Interesting. Another possible reason Chopin's students didn't mention the extreme difficulty may have been because of the pianos of the time which had a lighter touch and their octave was like a 7th compared to a modern piano.
I am not a double-beat absolutist, but I don’t think a lighter touch and narrower keys necessarily make it easier to play at the composers’ tempi in single-beat. It would really just increase the chance of such a performance being a hot mess with a ton of wrong notes.
From Felix to Fanny, October 6, 1835: “Chopin played his new [op. 25] etudes to the astonished residents of Leipzig with the speed of lightning.” Apparently lightning traveled half speed back then.
People certainly had another understanding of speed back then. Mendelssohn uses a metapher, witch cannot prove anything about Chopin beeing MUCH faster than Lang Lang or Lisitsa. He was first of all a composer, not a concert pianist like Liszt or Clara Schumann for instance. And a small remark by the way: double beat doesn't mean half speed, because many Chopin's metronome markings are totally unplayable, if you look at them from the modern perspective.
I already complimented you on your playing, I would just like to add some info. Unfortunately Chopin wrote very little in the scores of his pupils. But if we really look at Eicheldingers sources, the majority of Chopins students were never allowed to touch the etudes. The ones that were played were usually among the easier ones (if such a thing exists). One of the few to play the etudes was Camille Dubois (born O'Meara), but she had a great career afterwards, and even Liszt referred to her teaching of the Berceuse in his masterclasses. And before touching the etudes she had worked the Gradus, and Bachs WTK. Speaking about Liszt: he wanted the tempo of op. 10-3 much slower than indicated, and the piece was dedicated to him. Interestingly enough, he didn't give double-beat as reason, but just accepted the difference between MM and his tempo.
@@DavidArdittiComposer I think most double beaters believe Czerny was double beat and Czerny taught Liszt right? BTW if you look on Wikipedia, you see that the originial indications where "Vivace", then "Vivace ma non troppo", then finally "Lento ma non troppo H = 100" in the published edition"
@@maxxiong And Liszt taught lots of people, who taught lots of other people, and you get chain that quickly arrives at today. Who was it who stopped using double-beat? Why don't we use it now? This is the question they can't answer.
Thank you for your comment. It is true that not many students studied some of the etudes with Chopin. However I find it striking that the issue of tempo never seems to have come up with the students who did study the etudes. And that issue is just there even in the "easier" ones when one aspires to reach the demanded tempo.
@@DavidArdittiComposer It is important to question these things. I wish to point out that we must remember: the metronome was not a big deal for many teachers & pupils. It sounds like Beethoven was initially reluctant. Chopin mysteriously abandoned MMs by his mid-20s. Liszt hated the metronome. Beyond the mid-1800s, its popularity really faded. Most Russian composers never really adopted the metronome at all. The question of double to single transition. Well, we must take on the mentality of the 1800s; imagine how the world was so much different. There was no internet, no TV, no telephones, no ISO standards; everything and everybody was very disjoint. If an acquaintance departed for some travel to another country, communication was only by letter, and it could take days or weeks to arrive. Taking Chopin as an example, his scores would be published I believe in London, Germany and France, and distributed to teachers in various countries. How do we know that they all understood it should be played double-beat? What if some teachers or performers misunderstood it as single-beat? How would Chopin know? It is very possible even during Chopin's lifetime, that his works were being played (or attempted!) at single-beat in another country, and that he never knew. The only way he would know is if he physically attended the location and listened for himself. Secondly, it's not like Chopin could upload a RUclips video like "Ok guys, quick update. Some people are playing my music way too fast.". Maelzel attempted this kind of clarification by publishing an article in a German publication 7 years after his metronome was initially produced. But what percentage of teachers & performers would have read that exact publication or become aware of its message? It seems like the message would get lost in the wilderness. When we look to the past, in our mind all events and situations of that time get merged into one. In other words, if we know that Chopin used the metronome, then in our mind, we imagine that in every minute of every lesson of ever pupil, they were referencing the metronome. This is likely incorrect. We have a tendency to take one documented sentence, and apply that to the whole life and approach of the composer. In my opinion, the likely reality that double-motion counting got lost in translation, is more a reflection of composers and students just not as interested in the metronome as we believe they were. How could Czerny be double-beat, yet student Liszt emerge with no understanding? Well, across several years of my childhood piano lessons, I can remember about 3 times that the teacher took out the metronome as reference. We didn't use it often because it just wasn't a useful tool. If I were playing too slowly or too quickly, he would simply say it, or reach over and demonstrate. Czerny is documented as placing great emphasis on the importance of TEMPO, but I have not (yet) seen evidence of him placing strong emphasis on the importance of specifically the metronome. So maybe the metronome just wasn't utilised as much as we think during lessons.
No.3 is played at double beat tempo all the time actually. Wikipedia has something interesting though: apparently the original marking was "Vivace", then "Vivace ma non troppo", then finally "Lento ma non troppo H = 100". Actually there is something interesting I read about the Chopin Etudes recently. I was reading an article about Czerny tempo indications because of this whole double beat debate. At one point the article mentions that Czerny's Etudes were considered easier than Chopin's Etudes by their contemporaries, but of course Czerny's tempo has faster 16 note runs. If double beat was brought into the story here one would more likely conclude that Czerny was double beat, not Chopin. Do you think Op 10 no 3 was inspired by Pathetique mov 2?
Some pianists who are not nowadays play Chopin slower than the indicated tempi, I think. Well, I have the book “Etude” edited by Jan Ekier in my stock. Looking at the pieces, especially for the etudes of “#3 (Lento ma non troppo/ 8th=100)” and “#6 (Andante/ Crotchet+dot =69),” I couldn’t have imaged their color of harmony in double-beat tempo. So, I'm waiting for their uploading. "Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger" is a musicologist in Switzerland, isn’t he? I know the book you mentioned on this video. I remembered the book cover. Because the book written in French was published in our language first in 1985, second in 2005 , and it was republished as new edition this June. Also, The book " L'univers musical de Chopin, Paris" (Fayard, 2000 /ISBN 2-213-60751-6 [French]) was published in our language in 2003. And, I was interested in "Vingt-Quatre Préludes et fugues: Le Clavier bien tempéré, livre I, annoté par Frédéric Chopin (French) by "Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger ." When I knew the book a few years ago, it had been already unavailable. ----- Book Information ------ Author: Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger (Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Eigeldinger [English]) ------------- French Edition: [Title] Chopin vu par ses élèves (Musique) Fayard (18 octobre 2006) / Only Kindle Edition ------------- English Edition: [Title] Chopin: Pianist and Teacher: As Seen by his Pupils Cambridge University Press (1987/1/22) /[ISBN]: 978-05213670 / Kindle edition available ---------------------------------
3:20 «There was a time when ‘the ability to execute passages in the most extremely rapid tempo served as a chief mark of virtuosity’. The faster, so much the more admirable». It is from children and drunk people that we hear the truth. Now we are not going to drink, but we are going to listen to the children. Here at RUclips, there are many videos featuring children, 7-12 years old, playing Chopin’s opus 10 and 25 much faster than double beat tempo. Chopin was 20-22 years old when he composed the etudes. He had about 10 more years to reach a virtuoso level, and some people think Chopin played much slower than the kids? It’s totally illogical!
Respect tempo mark in Chopin manuscript. So many music hobbyists tamper Chopin manuscript, that's their own style, Non Chopin style. Don't take it seriously
The only questions remaining are: Will the Double Beat Theory be ignored by most musicians in the future? Will the people who think Single Beat is right keep on dismissing the problems that come with it? Are all your efforts in vain? Will we keep on hearing versions of classical pieces ruined by fast tempi? And be told this is beautiful and right? There are people who wish to hear the music in the way the composer intended, and that means a lot slower. But are we enough?
@@robertklein8187 I don't think the first two can be separated so easily. The third (for it's own sake) should clearly be avoided, but what if 1 and/or 2 lead to 3?
I can speak only for my self. After almost 30years of being a single beater... I have more and more doubts about it. The more I study the scores, the more contradictions appear. I wrote about this but i will once again. Chopin's Nocturnes are very good examples. Italian tempo and expression descriptions are against the metronome markings. Op.15,27 are good starting point to analyse. Some Etudes op.10 are also absurdly fast in single beat...just check f minor no 9. I doubt in single beat. It simply doesn't make musical sense in too many beautiful pieces. At least for me. That doesn't mean that the double beat makes...
@@mashoy78 I agree with you that there are some surprisingly fast MM... nobody denies this. However, you are Polish (I presume...) could you live with the Krakiowak (quarter 104, Allegro ma non troppo) at half speed. Also the bolero: can one really consider halving this tempo? Or the polonaise op. 3??? Some mazurkas are 'normal', some are extremely fast (op 24-2) yet op 6 nr 2 is extremely slow. I believe the question Bernhard Ruchti very reasonably asks: 'Did Chopins expect his students to play his etudes at his MM?' could be expanded to other works as well, and in both directions.
Perhaps we don't have to concentrate on MM markings alone, not even Chopin's. In the sources on performance practice from the 19th century, usually only a few words, or no words at all, are devoted to the MM markings. That is a disappointment for the fanatic double beaters or single beaters. Because they like to put all their energy into the double beat versus single beat discussion. If you take a look at the music of the 19th century, you will see that at least 75% of this has no MM markings. Apparently these were not considered very important. This is also evident from the book about the students who were taught by Chopin by Eicheldingers, because the word metronome does not appear in it. Therefore my question: don't we pay way more attention to this nasty thing today than people did in the 19th century?
this is very well possible. Even in the late 19th century Gustave Hirn (of the Académie Française) said that the metronome was NOT a precision device, and that its scale and use were perfectly clear.
For me this is mainly a source of inspiration. I like the aesthetic that is connected to the double-beat approach. Also, I see the option on a historical level. However, there are clearly examples of metronome markings that are not convincing in double-beat. On a general level I agree with you that in the end the music is what this is all about and that is supposed to be the main focus!
As much as I respect your work, I disagree with your rationale. Here is why: You use Kullak's comment not liking the excessive tempo of some to the etudes. This comment itself tend to prove that double beat practice never existed, as he didn't consider this possibility which is rather surprising for a german pianist born in 1818. If this interpretation of the metronome was known, the first question you would expect a german pianist from that period to ask , would be ' How did he use the metronome ' as opposed to ' this is excessively fast' More importantly , if you look at Alfred Cortot's edition including the timings for all etudes, he recommends 3 mn for op 10 no 6. There is actually a recording of Cortot in 2m 56 on RUclips . So the example that you give about Pollini is not the most relevant. In fact, history shows that performance speed has decreased in the 20th Century compared the 19th Century. I would consider Cortot as extremely relevant when it comes to Chopin's interpretation given his teachers.
I'm not sure whether Cortot's playing is representative of something that Chopin might have heard or not (period instruments aside), but the point about Kullak is pertinent here.
There is a recording of op 10 no 6 by Paul Barton with chopin's metronome marking (dotted crotchet = 69 single beat) on YT. ruclips.net/video/F9KO9oK-9PA/видео.html&start_radio=1. And the result is not at all ludicrous. I would even say that musically it makes sens. The mood is very poignant with this feverish sadness. After all it is an Andante, not a Largo ! If you take the etudes in 6/8 time we have : - no 6 Andante (dotted crotchet = 69) - no 7 Vivace ( dotted crotchet = 84) - no 9 Allegro molto agitato ( dotted crotchet = 96) Do you think that no 7 is a Vivace if played in double beat ? I also think that the scale of tempi has changed and that today it is much wider toward slowness, and that slow movements are played much slower now than in the 18th and 19th centuries. In fact Chopin's Etudes are not only playable in single beat, but also very musical at these tempi. Many recordings prove it.
Do you really think Paul Barton's performance observes the indication "andante" and "con espressione"? To me it sounds like an "allegro moderato", and certainly far more than an "andante con moto".
@@petertyrrell3391 Yes, I do think (and feel) that Paul Barton play with a lot of expression, and that his tempo is closer to an Andante than what we usually hear for this étude. Please follow the melodic line and not the accompaniment. If we take the definition of tempi, we have, as you know, from slowest to fastest : Grave, Largo, Lento, Adagio, Andante, Moderato, Allegro, Vivace, Presto (with all superlatives or diminutives, complementary). So an Andante is not so slow, and Chopin's metronome marking is quite in the range of usual tempo markings (crotchet 76-108 bpm). So dotted crotchet = 69 is roughly crotchet = 104, which is at the top of the range for Andante.
@@rigel48 However at this speed you become more aware of the accompaniment because performer does not have time to phrase off or put it more into the background. What are you going to do with the Nocturnes - they are slow pieces, but played in single beat they are not really slow pieces.
@@petertyrrell3391 whatever you think of Bartons version (I really don't think it is artistically succesful, but who cares...) to say that dotted quarter 69 is not andante is just ridiculous. It is a perfectly normal walking speed, let's not forget that 6-8 was always defined as a bar in two beats. To quote Gustav Leonhardt in a masterclass: 'it is not fast, it just has many notes...'. And why should a nocturne be slow by definition? Very passionate things can happen during the night, like Schumann's 'In der Nacht' suggests. His third Nachtstück has 'Mit grosser Lebhaftigkeit'... Alkan second Nocturne from op 57 is 'Très vif', and he was a personal friend of Chopin. Erlkönig is a night piece, Schnell... even Presto Agitato in Liszts piano transcription. And Liszts Mephisto-Waltz also takes place in a nightly setting, that is why you have the nightingale at the end. And no, you cannot take that piece in three eights, Liszt specifically tells the conductor how to beat it (four bars at a time).
@@benjaminachron1493 I don't agree that 6/8 was always in practice a bar of 2 beats. It always depends on context - sometimes the quavers need to felt more in slower movements. They are the ones which do the walking in this case. What is considered walking tempo is also up for discussion. A typical Chopin or field Nocturne does seem to mean a slower piece, though there can be faster outbursts; the Schumann Nachtstuecke are different types of pieces as are the other pieces you mention. I always feel Erlkoenig is taken too fast as there is no possibility of a noticeable acceleration nearer the end where it is called for, but a slower tempo makes difficulties for the singer!
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Chopin was a poet, not a prestidigitator. Bernhard's beautiful performances bring that poetry to life.
Thank you!
This is exactly what I was looking for years... I success most Chopin's etudes modern vers but didn't know this...
Interesting. Another possible reason Chopin's students didn't mention the extreme difficulty may have been because of the pianos of the time which had a lighter touch and their octave was like a 7th compared to a modern piano.
I am not a double-beat absolutist, but I don’t think a lighter touch and narrower keys necessarily make it easier to play at the composers’ tempi in single-beat. It would really just increase the chance of such a performance being a hot mess with a ton of wrong notes.
From Felix to Fanny, October 6, 1835: “Chopin played his new [op. 25] etudes to the astonished residents of Leipzig with the speed of lightning.” Apparently lightning traveled half speed back then.
I'm sure people in the 19th century could compare the speed of a lively horse to the speed of lightning
People certainly had another understanding of speed back then. Mendelssohn uses a metapher, witch cannot prove anything about Chopin beeing MUCH faster than Lang Lang or Lisitsa. He was first of all a composer, not a concert pianist like Liszt or Clara Schumann for instance. And a small remark by the way: double beat doesn't mean half speed, because many Chopin's metronome markings are totally unplayable, if you look at them from the modern perspective.
I already complimented you on your playing, I would just like to add some info.
Unfortunately Chopin wrote very little in the scores of his pupils. But if we really look at Eicheldingers sources, the majority of Chopins students were never allowed to touch the etudes. The ones that were played were usually among the easier ones (if such a thing exists).
One of the few to play the etudes was Camille Dubois (born O'Meara), but she had a great career afterwards, and even Liszt referred to her teaching of the Berceuse in his masterclasses. And before touching the etudes she had worked the Gradus, and Bachs WTK.
Speaking about Liszt: he wanted the tempo of op. 10-3 much slower than indicated, and the piece was dedicated to him. Interestingly enough, he didn't give double-beat as reason, but just accepted the difference between MM and his tempo.
There’s a reason Liszt didn’t give double-beat as a reason. He’d never heard of it.
@@DavidArdittiComposer I think most double beaters believe Czerny was double beat and Czerny taught Liszt right?
BTW if you look on Wikipedia, you see that the originial indications where "Vivace", then "Vivace ma non troppo", then finally "Lento ma non troppo H = 100" in the published edition"
@@maxxiong And Liszt taught lots of people, who taught lots of other people, and you get chain that quickly arrives at today. Who was it who stopped using double-beat? Why don't we use it now? This is the question they can't answer.
Thank you for your comment. It is true that not many students studied some of the etudes with Chopin. However I find it striking that the issue of tempo never seems to have come up with the students who did study the etudes. And that issue is just there even in the "easier" ones when one aspires to reach the demanded tempo.
@@DavidArdittiComposer It is important to question these things. I wish to point out that we must remember: the metronome was not a big deal for many teachers & pupils. It sounds like Beethoven was initially reluctant. Chopin mysteriously abandoned MMs by his mid-20s. Liszt hated the metronome. Beyond the mid-1800s, its popularity really faded. Most Russian composers never really adopted the metronome at all.
The question of double to single transition. Well, we must take on the mentality of the 1800s; imagine how the world was so much different. There was no internet, no TV, no telephones, no ISO standards; everything and everybody was very disjoint. If an acquaintance departed for some travel to another country, communication was only by letter, and it could take days or weeks to arrive. Taking Chopin as an example, his scores would be published I believe in London, Germany and France, and distributed to teachers in various countries. How do we know that they all understood it should be played double-beat? What if some teachers or performers misunderstood it as single-beat? How would Chopin know? It is very possible even during Chopin's lifetime, that his works were being played (or attempted!) at single-beat in another country, and that he never knew. The only way he would know is if he physically attended the location and listened for himself. Secondly, it's not like Chopin could upload a RUclips video like "Ok guys, quick update. Some people are playing my music way too fast.". Maelzel attempted this kind of clarification by publishing an article in a German publication 7 years after his metronome was initially produced. But what percentage of teachers & performers would have read that exact publication or become aware of its message? It seems like the message would get lost in the wilderness.
When we look to the past, in our mind all events and situations of that time get merged into one. In other words, if we know that Chopin used the metronome, then in our mind, we imagine that in every minute of every lesson of ever pupil, they were referencing the metronome. This is likely incorrect. We have a tendency to take one documented sentence, and apply that to the whole life and approach of the composer.
In my opinion, the likely reality that double-motion counting got lost in translation, is more a reflection of composers and students just not as interested in the metronome as we believe they were.
How could Czerny be double-beat, yet student Liszt emerge with no understanding? Well, across several years of my childhood piano lessons, I can remember about 3 times that the teacher took out the metronome as reference. We didn't use it often because it just wasn't a useful tool. If I were playing too slowly or too quickly, he would simply say it, or reach over and demonstrate. Czerny is documented as placing great emphasis on the importance of TEMPO, but I have not (yet) seen evidence of him placing strong emphasis on the importance of specifically the metronome. So maybe the metronome just wasn't utilised as much as we think during lessons.
No.3 is played at double beat tempo all the time actually. Wikipedia has something interesting though: apparently the original marking was "Vivace", then "Vivace ma non troppo", then finally "Lento ma non troppo H = 100".
Actually there is something interesting I read about the Chopin Etudes recently. I was reading an article about Czerny tempo indications because of this whole double beat debate. At one point the article mentions that Czerny's Etudes were considered easier than Chopin's Etudes by their contemporaries, but of course Czerny's tempo has faster 16 note runs. If double beat was brought into the story here one would more likely conclude that Czerny was double beat, not Chopin.
Do you think Op 10 no 3 was inspired by Pathetique mov 2?
Some pianists who are not nowadays play Chopin slower than the indicated tempi, I think. Well, I have the book “Etude” edited by Jan Ekier in my stock. Looking at the pieces, especially for the etudes of “#3 (Lento ma non troppo/ 8th=100)” and “#6 (Andante/ Crotchet+dot =69),” I couldn’t have imaged their color of harmony in double-beat tempo. So, I'm waiting for their uploading.
"Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger" is a musicologist in Switzerland, isn’t he? I know the book you mentioned on this video. I remembered the book cover. Because the book written in French was published in our language first in 1985, second in 2005 , and it was republished as new edition this June. Also, The book " L'univers musical de Chopin, Paris" (Fayard, 2000 /ISBN 2-213-60751-6 [French]) was published in our language in 2003.
And, I was interested in "Vingt-Quatre Préludes et fugues: Le Clavier bien tempéré, livre I, annoté par Frédéric Chopin (French) by "Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger ." When I knew the book a few years ago, it had been already unavailable.
----- Book Information ------
Author: Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger
(Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Eigeldinger [English])
-------------
French Edition:
[Title] Chopin vu par ses élèves (Musique)
Fayard (18 octobre 2006) / Only Kindle Edition
-------------
English Edition:
[Title] Chopin: Pianist and Teacher: As Seen by his Pupils
Cambridge University Press (1987/1/22) /[ISBN]: 978-05213670 / Kindle edition available
---------------------------------
3:20 «There was a time when ‘the ability to execute passages in the most extremely rapid tempo served as a chief mark of virtuosity’. The faster, so much the more admirable».
It is from children and drunk people that we hear the truth. Now we are not going to drink, but we are going to listen to the children. Here at RUclips, there are many videos featuring children, 7-12 years old, playing Chopin’s opus 10 and 25 much faster than double beat tempo. Chopin was 20-22 years old when he composed the etudes. He had about 10 more years to reach a virtuoso level, and some people think Chopin played much slower than the kids? It’s totally illogical!
Respect tempo mark in Chopin manuscript. So many music hobbyists tamper Chopin manuscript, that's their own style, Non Chopin style. Don't take it seriously
The only questions remaining are: Will the Double Beat Theory be ignored by most musicians in the future? Will the people who think Single Beat is right keep on dismissing the problems that come with it? Are all your efforts in vain? Will we keep on hearing versions of classical pieces ruined by fast tempi? And be told this is beautiful and right? There are people who wish to hear the music in the way the composer intended, and that means a lot slower. But are we enough?
This relates to the question of whether a performer should strive for authenticity, individuality, or sensationalism.
@@robertklein8187 I don't think the first two can be separated so easily. The third (for it's own sake) should clearly be avoided, but what if 1 and/or 2 lead to 3?
I can speak only for my self. After almost 30years of being a single beater... I have more and more doubts about it. The more I study the scores, the more contradictions appear. I wrote about this but i will once again. Chopin's Nocturnes are very good examples. Italian tempo and expression descriptions are against the metronome markings. Op.15,27 are good starting point to analyse. Some Etudes op.10 are also absurdly fast in single beat...just check f minor no 9. I doubt in single beat. It simply doesn't make musical sense in too many beautiful pieces. At least for me. That doesn't mean that the double beat makes...
Benjamin Achron Good question. I suppose it comes down to the intention of the performer.
@@mashoy78 I agree with you that there are some surprisingly fast MM... nobody denies this. However, you are Polish (I presume...) could you live with the Krakiowak (quarter 104, Allegro ma non troppo) at half speed. Also the bolero: can one really consider halving this tempo? Or the polonaise op. 3???
Some mazurkas are 'normal', some are extremely fast (op 24-2) yet op 6 nr 2 is extremely slow.
I believe the question Bernhard Ruchti very reasonably asks: 'Did Chopins expect his students to play his etudes at his MM?' could be expanded to other works as well, and in both directions.
Perhaps we don't have to concentrate on MM markings alone, not even Chopin's. In the sources on performance practice from the 19th century, usually only a few words, or no words at all, are devoted to the MM markings. That is a disappointment for the fanatic double beaters or single beaters. Because they like to put all their energy into the double beat versus single beat discussion. If you take a look at the music of the 19th century, you will see that at least 75% of this has no MM markings. Apparently these were not considered very important. This is also evident from the book about the students who were taught by Chopin by Eicheldingers, because the word metronome does not appear in it. Therefore my question: don't we pay way more attention to this nasty thing today than people did in the 19th century?
this is very well possible. Even in the late 19th century Gustave Hirn (of the Académie Française) said that the metronome was NOT a precision device, and that its scale and use were perfectly clear.
For me this is mainly a source of inspiration. I like the aesthetic that is connected to the double-beat approach. Also, I see the option on a historical level. However, there are clearly examples of metronome markings that are not convincing in double-beat. On a general level I agree with you that in the end the music is what this is all about and that is supposed to be the main focus!
As much as I respect your work, I disagree with your rationale. Here is why:
You use Kullak's comment not liking the excessive tempo of some to the etudes. This comment itself tend to prove that double beat practice never existed, as he didn't consider this possibility which is rather surprising for a german pianist born in 1818. If this interpretation of the metronome was known, the first question you would expect a german pianist from that period to ask , would be ' How did he use the metronome ' as opposed to ' this is excessively fast'
More importantly , if you look at Alfred Cortot's edition including the timings for all etudes, he recommends 3 mn for op 10 no 6. There is actually a recording of Cortot in 2m 56 on RUclips . So the example that you give about Pollini is not the most relevant. In fact, history shows that performance speed has decreased in the 20th Century compared the 19th Century. I would consider Cortot as extremely relevant when it comes to Chopin's interpretation given his teachers.
I'm not sure whether Cortot's playing is representative of something that Chopin might have heard or not (period instruments aside), but the point about Kullak is pertinent here.
Music hobbyist can freedom speech to express own opinion.
Don't take it seriously about music hobbyists tamper and misunderstand.
There is a recording of op 10 no 6 by Paul Barton with chopin's metronome marking (dotted crotchet = 69 single beat) on YT.
ruclips.net/video/F9KO9oK-9PA/видео.html&start_radio=1.
And the result is not at all ludicrous. I would even say that musically it makes sens. The mood is very poignant with this feverish sadness. After all it is an Andante, not a Largo !
If you take the etudes in 6/8 time we have :
- no 6 Andante (dotted crotchet = 69)
- no 7 Vivace ( dotted crotchet = 84)
- no 9 Allegro molto agitato ( dotted crotchet = 96)
Do you think that no 7 is a Vivace if played in double beat ?
I also think that the scale of tempi has changed and that today it is much wider toward slowness, and that slow movements are played much slower now than in the 18th and 19th centuries.
In fact Chopin's Etudes are not only playable in single beat, but also very musical at these tempi. Many recordings prove it.
Do you really think Paul Barton's performance observes the indication "andante" and "con espressione"? To me it sounds like an "allegro moderato", and certainly far more than an "andante con moto".
@@petertyrrell3391 Yes, I do think (and feel) that Paul Barton play with a lot of expression, and that his tempo is closer to an Andante than what we usually hear for this étude. Please follow the melodic line and not the accompaniment.
If we take the definition of tempi, we have, as you know, from slowest to fastest :
Grave, Largo, Lento, Adagio, Andante, Moderato, Allegro, Vivace, Presto (with all superlatives or diminutives, complementary).
So an Andante is not so slow, and Chopin's metronome marking is quite in the range of usual tempo markings (crotchet 76-108 bpm). So dotted crotchet = 69 is roughly crotchet = 104, which is at the top of the range for Andante.
@@rigel48 However at this speed you become more aware of the accompaniment because performer does not have time to phrase off or put it more into the background. What are you going to do with the Nocturnes - they are slow pieces, but played in single beat they are not really slow pieces.
@@petertyrrell3391 whatever you think of Bartons version (I really don't think it is artistically succesful, but who cares...) to say that dotted quarter 69 is not andante is just ridiculous. It is a perfectly normal walking speed, let's not forget that 6-8 was always defined as a bar in two beats.
To quote Gustav Leonhardt in a masterclass: 'it is not fast, it just has many notes...'.
And why should a nocturne be slow by definition? Very passionate things can happen during the night, like Schumann's 'In der Nacht' suggests. His third Nachtstück has 'Mit grosser Lebhaftigkeit'...
Alkan second Nocturne from op 57 is 'Très vif', and he was a personal friend of Chopin.
Erlkönig is a night piece, Schnell... even Presto Agitato in Liszts piano transcription.
And Liszts Mephisto-Waltz also takes place in a nightly setting, that is why you have the nightingale at the end. And no, you cannot take that piece in three eights, Liszt specifically tells the conductor how to beat it (four bars at a time).
@@benjaminachron1493 I don't agree that 6/8 was always in practice a bar of 2 beats. It always depends on context - sometimes the quavers need to felt more in slower movements. They are the ones which do the walking in this case. What is considered walking tempo is also up for discussion. A typical Chopin or field Nocturne does seem to mean a slower piece, though there can be faster outbursts; the Schumann Nachtstuecke are different types of pieces as are the other pieces you mention. I always feel Erlkoenig is taken too fast as there is no possibility of a noticeable acceleration nearer the end where it is called for, but a slower tempo makes difficulties for the singer!
Oh yes Earth is flat
These people are music hobbyist. Non professional musician.