: The rhythm of Liszt's consolation no3 I am working on Liszt consolation no3, I actually don't completely understand the rhythm; triplets in the left hand along with normal notes in the right one. So every "2" quavers in the

Vote Up Vote Down   0 Reactions

Login to give Reaction!

The first note of the triplet is played with the first note of the two quavers.then the second triplet note, then the second quaver, then the last triplet note.. BUT - that doesn't mean the time is split evenly between all five notes! You need to play it so the triplets are even with each other, and the two quavers are evenly spaced with each other as well. Practise separately, lots, till each hand works automatically before trying to put them together. It's a weird feel.

Vote Up Vote Down   0 Reactions

Login to give Reaction!

I also find it helpful to imagine yourself saying some words that match with the polyrhythms you are trying to learn. I have read of people using the following ones for 2 vs 3, like in your piece:

Right hand: George --- -ing- ---
Left hand: George Wash- --- -ton
(https://www.key-notes.com/blog/how-to-practice-polyrhythms)
or

Right hand: Not --- -fi- ---
Left hand: Not dif- --- -cult
(http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/1704427/Tricky_2_vs_3_polyrhythm?.html)

I think there are examples for most languages.
Once you have found an example, exercise by tapping on a table to get a feeling of what it should "feel like". Then go ahead and exercise it on the piano.

Vote Up Vote Down   0 Reactions

Login to give Reaction!

The quavers in the left hand are all triplets, though for some reason Liszt didn't bother to mark the first bar or two to show that.

So, the rhythm of both hands together is often 3-against-2, or 3-against-4 for the semiquavers.

The 3-against-2 rhythm goes like the example below - you split the middle note of the triplet into two equal parts.

A good way to learn to play 3-against-4 is to practice each hand separately, with a metronome, and then put the hands together and "just go for it". Trying to count it out mathematically is unlikely to help much.