|
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
65 members (aphexdisklavier, bobrunyan, anotherscott, AaronSF, apianostudent, beeboss, brdwyguy, benkeys, 14 invisible),
2,188
guests, and
386
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,845
2000 Post Club Member
|
OP
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,845 |
Greetings,
Leaving the "bright vs dark" tone thread, for this side discussion of Chopin's music and the comparisons of old pianos and new ones. They have very different sounds.
I think the more pertinent question could be "What would Chopin play if given a choice between a 1850 Pleyel or a 2012 Steingraeber, or even the (now generic) sound of a stage-ready, happily lacquered-up Steinway D ?"
We listen to his music on a far wider variety of instruments than he ever did, and it is easy to distinguish between the modern piano, with its attack-defined clarity, and the earlier instruments that produced the note without such emphasis on the higher overtones.
I, as a technician, would like to hear from the pianists that play Chopin; which style of instrument do you think produces the most musical result when playing this music? The older delicate ones with their nuance and subtle charm, or the modern stage cannon that can really make a big show of it?
Just wondering... Regards,
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 313
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 313 |
Here are some quotes of Chopin about his preferences about pianos:
"Quand je suis mal disposé, disait Chopin, je joue sur un piano d'Erard et j'y trouve facilement un son fait. Mais quand je me sens en verve et assez fort pour trouver mon propre son à moi, il me faut un piano de Pleyel."
"All the same it is being said everywhere that I played too softly, or rather, too delicately for people used to the piano-pounding of the artists here."
"Chopin ne supportait pas le son trop intense du piano ; il l'appelait "un aboiement de chien"." (Mikuli, propos relaté par A. Michalowski)
"Chopin aimait spécialement les cottage pianos "Boudoir" que Broadwood fabriquait à cette époque [1848] ; il prenait plaisir à jouer sur ces instruments à deux cordes, mais de sonorité très douce." (Hipkins)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 313
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 313 |
I think that Paul (not Phil) McNulty sound of Pleyel is not really good....
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808 |
I, as a technician, would like to hear from the pianists that play Chopin; which style of instrument do you think produces the most musical result when playing this music? The older delicate ones with their nuance and subtle charm, or the modern stage cannon that can really make a big show of it?
Just wondering... Regards, I think most home pianos can't be correctly described as stage cannons. I have no problem playing my Mason BB very softly and my room is only 12'by 18'( but opening into other rooms). I don't think "delicate" necessarily implies more nuance and charm. I don't know whether pianos of Chopin's time would be suitable for large venues like Carnegie Hall and with the size orchestras commonly used today. I don't know how big the largest venues using those piano were but I'd guess they were generally smaller than the big concert halls of today. And I'd guess the orchestras were generally smaller also. I do know that my feeling about the tone of most of the older pianos posted in recent PW videos is not particularly positive. Whether that's just because I'm used to one kind of sound or because I'd really prefer the sound of the newer pianos if I had heard the older ones equally as often, I don't know.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808 |
Here are some quotes of Chopin about his preferences about pianos: "All the same it is being said everywhere that I played too softly, or rather, too delicately for people used to the piano-pounding of the artists here." I believe Chopin liked Liszt's playing and Liszt wasn't known for his delicate playing. Unless we know which "piano pounders" Chopin was referring to it's hard to evaluate his statement. He may have been referring to pianists of his time who would be called pounders even by today's standards.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,534
5000 Post Club Member
|
5000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,534 |
Leaving the "bright vs dark" tone thread, for this side discussion of Chopin's music and the comparisons of old pianos and new ones. They have very different sounds.
I think the more pertinent question could be "What would Chopin play if given a choice between a 1850 Pleyel or a 2012 Steingraeber, or even the (now generic) sound of a stage-ready, happily lacquered-up Steinway D ?"
We listen to his music on a far wider variety of instruments than he ever did, and it is easy to distinguish between the modern piano, with its attack-defined clarity, and the earlier instruments that produced the note without such emphasis on the higher overtones.
I, as a technician, would like to hear from the pianists that play Chopin; which style of instrument do you think produces the most musical result when playing this music? The older delicate ones with their nuance and subtle charm, or the modern stage cannon that can really make a big show of it? One problem with this question is that most of us have absolutely no idea what the pianos Chopin might have played on really sounded like when they were new (or nearly so). We know only what they sound like today. And, in terms of comparison with so-called “modern†pianos, that is often not very good. Even if well cared for, a century and a half of time takes its toll. Hammer resilience changes and soundboard panel stiffness changes. Strings age. We can make broad assumptions about how their voice has changed; the balance between the attack sounds and the sustain rate—i.e., there will be a stronger attack with the fundamental and lower partials dying out at a faster rate than when new—but none of us really knows from firsthand experience what that tone was really like on the day Chopin sat down to play. What is safe to assume is that the sounds he heard coming from the piano were nothing like the sounds we hear today. So when we make assumptions about what kinds of pianos he would have liked today they are just that, I think, assumptions. And if we go only by the evidence of our ears those are often based on faulty evidence. Given a reasonable knowledge of basic piano design and construction theory we can extrapolate some and assume that the original sound of these pianos would have had a little less abrupt attack sound, a little slower decay rate (longer sustain) and a little more energy in the higher partials.. We can make these assumptions but, until someone makes an accurate copy of an early Erard or Pleyel these will remain just that: assumptions. What we can say with certainty is that the remaining examples of these instruments no longer sounded the way they sounded in Chopin’s day. We can also say with certainty that no recording of any of these pianos will give us sounds anything like those of the originals. Given all this we can also say with some certainty that—given their lower-tensioned scaling and lighter, (probably) more resilient hammers—the original sounds of these instruments would have been considerably less loud, the attack would not have been as sharp and I suspect the decay rate would have been much slower (longer sustain). We also know that, properly regulated, the touch and feel of the actions is lighter, quicker and more precise. I believe modern pianists have the right to interpret the music composed by these musical masters as they see fit given the realities of modern pianos. Just as I, as an audience member, should have the right to walk out when the performance turns offensive. As it did a few years ago at a sadly memorable performance at one of our PTG annual conventions. Admittedly, the piano was not one of the all-time greats—a S&S D fully fitted with some of those happily lacquered-up hammers you mentioned and a nicely dead soundboard—but when the pianist got to his Chopin piece and started pounding on the keys with enough animal force to lift his butt off the piano bench while sending very un-pianistic crashing sounds bouncing around an acoustical disaster of a room at painful sound pressure levels it is (was) time for me to leave. If enough people leave these “performances†perhaps both the pianists and the instrument makers will take the hint. ddf
Delwin D Fandrich Piano Research, Design & Manufacturing Consultant ddfandrich@gmail.com (To contact me privately please use this e-mail address.)
Stupidity is a rare condition, ignorance is a common choice. --Anon
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808 |
Del-I found it interesting that you mentioned the probably longer sustain(based on their design) of the Chopin era pianos. At least for the examples posted in the recent threads about older pianos, I felt(not sure if I'm correct here?) the pianos were lacking in sustain and wooden sounding. Of course, you also mentioned that these pianos might very well not sound much like Chopin's pianos sounded when new. So if in fact my description of those piano's tone is correct, this seems to imply that these pianos don't sound much like new pianos in Chopin's time sounded.
Am I making sense here?
Last edited by pianoloverus; 10/07/12 12:38 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 589
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 589 |
You can get some information by reading the Eigeldinger book http://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Pianist-Teacher-Seen-Pupils/dp/0521367093where there are several pages of excerpts from Chopin's letters about instrument selection. Of course, you can't tell too much from a written description. But this book is a must have for anyone studying Chopin.
Robert Swirsky Thrill Science, Inc.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 7,439
7000 Post Club Member
|
7000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 7,439 |
Ed,
To answer your direct question about playing/performing Chopin, when I program it, it would never even cross my mind to play it on a period instrument. I am a product of the 20th Century and now perform for 21st Century listeners.
To me, it isn't so much a question of should we prefer what Chopin played upon, but rather, would Chopin have chosen the modern "stage cannons" if they were available to him? That question is equally as valid.
Before I get argumentative replies, let me state that I enjoy period instrument performances. Music history, performance history, and musicology are all part of musicianship. I rely on all of those skills in what I strive to accomplish as a pianist.
Marty in Minnesota
It's much easier to bash a Steinway than it is to play one.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,845
2000 Post Club Member
|
OP
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,845 |
To me, it isn't so much a question of should we prefer what Chopin played upon, but rather, would Chopin have chosen the modern "stage cannons" if they were available to him? That question is equally as valid. Greetings, I don't like to use the word 'should'. I asked of the pianists , " which style of instrument do you think produces the most musical result when playing this music? " So far, it has been addressed more by instrument builders and technicians than players! I think we techs can suffer some occupational hazards inre how things "should" be, at times concentrating more on the instrument than the music, but there is some reason that the piano styles of the 1840's went obsolete. Regards,
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,331
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,331 |
To me, it isn't so much a question of should we prefer what Chopin played upon, but rather, would Chopin have chosen the modern "stage cannons" if they were available to him? That question is equally as valid.
Greetings, I don't like to use the word 'should'. I asked of the pianists , " which style of instrument do you think produces the most musical result when playing this music? " Read what Chopin had to say about pianos and you will see what he would have thought about stage "cannons". Here is one pianist, Adolfo Barabino, who knows what sort of piano produces the most musical result for Chopin. Please focus on what he says about about the piano and the music, rather than unequal temperament: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41xRupc3Hz8On reflection he goes on a bit and you might prefer to listen to him playing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zxNrQuxfNY.No "stage cannons" for Mr Barabino, methinks.
Last edited by Withindale; 10/07/12 03:45 PM.
Ian Russell Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,734
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,734 |
Leaving the "bright vs dark" tone thread, for this side discussion of Chopin's music and the comparisons of old pianos and new ones. They have very different sounds.
I think the more pertinent question could be "What would Chopin play if given a choice between a 1850 Pleyel or a 2012 Steingraeber, or even the (now generic) sound of a stage-ready, happily lacquered-up Steinway D ?"
We listen to his music on a far wider variety of instruments than he ever did, and it is easy to distinguish between the modern piano, with its attack-defined clarity, and the earlier instruments that produced the note without such emphasis on the higher overtones.
I, as a technician, would like to hear from the pianists that play Chopin; which style of instrument do you think produces the most musical result when playing this music? The older delicate ones with their nuance and subtle charm, or the modern stage cannon that can really make a big show of it? One problem with this question is that most of us have absolutely no idea what the pianos Chopin might have played on really sounded like when they were new (or nearly so). We know only what they sound like today. And, in terms of comparison with so-called “modern†pianos, that is often not very good. Even if well cared for, a century and a half of time takes its toll. Hammer resilience changes and soundboard panel stiffness changes. Strings age. We can make broad assumptions about how their voice has changed; the balance between the attack sounds and the sustain rate—i.e., there will be a stronger attack with the fundamental and lower partials dying out at a faster rate than when new—but none of us really knows from firsthand experience what that tone was really like on the day Chopin sat down to play. What is safe to assume is that the sounds he heard coming from the piano were nothing like the sounds we hear today. So when we make assumptions about what kinds of pianos he would have liked today they are just that, I think, assumptions. And if we go only by the evidence of our ears those are often based on faulty evidence. Given a reasonable knowledge of basic piano design and construction theory we can extrapolate some and assume that the original sound of these pianos would have had a little less abrupt attack sound, a little slower decay rate (longer sustain) and a little more energy in the higher partials.. We can make these assumptions but, until someone makes an accurate copy of an early Erard or Pleyel these will remain just that: assumptions. What we can say with certainty is that the remaining examples of these instruments no longer sounded the way they sounded in Chopin’s day. We can also say with certainty that no recording of any of these pianos will give us sounds anything like those of the originals. Given all this we can also say with some certainty that—given their lower-tensioned scaling and lighter, (probably) more resilient hammers—the original sounds of these instruments would have been considerably less loud, the attack would not have been as sharp and I suspect the decay rate would have been much slower (longer sustain). We also know that, properly regulated, the touch and feel of the actions is lighter, quicker and more precise. I believe modern pianists have the right to interpret the music composed by these musical masters as they see fit given the realities of modern pianos. Just as I, as an audience member, should have the right to walk out when the performance turns offensive. As it did a few years ago at a sadly memorable performance at one of our PTG annual conventions. Admittedly, the piano was not one of the all-time greats—a S&S D fully fitted with some of those happily lacquered-up hammers you mentioned and a nicely dead soundboard—but when the pianist got to his Chopin piece and started pounding on the keys with enough animal force to lift his butt off the piano bench while sending very un-pianistic crashing sounds bouncing around an acoustical disaster of a room at painful sound pressure levels it is (was) time for me to leave. If enough people leave these “performances†perhaps both the pianists and the instrument makers will take the hint. ddf Del, is it possible to build an exact copy of a Chopin-prefered Pleyel given materials available today?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 313
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 313 |
Leaving the "bright vs dark" tone thread, for this side discussion of Chopin's music and the comparisons of old pianos and new ones. They have very different sounds.
I think the more pertinent question could be "What would Chopin play if given a choice between a 1850 Pleyel or a 2012 Steingraeber, or even the (now generic) sound of a stage-ready, happily lacquered-up Steinway D ?"
We listen to his music on a far wider variety of instruments than he ever did, and it is easy to distinguish between the modern piano, with its attack-defined clarity, and the earlier instruments that produced the note without such emphasis on the higher overtones.
I, as a technician, would like to hear from the pianists that play Chopin; which style of instrument do you think produces the most musical result when playing this music? The older delicate ones with their nuance and subtle charm, or the modern stage cannon that can really make a big show of it? One problem with this question is that most of us have absolutely no idea what the pianos Chopin might have played on really sounded like when they were new (or nearly so). We know only what they sound like today. And, in terms of comparison with so-called “modern†pianos, that is often not very good. Even if well cared for, a century and a half of time takes its toll. Hammer resilience changes and soundboard panel stiffness changes. Strings age. We can make broad assumptions about how their voice has changed; the balance between the attack sounds and the sustain rate—i.e., there will be a stronger attack with the fundamental and lower partials dying out at a faster rate than when new—but none of us really knows from firsthand experience what that tone was really like on the day Chopin sat down to play. What is safe to assume is that the sounds he heard coming from the piano were nothing like the sounds we hear today. So when we make assumptions about what kinds of pianos he would have liked today they are just that, I think, assumptions. And if we go only by the evidence of our ears those are often based on faulty evidence. Given a reasonable knowledge of basic piano design and construction theory we can extrapolate some and assume that the original sound of these pianos would have had a little less abrupt attack sound, a little slower decay rate (longer sustain) and a little more energy in the higher partials.. We can make these assumptions but, until someone makes an accurate copy of an early Erard or Pleyel these will remain just that: assumptions. What we can say with certainty is that the remaining examples of these instruments no longer sounded the way they sounded in Chopin’s day. We can also say with certainty that no recording of any of these pianos will give us sounds anything like those of the originals. Given all this we can also say with some certainty that—given their lower-tensioned scaling and lighter, (probably) more resilient hammers—the original sounds of these instruments would have been considerably less loud, the attack would not have been as sharp and I suspect the decay rate would have been much slower (longer sustain). We also know that, properly regulated, the touch and feel of the actions is lighter, quicker and more precise. I believe modern pianists have the right to interpret the music composed by these musical masters as they see fit given the realities of modern pianos. Just as I, as an audience member, should have the right to walk out when the performance turns offensive. As it did a few years ago at a sadly memorable performance at one of our PTG annual conventions. Admittedly, the piano was not one of the all-time greats—a S&S D fully fitted with some of those happily lacquered-up hammers you mentioned and a nicely dead soundboard—but when the pianist got to his Chopin piece and started pounding on the keys with enough animal force to lift his butt off the piano bench while sending very un-pianistic crashing sounds bouncing around an acoustical disaster of a room at painful sound pressure levels it is (was) time for me to leave. If enough people leave these “performances†perhaps both the pianists and the instrument makers will take the hint. ddf Del, is it possible to build an exact copy of a Chopin-prefered Pleyel given materials available today? Yes, maybe the only material no-longer avaible is the mahogany from Cuba , but thats a decorative issue.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808 |
No "stage cannons" for Mr Barabino, methinks. So what piano does he perform on?
Last edited by pianoloverus; 10/07/12 04:36 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,331
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,331 |
No "stage cannons" for Mr Barabino, methinks. So what piano does he perform on? The question was what type of piano produces the most musical result when playing Chopin. Barabino is a Steinway artist according to David P's post on another forum: "I used to joke that every note on a Steinway was an interruption of the music, but under the hands of Steinway artist Adolfo Barabino that's far from the case." http://www.organmatters.com/index.php?topic=1150.0
Ian Russell Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 36,808 |
No "stage cannons" for Mr Barabino, methinks. So what piano does he perform on? The question was what type of piano produces the most musical result when playing Chopin. But my point was that Barabino apparently performs on a "stage cannon"(not a fair term I think, but used in the OP) although you said "No stage cannons for Mr. Barabino".
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,331
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,331 |
Turandot posted this recording of Chopin Mazurkas in the original bright v mellow thread, saying that for him the second Mazurka comes closest to typifying Steingraeber qualities. [video:youtube] http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FCz1U2FrhFM[/video] To my ear the recording sounds a bit brash, but it may be just be the recording. As I'm on a YouTube recordings spin, here for comparison are Horowitz and Menahem Pressler who was named last week as one of Fifty Great Pianists in the current BBC Piano Season. "It's very intimate now" says Horowitz, but would you say his piano is the most musical for Chopin, as the OP asks?
Ian Russell Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,331
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,331 |
No "stage cannons" for Mr Barabino, methinks. So what piano does he perform on? The question was what type of piano produces the most musical result when playing Chopin. But my point was that Barabino apparently performs on a "stage cannon"(not a fair term I think, but used in the OP) although you said "No stage cannons for Mr. Barabino". Well, in the first video, Adolfo Barabino explains that the Bechstein came as a revelation after 30 years. From what he says, and how he plays, I can only imagine he would give a sympathetic answer to Ed Foote's question.
Ian Russell Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 140cm Ibach, 1905 F-IV, 235cm
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,845
2000 Post Club Member
|
OP
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,845 |
As I'm on a YouTube recordings spin, here for comparison are Horowitz and Menahem Pressler who was named last week as one of Fifty Great Pianists in the current BBC Piano Season. "It's very intimate now" says Horowitz, but I would you say his piano is the most musical for Chopin, as the OP asks? Greetings, I think Horowitz was going deaf. I played that piano after he died, at the factory, before it was totally de-regulated. It sounded like a tin can, or,a Nashville recording studio piano. That he was able to get it to speak as well as he did is a testament to his control. Perhaps Chopin would have liked an extremely light and brilliant piano like this, I think it makes his music really sparkle, but there was nothing in 1850 that sounded like this. ( I was able to also examine this piano after it was "restored" and sent out on tour. It was a totally different action, and nothing at all like what Horowitz was playing. ) Regards,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,408
Posts3,349,457
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|