Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2.7 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
What's Hot!!
New in our online store...
Tea Light
Tea Light with Frosted Music Staff Candle Holder


-------------------
European Tour for Piano Lovers
JOIN US FOR THE TOUR!
--------------------
Posting Pictures on the Forums
-------------------
Forums RULES & HELP
-------------------
ADVERTISE on Piano World
Find a Professional
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers

Advertise on Piano World

(ad)
Piano Buyer Guide
Piano Buyer Spring 2018
ad
Pierce Piano Atlas


Who's Online Now
114 registered members (Aaron W, Alex Hutor, anotherscott, agraffe, almo82, 26 invisible), 1,290 guests, and 5 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Quick Links to Useful Piano & Music Resources
Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano & Music Accessories
*Live Piano Venues
*Music School Listings
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Directory/Site Map
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords & Scales
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 #2737316
05/17/18 01:53 AM
05/17/18 01:53 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Hey favorite people. I am planning to play the last movement of Brahms's first concerto at PianoTexas in a month or so. I am behind, as usual, on learning this not un-difficult piece, which I have had to do from scratch over the past couple of months, so I am cynically wondering what's the slowest tempo (equals least work) I can get away with. Before anyone replies something to the effect that I need to listen to my heart or let my soul set the tempo, let me spare you the effort of putting fingers to the qwerty or whatever. I'm not interested in that kind of advice. The absolutely best advice would be a recommendation from someone who has played this movement about the tempo they chose and whether it worked or not. Better still, a video of them performing it at said tempo would be spectacular.

I am currently doing regimented (for me) practice at MM quarter = 88. Here are the performance speeds I've clocked for some of our favorite artists:

Fleischer (1998) - 104
Zimmerman (1983) - 90
Kissin (2008) - 102
Sokolov (?) - 104/108/112
Katchen (1961) - 104
Grimaud (2014) 100/102 (awful performance IMO)
Rubinstein (1954) - 100/102
Ashkenazy (?) - 96/102
Brendel (1974) - 98
Wang (that would by Yuja!!!) (2017) - 100 (lovely performance IMO)
Curzon (?) - 98

The "/" means that there were tempo fluctuations within the exposition, which was as far as I listened to most of them.

So most of them appear to orbit a quarter note = 100 norm, though a few vary from their base tempi almost without constraint (Sokolov and Ashkenazy for example). I'd be interested to read what members think of the Zimmerman/Bernstein performance, for obvious reasons. My own favorite, by the way, is Curzon's. So, remembering that I don't care about what feels right for the person performing, anyone have any useful feedback?


SRF
(ad)
Piano & Music Accessories
piano accessories music gifts tuning and moving equipment
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737318
05/17/18 02:09 AM
05/17/18 02:09 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Simon -- I'm puzzled that you're asking!
Because, it looks like you're saying you can play it pretty comfortably at 88 (do you not mean that?), and we can see from those listed speeds that 88 is close enough that we can't much doubt that it's "in the ballpark." So, why are you worried?

Anyway......I found it an interesting question, interesting enough to go and try it, and I have my confident answer:

76

You can "get away" with 76, at least to my ears you can. 80 is better -- it feels like a big difference, actually -- but you can make 76 work.

I don't think you can get away with any slower.

---------

On second look: Is it that you really were worrying that 88 is too slow?

I don't think it is at all.
It's a very fine tempo.
(Heck, I'm even saying you could get away OK with 76!!)

Last edited by Mark_C; 05/17/18 02:12 AM.
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737322
05/17/18 02:26 AM
05/17/18 02:26 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
P.S. I remember so well the first time I heard the piece. It was in your current hometown. I was in Washington for a meeting, had a free evening and was delighted to see that the National Symphony was in town and that the program included a Brahms Concerto. I wasn't familiar with either one at the time.
It was a great, great performance, Bruno Leonardo Gelber the pianist. I was completely bowled over, especially by this movement.

Funnily, when I got back home, my first evening back, it happened to be the evening of a monthly master class that I was allowed to crash. Near the end of the class, an old friend of the teacher came in to say hi, a guy who happened to be playing with our local symphony the next night. This was Jerome Rose, who I'd never heard of before either, and, lo and behold, he was going to be playing (you guessed it) the Brahms D minor. Someone yelled out, why don't you sit down and play it for us. Rose and our teacher both said they have to leave in about 5 minutes. I said, well, I just heard it a couple of nights ago and I think the last movement doesn't take much more than about 5 minutes. grin
So, Rose did sit down and play it, with our teacher playing the orchestra part on this little upright piano that was in the corner of the room. I never heard the piece before, and now I got to hear it up-close twice in three days.....



BTW, FWIW: Gould: 80

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737323
05/17/18 02:44 AM
05/17/18 02:44 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
.....and maybe more of interest: Gilels 90

(ad ) MusicNotes.com
sheet music search
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737366
05/17/18 08:21 AM
05/17/18 08:21 AM
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
S
Steve.L Offline
Full Member
Steve.L  Offline
Full Member
S
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 34
I'm pretty sure Barenboim/Barbirolli is 88, and it's one of my favorite performances.

https://open.spotify.com/track/5cB5NwCanNggkOqaIzUeOe?si=jeWLn1BJQ-e8V8DupjxGmA

I'm also a great fan of Kapell/Mitropoulos, which is much faster.

https://open.spotify.com/track/60uLjpg7nyeGbowGgXJWul?si=Vw_AbuUeSguMxsAMRuloPw

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2737475
05/17/18 03:02 PM
05/17/18 03:02 PM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by Mark_C
. . . it looks like you're saying you can play it pretty comfortably at 88 (do you not mean that?) . . .

Anyway......I found it an interesting question, interesting enough to go and try it, and I have my confident answer:

76

You can "get away" with 76, at least to my ears you can. 80 is better -- it feels like a big difference, actually -- but you can make 76 work.

I don't think you can get away with any slower.

Oops, it turns out I did not mean it! Not at all. I'm practicing at with the metronome set for 8th notes at 136. I must have had a senior moment when I did some quick mental arithmetic as I typed the OP because 136 / 2 does not equal 88. As everyone except me would probably be able to say without much hesitation, it equals 68. Sorry to have misled you all.

Actually, that makes the responses even more helpful, because I can set a realistic goal for myself. I think I probably can get to 80 (and if that's good enough for both Mr. Gould and Dr. Mark, it's good enough for me. I want to listen to the other performances that were cited and try a run-through at 76 and 80 to confirm what I already suspect is good advice.

Thanks!


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737496
05/17/18 04:01 PM
05/17/18 04:01 PM
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,540
SE USA
WhoDwaldi Offline
2000 Post Club Member
WhoDwaldi  Offline
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,540
SE USA
I was very impressed with the Zimerman/Berstein performance, seeing it as a film on TV. But, that way you have Bernstein jumping around and KZ's technique to watch. For audio only, it is probably a little slow.

Lenny was always better on TV. laugh


WhoDwaldi
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737504
05/17/18 04:36 PM
05/17/18 04:36 PM
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,540
SE USA
WhoDwaldi Offline
2000 Post Club Member
WhoDwaldi  Offline
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,540
SE USA
Originally Posted by SiFi

Actually, that makes the responses even more helpful, because I can set a realistic goal for myself. I think I probably can get to 80 (and if that's good enough for both Mr. Gould and Dr. Mark, it's good enough for me. I want to listen to the other performances that were cited and try a run-through at 76 and 80 to confirm what I already suspect is good advice.

Thanks!


Live, you have people hanging attention on every note. For recordings, you have listeners who have drunk too much coffee yelling "too slow!" at the speakers. So, you can probably pull it off as a performance.


WhoDwaldi
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737518
05/17/18 05:59 PM
05/17/18 05:59 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by SiFi
....I think I probably can get to 80

Sounds good, and I have a confident prediction: If you'll be drilling it at 80 and planning to play it at that tempo, when you get up there you'll play 84. smile

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2737559
05/18/18 12:09 AM
05/18/18 12:09 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by Mark_C
Originally Posted by SiFi
....I think I probably can get to 80

Sounds good, and I have a confident prediction: If you'll be drilling it at 80 and planning to play it at that tempo, when you get up there you'll play 84. smile

I know, right? Concerto movements where the soloist sets the tempo are undoubtedly a conductor's and orchestra's nightmare. I played Mozart K.459 with my school's orchestra when I was 13. The last movement is marked molto allegro or something similar, but we'd rehearsed it at a speed that the orchestra, who were almost all students, could cope with. This was my first big performance. No problems with the first two movements, but I went at the opening of the last movement like a bat out of heck because of, you know, adrenaline, youthful exuberance, etc. Evidently the bassoons and oboists had panic attacks, or whatever we called such things in those days. I know this because they all told me afterwards.

So drill baby drill at 80 it is. Perform at 84. Nice plan.


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: WhoDwaldi] #2737560
05/18/18 12:17 AM
05/18/18 12:17 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by WhoDwaldi
I was very impressed with the Zimerman/Berstein performance, seeing it as a film on TV. But, that way you have Bernstein jumping around and KZ's technique to watch. For audio only, it is probably a little slow.

Lenny was always better on TV. laugh

I totally agree about Leonard. His stage presence was electric. But I actually think the tempo works. Of course, I have to say that because I am contemplating an even slower tempo. However, there's so much detail and intricacy built in to the orchestra and piano scoring, that if it even has the appearance of being rushed I think it will fail. I do believe it can work at a slower than standard tempo.


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: WhoDwaldi] #2737562
05/18/18 12:24 AM
05/18/18 12:24 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by WhoDwaldi
Live, you have people hanging attention on every note. For recordings, you have listeners who have drunk too much coffee yelling "too slow!" at the speakers. So, you can probably pull it off as a performance.

On yelling at the speakers, I am guilty as charged. Actually, I had to stop listening to classical music when I worked out on a treadmill because everything on my playlist seemed glacially slow. I remember listening to one of my own performances while running one time. Depressing. I eventually started just listening to rock.


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737563
05/18/18 12:26 AM
05/18/18 12:26 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by SiFi
.....So drill baby drill at 80 it is. Perform at 84. Nice plan.

No no!!
If you'll be looking at it that way, when you sit down to play it you'll do 88! ha

BTW, here's a thing I would have asked you right up top, if not that I was so interested to find my own answer:

What was your idea of what the minimum OK speed would be?
I figure you must have thought something, even if not confidently.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2737646
05/18/18 10:23 AM
05/18/18 10:23 AM
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 110
K
kbrod1 Offline
Full Member
kbrod1  Offline
Full Member
K
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 110
I always loved the Fleischer. Nelson Freire (@100) also is quite good.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: kbrod1] #2738124
05/20/18 02:04 AM
05/20/18 02:04 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by kbrod1
I always loved the Fleischer. Nelson Freire (@100) also is quite good.

I agree about Fleischer. It's aggressive in a good way, fiery yet completely controlled. I wish he would have slowed down a bit in some places, but the performance as a whole is just awesome.

I haven't heard Nelson Freire, but I will endeavor to do so.


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2738130
05/20/18 02:32 AM
05/20/18 02:32 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,771
Louisville, Kentucky, United S...
Orange Soda King Offline
6000 Post Club Member
Orange Soda King  Offline
6000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,771
Louisville, Kentucky, United S...
My personal opinion: 88 is fine, but I personally wouldn't play it slower than that.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2738132
05/20/18 02:37 AM
05/20/18 02:37 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by Mark_C
BTW, here's a thing I would have asked you right up top, if not that I was so interested to find my own answer:

What was your idea of what the minimum OK speed would be?
I figure you must have thought something, even if not confidently.

I did have thoughts. I was expecting responses like "no slower than 100" or "this movement needs to rock along at high speed." I thought everyone would be saying, you know, don't go under 100 or the judges will kill you. Also, I love most aspects of the Curzon performance, so I had hoped to emulate him right down to his metronome settings. The other thing is that I hate when my YouTube postings are always longer than the pros -- witness my last upload to Members Recordings, a performance, which I thought would be around 5:50 and was in fact more than 6 minutes.

I guess what I'm saying is that expected all those things, but was hoping for what you said. And now I think I have a good solution. I tried the Brahms today at 88 and coped without too many wrong notes. The really interesting thing was that, having started at that tempo, I tended to slow down in the easier bits. So now my question has evolved to "how much tempo variation is permissible or justifiable in Brahms concerto I / 3? In particular, should that second subject with the staccato LH part be lyrical or dynamic? (How much pedal??). I guess it can be both, but tempo-wise I don't know of any performance other than Fleischers's that moves with the same kinetic energy as the opening section.


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Orange Soda King] #2738134
05/20/18 02:38 AM
05/20/18 02:38 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by Orange Soda King
My personal opinion: 88 is fine, but I personally wouldn't play it slower than that.

I agree. Sorry, +1


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2738145
05/20/18 04:10 AM
05/20/18 04:10 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by SiFi
....having started at that tempo, I tended to slow down in the easier bits. So now my question has evolved to "how much tempo variation is permissible or justifiable....

As much as your taste asks for (which I wouldn't say unless I knew that you have good taste) smile ......and as long as it doesn't seem like you're slowing down in the HARDER bits!!

Quote
....In particular, should that second subject with the staccato LH part be lyrical or dynamic?

Yes. ha

Quote
(How much pedal??).

Whichever. grin

Quote
I guess it can be both....

Yeah, as long as you don't play it too much one way the first time and the other way the second time. ha

Quote
....I don't know of any performance other than Fleischers's that moves with the same kinetic energy as the opening section.

.....and maybe you won't want to!

He sounds to me like he might have had too much coffee. grin

(Maybe I'm just mad at him because the one time I got a review in the NY Times, it was the same day that Fleisher decided to make his "2-handed return," which got put on the front page and stole whatever thunder I mighta had!
Or actually maybe it helped because maybe it sold more copies of that paper to piano people....)

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2738173
05/20/18 08:35 AM
05/20/18 08:35 AM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 591
N
newport Offline
500 Post Club Member
newport  Offline
500 Post Club Member
N
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 591
Originally Posted by SiFi

I am currently doing regimented (for me) practice at MM quarter = 88. Here are the performance speeds I've clocked for some of our favorite artists:

Fleischer (1998) - 104
Zimmerman (1983) - 90
Kissin (2008) - 102
Sokolov (?) - 104/108/112
Katchen (1961) - 104
Grimaud (2014) 100/102 (awful performance IMO)
Rubinstein (1954) - 100/102
Ashkenazy (?) - 96/102
Brendel (1974) - 98
Wang (that would by Yuja!!!) (2017) - 100 (lovely performance IMO)
Curzon (?) - 98



I found a Grimaud video published in 2014 but performed in 2005 and wondered if it's the one you meant.


Czerny Variations on a theme by Rode - La Ricordanza
Schubert Drei Klavierstücke, D. 946 No. 2

John
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2738280
05/20/18 05:28 PM
05/20/18 05:28 PM
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 924
Ohio
M
MikeN Offline
500 Post Club Member
MikeN  Offline
500 Post Club Member
M
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 924
Ohio
Originally Posted by SiFi
BTW, here's a thing I would have asked you right up top, if not that I was so interested to find my own answer:

I did have thoughts. I was expecting responses like "no slower than 100" or "this movement needs to rock along at high speed." I thought everyone would be saying, you know, don't go under 100 or the judges will kill you. Also, I love most aspects of the Curzon performance, so I had hoped to emulate him right down to his metronome settings. The other thing is that I hate when my YouTube postings are always longer than the pros -- witness my last upload to Members Recordings, a performance, which I thought would be around 5:50 and was in fact more than 6 minutes.


How interesting to hear your thoughts about the Balakirev as I’m listening...

When you started, I did think, “Well this is a bit on the slower side than I’m use to.” Then, I heard you shape the main theme and I thought, “Well, that doesn’t matter. There’s a large enough tonal pallet here that this will be plenty enjoyable.” grin

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2738793
05/23/18 12:07 AM
05/23/18 12:07 AM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 525
Bristol, UK
T
timmyab Offline
500 Post Club Member
timmyab  Offline
500 Post Club Member
T
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 525
Bristol, UK
I did some work on this concerto a few years ago and came to the conclusion that the slowest tempo you could get away with for the third movement was around about 85. Actually I'd be struggling at half that speed in places, but if the gods suddenly blessed me with a virtuoso technique this is the concerto that I'd be taking to the royal albert hall. Coincidently I have been working on the adagio for the last few weeks which I can now more or less play.

I've got a soft spot for the Zimmerman recording, it was the first one I owned and fell in love with the concerto listening to it. I agree that the Curson/Szell recording is outstanding.
Some artists do drop down into the 80s including the famous Gilels/Jochum recording I think. If I had the required technique I would choose to play it a bit faster, probably about 100 although the Gilels certainly sounds beautifully clean and magestic at the slower tempo.

Last edited by timmyab; 05/23/18 12:08 AM.
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2738811
05/23/18 02:05 AM
05/23/18 02:05 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Just thought I'd add a P.S. to this earlier post:

Originally Posted by Mark_C
P.S. I remember so well the first time I heard the piece. It was in your current hometown. I was in Washington for a meeting, had a free evening and was delighted to see that the National Symphony was in town and that the program included a Brahms Concerto. I wasn't familiar with either one at the time.
It was a great, great performance, Bruno Leonardo Gelber the pianist. I was completely bowled over, especially by this movement.....

A year later -- it was exactly a year -- I was in Washington again, for a similar meeting -- and, miracle of miracles, there was a Symphony concert again, and they were doing Brahms' second Concerto, again with Gelber as the pianist. While I had never heard either Brahms concerto a year ago, by now I had listened to both of them dozens of times on LP's, was in love with both, and was beyond thrilled at my great fortune that I happened to be back there to hear them do the second one.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: MikeN] #2739250
05/25/18 01:23 AM
05/25/18 01:23 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by MikeN

How interesting to hear your thoughts about the Balakirev as I’m listening...

When you started, I did think, “Well this is a bit on the slower side than I’m use to.” Then, I heard you shape the main theme and I thought, “Well, that doesn’t matter. There’s a large enough tonal pallet here that this will be plenty enjoyable.” grin

You are awfully kind. Thank you! It is a lovely piece.

Last edited by SiFi; 05/25/18 01:25 AM.

SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2739254
05/25/18 02:20 AM
05/25/18 02:20 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
To everyone who has commented on this thread: thank you. I have learnt a lot about how best to deal with the tempo issue. Looks like I'll be going at between 88 and 94 and keeping it consistent through the movement until the tempo changes as required by the composer towards the end.

I have a couple of other insights and issues I'd like to raise, given that we're already talking as it were.

1. The typically Brahmsian (typically nasty, technically) variant on the transitional passage starting at bar 311 has a Leichiere Ausfuehrueng alternative in the Peters piano score. I devised a completely different "cheat" way of playing this passage in its original form that was quite complicated but worked up until the point where the figure starts to ascend. My teacher thought I was playing the Peters ossia, which of course meant that my workaround wasn't working properly. ha I've since figured out a solution that works. It's even more complicated than my original "cheat", but whatever. Anyone interested, PM me. But if anyone has a failsafe way to play this passage, respond to this post, per favore.

2. The broken octaves with the big leaps beginning on the upbeat to bar 360 present the most difficult technical challenges of the movement. There are no cheats for this. It's especially important to nail it because everyone (viz. jury) knows it's, like, a decision point. If the person can play this bit, we can all relax. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to perfect this passage? I've tried using the left hand as the anchor but that just results in inappropriate accents on the bass A. Using the phrasing and pedal indications definitely helps. But I still have too many misses in this section. You can't slow down because the orchestra is playing. So, yeah.

3. The "second subject" that first appears in bar 66: What do you all think about LH articulation, pedaling, accentuation (bass notes!), and volume throughout this passage and the recap? The recap (b. 348) is marked "con passione" forte, but how big should one play this? The lead in is so powerful that I just want to let it rip, but that's not what's codified in the score. (What a glorious Brahms moment though!)

4. In bar 354, should one use the 4th or third finger on the 3rd 16th note at the bottom of the 6th chord in the left hand? ha I say haha, but it's actually not a funny question.

Thanks everyone. I love you all.





SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2739260
05/25/18 03:22 AM
05/25/18 03:22 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
(It would probably help some of us if you also gave the timings of those places on some selected video of the movement. Even for people who have the scores, not all scores give measure numbers.)

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2739269
05/25/18 03:53 AM
05/25/18 03:53 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Anyway, since my score does give them... grin

About that fingering in m.354: I don't get why this one is any more dilemma-ic than the rest of them. Why do you wonder about using anything but '3'?

Actually I can see a reason, but only 1, and I don't think it's a good reason.
Using 4 rather than 3 puts the hand into a 'healthier' position, but only slightly and only very momentarily, and anyway I don't see the problem about using 3, which doesn't give a particularly unhealthy position anyway.


About those broken octaves (beginning at end of m.359): I'm surprised you're singling this out too. While it's impossible for me to really know how it would be for me without working seriously on the movement, just from a play-through this seems like one of the less problematic parts. The only aspects that seem challenging are the upward leaps, which I guess is exactly what you're talking about, and maybe I'm terribly mistaken but those don't seem like they'd be any problem at all. Maybe it's because long ago I learned sort of a 'trick' for both-hands-leaping-at-the-same-time passages from Seymour Bernstein, although I don't know how much of a trick it is and never regarded it as one, because I figured it was a common approach; maybe it isn't.

In fact maybe it's much the same as what you mean when you talk about using one hand as the "anchor."

Here it is:
Two things are involved, the second of them being perhaps the "anchor" thing.

(1) Put your eyes (and head) to where you'll be leaping while you're still playing the previous note; in fact actually, a split second before playing the previous note, since you're solidly down there well before playing the note; no need to keep looking there the whole time.

And then:

(2) Don't try to look at both hands' destinations at the same time; pick one to look at first, and in fact start moving that hand first; don't be leaping both hands at exactly the same time. The difference between them is just a tiny fraction of a second but it's important. And, in shifting the gaze from each spot to the next, keep using that thing I said before about not waiting fully till your hand gets to the destination before looking to the next spot; the "looking" to each next spot is always slightly before getting to the previous spot.

I wonder if maybe when you say "anchor" you're talking about which hand leaps up first, and therefore which next spot you look at first. Not that the 'linguistics' of the word suggests that -- it more suggests something about the low notes before the upward leap -- but still I'm wondering if you mean what I'm talking about.

As to which hand to look/leap first, I think it could be either. I found myself doing left-hand-first because that way, the right hand, which is the one I want to emphasize more (presumably everyone does), is more in motion at the time of attack, which makes a stronger attack sort of automatic.

Another thing: If you use this approach, it means that one hand arrives at the upward leap a little before it plays the note. Seymour has a funny thing that he says about such arrivals: It's like how it was all the time in the army, "Hurry up and wait." grin
I find it a useful (and tension easing) internal message for places like that. Now and then while practicing it, I'd be smiling and telling my left hand to hurry up (to get up there) and wait (before hitting the note).
It makes the accuracy of the arrival very secure, and lets you concentrate fully on the arrival of the hand that's leaping later.


About that second subject, I'm standing pat with what I said before: Whatever. smile
To taste.
And you have good taste!!

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2739271
05/25/18 04:03 AM
05/25/18 04:03 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
That is really, really interesting advice on the octaves/broken octaves section. As it happens, I am doing the "hurry up and wait" thing with the left hand, though oddly enough, that usually results in me hitting the right hand stuff accurately and flubbing the left hand. For some reason the LH loses its orientation as the right hand tries to find those high notes and usually finds them.

Anyway, good stuff. This is why I love PianistCorner.


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2739272
05/25/18 04:05 AM
05/25/18 04:05 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by SiFi
...the LH loses its orientation as the right hand tries to find those high notes and usually finds them.

Well, that means either the hand isn't really arriving there, or isn't really waiting!

BTW, what indeed is the issue about the fingering in 354?

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2739274
05/25/18 04:38 AM
05/25/18 04:38 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by Mark_C
About that second subject...

As I said, do it your way!

And y'know, "our way" can differ at different times, or change.




It can vary by the season of our life.
Or of our day.

I think I'd do that Brahms theme more like the younger Sinatra when I was young, and more like the older Sinatra when I'm older.
Although I had some older seasons when I was younger, and I imagine I'll have some younger seasons when I'm older. smile

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2739319
05/25/18 08:08 AM
05/25/18 08:08 AM
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 110
K
kbrod1 Offline
Full Member
kbrod1  Offline
Full Member
K
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 110
Can't argue with the Chairman of the Board.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: kbrod1] #2739765
05/27/18 02:49 AM
05/27/18 02:49 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by kbrod1
Can't argue with the Chairman of the Board.

I know. That would be wrong!

So would the chairman have preferred the first or the second of these randomly recorded samples of the B subject? I'm talking about my original question regarding the B theme, specifically regarding LH articulation and texture. (1) This is pretty close to the score (aside from the mistakes); hardly any pedal, restrained dynamcs. (2) More rubato, more passion, more pedal. More romantic, emotional. But less true to the score. (And please forgive the big thump at the end. That was a mistake.). Maybe this con passionato version is more how one should perform the passage in the final B section.

Anyway, I hear in advance the comments that are likely to come from certain sources. For example, "You must find a happy medium." "Somewhere between the two." That's all fine, but I would be really interested to hear a recommendation that is not not both of them. Leaving aside the fact that this interpretation is still in the embryonic stage, which of them represents a better way forward in the mind hive opinion?

Ciao







SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2739775
05/27/18 04:10 AM
05/27/18 04:10 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Main thing: You're doing great.

Which way: I like the second way 100x more, but I'm not sure if it's that I really prefer your playing it that way or that I happen to like the way you did it 'that way' in this performance more than how you did it the other way.
BTW that doesn't mean you didn't also play well when you were doing the first way.

It's very interesting that you're so well able to do it both ways, but indeed I think that in this particular sit-down you "sold" the 2nd way much better. I suspect that if you committed yourself to the 1st way and had it solely in mind when you sat down to play, you'd 'sell' it better than you did here. That doesn't mean I think you should necessarily decide well in advance which way to go. As long as you know what your approach will be when you're playing the movement and have it firmly in mind, I think it will be fine -- either way.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2739779
05/27/18 04:40 AM
05/27/18 04:40 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by Mark_C
Main thing: You're doing great.

Which way: I like the second way 100x more, but I'm not sure if it's that I really prefer your playing it that way or that I happen to like the way you did it 'that way' in this performance more than how you did it the other way.
BTW that doesn't mean you didn't also play well when you were doing the first way.

It's very interesting that you're so well able to do it both ways, but indeed I think that in this particular sit-down you "sold" the 2nd way much better. I suspect that if you committed yourself to the 1st way and had it solely in mind when you sat down to play, you'd 'sell' it better than you did here. That doesn't mean I think you should necessarily decide well in advance which way to go. As long as you know what your approach will be when you're playing the movement and have it firmly in mind, I think it will be fine -- either way.

OMG, what do I do now? Thank you, I think. Mainly, thank you for not saying "something in between". What's the quote? ?There is no first or second way, only do."

Right now I'm thinking possibly first way for B1 and second way for B2. In the latter case, Brahms specifically indicates "con passione". As Trump is fond of saying, we'll see what happens.


SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2739853
05/27/18 01:08 PM
05/27/18 01:08 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by SiFi
Right now I'm thinking possibly first way for B1 and second way for B2.

I was going to say "Yecchhh" to that, before I saw the next thing....

Quote
In the latter case, Brahms specifically indicates "con passione."

Really? And not the first time?
Huh.

BTW, here's something else that I was thinking of saying before but I didn't want to make it too complicated.
You said not to say "Something in between." Actually it sounds to me like the 'first way' that you played it was sort of "in between." I mean, you did it in a way that we knew what you were doing, but to me it sounded as though you might have been having 'the second way' in your mind or body. Maybe because you were already thinking 'the second way' in anticipation, maybe because you had just practiced 'the second way' before starting that take (or maybe because you were coming from a prior take, which meant you had just played the second way). Or maybe I'm just wrong. ha

Anyway, as I said up there, I think you happened to do the second way much better in the recording. I don't think that means anything about how you should do it.

So, how is this helpful??
It tells you that you can do whatever, as long as you know what you're doing. smile

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2739896
05/27/18 03:44 PM
05/27/18 03:44 PM
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 21,272
Victoria, BC
BruceD Offline
Gold Subscriber
BruceD  Offline
Gold Subscriber
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 21,272
Victoria, BC
I think that they are both viable interpretations of the section in question. Perhaps one thing to consider is whether one works better than the other with respect to what is going on in the orchestra (not much from my two-piano score) and how much support (or lack thereof) comes from the orchestral accompaniment.

Regards,


BruceD
- - - - -
Estonia 190
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: BruceD] #2739903
05/27/18 04:01 PM
05/27/18 04:01 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by BruceD
I think that they are both viable interpretations of the section in question. Perhaps one thing to consider is whether one works better than the other with respect to what is going on in the orchestra (not much from my two-piano score) and how much support (or lack thereof) comes from the orchestral accompaniment.

Yes -- always important to consider. (But) regarding this passage, I think the conductor and orchestra can adjust fine to either way -- but they have to know how the pianist will be viewing it each time the passage will be coming in.

Well actually they don't "have to" and I'm sure sometimes they don't. grin and that's not too good.
But provided they do....

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2742170
06/04/18 09:25 PM
06/04/18 09:25 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 2
notPaoloFazioli Offline
Junior Member
notPaoloFazioli  Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by SiFi
Originally Posted by kbrod1
Can't argue with the Chairman of the Board.

I know. That would be wrong!

So would the chairman have preferred the first or the second of these randomly recorded samples of the B subject? I'm talking about my original question regarding the B theme, specifically regarding LH articulation and texture. (1) This is pretty close to the score (aside from the mistakes); hardly any pedal, restrained dynamcs. (2) More rubato, more passion, more pedal. More romantic, emotional. But less true to the score. (And please forgive the big thump at the end. That was a mistake.). Maybe this con passionato version is more how one should perform the passage in the final B section.

Anyway, I hear in advance the comments that are likely to come from certain sources. For example, "You must find a happy medium." "Somewhere between the two." That's all fine, but I would be really interested to hear a recommendation that is not not both of them. Leaving aside the fact that this interpretation is still in the embryonic stage, which of them represents a better way forward in the mind hive opinion?

Ciao







Take this with a grain of salt-- I'm seventeen-- but as someone who plays this concerto and has a particular love for Brahms, I vastly prefer the first sample. Think about it: in that B section, your only accompaniment comes from pizzicato cellos. I play the left hand here as precisely and staccato as I can; it therefore blends with the cello accompaniment and contrasts with the legato, songlike right hand. Also, regarding pedal in early Brahms, less is almost always better. This piece was written from 1854-1859. A piano back then would not have had nearly the same sustaining capability as one made in the 1900s, so in my opinion, keep pedal usage to a minimum. Personally, I play the very opening of the third movement (the first statement of the rondo theme) without pedal!


"The piano is an orchestra with 88... things, you know" -Vladimir Horowitz
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: notPaoloFazioli] #2742173
06/04/18 09:41 PM
06/04/18 09:41 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by notPaoloFazioli
Take this with a grain of salt-- I'm seventeen-- but as someone who plays this concerto and has a particular love for Brahms, I vastly prefer the first sample. Think about it: in that B section, your only accompaniment comes from pizzicato cellos. I play the left hand here as precisely and staccato as I can; it therefore blends with the cello accompaniment and contrasts with the legato, songlike right hand. Also, regarding pedal in early Brahms, less is almost always better. This piece was written from 1854-1859. A piano back then would not have had nearly the same sustaining capability as one made in the 1900s, so in my opinion, keep pedal usage to a minimum. Personally, I play the very opening of the third movement (the first statement of the rondo theme) without pedal!

Good points -- but it sounds to me like you're talking just in the abstract -- i.e. in a general way about how you regard the piece -- rather than with reference to him and how he played them.

Since he asked about it, it means he personally believes and feels it can be done either way. It sounds like you're basically just disagreeing with that, which is fine -- but it didn't seem like that's the main kind of thing he was looking for. In such a situation, unless I think that the idea of doing it one of the ways is way way off (and I think that's clearly not the case here; either way is justifiable), I try to look at it in terms of that particular person and what he's doing.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2742174
06/04/18 09:50 PM
06/04/18 09:50 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 2
notPaoloFazioli Offline
Junior Member
notPaoloFazioli  Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by Mark_C
Originally Posted by notPaoloFazioli
Take this with a grain of salt-- I'm seventeen-- but as someone who plays this concerto and has a particular love for Brahms, I vastly prefer the first sample. Think about it: in that B section, your only accompaniment comes from pizzicato cellos. I play the left hand here as precisely and staccato as I can; it therefore blends with the cello accompaniment and contrasts with the legato, songlike right hand. Also, regarding pedal in early Brahms, less is almost always better. This piece was written from 1854-1859. A piano back then would not have had nearly the same sustaining capability as one made in the 1900s, so in my opinion, keep pedal usage to a minimum. Personally, I play the very opening of the third movement (the first statement of the rondo theme) without pedal!

Good points -- but it sounds to me like you're talking just in the abstract -- i.e. in a general way about how you regard the piece -- rather than with reference to him and how he played them.

Since he asked about it, it means he personally believes and feels it can be done either way. It sounds like you're basically just disagreeing with that, which is fine -- but it didn't seem like that's the main kind of thing he was looking for. In such a situation, unless I think that the idea of doing it one of the ways is way way off (and I think that's clearly not the case here; either way is justifiable), I try to look at it in terms of that particular person and what he's doing.


You're quite right! I guess, to revise what I said, it's important to keep things such as the accompaniment and the capabilities of historical instruments in mind when considering how to play it.


"The piano is an orchestra with 88... things, you know" -Vladimir Horowitz
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2742175
06/04/18 09:52 PM
06/04/18 09:52 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
BTW, about the pizzicato: Funny you should mention about that, because:
I was recently thinking about the different ways that two different violinists did a pizzicato passage in a little orchestra that I was in (long time ago), when they were first-chairs. One of them did the pizzicato in what we might call the usual way. The other, who was the usual first-chair and who was more advanced (the other one was first-chair just for a couple of rehearsals while the main guy was out), did it in a mellower kind of way (really!) and so the rest of the strings followed in kind.

The reason I've remembered it (for 50 years!!) grin is because of how striking it was -- not just that there was such a difference between the two but that it involved a "mellow" approach to pizzicato.
Pizzicato doesn't necessarily mean just one way.
And, BTW, this is a great example of why, as I said before, it would be important for the conductor and players to know how the pianist is going to be approaching the section.

P.S. Just saw your answer to the other post.
Nice job! -- and just want to say, that's one of the great things about this site. In all too many places on the net (not to mention in real life) grin there's little real give-and-take. Somebody says something, somebody else says something else, and if they disagree, they just keep disagreeing more and more, sometimes hardly listening to each other, and if it's on youtube, inside of 5 minutes it can degenerate into 4-letter words.
I'm glad this ain't youtube. ha

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2742792
06/07/18 11:23 AM
06/07/18 11:23 AM
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 49
Colorado, USA
T
T Cord Offline
Full Member
T Cord  Offline
Full Member
T
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 49
Colorado, USA
Gould has already been mentioned as having a really slow broad tempo and taking a lot of liberties with this piece, but I just started reading a book and this fact was mentioned along with a speech Berstein made which reminded me that I thought I read a thread about this on the PW forums!

In case other members haven't heard about this. Here's a link to the speech and performance.



As to the OP's original question, I do think that the slow tempo gets some getting use to, but it's still a convincing performance. However, I haven't listened to this piece more than once or maybe twice so for a more experienced listener who has a better idea of this piece it would sound more odd. Anyway Thanks Si-Fi for sharing your progress on the piece. Really enjoy seeing these type of posts!

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2742834
06/07/18 01:42 PM
06/07/18 01:42 PM
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 93
deerfield Offline
Full Member
deerfield  Offline
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 93
GG has played this concerto with other orchestras using a faster (“normal”) tempo which is probably not so well known:

https://youtu.be/1p-1hKY-ol0

https://youtu.be/CiIzsRh5fzE

He sounds fabulous, no problems with his “technique” here lol. I think the slower tempo with Bernstein has its own merits. Note that the Bernstein recording with Krystian Zimerman is only a tad faster, and Bernstein in his later years often adopted slower tempos in his conducting (a la Gould perhaps?).


The moment one feels that the finger must sing, it becomes strong.
-Horowitz
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2742935
06/08/18 01:19 AM
06/08/18 01:19 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
SiFi Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
SiFi  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,626
Washington, DC
Originally Posted by Mark_C
Originally Posted by notPaoloFazioli
Take this with a grain of salt-- I'm seventeen-- but as someone who plays this concerto and has a particular love for Brahms, I vastly prefer the first sample. Think about it: in that B section, your only accompaniment comes from pizzicato cellos. I play the left hand here as precisely and staccato as I can; it therefore blends with the cello accompaniment and contrasts with the legato, songlike right hand. Also, regarding pedal in early Brahms, less is almost always better. This piece was written from 1854-1859. A piano back then would not have had nearly the same sustaining capability as one made in the 1900s, so in my opinion, keep pedal usage to a minimum. Personally, I play the very opening of the third movement (the first statement of the rondo theme) without pedal!

Good points -- but it sounds to me like you're talking just in the abstract -- i.e. in a general way about how you regard the piece -- rather than with reference to him and how he played them.

Since he asked about it, it means he personally believes and feels it can be done either way. It sounds like you're basically just disagreeing with that, which is fine -- but it didn't seem like that's the main kind of thing he was looking for. In such a situation, unless I think that the idea of doing it one of the ways is way way off (and I think that's clearly not the case here; either way is justifiable), I try to look at it in terms of that particular person and what he's doing.

First of all, notPaolo: Thank you for expressing your opinion, which I very much respect given that it (1) comports with the opinion of my teacher and (2) is based on your own personal experience and understanding of the music. You are absolutely right that a "pure" interpretation would render the music as written, i.e. staccato LH with no pedal and fingered legato in the RH. Very difficult to pull off, as you obviously already know, but a fully justifiable approach or, possibly, the only justifiable approach. The main point I would make about this choice, if that's the right word, is that it really only works with a rather brisk tempo, like Fleischer's or Sokolov's. And because of that, the passage becomes orders of magnitude more difficult because of the requisite LH acrobatics. My teacher was adamant about the need for note-perfect technical accuracy if the "clean" version of this passage is to succeed. (Interesting how this has come all the way back around to tempo again.)

Second of all, Mark: Thank you for your opinion also. And for your insights. You read between the lines, as it were, as well as anyone I know. Yes, I am more naturally inclined towards the second version and, yes, I was envisaging the second version when I played the first (how the fudge could you have known that????). However, I always practice version 1, simply because it's more "correct", at least with regard to the score. I suppose, given that this is Brahms, one could interpret the staccatos as implied portato, but there are no phrase markings whatsoever in the LH. I don't think there's any doubt at all about what Brahms intended here, and therefore I think notPaolo has it right. Version 1 is it . . .

. . . except I'm not Leon Fleischer or Yuja Wang and I'm not going to be performing this movement at quarter note = 108. Furthermore, I don't want the LH here to sound exactly like the LH in the first theme, which is marked "non legato"; I play the entire opening with no sustaining pedal, same as notPaolo, because that's the only way you can distinguish the non legato LH part from the actual staccatos in the RH part. But that LH part is significant line; in the B theme it really is not. In fact, the only quasi-melodic elements in the LH of the second theme are in the bass, which makes the argument for (discreet) pedaling even stronger. And finally, before I pass out from all this thinking, there's that "con passione" marking when the theme is reprised. The articulation is supposedly, actually explicitly, the same, but I think it is impossible to play the passage "with passion" if you don't use any pedal at all. And I don't think the composer wanted this recap to sound different in kind from the first statement. Ergo, I'm probably going with an approximation to version 2, but with very careful pedaling and clean, crisp staccato in the LH so the jury can both see and hear how much respect I am according to the musical score.

This has been hugely helpful for me, so thank you to everyone who has offered opinions. I'll try to respond to some of the other posts in due course. In the meantime, here is my favorite interpretation of the concerto, a performance by Clifford Curzon, who was a great friend of my great aunt Lilian (nothing I can do about the jingle with the "greats' there). The third movement starts at 35.02. Notice how he does version 2 plus some!



SRF
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2743061
06/08/18 03:15 PM
06/08/18 03:15 PM
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 178
R
Roshan Kakiya Offline
Full Member
Roshan Kakiya  Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 178
Originally Posted by SiFi
I am cynically wondering what's the slowest tempo (equals least work) I can get away with.


I think Glenn Gould's performance of Brahms' Piano Concerto No. 1 on April 6th, 1962 should be examined closely in order to determine, to some extent, the slowest tempo a performer can get away with.

Gould was, unfortunately, criticised for his tempo which was apparently considered too slow:

Quote
“The Gould boy played the Brahms D Minor Concerto slower than the way we used to practice it. (And between you, me and the corner lamppost, Ossip, maybe the reason he plays it so slow is maybe his technique is not so good.)”


Source: https://www.wnyc.org/story/battling-over-brahms/

Quote
In early 1962 Gould had called Bernstein from Toronto, excitedly reporting that he’d struck upon an unconventional take on the concerto, with glacially slow tempos in the first and second movements.


Source: https://nyphil.org/~/media/pdfs/program-notes/1718/Brahms-Piano-Concerto-No-1.pdf?la=en

Originally Posted by SiFi
Fleischer (1998) - 104
Zimmerman (1983) - 90
Kissin (2008) - 102
Sokolov (?) - 104/108/112
Katchen (1961) - 104
Grimaud (2014) 100/102 (awful performance IMO)
Rubinstein (1954) - 100/102
Ashkenazy (?) - 96/102
Brendel (1974) - 98
Wang (that would by Yuja!!!) (2017) - 100 (lovely performance IMO)
Curzon (?) - 98


Thank you for providing these figures.

Average lowest tempo = (104+90+102+104+104+100+100+96+98+100+98)/11 = 1096/11 = 100.

Average tempo based on figures less than 100 = (90+96+98+98)/4 = 382/4 = 96.

Therefore, I think 96 is likely to be a safe tempo. However, my answer is only one answer among many so it may not be the best answer. I hope the information I have provided is useful.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: SiFi] #2743088
06/08/18 04:17 PM
06/08/18 04:17 PM
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 21,272
Victoria, BC
BruceD Offline
Gold Subscriber
BruceD  Offline
Gold Subscriber
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 21,272
Victoria, BC
[Irrelevant observation?]

When it comes to trying to find an "ideal" tempo for a work, or a movement of a work, I (personally) would not rely too heavily on what others do - except as a point of information and comparison. I occasionally, but with respect, disagree with tempi that my teacher sometimes suggests, although she is much more aware, informed and trained than I shall ever be.

Many works, as we become more and more familiar with them through study, it seems to me, set their own tempo in relation to our concept of them, and it is up to us to be convincing in what tempo we feel is "right", i.e. right for us.

I only mention this now because I have recently been bringing up to performance level a work whose tempi by some of the "greats," by comparison to what I feel, I simply cannot agree with. While they are doubtless much greater artists than I, I still have to go with what I feel rather than what their performances might tell me to do.

Regards,


BruceD
- - - - -
Estonia 190
Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: BruceD] #2743094
06/08/18 04:50 PM
06/08/18 04:50 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Mark_C Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Mark_C  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 21,906
New York
Originally Posted by BruceD
When it comes to trying to find an "ideal" tempo for a work, or a movement of a work, I (personally) would not rely too heavily on what others do - except as a point of information and comparison.....

Agree completely.
Every player and every performance needs be heard (and judged, if you will) smile on its own terms.
And I'm confident that that's what the very great majority of listeners do. They hear the music -- and if it's music, it's music, and if they like it, they like it. They don't go "But so-and-so plays it faster" (or slower, or whatever).
It's not necessarily this way in competitions, or in a reviewer's ear and pen, but not many of us have to worry about that.

I mean, SiFi is. ha
But even when it comes to competitions and reviews and so on -- even on those -- I think that the great majority of us, if not all, are better off approaching it as you're saying rather than worrying a whole lot about other people's tempos. At least in the amateur competitions, quite uniformly the players are rewarded for making musical sense within themselves, whatever that may be, and nonrewarded for seemingly trying to stretch themselves to something that's not in technical or musical tune with themselves.

When I went to see what I thought might be the possible range of tempo for this movement, I didn't check anyone's performance. I grabbed the score and sat down and tried it, in various ways, to see what I thought, in my little opinion, grin might very plausibly work.

Re: Tempo For Brahms Piano Concerto I / 3 [Re: Mark_C] #2743107
06/08/18 06:15 PM
06/08/18 06:15 PM
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 178
R
Roshan Kakiya Offline
Full Member
Roshan Kakiya  Offline
Full Member
R
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 178
Originally Posted by BruceD
I have recently been bringing up to performance level a work whose tempi by some of the "greats," by comparison to what I feel, I simply cannot agree with. While they are doubtless much greater artists than I, I still have to go with what I feel rather than what their performances might tell me to do.


Originally Posted by Mark_C
When I went to see what I thought might be the possible range of tempo for this movement, I didn't check anyone's performance. I grabbed the score and sat down and tried it, in various ways, to see what I thought, in my little opinion, grin might very plausibly work.


Sound advice. thumb

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Brendan, Kreisler 

New Topics - Multiple Forums
Kawai RX6 heavy action
by Radio.Octave. 06/23/18 03:50 PM
Accident-prone accidentals in printed music
by FrankCox. 06/23/18 02:01 PM
Reyburn Grand Cyberhammer
by Miguel Rey. 06/23/18 12:37 PM
Should I say goodbye?
by eyeluvlucy. 06/23/18 11:48 AM
(ad)
Pianoteq
PianoTeq Steingraeber
(125ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
Forum Statistics
Forums40
Topics186,108
Posts2,726,909
Members90,435
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
(ad)
Accu-Tuner
Sanderson Accu-Tuner
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers


 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter |


copyright 1997 - 2018 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1