.070 --> 00:15:29.230 and uh it gave the young alcon sleepless nights 00:15:29.230 --> 00:15:32.019 and it completely Sort of crushed him for a while. 00:15:32.240 --> 00:15:35.480 So goes the story. Then later on, of course, 00:15:35.559 --> 00:15:40.840 this rivalry sort of dissolved into a friendly 00:15:40.840 --> 00:15:43.580 camaraderie. They shared the concert platform 00:15:43.580 --> 00:15:48.539 several times together. I think right up until 00:15:48.539 --> 00:15:51.860 the late 1830s. And there was always mutual respect 00:15:51.860 --> 00:15:55.460 there. Though interestingly, neither one played 00:15:55.460 --> 00:15:57.480 a note of the other's music. Oh my goodness! 00:15:58.409 --> 00:16:00.909 So Alcan never played any Liszt and vice versa? 00:16:01.350 --> 00:16:06.230 No, not a note. No, nothing at all. Liszt almost 00:16:06.230 --> 00:16:08.289 certainly knew the Grand Sonata because there 00:16:08.289 --> 00:16:10.789 are similarities with the Liszt B Minor Sonata, 00:16:10.870 --> 00:16:15.129 which are just too... It's just too close for 00:16:15.129 --> 00:16:19.629 coincidence, really. And, you know, it antedates 00:16:19.629 --> 00:16:23.909 the Liszt Sonata by a couple of years. So I think 00:16:23.909 --> 00:16:26.029 he was probably influenced by it. But, of course, 00:16:26.110 --> 00:16:29.769 Alcan's... aesthetic criteria he was very much 00:16:29.769 --> 00:16:31.789 against the trajectory of the new german school 00:16:31.789 --> 00:16:35.649 yes unbridled chromaticism all of that you know 00:16:35.649 --> 00:16:39.769 he was very much a um i suppose of the leipzig 00:16:39.769 --> 00:16:42.570 more conservative camp so his repertoire really 00:16:42.570 --> 00:16:45.210 despite the fact he was this great virtuoso his 00:16:45.210 --> 00:16:48.649 repertoire was solidly um schumann schubert bach 00:16:48.649 --> 00:16:55.590 he played um mozart beethoven so it was really 00:16:55.590 --> 00:17:00.279 very um very Germanic classical and especially 00:17:00.279 --> 00:17:02.299 during a time just in the wake of the Franco 00:17:02.299 --> 00:17:05.740 -Prussian war which is also interesting that 00:17:05.740 --> 00:17:09.740 he was embracing still such German things you 00:17:09.740 --> 00:17:14.279 might draw a parallel with Myra Hess there just 00:17:14.279 --> 00:17:17.819 to show people this is what great music is and 00:17:17.819 --> 00:17:20.839 I'm here to show it to you Yes, but how remarkable 00:17:20.839 --> 00:17:23.140 that he didn't play any Liszt considering he 00:17:23.140 --> 00:17:26.869 was an incredible virtuoso wasn't he? Yes But 00:17:26.869 --> 00:17:28.450 they were proprietors. I don't think there's 00:17:28.450 --> 00:17:30.750 any evidence to suggest that Talberg played any 00:17:30.750 --> 00:17:34.809 Liszt. Okay. Liszt did play some Talberg where 00:17:34.809 --> 00:17:37.029 he played, I think it was a second piano part 00:17:37.029 --> 00:17:40.089 of the Norma Fantasy for two pianos. But not 00:17:40.089 --> 00:17:43.210 much else publicly, no. No, I think they really 00:17:43.210 --> 00:17:45.369 stuck to their own. In those days you did, you 00:17:45.369 --> 00:17:47.589 played your own wares. You know, if you were 00:17:47.589 --> 00:17:49.630 a Clementi, you played your own music on your 00:17:49.630 --> 00:17:53.609 own piano. And sold your own piano. My goodness, 00:17:53.690 --> 00:17:55.869 what pianos did Alcon play then, do you know? 00:17:56.279 --> 00:17:59.240 Well, in the early days, it was pianos by the 00:17:59.240 --> 00:18:01.440 firm Henri Pape, and that's one of the reasons 00:18:01.440 --> 00:18:04.619 why he was sent over to London about 1834, to 00:18:04.619 --> 00:18:06.960 demonstrate them at the Pape showrooms at Soho 00:18:06.960 --> 00:18:10.000 Square. And then later on, he gravitated to the 00:18:10.000 --> 00:18:12.779 Erard, which was really his choice of instrument. 00:18:13.240 --> 00:18:16.619 And in fact, his last Erard, which is also a 00:18:16.619 --> 00:18:21.160 pedalier, it's a pedal piano, that's in the Museum 00:18:21.160 --> 00:18:23.819 of Musical Instruments in the Paris Conservatoire. 00:18:24.589 --> 00:18:26.890 And that's been fully restored. And it's a beautiful 00:18:26.890 --> 00:18:29.529 sounding thing. Oh, have you played it? No, I 00:18:29.529 --> 00:18:31.470 haven't, regrettably. But there is a record. 00:18:32.210 --> 00:18:35.829 I think it's Olivier Laffey playing it. Okay. 00:18:35.990 --> 00:18:40.309 Which is really worthwhile listening to. Interesting. 00:18:40.890 --> 00:18:44.490 So, I mean, this is difficult music to take on, 00:18:44.569 --> 00:18:47.630 isn't it, as a pianist? I mean, what I also can't 00:18:47.630 --> 00:18:50.930 believe is you started the piano at 11. How, 00:18:51.230 --> 00:18:55.250 by the age of 13, were you playing? this music 00:18:55.250 --> 00:18:59.329 at the Purcell School? Well, I think I was lucky 00:18:59.329 --> 00:19:03.569 in that I had a very, very fine teacher who is, 00:19:03.690 --> 00:19:08.650 I believe, to be especially talented at teaching 00:19:08.650 --> 00:19:16.309 the fundamentals of piano technique. So the great 00:19:16.309 --> 00:19:19.990 thing is, one of the upside of starting late 00:19:19.990 --> 00:19:23.569 is that I can remember precisely how she taught 00:19:23.569 --> 00:19:27.210 me. and what she told me to do, just so that 00:19:27.210 --> 00:19:30.369 I could play the thing. And that's quite good. 00:19:30.430 --> 00:19:32.670 That puts you instead later on as a teacher, 00:19:32.769 --> 00:19:36.210 because I feel I know how to teach that technique 00:19:36.210 --> 00:19:39.150 in the way I was taught by her. So I got those 00:19:39.150 --> 00:19:41.630 fundamentals just at the right time. I think 00:19:41.630 --> 00:19:43.549 had it been a little bit later, it would have 00:19:43.549 --> 00:19:46.569 been... I'm not sure how easy it would have been 00:19:46.569 --> 00:19:52.690 for me. By the time I was 18, I mean, I was playing... 00:19:53.639 --> 00:19:55.900 some big things. I was playing Le Festin des 00:19:55.900 --> 00:20:01.339 Hommes. A lot of standard repertoire, but besides 00:20:01.339 --> 00:20:04.619 that, I mean, I hadn't gone anywhere near Talberg 00:20:04.619 --> 00:20:07.200 or Godofsky or Mettner or anything like that. 00:20:07.380 --> 00:20:09.460 And I didn't really play a great deal of Liszt 00:20:09.460 --> 00:20:15.200 by then. And then, you know, I gradually grew 00:20:15.200 --> 00:20:17.660 and developed and went to the Royal College and 00:20:17.660 --> 00:20:20.480 studied with Neil Immelmann, who really got me 00:20:20.480 --> 00:20:24.789 to listen to what I was doing. to really use 00:20:24.789 --> 00:20:28.630 my ears um in terms of pedaling and just just 00:20:28.630 --> 00:20:32.529 layering he was fantastic he was absolutely the 00:20:32.529 --> 00:20:35.470 right person to go to and then i i sort of was 00:20:35.470 --> 00:20:39.789 more or less had my own free reign by then and 00:20:39.789 --> 00:20:43.410 i started finding my own path but going back 00:20:43.410 --> 00:20:46.509 to your question um i don't think the challenge 00:20:46.509 --> 00:20:48.690 is really and i do mean this i don't think it's 00:20:48.690 --> 00:20:50.410 any greater than than anything else you would 00:20:50.410 --> 00:20:57.440 study um You know what the language is and you 00:20:57.440 --> 00:21:02.440 know what to do with it, more or less. But then 00:21:02.440 --> 00:21:05.299 there's the facility, isn't there? You know, 00:21:05.380 --> 00:21:07.259 people say it's like riding a bike or whatever, 00:21:07.500 --> 00:21:10.740 but do you think you had a natural facility? 00:21:11.380 --> 00:21:15.079 Oh, there were certain things, yes, there were 00:21:15.079 --> 00:21:17.900 certain things I could do quite well. I was always, 00:21:17.960 --> 00:21:21.559 I've always been very supple. and there are certain 00:21:21.559 --> 00:21:23.859 things i found a great deal easier than others 00:21:23.859 --> 00:21:28.359 like with certain passages and octave passages 00:21:28.359 --> 00:21:31.599 or doing doing certain things quite quickly or 00:21:31.599 --> 00:21:35.200 brilliantly you know when one's younger and one 00:21:35.200 --> 00:21:37.859 likes to flex one's muscles and show off yeah 00:21:37.859 --> 00:21:39.799 i found i could i could do a lot of that stuff 00:21:39.799 --> 00:21:44.079 without uh well it just came quite naturally 00:21:44.079 --> 00:21:46.819 so that there was that side that doesn't mean 00:21:46.819 --> 00:21:49.339 to say that i found i i found and find any of 00:21:49.339 --> 00:21:53.339 this stuff easy because i don't and um but then 00:21:53.339 --> 00:21:55.660 there are there are plenty of plenty of pieces 00:21:55.660 --> 00:21:57.319 in the standard repertoire which are difficult 00:21:57.319 --> 00:22:00.599 and you have to build up for um i mean no one's 00:22:00.599 --> 00:22:05.299 going to neglect if if they're you know if they 00:22:05.299 --> 00:22:08.740 have to play something like mazeppa you the transcendental 00:22:08.740 --> 00:22:12.259 study of list you you really do have to maintain 00:22:12.259 --> 00:22:15.039 your sort of physique for doing that. Yes. You 00:22:15.039 --> 00:22:17.680 can't really let it go for a week. No. In the 00:22:17.680 --> 00:22:20.799 way perhaps you could with a Mozart sonata. It's 00:22:20.799 --> 00:22:23.299 a different kind of thing. Stamina. Stamina. 00:22:23.759 --> 00:22:26.200 Absolutely. It's the maintenance of your sort 00:22:26.200 --> 00:22:28.279 of physical stamina and all of that. So there 00:22:28.279 --> 00:22:30.500 are a few pieces like that, yeah, but not all 00:22:30.500 --> 00:22:33.319 of it's like that. I really do think, actually, 00:22:33.400 --> 00:22:35.480 if you add it all up, it's really only about 00:22:35.480 --> 00:22:40.890 25%, 30 % of the music is really out there. I 00:22:40.890 --> 00:22:44.369 don't think the vast majority is difficult at 00:22:44.369 --> 00:22:47.089 all. There are some pieces which really are, 00:22:47.089 --> 00:22:50.430 really are truly hard. Oh, yes. I'm not denying 00:22:50.430 --> 00:22:53.430 that. But there are so many things that are just 00:22:53.430 --> 00:22:56.210 like your average Schumann or Chopin, quite frankly. 00:22:56.329 --> 00:22:59.170 But of course, to play anything well, I mean, 00:22:59.190 --> 00:23:02.589 even the Schumann. Oh, yeah. Yeah, of course. 00:23:02.589 --> 00:23:05.329 Oh, yeah. There's that that level, of course. 00:23:06.380 --> 00:23:09.519 um but and i think of course you know ever since 00:23:09.519 --> 00:23:12.380 the the 60s and 70s when this music sort of um 00:23:12.380 --> 00:23:17.920 had a sort of renaissance of course things are 00:23:17.920 --> 00:23:20.740 always pigeonholed when they're first out what 00:23:20.740 --> 00:23:23.799 is it how do we describe it and because you know 00:23:23.799 --> 00:23:25.920 the big works like the concerto for solo piano 00:23:25.920 --> 00:23:28.799 and the symphony for solo piano were being played 00:23:28.799 --> 00:23:31.799 quite a bit and rightly so and they're difficult 00:23:31.799 --> 00:23:35.319 pieces people just associated it with this sort 00:23:35.319 --> 00:23:41.380 of high level piano wizardry. And those, I'm 00:23:41.380 --> 00:23:43.640 not denying the fact that those pieces are, but 00:23:43.640 --> 00:23:48.359 I've been trying gradually to try and fill out 00:23:48.359 --> 00:23:50.559 the rest of the canvas here and give the full 00:23:50.559 --> 00:23:54.059 picture. There's so much, so much of it that's 00:23:54.059 --> 00:23:56.619 so attractive and well within reach of the fluent 00:23:56.619 --> 00:23:59.299 amateur. You're talking about Alcan or in general? 00:23:59.500 --> 00:24:03.500 No, just Alcan's music. There is. Yes, as you 00:24:03.500 --> 00:24:05.400 know, because you've published several pieces 00:24:05.400 --> 00:24:08.380 in the musical supplement to the magazine. Yes. 00:24:08.480 --> 00:24:11.619 Oh, there's some absolute gems. Absolute gems. 00:24:12.720 --> 00:24:16.920 So beautiful. Well, obviously, your record company, 00:24:17.140 --> 00:24:19.640 they've been supportive of you, Piano Classics, 00:24:19.640 --> 00:24:23.539 with your quest to discover all this romantic, 00:24:23.799 --> 00:24:25.440 slightly off -the -beaten -track repertoire. 00:24:26.059 --> 00:24:34.059 Yes. Yes, they have. Well, I'm immensely grateful 00:24:34.059 --> 00:24:37.880 to them and to my producer, Peter Van Winkle, 00:24:38.059 --> 00:24:42.240 who's just been top. I've been with them now 00:24:42.240 --> 00:24:46.940 for just over 11 years. And it was at a time 00:24:46.940 --> 00:24:50.079 where, you know, I think I must have left the 00:24:50.079 --> 00:24:54.700 college in about 2013. And I graduated by then. 00:24:54.740 --> 00:24:58.559 And you're sort of... in a little bit in a no 00:24:58.559 --> 00:25:00.759 man's land if you don't have anything to do and 00:25:00.759 --> 00:25:03.700 it can be a very painful frightening place to 00:25:03.700 --> 00:25:06.420 be once you're suddenly out there you're trying 00:25:06.420 --> 00:25:10.799 to you know make ends meet and just just fulfill 00:25:10.799 --> 00:25:15.619 your promise as it were and uh it was actually 00:25:15.619 --> 00:25:18.119 uh the italian pianist vincenzo maltempo who 00:25:18.119 --> 00:25:20.460 had already recorded a lot of alcan by then i 00:25:20.460 --> 00:25:23.740 we were already friendly and he had recorded 00:25:23.740 --> 00:25:26.779 for them and i asked him for a sort of introduction. 00:25:27.079 --> 00:25:30.519 And he said, of course, I'll write to them. Here's 00:25:30.519 --> 00:25:34.019 the email, which is very, very nice. And I think 00:25:34.019 --> 00:25:36.119 actually initially, this is quite interesting. 00:25:36.299 --> 00:25:39.720 I gave five proposals at the beginning. I think 00:25:39.720 --> 00:25:43.759 I proposed a disc of Mettner, Liszt, Godowski, 00:25:43.980 --> 00:25:46.779 Talberg and Alcan. And they went for Talberg. 00:25:47.400 --> 00:25:50.200 And I didn't really, I mean, I didn't really 00:25:50.200 --> 00:25:52.099 want to do it at the time. I'd already played 00:25:52.099 --> 00:25:56.160 two pieces. they went for that. And I thought, 00:25:56.180 --> 00:25:57.960 well, if they've gone for it, I'll have to do 00:25:57.960 --> 00:26:00.960 it. So I did and threw myself into it and ended 00:26:00.960 --> 00:26:04.140 up loving this piano writing a great deal more 00:26:04.140 --> 00:26:06.539 than I thought I would. It's wonderful fun and 00:26:06.539 --> 00:26:09.240 it just makes the piano sound like a chest of 00:26:09.240 --> 00:26:12.579 jewels, you know, when it's the right piece. 00:26:12.880 --> 00:26:17.220 And so that was my first CD. And then afterwards, 00:26:17.359 --> 00:26:20.819 gradually, the doors opened and I think that 00:26:20.819 --> 00:26:22.880 did well. It sold well. Then I did a disc of 00:26:22.880 --> 00:26:26.029 Liszt. And then we went on to do, I think, some 00:26:26.029 --> 00:26:28.109 Chaminade and then that did very well. And I 00:26:28.109 --> 00:26:34.130 gradually gained their trust. And I'm just so 00:26:34.130 --> 00:26:36.029 grateful for it because it's given me such a 00:26:36.029 --> 00:26:42.349 sense of purpose. Just to be, as I say, filling 00:26:42.349 --> 00:26:44.630 in the blanks with so much of this repertoire 00:26:44.630 --> 00:26:48.809 and just having a sense of artistic fulfilment. 00:26:48.829 --> 00:26:51.430 Again, as I said before, so much of this stuff 00:26:51.430 --> 00:26:55.119 can't be played. in the concert hall. No. Yeah, 00:26:55.220 --> 00:26:58.099 and concerts, I'm not, you know, that's not the 00:26:58.099 --> 00:26:59.700 be -all and end -all for me. I know it is for 00:26:59.700 --> 00:27:01.900 some people and that's fine, but I really love 00:27:01.900 --> 00:27:05.240 digging and investigating and seeing what I can 00:27:05.240 --> 00:27:08.259 find and unearth. It gives me an immense thrill 00:27:08.259 --> 00:27:12.140 to find a mouldering old score in a second -hand 00:27:12.140 --> 00:27:14.460 music shop or even a charity shop somewhere. 00:27:14.720 --> 00:27:17.240 And it's something I've never seen before. And 00:27:17.240 --> 00:27:22.359 it's just wonderful finding rare scores. Absolutely. 00:27:22.660 --> 00:27:25.559 Absolutely. So it's been it's been a really fulfilling, 00:27:25.660 --> 00:27:29.440 I hope, on both ends relationship with piano 00:27:29.440 --> 00:27:33.019 classics and long may it continue. Yes. And through 00:27:33.019 --> 00:27:37.059 that, then, was that your way of getting being 00:27:37.059 --> 00:27:40.019 offered dates, concert dates, recitals? I mean, 00:27:40.039 --> 00:27:41.700 you've got quite a busy calendar, don't you? 00:27:43.500 --> 00:27:49.029 Dates? Not really. I think it's probably, yes, 00:27:49.069 --> 00:27:52.289 it has helped a lot more. It has helped. I mean, 00:27:52.289 --> 00:27:56.089 being available on record is a sort of gold dust 00:27:56.089 --> 00:28:00.869 because you suddenly exist. Whereas it's difficult 00:28:00.869 --> 00:28:03.130 to exist just playing concerts, especially if 00:28:03.130 --> 00:28:07.029 you're only playing concerts in small churches 00:28:07.029 --> 00:28:09.730 in rural England, for example. Even though those 00:28:09.730 --> 00:28:13.069 concerts are very spiritually fulfilling, it 00:28:13.069 --> 00:28:17.069 doesn't cast the net very wide for us. Yes, I 00:28:17.069 --> 00:28:21.609 benefit from that. Yes, I think I do. There have 00:28:21.609 --> 00:28:24.369 been certain requests from concert promoters 00:28:24.369 --> 00:28:26.769 who asked me to play a certain work because they've 00:28:26.769 --> 00:28:30.650 heard the recording. And that can be nice and 00:28:30.650 --> 00:28:34.289 surprising and sometimes... a little bit unwelcome 00:28:34.289 --> 00:28:37.329 because sometimes I think with certain works 00:28:37.329 --> 00:28:39.289 I you know once I've done it I don't want to 00:28:39.289 --> 00:28:41.650 go back to it I want to just move on to the next 00:28:41.650 --> 00:28:45.049 thing so so there is that that bonus there but 00:28:45.049 --> 00:28:47.690 no it's been I wouldn't say I play really any 00:28:47.690 --> 00:28:51.569 more than 20 or 25 concerts a year to be honest 00:28:51.569 --> 00:28:55.049 which is very little Well, that sounds quite 00:28:55.049 --> 00:29:00.549 nice. I mean, you teach, you give masterclasses 00:29:00.549 --> 00:29:02.230 as well, don't you? Teaching is important for 00:29:02.230 --> 00:29:06.230 you. Yes, I teach a great deal privately and 00:29:06.230 --> 00:29:10.630 I have given the occasional masterclass, but 00:29:10.630 --> 00:29:14.250 not so often, that sort of thing. But I do enjoy 00:29:14.250 --> 00:29:22.980 teaching a great deal, especially when... when 00:29:22.980 --> 00:29:28.440 it's very clear that you're helping somebody 00:29:28.440 --> 00:29:33.920 get where they want to be. And that doesn't always 00:29:33.920 --> 00:29:38.400 happen, you know, because it's very, one of the 00:29:38.400 --> 00:29:41.539 hardest things is just simply helping someone 00:29:41.539 --> 00:29:43.299 understand what they need to do when they get 00:29:43.299 --> 00:29:46.589 home. what do you actually do when you're in 00:29:46.589 --> 00:29:48.450 front of a piano, how to practice and all of 00:29:48.450 --> 00:29:51.309 that. And then when they do, just take my advice 00:29:51.309 --> 00:29:54.289 and follow it through. It's immensely fulfilling. 00:29:55.009 --> 00:29:59.950 It really is. And I learn a lot. I mean, I learn 00:29:59.950 --> 00:30:04.730 so much. I have done teaching, especially all 00:30:04.730 --> 00:30:08.230 levels, be it a five -year -old to an 85 -year 00:30:08.230 --> 00:30:10.289 -old. And that really has been the sort of spectrum 00:30:10.289 --> 00:30:15.369 of people I've taught. Yes. Yes. Oh, I think 00:30:15.369 --> 00:30:17.349 you've got a lovely combination of things going 00:30:17.349 --> 00:30:22.410 on. Oh, well, Mark, we're getting close towards 00:30:22.410 --> 00:30:25.410 the end now, actually. So I think we'll go off 00:30:25.410 --> 00:30:27.609 on a little bit of a lighthearted journey to 00:30:27.609 --> 00:30:31.029 round things off. I'm going to ask you some lighthearted 00:30:31.029 --> 00:30:34.589 questions. And if you could come back to me with 00:30:34.589 --> 00:30:37.490 the answers, that would be great. The first one 00:30:37.490 --> 00:30:40.569 being, if you could play only one composer from 00:30:40.569 --> 00:30:45.109 now on, who would it be? I know it's not really 00:30:45.109 --> 00:30:49.529 going to happen, but... Well, I think it really 00:30:49.529 --> 00:30:52.269 is impossible to answer. Of course, what everybody 00:30:52.269 --> 00:30:54.750 says and what is considered the correct answer 00:30:54.750 --> 00:30:59.869 is Bach. But I wouldn't say that, because I'm 00:30:59.869 --> 00:31:02.130 not sure it would be enough for me. I know that 00:31:02.130 --> 00:31:06.190 sounds sacrilegious, so as a result... Gone held 00:31:06.190 --> 00:31:08.210 to my head, I had no choice at all. I would say 00:31:08.210 --> 00:31:12.220 Franz Liszt. Now, the reason why... is because 00:31:12.220 --> 00:31:15.339 we've thereby got the Beethoven symphonies, and 00:31:15.339 --> 00:31:17.140 we've got just about all the Schubert songs, 00:31:17.420 --> 00:31:19.900 and we've got the Bach transcriptions, and we've 00:31:19.900 --> 00:31:22.220 got a few songs by Chopin, and we've got the 00:31:22.220 --> 00:31:24.900 rest of his own music. That's very, very clever. 00:31:25.259 --> 00:31:27.480 Well, it's not too bad, is it, really? I think 00:31:27.480 --> 00:31:31.339 if I had to, that would be all right. You can 00:31:31.339 --> 00:31:32.900 play all the Beethoven symphonies, yeah, that's 00:31:32.900 --> 00:31:35.279 great. Well, yes. Of course, they'll probably 00:31:35.279 --> 00:31:37.559 take a bit to work up, and it might be hot on 00:31:37.559 --> 00:31:42.890 that desert island. That would be it. Oh, lovely 00:31:42.890 --> 00:31:47.009 answer that. One pianist, dead or alive, you 00:31:47.009 --> 00:31:51.049 travel long and far to hear? Probably Liszt. 00:31:52.109 --> 00:32:03.529 Why? I think... I mean, reading so much about 00:32:03.529 --> 00:32:06.960 him, it's... Just the accounts of his playing 00:32:06.960 --> 00:32:11.359 and who he was, the magnetic personality. It 00:32:11.359 --> 00:32:14.140 would be, I think it would have to be him. Or 00:32:14.140 --> 00:32:17.920 it might be Alcan, just to satisfy my own curiosity. 00:32:19.940 --> 00:32:21.759 But yes, I think it would probably have to be 00:32:21.759 --> 00:32:26.059 Liszt. OK. One person, dead or alive, you'd love 00:32:26.059 --> 00:32:31.000 to play for? Probably Alcan. Hmm. You think he'd 00:32:31.000 --> 00:32:33.700 give you some good advice? Well, it would be 00:32:33.700 --> 00:32:36.019 very nice to know what he thinks of everything 00:32:36.019 --> 00:32:39.380 I've been doing and whether I've been doing it 00:32:39.380 --> 00:32:41.519 as he would like. And I hope it would be the 00:32:41.519 --> 00:32:43.259 right answer. Perhaps then it would be a terrible 00:32:43.259 --> 00:32:44.900 thing to choose because what if he doesn't like 00:32:44.900 --> 00:32:47.960 it at all? This is very interesting, though. 00:32:48.019 --> 00:32:51.240 We don't know how Alcon played, do we? Well, 00:32:51.319 --> 00:32:53.140 we have an idea that he was very much in the 00:32:53.140 --> 00:32:56.220 severe style. So if you hear the recording, if 00:32:56.220 --> 00:32:58.829 you hear recordings by Samson. in his later years 00:32:58.829 --> 00:33:00.369 that gives you a sort of measure of what he was 00:33:00.369 --> 00:33:05.930 like okay yeah um so so yeah we we have an idea 00:33:05.930 --> 00:33:07.849 of what he was like he was very much that old 00:33:07.849 --> 00:33:10.450 french school very tight crisp rhythm brilliant 00:33:10.450 --> 00:33:14.369 articulation sort of thing you know okay oh okay 00:33:14.369 --> 00:33:17.329 i know you've touched on this but i'm going to 00:33:17.329 --> 00:33:21.289 ask you do you have any technical struggles oh 00:33:21.289 --> 00:33:28.190 all the time oh yeah of course and um You know, 00:33:28.210 --> 00:33:32.670 just because... Just because we can do something 00:33:32.670 --> 00:33:36.990 doesn't mean that we didn't have to seek out 00:33:36.990 --> 00:33:40.190 a solution for it. And it doesn't mean to say 00:33:40.190 --> 00:33:41.910 that just because we have the solution, it makes 00:33:41.910 --> 00:33:47.609 it easy. It can do. But I... Oh, yeah. Absolutely, 00:33:47.650 --> 00:33:51.970 I do. I guess it's how the brain does it, isn't 00:33:51.970 --> 00:33:54.049 it? From the brain to the fingers, the solution. 00:33:54.769 --> 00:33:57.089 Yes, I think one of the hardest things I actually 00:33:57.089 --> 00:34:01.029 had to... Up until fairly recently, and I don't 00:34:01.029 --> 00:34:02.750 know whether this was because I was a late starter, 00:34:02.849 --> 00:34:07.029 what I found quite difficult to do was when certain 00:34:07.029 --> 00:34:11.269 techniques switched like that and you had to 00:34:11.269 --> 00:34:15.389 do... The writing changed immediately. Or if 00:34:15.389 --> 00:34:18.590 it were a very quick emotional change. in the 00:34:18.590 --> 00:34:21.170 music I found that quite hard to do I find it 00:34:21.170 --> 00:34:24.429 easier now but I don't know what it is we're 00:34:24.429 --> 00:34:26.309 all different we all have our own our own things 00:34:26.309 --> 00:34:28.389 but that that was something I would say that 00:34:28.389 --> 00:34:31.469 was both musical and technical interesting not 00:34:31.469 --> 00:34:35.829 that that gives you a distinct answer well that 00:34:35.829 --> 00:34:39.269 sudden change I guess it's like an acrobat who's 00:34:39.920 --> 00:34:42.579 i don't do one form of technique and then having 00:34:42.579 --> 00:34:44.820 to do another i don't know yeah certainly when 00:34:44.820 --> 00:34:46.480 i was a student at college that was something 00:34:46.480 --> 00:34:50.079 i was really trying to it was preempting it's 00:34:50.079 --> 00:34:53.579 preemptive sort of technique that sort of but 00:34:53.579 --> 00:34:56.659 that was then um i think i'm better at it now 00:34:56.659 --> 00:34:59.219 but oh no every day with every new piece i study 00:34:59.219 --> 00:35:02.739 there's always something yeah of course okay 00:35:02.739 --> 00:35:05.739 what would be your advice to an amateur pianist 00:35:05.739 --> 00:35:12.239 about how to improve I think, and this is what 00:35:12.239 --> 00:35:14.639 I would say about just teaching my own pupils, 00:35:14.760 --> 00:35:22.000 I think an appreciation of harmony, from the 00:35:22.000 --> 00:35:25.239 very beginning, basic harmony just does wonders. 00:35:25.320 --> 00:35:31.219 Just understanding that they're not emulating 00:35:31.219 --> 00:35:35.880 abstract notes and patterns just of random notes. 00:35:35.980 --> 00:35:38.579 They're actually... they're they are patterns 00:35:38.579 --> 00:35:42.159 which are something and you know just the tug 00:35:42.159 --> 00:35:45.159 between the sense of pull between tonic and dominant 00:35:45.159 --> 00:35:47.739 those sorts of things if you can if you can really 00:35:47.739 --> 00:35:50.719 get that into your mind and fingers and see the 00:35:50.719 --> 00:35:52.539 harmony that you're playing in your mind as you're 00:35:52.539 --> 00:35:56.019 playing it and then gradually broaden that that 00:35:56.019 --> 00:35:58.960 with all the keys it just sets you up so well 00:35:58.960 --> 00:36:02.670 and it makes learning so much easier That's for 00:36:02.670 --> 00:36:05.809 me anyway. Okay, absolutely. If you weren't a 00:36:05.809 --> 00:36:12.829 pianist, what would you be? Probably a priest. 00:36:13.989 --> 00:36:17.769 But that would be somewhat presumptive on my 00:36:17.769 --> 00:36:21.090 part because it's not to say that the clergy 00:36:21.090 --> 00:36:25.570 would necessarily want me. Wow. But I think that's 00:36:25.570 --> 00:36:28.610 probably what I'd be, yes. So you're obviously 00:36:28.610 --> 00:36:33.300 a religious person. oh yes yes it's a hard question 00:36:33.300 --> 00:36:38.460 to ask yes yes i i have my faith and um and and 00:36:38.460 --> 00:36:41.500 and of course you know things like that are big 00:36:41.500 --> 00:36:43.760 parts of our lives and it's not to say it's um 00:36:43.760 --> 00:36:46.860 absolutely concrete all the time i don't think 00:36:46.860 --> 00:36:49.420 anything is in life is it but it's um it's certainly 00:36:49.420 --> 00:36:53.260 a big part of who i am and um i think if i didn't 00:36:53.260 --> 00:36:56.940 spend so many hours at the piano it would probably 00:36:56.940 --> 00:37:00.659 be In the church, yes. More than I already do, 00:37:00.699 --> 00:37:06.380 at least. Lovely. Very interesting. Finally, 00:37:06.579 --> 00:37:09.179 one composer you're not quite ready to tackle. 00:37:15.059 --> 00:37:20.519 Rachmaninoff. Now that's interesting. Yeah. And 00:37:20.519 --> 00:37:25.659 it's not... It's not because I don't like the 00:37:25.659 --> 00:37:29.039 music. I absolutely love the music. I just don't... 00:37:29.039 --> 00:37:32.059 I just have no... I don't play one note of his 00:37:32.059 --> 00:37:36.179 music at all. Not one note. No. Shock horror. 00:37:37.219 --> 00:37:39.199 I'm a pianist and I don't play any Rachmaninoff. 00:37:39.280 --> 00:37:43.320 I just feel... Also, it's very well represented 00:37:43.320 --> 00:37:45.500 by other pianists who play it so wonderfully 00:37:45.500 --> 00:37:48.800 well and I love hearing them play it. But I just... 00:37:48.800 --> 00:37:53.480 I'm not sure yet whether I'm the right pianist 00:37:53.480 --> 00:38:00.119 for it. All sorts of reasons. Yeah, I don't associate 00:38:00.119 --> 00:38:01.659 with you. I wouldn't have thought you were, and 00:38:01.659 --> 00:38:05.840 don't ask me why, but... No, but I do love it. 00:38:06.099 --> 00:38:10.599 I absolutely think it's wonderful. And so many 00:38:10.599 --> 00:38:13.340 things I haven't even opened the score to, which 00:38:13.340 --> 00:38:18.239 is a terrible thing to admit to. No. No, I don't 00:38:18.239 --> 00:38:22.780 think so. Oh, well, you've got time for that. 00:38:22.820 --> 00:38:26.289 You might change your mind. Yes. Oh, yes. All 00:38:26.289 --> 00:38:29.170 of this changes. Everything is in flux. I mean, 00:38:29.190 --> 00:38:31.630 there were I mean, about 10 years ago, I mean, 00:38:31.630 --> 00:38:34.429 Beethoven was a bit of a blind spot for me. And 00:38:34.429 --> 00:38:38.489 that changed radically ever since lockdown. Really. 00:38:38.929 --> 00:38:43.030 I really, really became completely sort of obsessed. 00:38:44.409 --> 00:38:47.030 He was my and still is a sort of drug to me. 00:38:47.630 --> 00:38:49.710 Beethoven. Oh, I couldn't live without Beethoven. 00:38:50.429 --> 00:38:53.449 Yeah, you're right. I don't know many people 00:38:53.449 --> 00:38:56.030 who would argue with that case. Yeah, it's just, 00:38:56.090 --> 00:39:01.269 it ticks every single box for me. And it's such 00:39:01.269 --> 00:39:05.630 a joy to play. It is, but you chose Liszt. You 00:39:05.630 --> 00:39:07.989 said if there was one composer from now on you 00:39:07.989 --> 00:39:09.889 could play, it would be Liszt. Ah, but then of 00:39:09.889 --> 00:39:12.070 course you can play the arrangements of the Beethoven 00:39:12.070 --> 00:39:15.349 symphonies, can't you? That's the caveat. But 00:39:15.349 --> 00:39:17.510 it would be probably a toss -up between Beethoven 00:39:17.510 --> 00:39:21.039 and Liszt, if I'm really honest. Yes. both very 00:39:21.039 --> 00:39:26.239 different yes yes well yes i suppose they are 00:39:26.239 --> 00:39:30.780 oh mark well listen it's been it's been wonderful 00:39:30.780 --> 00:39:34.500 talking to you today so many interesting wonderful 00:39:34.500 --> 00:39:38.780 beings yeah and um what are you up to for the 00:39:38.780 --> 00:39:43.260 rest of the spring and summer i hope to record 00:39:43.260 --> 00:39:46.260 um at some point in the summer and that will 00:39:46.260 --> 00:39:53.449 be i think all of the esquisse of alcan And aside 00:39:53.449 --> 00:39:58.010 from that, I just need to decide what I'm playing 00:39:58.010 --> 00:40:00.030 this season in terms of concert repertoire, because 00:40:00.030 --> 00:40:03.150 I still haven't quite made decisions about that. 00:40:03.429 --> 00:40:09.610 And that's the 2026 -27 season? Yes, yes, yes. 00:40:10.389 --> 00:40:12.690 And how it's going to fit in with various other 00:40:12.690 --> 00:40:15.690 projects. There's also a project to record the 00:40:15.690 --> 00:40:18.110 Godofsky Java Suite, which is a work I've... 00:40:18.300 --> 00:40:21.239 held very close to my heart for years but you 00:40:21.239 --> 00:40:23.659 know all of that stuff requires time and planning 00:40:23.659 --> 00:40:26.260 and it's not something i especially with with 00:40:26.260 --> 00:40:28.360 you know a lot of teaching commitments it's it's 00:40:28.360 --> 00:40:31.940 just working out pacing oneself and setting reasonable 00:40:31.940 --> 00:40:35.539 goals oh oh well i wish you all the best with 00:40:35.539 --> 00:40:39.260 that and no doubt i'll bump into you at a concert 00:40:39.260 --> 00:40:43.139 i'm sure somewhere very very soon thanks mark 00:40:43.139 --> 00:41:40.500 for joining us today thank you thanks And it 00:41:40.500 --> 00:41:43.400 appears on Mark Viner's latest volume eight of 00:41:43.400 --> 00:41:46.840 the complete piano music of Alcon, recently released 00:41:46.840 --> 00:41:50.320 on the Piano Classics label. Pianist podcasts 00:41:50.320 --> 00:41:52.719 are free and a really good way to support what 00:41:52.719 --> 00:41:56.079 we do is by subscribing to Pianist. Visit our 00:41:56.079 --> 00:41:59.519 website at pianistmagazine .com and listen to 00:41:59.519 --> 00:42:02.159 us on YouTube by searching Pianist magazine. 00:42:02.579 --> 00:42:05.139 And don't forget to sign up to our newsletter, 00:42:05.380 --> 00:42:08.300 which is full of extra playing tips and useful 00:42:08.300 --> 00:42:12.039 information. Go to pianistmagazine .com to find 00:42:12.039 --> 00:42:13.199 out how to sign up.