Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner rythm

In this context, "triplet" is the correct nomenclature.

Regards,

I did, indeed. Concentrating on the exercises that relate directly to the Etude under discussion, I found your "spoilers" quite brilliant! I saved them, printed them out, and will insert a copy into my Chopin Etudes volume in the event that ...!

Thank you!

Regards,

So, Bruce, you're saying this music has three against two? Because I'm reading that it's a 1:1 ratio all the way.

Nice definition of triplet here:
http://www.dolmetsch.com/musictheory15.htm

I did, and this is still the first page.

It depends. Not everybody sees the same number of posts per page. You can set it differently in the preferences. For me, this is quite a ways down page 2.

Eleanor Bailie [1] says it better than I :

The ostensible difficulty is that of the synchronising of the differently 'paced' LH and RH triplets, which create a continual cross-rhythm effect. However, provided that the rhythmic and melodic shape of each hand is thoroughly studied alone[2], and the shapes maintained when the hands are put together, it will be found that the individual flow of the two hands, apparently at cross-purposes, will merge quite happily - any conscious manipulation of the cross-rhythm will be unnecessary and indeed disastrous.

Cortot says [3] : "Before combining the two hands for the final practise of these pages, it will be necessary to get accustomed to the minor difficulties arising from the superposition of two different rhythms :
[illustration showing four groups of eighth-note triplets over two groups of quarter-note triplets, with accents on the first of each triplet in both hands]
the triplets in crotchets should be placed strictly regularly in spite of the discreet part played by the left hand as it is they which create its individual rhythm."

[1] Eleanor Bailie. The Pianist's Repertoire : Chopin, A Graded Practical Guide. London, Kahn & Averill, 1998 (p. 422)
[2] my emphasis.
[3] Chopin : 12 Studies Op 25 (Study edition commented by Alfred Cortot, translated by M. Parkinson.) Paris, Salabert, 2000 (Original copyright date: 1914).

Regards,

Yes, it has three against two. There are two quarter notes in the right hand (divided into two sets of triplets) coincidental with three quarter notes in the left hand.

Steven

As Steven says, but put another way :

For every two quarter notes in the right hand (written as triplet eighth-notes) there are three quarter notes (played in the time of two quarter-notes) in the left hand.

This is not meant to contradict - I hope - what I stated in my first post, where I was commenting solely on how the notes in the right hand coincide with those of the left. In that post, I stated that "simply" there are two notes in the right hand for every note in the left. Once that is mastered, then the fun begins, but as the quote from Bailie points out, it shouldn't be as complex as it initially seems.

Did you see OSK's helpful spoilers?

Regards,

Ah, I went and actually looked at the music. 3:2 it is. Sorry--I should have done that first, rather than listening to what people were saying. :-)

I don't hear 3-against-2 at all, and I don't understand why anyone would even consider that. Since the piece is written in cut time, I'd think it's 6-against-3. If I were to speculate on Chopin's "intent" of this etude, I wouldn't think rhythm would be the focus. To me, this is a study in fast R.H. runs with tricky fingering choices.

May I suggest that you have a look at it again; better yet, try playing it.

Regards,

Succinctly put BruceD ... "there are two notes in the right hand for every note in the left."

It takes a while for some of our respected company to get past the notation "hobgoblin triplet" detour ... and cotton on to the continuous flow of the Presto RH single-note outline ...

Thanks for your down-to-earth comment to one of our catch-ups

" may I suggest that you have a look at it again; better yet, try playing it."

Happy New Year chaps!!

My comment to AZNpiano was not meant to be as flippant as some may take it. While the note values show that the putting together of the two hands is "simply" two notes in the right against one in the left, the final realization is not as simple as that. For, if one is to play this as written - and how else would one play it? - one needs to think two triplets in the right hand against one triplet in the left hand. The result is that the first note of the second triplet in the right comes between the second and third notes of the triplet in the left, and even lightly accenting the right hand triplets brings one up against the two-against-three rhythmic challenge of this piece.

Regards,

When I originally learned this piece, I played it the "simple" way: 2 notes in the RH per each note in the LH. But when I finally re-learned it the way Chopin notated it, it resulted in the melody smoothing out and becoming nearly pulse-less, sort of like floating outside the time signature (to borrow a phrase from Kreisler, I think). Perhaps that was Chopin's intent?

BruceD, was that sarcasm or are you serious? I mean, I think they make sense but I see how they may be very confusing...

But it is definitely more than just 6 against 3.

No, not meant to be at all sarcastic, although perhaps my hyperbolic use of "brilliant" led you to feel sarcasm. I was, nevertheless, impressed with the practicality of your comments and suggested exercises. Moreover, the exercises showed - without one's having to struggle with the notes - that the Etude is, as you say, more than just 6 against 3.

Again: thanks!

Regards,

Yes -- that seems to be a good way to put it together, and the Cortot recording seems to follow it. I think the Arrau performance follows the indication in a more thorough and complex way, but what you said "works."

I don't think it's quite what Chopin "meant," though, because there would seem to have been easier and more obvious ways of indicating it -- but it works. What doesn't work (not really) is just playing 6-against-3 in the 'normal' way, or thinking that there's no issue.

His post looked pretty serious to me......

Oh, awesome! I feel useful (hehe).

After looking at the score for a while, I started pondering why Chopin didn't write the piece in a 3-based meter instead. Then I saw that with triplet 8th and quarter notes, there were multiple X-against-Y rhythms going on, and in a 3-based meter, the emphasis would be on ONLY the 1st and 4th eighth notes or the 1st, 3rd, and 5th eighth notes, which is less interesting. In 4-based meter, there is MUCH more rhythmically you can explore, as well as it is much more interesting with all these different rhythms going on.