Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Best way to play muddy LH octaves in Brahms Rhapsody

I'm working on the Brahms Rhapsody in G minor (Op 79 no. 2) and there's several places where the melody is carried in LH octaves in the lower register. This can get muddy once you add pedaling & dynamics. My teacher said that the best way to bring the melody out is to emphasize the higher note of the LH octave and slightly back off the lower one. I've been practicing this and I'm curious if its better to extend the LH thumb downwards for the high note or should I slightly rotate the wrist towards the thumb (and away from the 5th finger) ?

Or am I just splitting hairs…?

I think you should worry more about playing the RH softer those passages.

Yes I get that & have been concentrating on it. The point behind my question is more technical than musical. Is there a conventional wisdom on how this is usually approached ?

Agree with pianoloverus, and add to that don't rush ;^) But to your point, either technique will work. Use the one that you can do with the least tension.

Extending the LH thumb is basically raising the wrist slightly and/or giving a "higher/stronger bridge" across the knuckles.

Rotating toward the thumb involves wrist rotation, or adduction, or both.

In either higher bridge or wrist rotation technique, you might also try adduction, which is bending the wrist toward the 5th finger in the flat plane. This may seem contrary if you haven't experimented with it, but you can rotate the wrist towards the thumb while bending the wrist away from the thumb. To use a cultural reference, the wrist rotation motion is like the gesture for "50/50" or "mezzo mezzo" or "maybe/maybe not." The adduction is more like a gesture for "no way". You may find that if you do the adduction you won't need the wrist rotation, or vice versa. And the adduction can be combined with raised wrist or high bridge.

If you use the high bridge, you may be more inclined to use full arm motion for each note. In any case it is possible to play octaves by moving the hand up and down from the wrist only (like flapping or waving the hand), if you can do it with loose forearm muscles.

You may also have accuracy issues with the larger leaps. There are additional things to add if that occurs.

Maybe try a variety of combinations of the above to see what suits you best. Those octaves aren't tiring once you find the best approach.

Hope that helps!

To be honest, I'd usually voice the lower note in Brahms. The collossal separation between the lowest and highest (often with few notes in between) is often extremely pronounced in Brahms and I prefer to make the most of it- even in quieter writing. Actually, perhaps even especially in quieter passages. What other composer writes this way within piano dynamics? I don't think that low note is just filler. To bring it down too much makes it sound normal and less Brahmsian. However, I wouldn't say never go the other way. Try varying it. I've recently been working on this, as I have two students currently playing it. Initially, I was going to suggest what to bring out in this bit, but instead I decided to just show them how to draw attention to any part at will, and let them experiment. You should be able to voice any part as much as mezzo forte, while keeping the others almost silent. The more you exagerate this the better. Even if it sounds absurdly unbalanced, you will learn something from trying every combination.

If anything is muddy, you're either pedalling too late (EDIT I meant too early, sorry) or overloading the accompaniment. Even when played way too loudly, I wouldn't describe the results of the bass as causing 'muddy' sounds- unless there's a pedalling issue. You should be pedalling very cleanly and then listening to make sure the triplet notes are virtually as soft as can be, following the chord. Personally, I actually like to blur things a little in a few places. Again, if you keep the triplets out the way, you can use a heck of a lot of pedal for certain spots. Although, for that matter, in a few spots I deliberately bring out that weird triplet drone instead of either the bass or treble and let it start to blur plenty, like a tortured moaning sound. It's nice to have a lot of variety in the many repetetions. But definitely start with clean pedalling first and quiet triplets first, to get the hang of it. Listen for a totally dry, empty sound before the pedal goes down- especially in bare fifths.

I went through a process of experimentation along these lines, and I found in the end, that the result was best when I didn't try to think about which muscles I was moving and which way I was rotating things, and simply focused on hearing the top note much more strongly than the bottom note. Never underestimate the power of listening very carefully. By simply focusing on the end result, you might find your hands moving in a different way from any that you thought of before you started experimenting.

That being said, I find now that when I'm voicing to the top or bottom of an octave, I keep my wrist rotated a little towards the side I want emphasized, and I also bring the finger or thumb I want emphasized closer to the edge of the key, and move the other finger or thumb farther from the key edge (I don't know if this is why, but it makes sense that if you strike with the same amount of force on each finger, and one is substantially closer to the edge of the key, the power transferred to that hammer is going to be higher).

I was trying this a little just now and thinking about what was said here. I really don't think you need to do anything at all to make the thumb heard- in terms of your hand. Although I personally think of it in quite the opposite way, when I pedal cleanly the thumb is abundantly clear. Even though I'm thinking very much of keeping the thumb lighter and trying to make the low note project, there's no muddiness whatsoever and both notes of the octave cut through easily.

So, unless you're doing something very unusual, it's all about the pedalling. The thumb is naturally heavier- and being higher comes through the texture more easily even if you play both notes at equal volume. So you shouldn't really need to do anything for it to already have a big head start over the lower octave. But when you play into a depressed pedal, things naturally merge togther more and the overtones take out all the clarity- minimising the effect of even exaggerated voicing and requiring phenomenal extremes of touch to make things clear. So, just get in the habit of listening for a dry sound after each octave before the pedal goes back down.

Thanks to all for the advice. As I think of this in light of everyone's responses, I suspect now Nyiregyhazi may be onto something regarding my pedaling (mostly when I'm doing it). When I first realized I wasn't getting the sound I wanted, I directed most of my efforts towards quieting the RH. But it still sounded cloudy to my ears. Especially near the end where the RH plays in the registers below middle C. Now when my teacher made his suggestion, he also mentioned pedaling but at the time I didn't think that was a problem so I let it pass. And he never said anything about the RH being too loud. However I may revisit the pedaling in those sections.

Gracias !

I'd agree that this is a pedaling issue, too. Experiment with the pedal. Brahms has this unfathomable darkness that descends deep into the bass area. It should be relished rather than toned down too much. For bass clarity a concert grand probably more authentically mirrors Brahms' ideas than a tubby baby grand. You might want to give it a try on a longer grand with great bass clarity and then see what happens.
Brahms low notes fascinate me. They definitely push the possibilities of the piano.

Unfortunately I'm stuck with a Yamaha upright to practice on which is even weaker than a decent baby grand. Fortunately my lessons at least are on a Steinway "B" or sometimes a "D".

This is one of those things that's just plain difficult, and I think it requires everything: voicing of the LH, pedaling, balance between the hands, etc...

It's also one of those things that could change drastically depending on the instrument. On a smaller grand or upright, I could see voicing towards the bottom of the LH being useful (to help the LH maintain a full, rich sound.) On a 9-foot Steinway, voicing towards the bottom could muddy the sound, in which case your teacher's advice is very good.

Maybe I'm setting myself up for a fall here, but I'm studying this piece myself at the moment and the passage with the left hand octaves under the right hand triplets is marked 'sotto voce' for the left hand, and my teacher made a point of saying that was the composer's intent. I assume that's the bit we're talking about?

Or do you mean softer tone rather than volume? Cos I know it's a demon to try and keep both right hand parts singing...

I'm pretty sure pianoloverus was referring to volume. The challenge I was referring to was bringing out the LH melody clearly.

Agree 200%. The droning triplets throughout the piece really add another sonic layer that can get in the way of other things. Particularly the quieter passages. Also, very astute observation about the instrument. I struggle more to control the dynamics, coloring etc when I go to my lessons with him because of the more powerful low end on the Steinway B/D. And of course the stiffer action and different pedal feel come into play as well. My lessons are at the local Steinway store and my teacher is a Steinway artist so he probably doesn't spend much time playing anything other than larger Steinways. No doubt that influences his thinking on this.

Who is your teacher?

I have not got 'sotto voce' in my score. Is this from an editor? I'd be pretty hushed, but I think sotto voce might be going a bit far. There's a sombre speaking quality that I think is needed here. Anyone else noticed just how simialr the first two beats are to John Carpenter's score from Halloween? The bass and harmonies (including the semitone from A to B flat) are identical. I wouldn't be overly hushed. Certainly not una corda, at least. I think it should "boom" out quietly, if you understand my meaning.

I think it's a good point about the bigger sound of a grand. However, I would stress that, musically speaking, the lower note is more significant and more remarkable. So, while you may need to be careful not to make the lower note too loud, the lower note is the more unusual and the more interesting. I taught a student today on a grand where the bass was notably huge. However, I still found it vital to hear both parts. The bass was not actively "pushed" out. But neither did it work to seek to suppress it, in favour of a more deliberate thumb. The practicality may not necessarily mean going out of your way to bring out the lower note. However, the lower note is the interesting one. Try playing only the lower octave, then the upper- both with every other part except the doubled octave. The upper alone is very (well, relatively) normal. The lower alone is typically Brahmsian. However you view it, I would never lose sight of the lower. The ultimate goal lies in the resultant sound, not in which note you have to adjust for. Adjust to the piano, certainly- but remember how it's the resonance of the low note that makes it special. That doesn't mean it needs to be loud. You just need to hear the space between very low and very much higher. This sheer separation is one the primary factors that defines Brahms' piano sound. If that does not register to the listener it can sound like any old composer- not one with his own unique sound. Even if you voice the bottom hugely, it's only muddy if the pedal goes down too early. After all, the notes are very sparse. It's only the sheer lowness that makes it thick IF you play into an open pedal. Pedal later and you still get the "boom" of such a low note, but without pedalling away the actual sparseness of the texture. If you time the pedal right and voice the bottom just a fraction more than thumb (in terms of resultant balance- not in terms of the details of which needs more effort on the particular piano) you have the classic Brahms sound.

Also, I've realised that one rather effective voicing is to start by bringing out the top. But then it fades away- while the middle start very soft but then builds through to the foreground. By the time you get to beat three, if you project the middle A over the top D, you get a VERY interesting contrast agains the bass G. I wouldn't use this as the most normal way to go. But it's very nice to make something of that overwhelming tension in the 9th (later a 2nd). The murmur grows from almost nothing to defining the biggest harmonic tension of all in the bar. I'm definitely going to use this some of the time- rather than always be keeping the triplet out of the way. It's nice to move the interest around.

His name is Steve Swedish. Terrific player and teacher !

My Peters edition has mezza voce in the sections I'm referring to (beginning at measures 21, 54 & 106). The only sotto voce is in the triple pianissimo part starting at measure 66 but this doesn't have the LH melody.

Just to clarify, my teacher didn't mean that I should totally suppress the low note. I understood him to say that if I emphasize the higher one a bit more than the lower (along with proper pedaling) the melody come out more. I have a lesson with him tomorrow and if we have time I'll ask him to expand on the pedalling. I think now thats where my problem lies.