Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Members Recordings - Pianist Corner Brahms and Debussy, Arpeggiated & Asychronized

There are some examples of rolled or aroeggiated chords(RC), asynchronizaton(A), extreme rubato(ER) in the examples you mentioned but, in general, I think few compared to many of the pianists of the early 20th century(for example most of the other recordings posted by the OP). To my ears the Elegy has virtually no RC, A or ER, the Schumann Carnival virtually none, he Bach-Rachmaninov virtually none, the middle section(or any part)of the Funeral March movement virtually none, the Chopin Waltzes only in the middle section of the C# minor out of the several waltzes, etc. The only pieces where I would agree with you about significant use of rolled chords are the Chopin D flat Nocturne and middle section of the Waltz C# minor Waltz.

I think many other pianists of his time use RC, A, and ER to an extent that makes any use of these by Rachmaninov seem rather small.

fnork:

Thank you for your inciteful and very well thought out comments/analysis.

As pointed out recently by Dr. Ingrid Pearson of the Royal College Of Music, in her October journal article in "Performance Practice Review," "historical performance is now an essential component of musical training and education. Successful performers must be able to seamlessly function across the widest possible range of musical styles, accommodating an equally wide gamut of tastes, both individually and collectively."

I enclose the link for the entire article.
http://scholarship.claremont.edu/ppr/vol17/iss1/5/

My point in all of this is to broach this subject to not only all pianists, but also to all those in the general public who have had any experience with the piano. History throughout the world is considered one of the most important subjects that can be experienced and taught. While we in the U.S. barely know anything about the history of anything.

And, as pointed out by musicologist Dr. Charles Roeckle, former Dean Of The College Of Fine Arts UT Austin, who was my faculty advisor "If this were “old news,” one would encounter more teaching and performing that incorporated these ideas. Of course, not everyone who knows about it will support the notion."

Finally, as far as your incite into the lack of rubato by Rachmaninoff, I noticed some time ago that instead of an Earl Wild style rubato, I find that this man judicially and seamlessly made extensive use of ritards and accelerandos.

Thanks once again.

LHP

If it doesn't apply to you, why would you assume it applies to anyone else? Change the title. Funnily enough, I think more people would examine your work with an open mind if your title did not imply that yours is closed.

He's already explained why he chose that title...he was told he needed a hook.

I think the posts on this thread have proved it's an effective hook in terms of getting attention but, as others have pointed out, I agree it has the big flaws of being not true and perhaps offensive.

A video with a different title would probably have gotten a better reaction especially on a site like PW. Also, just saying that this was a performance style of that time rather than claiming it was a better way of playing or that this information is some new discovery would be more accurate IMO.

Would a title such as "Have our piano teachers taught us wrong?" maybe be less offensive?

I remember in writing classes, teachers/professors discussed how having a title that is radical/attention grabbing is a good thing, though of course, there still is a line.

I personally don't find the title offensive as a statement like that, though it does prompt me to want to challenge in argument, instead of do original research in a less biased manner. That's how I feel.

Unrelated, one of the best titles to an article I've ever seen is "What's in Your Butt?" And the article was about cigarettes. It was an interesting read; one I would have not read if I hadn't been so hooked by the title!

Orange Soda King:

There is a strange trend developing here, in terms of the last two threads. And, that is a basic level of respectful discourse. Yours' is the second.

In terms of my philosophical writings, I spent the better part of the 1990's trying to get published, doing everything according to Hoyle. Then, I wrote an Op-Ed in twenty minutes, and it made print.

A man by the name of Albert Einstein published, as part of his Theory Of Relativity, "That a given reality exists within a given frame of reference."

You understand that, and probably much more.

Thank you for your suggestion.

LHP

"Musical vocabulary." Well said, fnork! Not only do we have a vocabulary, we also have a voice, a dialect, and a STYLE! What I like about what you point out (and what I wonder if Louis is trying to get at) is that it is more important to find the music in a piece than it is to be religiously tied to the score.

That said, I think, ideally, it is critical to learn a score exactly as it is written to see what it says. I am lately of the opinion that one must wrestle with the score exactly as indicated by the engraver to make sure one understands its meaning as rendered by the editorial chain that ends at the printing press. However, I have lived most of my life as a sloppy reader, and the music still comes out--sometimes with broken chords or grace notes where none are indicated but where the spirit moves.

Perhaps our teachers taught us right, but there is room to maneuver in all of it.

Cinnamonbear:

Praise Jesus! There is intelligent life at Piano World afterall.

First, citing one more source, which is Dr. Rigbie Turner, former Curator of Original Manuscripts at Pierpont Morgan Library, there is no one authentic Urtext score of any piece of music.

Many pieces were hand copied by students even before they went to the printer for the first time. Next, most composers made changes to what came back from the printer. Some of these have made it to today, and some have not.

Beethoven was pressured to submit his score for the 4th Piano Concerto because a representative from his publisher noticed that by following him on tour that he kept changing things around when he went from city to city.

Debussy was notorius for marking up his published scores with red, blue, and green pencil. And, returning to Beethoven, if you are fortunate enough to visit Pierpont Morgan, you will not see words like "espressivo" on any of his manuscripts. Earl Wild told me in one of our conversations that the performance style in Beethoven's time, in terms of rhythm, was to play at an even tempo, nothing like what Artur Schnabel did based on his rendering of "the score."

As stated in the video re: Dr. Kenneth Hamilton, the score was meant to be a guide. If you wanted to know how it was supposed to go, you studied the piece under the composer, or one of their teaching assistants.

So, when Maurice Hinson states that Olga Samaroff instructed him to pay meticulous attention to the score, just pull up one the extra examples listed above of her recording of the Brahms Op. 117 #2.

She learned the piece from her fellow faculty member at Julliard, Carl Friedberg, who learned it from Johnny Brahms. And, if you can find any written score of that piece which shows the extensive arpeggiation and asynchronization that she demonstrates in this rendering, then you post it on Piano World, and while you are at it call the Associated Press, because you will have made history.

Thank you, thank you, thank you "Cinnamonbear." You have discovered what very few pianists know, and that is the goal is to make music. Arpeggiation, asynchronization, rhythmic alteration, and tempo modification are the same exact techniques used by every symphony or opera conductor on earth. They would be laughed off the stage if they got up and did a literal interpretation.

Does this mean that anything goes when learning a particular work - of course not! However, once all of the wrong notes are corrected, and any improper micro-rhythms or dynamics are straightened out, then the task ahead is to have the student hear in their mind's ear what the composer heard in theirs, and then to re-create that beautiful music.

I do not know why I keep getting the number wrong on the Brahms selection that I cite. I play both of them, but the correct cite should be Brahms Intermezzo Op. 117 #1.

My apologies. Nevertheless, the "A" section of the #2, sounds very different when you asynchronize the left hand bass note, and the "B" section sounds very rich and warm when arpeggiated.

LHP

Yes and sadly, you are not part of it. You need to stop with this rolled chord nonsense. People will laugh at you.

You never addressed two of my points: what about the music composers wrote for other instruments? Orchestral stuff, string quartets? Should we go around every major string quartet and tell them their teachers/coaches taught them wrong? That every chord they have together has to be played sloppy, as if they can't play together? That ought to be easy enough to do! All you have to do is not listen! And what about the fact that music changes with time? You never answered that. I don't think you know what to say. Do we have to follow ancient customs even when we know they're ridiculous, just because they're ancient customs? I don't think we cut off somebody's arm for stealing anymore.................

Anyway, speaking of Beethoven and Debussy - those are two of the most severe examples of composers who wanted EVERY little detail to be followed in the score. And to not do so is not only disrespectful, but foolish as well. Bartok was very particular too, I think.

(btw, it's spelled Juilliard - just to save you from future awkward moments)

Oh dear god, how did I miss that???? How ridiculous is this, now????? I don't even know where to start... why would you think that just because pianists refuse to follow your weird notions about playing, that somehow their goal is not to make music? I'm very confused.

Could you be so kind to give an example of orchestral piece, with the name of the conductor, who do this? Find a conductor who doesn't like following what is on the score. I'm very very very curious.

Awaiting your response to all my remarks -

AP

Pogorelich:

Addressing your point about other genres of music that composers wrote, I once again cite Neal Peres Da Costa's book "Off The Record: Performing Practices In Romantic Piano Playing." It goes into an exhaustive study/discussion regarding the development of arpeggiation. At the time I filmed my video, I had no knowledge of his work. However, since that time, he has enthusiastically endorsed my video.

I inlcude for your listening pleasure You Tube links of his Quintet performing what I consider to be stunningly beautiful chamber music, where the piano part is arpeggiated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3uydnhCdU4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJXTmfMK3wI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgZtsAXD_MM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1czQoO0JPQ

Finally, in regards Debussy, I refer you to his piano roll recording "Debussy, The Composer As Pianist," wherein he is playing his own music. He not only rolls practically every single chord, he even plays broken octaves.

Next, there are the two analog recordings, the first of which is "Ravel Conducts Ravel," which has four Debussy selections played by Marguerite Long. The next is the disc "George Copeland, The Victor Solo Recordings."

Both of these recordings show extensive arpeggiation and asynchronization of this composer's music. George Copeland was the only American to every study under Debussy, and he premiered several of his works. Marguerite Long was a personal friend of the Debussys, as well as one of his students.

In terms of evolution, Copeland (1882-1971) played his last recital (every single one of which included at least one selection from Debussy) in 1964. Marguerite Long (1874-1966) died at the age of 91, and played and taught the composer's music in this fashion for 70 years.

Copeland with the exception of two students, did not teach. However, one of them is still very much alive, and he has enthusiastically endorsed my video, and established its accuracy regarding how the music of Debussy was performed.

In terms of evolution, he is a 77 year old Avant-Garde composer who was a student of both Copeland and Elliot Carter when he was 15 years old, and later on Darius Milhaud at Mills College.

I think it's spelled Copland not Copeland and I encourage you to listen to Rachmaninoff conducting his own symphonies with the Philadelphia. Also you still didn't address my point about music changing with time. I guess it's a complicated subject.

Aaron's last name was indeed Copland, but the previous post referred to George Copeland the pianist rather than Aaron Copland the composer.

Woops that happens when one reads too fast. I totally didn't see that, apologies.

Well yes the piano is arpeggiated but sounds extremely strange, and in the Brahms cello sonata the cello line couldn't really be heard...

I was talking about other genres such as string quartets and orchestral music. Or what about Brahms two piano works? That would sound kind of awful...

YOU might be talking about string quartets and orchestral works, but the discussion about arpeggiating chords and so on - that was a habit that concerned pianists, the piano being a chordal instrument, not just a melodic one. The allowances pianists of the past made would indeed in some cases be very unsuitable for string quartets, and nobody is claiming that quartets of the past performed in such a way. So let's keep the discussion to piano playing.

Why? Music is music. Composers were influenced by other genres when it comes to the piano. I think it's very relative.

....as were pianists. The practice of rolling chords probably had some of its origin in imitating orchestral sounds. For that reason and others, I think asking about the relation to other instruments and combinations is very relevant and helps get at this subject, but it appears to be a deeper and more analytic thing than Louis is inclined to do.

Another thing that's probably relevant is the history of design of keyboard instruments and in particular of the piano. A fellow named Mark Arnest (whom I happen to know from the Colorado amateur competition) wrote a very thoughtful and scholarly article looking at performance practices of the 19th century, including chord rolling and with much emphasis on it, and in a deeper and more open-minded way than what we're seeing here. He talks, among many other things, about the probable relation to the sounds of other instruments and the history of pianos. Louis would benefit from considering such additional factors, for various reasons including because he'd realize better the absurdity of how he's presenting it.

David Dubal likes pointing out that the piano is maybe the only 19th century thing that still takes pretty much exactly the form that it did then. The piano evolved a lot in its early years but has been pretty much constant since about 1880. Mark Arnest found that the practice of habitually rolling chords pretty much ended with people who came of age around that time, and he talks about why that might have been, with regard to these factors. Besides the fact that Louis is simply misrepresenting some supposed facts, which he is, the subject is just a lot more complicated than he seems to realize, and if he grasped more of it, he'd realize that there's a lot he's not taking into account and that he's way overstating things. Would he be interested to consider things like these, and that the practice of habitually rolling chords was a thing of a certain time and was related to these factors that were contemporary to that time, rather than that we have stupidly abandoned the practice and that teachers have been "teaching wrong"?

Let's see.