recital

these are the links for your second critique which is due by Nov. 20th 11:59pm. Choose one recital you would like to watch. Trifonov is one of the most prominent pianists of today. His link is a playlist which has titles for each one of the videos. Emil Gilels is a legendary pianist of the Golden Age back in 1970s. Both of them lasts about 1 hour and 30 min. So if you want to save time, you can watch it up to one hour and write the paper on the corresponding pieces.

*IMPORTANT: Be sure to paste the ULR link on your paper!! This is mandatory!!
Daniil Trifonov Recital
https://youtu.be/UhxEpXWW5CY?list=PLi1vDk-qPAbWdoe_NjUyE_3iUgCssXhmf
Emil Gilels recital

Each should be 750¬–1000 words longCritiques should be based on piano recital performances attended during the semester.
An original copy of the program for the recital attended must be submitted to your Instructor, or a 15-point penalty will be assessed.
A student who does not actually attend the recital being reviewed will receive zero for the critique and an additional deduction of two full grade letters for the course.
In rare circumstances, your instructor may substitute the review of specified videorecorded performances for a live recital. This is only at the discretion of the instructor.
Your critique should include the following elements:
• The date, time and location of the recital
• The name of the performer
• The names and dates of the pieces performed, and the names of the composers who wrote those pieces.
• Did any of the pieces have individual movements (smaller sections) listed on the program?
• What are the meanings of any titles of pieces or titles of movements?
• Compare the styles of the different pieces on the program. How do pieces written earlier in time sound different from pieces written later in time? You should talk about dynamics, tempo, and the ways in which the piano is used. Is the piano used to make song-like melodies, or is it being used for rhythmic effect? Are lots of notes used at the same time, or just a few? Are both rhythm and melody happening at the same time? Be sure to talk about all the pieces on the program.
• From your own knowledge of piano playing so far, describe the physical approach that the performer had to the piano. Describe the performer’s posture, movement, and overall use of their body.
• What parts of the recital did you really like? Why? Be sure to talk about aspects of the music here—talk about the pieces in terms of melody, rhythm, tempo, dynamics and so on. You can also talk about the performer’s interpretation.
• What parts of the recital did you enjoy less? Why? Again, be sure to give details about the music and the performer.
• One of the main jobs of a pianist is to make sure that the audience can hear the melody (when there is one)—even when there are lots of other things happening in the music. How did this pianist succeed in the pieces on this program?
These critiques will be graded as follows:
Clarity of writing: 5 points
Details of recital and performer: 5 points
Discussion of compositional style
(critique of the music): 10 points
Discussion of the performance
(critique of the performer): 10 points

recital

these are the links for your second critique which is due by Nov. 20th 11:59pm. Choose one recital you would like to watch. Trifonov is one of the most prominent pianists of today. His link is a playlist which has titles for each one of the videos. Emil Gilels is a legendary pianist of the Golden Age back in 1970s. Both of them lasts about 1 hour and 30 min. So if you want to save time, you can watch it up to one hour and write the paper on the corresponding pieces.

*IMPORTANT: Be sure to paste the ULR link on your paper!! This is mandatory!!
Daniil Trifonov Recital
https://youtu.be/UhxEpXWW5CY?list=PLi1vDk-qPAbWdoe_NjUyE_3iUgCssXhmf
Emil Gilels recital

Each should be 750¬–1000 words longCritiques should be based on piano recital performances attended during the semester.
An original copy of the program for the recital attended must be submitted to your Instructor, or a 15-point penalty will be assessed.
A student who does not actually attend the recital being reviewed will receive zero for the critique and an additional deduction of two full grade letters for the course.
In rare circumstances, your instructor may substitute the review of specified videorecorded performances for a live recital. This is only at the discretion of the instructor.
Your critique should include the following elements:
• The date, time and location of the recital
• The name of the performer
• The names and dates of the pieces performed, and the names of the composers who wrote those pieces.
• Did any of the pieces have individual movements (smaller sections) listed on the program?
• What are the meanings of any titles of pieces or titles of movements?
• Compare the styles of the different pieces on the program. How do pieces written earlier in time sound different from pieces written later in time? You should talk about dynamics, tempo, and the ways in which the piano is used. Is the piano used to make song-like melodies, or is it being used for rhythmic effect? Are lots of notes used at the same time, or just a few? Are both rhythm and melody happening at the same time? Be sure to talk about all the pieces on the program.
• From your own knowledge of piano playing so far, describe the physical approach that the performer had to the piano. Describe the performer’s posture, movement, and overall use of their body.
• What parts of the recital did you really like? Why? Be sure to talk about aspects of the music here—talk about the pieces in terms of melody, rhythm, tempo, dynamics and so on. You can also talk about the performer’s interpretation.
• What parts of the recital did you enjoy less? Why? Again, be sure to give details about the music and the performer.
• One of the main jobs of a pianist is to make sure that the audience can hear the melody (when there is one)—even when there are lots of other things happening in the music. How did this pianist succeed in the pieces on this program?
These critiques will be graded as follows:
Clarity of writing: 5 points
Details of recital and performer: 5 points
Discussion of compositional style
(critique of the music): 10 points
Discussion of the performance
(critique of the performer): 10 points