Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Balance problems in piano concerti

Now that I'm working on a piano concerto (as well as arranging a solo piano repertoire work for piano and orchestra as a study, like what Mozart did in his first four piano concerti), I'd like to discuss passages in piano concerti where the composer miscalculates and the orchestra is likely to cover up the soloist, as touched upon in another thread. Of course, it is possible for a full orchestra to play a tutti softly (the effective subito piano in the Fidelio Overture comes to mind), and of course in a recording one can give the soloist an audio boost (pretty much standard in concerto recordings nowadays, and sometimes taken to ridiculous extremes, such as in many of Zimerman's concerto recordings). If a passage doesn't work live as written it may require changing dynamics or even changing the orchestration. I wish to have these passages pointed out so that I can avoid such miscalculations in my own work. I'll get the ball rolling (oh, and I wish to limit the discussion to passages that don't work as written in live performance, since one can do almost anything with balances in recordings).

Grieg: the big tune glorification in the third movement is probably the most infamous example of the orchestra covering up a soloist unless the orchestra holds back dynamically (especially the trumpets and trombones). Of course the affect (grandeur/majesty/orgasm/whatever) is modified/lost when the orchestra holds back. I haven't heard the work live though, but on paper it certainly looks like a miscalculation. Or am I mistaken?

Schumann: aside from the bass notes, I can't fathom how the piano can be heard in the four loud measures of the tutti (in A major) towards the end of the first movement (the last hurrah before the cadenza). As I haven't heard this work live, I wasn't even aware that the figuration in the right hand continued in this passage until I saw the score!

Prokofiev First Piano Concerto: I heard this live only once, and the piano was completely swamped in the main theme's final statement. The soloist was reticent (completely unsuitable for the work IMHO), so I suppose the passage can be made to work. I've also noticed how some recordings dynamically modify the last four measures from the score's written fff to sffp cresc. fff so that the piano's ascending right hand chords can be heard. Some pianists even double the chords an octave lower in the left hand -- a sensible modification IMHO, since the original left hand's repeated Db - Ab alteration strikes me as superfluous.

Now, for queries:

Do the big tune glorifications in the finales of Tchaikovsky's First Concerto and Rachmaninov's Second and Third Concerti work? To me, they seem well calculated, at least on paper. I haven't heard the Rachmaninov works live. I heard the Tchaikovsky live, but I can't recall if balance was an issue. It doesn't help that (then and now) it is my least favorite piano concerto.

What about the busy coda of the finale of Prokofiev's Third Piano Concerto? Again, I haven't heard it live. The piano's upper register can be resonant if necessary, but the tutti looks formidable on paper.

What about the piano's resonant octaves in the second movement of Brahms's Second Piano Concerto, when the orchestra states the primary theme forte soon after the A section returns? Again, it looks good on paper, though it may also depend on the number of strings employed.

In any case, please mention more passages from piano concerti where balance may be an issue. I'm also eager to hear from those of you who have performed concerti and how problematic balances were dealt with.

Thanks in advance!

P.S. My main concern is the piano being inaudible, rather than simply blending in with the overall texture but still being audibly present (which is the impression one gets in the coda of studio recordings of the Grieg).

The best example I know of is in Prokofiev's Second Piano Concerto, right after the first-movement cadenza. The soloist has a complicated series of chords and arpeggios which are completely obliterated by fortissimo trombones. Would I change it? Absolutely not.

Oh gods, yes, I forgot about that passage. Rather similar to the Grieg -- one can hold back the orchestra dynamically so that the piano can be heard, but the affect is modified, and the effect is lost.

Alongside with what jeffreyjones said, I think that the struggle to come out as the soloist at all times is part of the game sometimes, for example in said place in the Prokofiev concerto. The very end of the 3rd concerto is a similar case perhaps, but from personal experience; all the adrenaline you have by the end of that concerto usually helps giving you the power needed. Unless the conductor chooses a tempo that is out of your reach, hehe.

Dmitri Bashkirov is giving masterclasses at my academy all week, and one of the things he talked about with a pianist working on a concerto was to really think differently when playing with an orchestra compared to playing solo. We can't play the way that sounds convincing to us in a practicing room - we adapt according to how a piece is orchestrated...

Is it not possible that the composer intended the piano to get lost in ( or, in fact, become part of ) the overall sound being produced at that moment? This is quite common in concerti played in period performance practice ( e.g., Beethoven played on a piano forte with a period orchestra) .

Well, if the piano isn't audible as a distinct sound entity no matter how hard the pianist tries, might as well not have the piano play in such passages. Though it doesn't seem to be much of a problem in Mozart and Beethoven piano concerti, since the division between solo and tutti is very clear, and the orchestration in solo passages is very transparent. Unless of course you're referring to non-solo passages when the soloist improvises continuo (which Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven did -- Haydn even in his symphonies, including the late ones), where the soloist can indeed get lost in the louder tuttis.

I disagree with your statement above. Why should the piano always be heard as a distinct entity? What about ensemble sound? There are times (not necessarily the ones this thread is about) when a solo instrument is meant to add to the overall sonority. If the piano was tacit during that passage, the work would suffer. If the pianist is banging away trying to be heard above the orchestra, the work will also suffer.

I am inclined to agree with Mwm. In some instances - the Grieg being one of them - the piano is just a thread in the total fabric of sound. You may not clearly hear the piano as a distinct entity over and above the orchestra at a particular point, but it is still there and part of the overall sound. I wouldn't change the orchestration in the Grieg for a moment and, believing that Grieg knew what he was doing, I don't think he would change it either.

The other side of this coin " ... if the piano isn't audible as a distinct sound entity no matter how hard the pianist tries, might as well not have the piano play in such passages." is a thought I don't agree with, for the reason stated above. Sometimes it's not piano against orchestra or piano with orchestra, but piano and orchestra that make up the overall sound palette.

Regards,

Also Janus,

Please, be careful about remaining at your current location. There is considerable evidence that Betelgeuse has already gone supernova, which implies that you will receive our replies too late to be of use.

I don't mind if the piano is a little covered in passages where it is simply doubling a few orchestral parts -- in such passages the piano is simply contributing to the overall decibel level and colour. But it seems a little of a waste if absolutely nothing can be heard from the piano in miscalculated tuttis, especially if the piano has a line or figuration that is not doubled in the orchestra but also has absolutely no chance of being audible. And I really mean inaudibility, rather than blending in with the overall texture but still being audibly present (which is the impression one gets in the coda of studio recordings of the Grieg).

P.S.: My previous location was Rigel.

I hear Rigel 7 is quite pleasant at this time of year.

I know what you mean. I heard the Ravel live recently and the pianist and/or piano, a S&S D, were not able to be heard at many points even though the conductor was careful to modulate the orchestral amplitude well. I don't think the composer was at fault in this case.

Being tidally locked doesn't help.

Yeah, the Ravel is very transparently orchestrated.

In many late-Romantic piano concertos, the piano is meant to strain at the leash, battling against the mighty orchestra at times, as well as collaborating, and I don't think the orchestra necessarily needs to hold back in tuttis just because the pianist is also playing. Schumann's and Chopin's (and even Liszt's) aren't in this category, but from Brahms onwards, they mostly are. Even Ravel, the master orchestrator, was not averse to drowning the piano when he felt it appropriate.

I've heard all the concertos mentioned live in concert (some of them many times, from several different pianists), and in general never found any balance problem except on the few occasions when the conductor was rather insensitive or the soloist somewhat lacking in firepower. I hope I'm not being sexist in saying this, but it's in some of the big concertos of this sort that one realises that female pianists don't quite have the power of most of their male counterparts (- Janina Fialkowska in a recent article in International Piano magazine put it even more bluntly), which is usually not evident in solo recitals.

If the piano part lies high up, it's almost always heard unless the orchestra is also playing ff in high registers. In the mid-range, it's more difficult to get heard, but low down, when the pianist is thumping hard in octaves/chords, the overtones are surprisingly audible, and the results can be quite thrilling, as in the ending of Rach 3.

I think that any time you have 96 people playing against 1 person, you're going to have balance issues regardless of instrument. That's why these pieces are performed by people and not by a computer. You can balance out the sound by using your ear, even in the middle of a passage.

I believe that what works and what doesn't work is a matter of orchestra and pianist in the moment, and that a perfect audible balance can be achieved by performers expert enough to be capable of calibrating their individual sound as part of the whole.

All very true. But as a composer I want to maximize the chances of the music being clearly projected with minimum effort from the performers, especially since rehearsal time is precious -- in short, write the music in such a way so that it is hard to screw up, balance-wise.

The Prokofiev tutti ending after the cadenze is not such a place. Prokofiev was very clear on what he wanted to do and the piano works, exactly like Bruce says: Adding to the fabric of the orchestral sound...

^ Have you heard it live?

Unfortunately not. Sorry... But I've studied the orchestral score and do think that his intentions are not lost... :-/ I could be mistaken of course, but I think the piano goes along with the woodwinds and high strings in blending this spider web around the F. Hrns and earlier on the Tbns and T.