Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Members Recordings - Pianist Corner Chopin Ballade 3 A-flat major

Phil, I seem to recall that, sometime in the last two years or so, you posted a recording of yours in which you rolled some of the chords without realizing that you were doing it. I don't remember right now which piece it was. Then, when it was pointed out to you, you did a new recording of it without rolling the chords. Do you remember that? I'm sure it wasn't a technical issue. I think you just quite naturally played it that way without giving it a second thought.

What I am saying by bringing up this recollection is that sometimes, we "own" music a certain way when we play, and an arpeggiation here or there can come quite naturally in the flow of things. I would argue that it is not something to make a big deal about.

--Andy

(ChopinAddict--thanks for the birthday wishes, and YES, I sing when I work ALL THE TIME! )

Good memory Andy. It was the Brahms Rhapsody Opus 79/2. BruceD pointed out that I was doing this...[i.e., "In this section, I also hear some left hand before right hand, almost as if you were playing an arpeggiated chord in the bass on the first beat on each of measures 65 through 77 and again in measures 79 through 82. I don't find that effect particularly satisfying."] I responded that it was an unconscious "bad habit" that past teachers tried hard to cure me of - and that apparently I'd slipped back into doing it. I also agreed that it wasn't appropriate...and I recorded the piece again.

In the case of the Brahms, it was sloppiness on my part. I've made a conscious decision to add the arpeggiation in the Chopin Nocturne because I think it enhances the music and I now appreciate that there is historic justification for doing so.

BUT - in general I agree with your comment.

(Now back to the 3rd Ballade....)

Sorry, but what is this thing going on about rolling chords?

I mean, if Chopin had wanted us to roll some of the chords he would have just indicated it in the score, wouldn't he? Or his students' copies would have them so, and there would be editions referring to those copies. But to my limited knowledge I am not aware of such a thing. Are you?

Probably, since LP is in my ignore list, hence I don't see LP's posts, I am missing some of the conversation.

I would be delighted if someone else could shed a light on the subject.

The only light I can shed for you is a rather dim one. It amounts to, as I read it, that LP believes, from recorded and written evidence (particularly that preached by one expert on performance practice), that all performers in the late 19th/early 20th centuries rolled chords ad libitum.

He further suggests that, because that was the way performers and composers of that era performed, that is the only way to play pieces from that era. Those of us who play solid chords (as written), are simply wrong in our approach.

I am unable to follow the logic of this argument, hence my very unenlightened observation, but if it helps ....

Regards,

Thanks Bruce. It sure helps.

No surprise that I didn't get what was going on, because it seems, it was just an insane claim on LP's part.

Bruce - Hakki -

I believe the expert that LP has referred to in the past is Neal Peres da Costa. Here's a synopsis of his recent book, "Off the Record." Personally, I find this subject very interesting. What we choose (or don't choose) to do with the information is another thing.

http://www.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780195386912/book/

But this is something very different.

Of course any pianist can play a certain piece in a certain manner he likes. And as with Elvis' sideburns, it can be adopted by other admirers for some period of time. Fashion, in other words. But fashion chances with time.

I am bounded by what Chopin has put on the score. He was as intellectual and wise man as it gets to know how to write his scores if he would have wanted. Everything else is pure speculation on Chopin.

Other evidences are all about a particular way of playing once was fashionable. So was Elvis sideburns. But it does not mean that all men must have Elvis sideburns now.

Absolutely !!

True - but a particular way of playing that was fashionable during Chopin's lifetime....so it's feasible that Chopin might have understood that "liberties would be taken" by various performers. And speaking of speculation, is it possible that Chopin might have taken similar liberties when interpreting the works of other composers?

Yes, but, neither of us are Chopin, Brahms or Saint-Saëns are we?

I realize that there was a period when it was the "performer" rather than the "composer" who gathered crowds to the saloons. Where they would take all kinds of liberties and even improvise.

But, here, we, no name pianists, are not one of those pianists that have that kind of liberty.

I will better stick to the score.

Edit: But here I am taking all the liberties I wish.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew4x2ZRV3dg

This business of what is written and what is not written sure is getting a run on various threads here. If you have done your homework for a particular composer, you will many things that are expected to played that are not written in the score because it was a current convention. These things are not liberties, they are required. The fact they aren't in the score does not absolve you of not playing them.

Absolutely brilliant rendition !! The composer would be proud !!

No, doggone it !!!



If by adhering to that philosophy you successfully produce amazing performances such as the one you shared with us a few months ago of the Chopin Nocturne Opus 62/1 - then I say "go for it and don't look back!"

The challenge comes in being able to distinguish between valid "conventions" and the not so valid "liberties." And the challenge becomes even greater when the information about the conventions is "anecdotal" rather than "first-hand." Too bad the phonograph wasn't invented 100 years earlier.

A lot has been said about what Chopin wrote. There isn't a single human being alive who knows what Chopin wrote.

When Debussy was hired by his publisher to edit a version of the Chopin Etudes, he had to quit the project. He stated that he discovered three different editions of the collected works. His response was there could only be one correct edition, and there was no way to determine which one was that true score.

As I have stated before, Kenneth Hamilton says conclusively in his book "After The Golden Age (also a must read) that if someone wanted to know how to play a particular composer's work they would travel to a city where he lived or they would study under one of his teaching assistants. That is why people came from all over the world to study under Czerny (Beethoven, Hummel) or Leschetizky (Czerny) or Liszt (Czerny) or Cortot or Carreno, who were students of Chopin teaching assistants.

So, these people (Leschetizky, Cortot, Carreno) all made recordings which differ drastically from today's block chord/strict tempo playing.

Finally, everyone seems to think that myself and Dr. Peres Da Costa are talking about throwing caution to the wind and playing whatever you want however you want to. WE ARE NOT!!

What we are saying is that there is overwhelming recorded evidence to show that those who originally played this music utilized arpeggiation, asynchronization, and tempo modification. Did they learn the notes from a score? Of course, they did.

But, as referred to in Carl Frieberg's biography, once the basic notes, rhythm and dynamics were mastered, then the work began on making the music that the composer intended.

There are many people who know what Chopin wrote, but there are those who insist that Chopin could only have written his pieces out only once in one version, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I am beginning to understand why my Dad, who had a Master of Music degree from Westminster Choir College and was a very good pianist and an excellent organist, always encouraged me to "play it any way you like!"

I would add what my late teacher taught me which was to play with you own voice, as long as it makes logical sense.

Toradze slows down, speeds up, and then beats the piano to death. That is not musical individuality: it is just weird for weirdness sake.

Paderewski starting the A Flat Major Ballade off at a crawl and then off the races at the end was not logical: it was just plain stupid.

Exactly, Louis. I think that's what my dad was getting at. He said "play it any way you like" when I was starting to work on a new piece, and I said, "I don't know how it goes." He was trusting that in not telling me "how it goes," by wrestling with the reading of it, I'd find out not only "how it goes," but also whether or not the piece had meaning for me, and if it did, how to play it using my own voice.

Louis, you don't seem interested in taking any advice from us, but sometimes I can't help giving you a little.

It would be good for you to realize that when you say something like this, Paderewski isn't the one that you're making seem stupid. Try to consider more closely what things you try to judge.

Well, I list the link so those who care can listen for themselves. He plays a slow andante for the better part of 5 minutes 30 seconds, and then he suddenly shifts into overdrive.

On second thought, I take back the word stupid because he knew exactly what he was doing which was hamming it up for his audience with a big flashy finish. It wasn't right, by his own admission, when Horowitz did it, and it is not acceptable for any other pianist to do it (Toradze!).

It is one thing to be rhapsodic like Cortot, but it is entirely different matter to play a certain way just for the effect.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma1t7bTI-uQ