As choral singer who used to perform composers works conducted by them, then others, I've come to the conclusion that composers are not always the best interpreter of their own works. In some cases yes, but often not. Think about it. If they spent most of the time by themselves composing, and not performing in front and audience, and add the fact that they've obsessed on the piece for hours and hours/days/weeks/months, they probably get bored with the original tempos, and try to add a fresh interpretation to it after playing a zillion times.
Debussy’s version: rapidly yet gently falling in love with a fluttering heart Modern version: reminiscing a relationship that ended with bittersweet memories
Claire de Lune refers to a poem by Paul Verlaine; my copy of the score has an excerpt translated as, "...they go to charming masques and bergamasques Playing the lute and dancing and somewhat sad beneath their fantastic costumes." Debussy's version captures this mood quite a lot better than most modern versions I've heard, imo.
I agree instantly with your comment! I am thinking about how this is making me feel... and you have made it so easy for me!!! :) very well interpreted!!
the actual reason it’s so fast is because it’s recorded on a roll that has limited time for recording, so playing it fast is the only way to get through the whole thing
Yall fucken dumb its not called a roll its called a cylinder that was produced by edison labortories and are ment to b played on phonographs early types of cylinders that were produced from 1880s-1900 were wax then after from 1901-1929 they were made out of celluloid (a early type of plastic) then there was victor and berliner which made discs that were usually made outta shellac but some early berliners were made outta wax too
That´s the way I like to hear it. He knows best. A lot of the other pianist means apparently, that they can play it better than the composer and play it like it is a lullaby with pauses the wrong places.
*ONLY* Debussy himself could play it like this, because if anyone else did it, they would be surrounded with people telling them no, no, you played it *wrong*. But nobody can tell Debussy that he played his own piece wrong. So he plays it however he damn well pleases. Something to be learned about trust here, I think.
Gosh, it's always validating for me to come back to this video and hear how the man himself apparently played it. This is the tempo I go for too but I'm always a bit self conscious that seemingly more authoritative people might criticize me for it. To be fair though, I'm sure I play everything too fast LOL. This one just happens to be correct.
Well... this shows-for me- that even sometimes the composers do not entirely see all the dimensions that their work is able to have. Michelangelo, Abbado... other times, other circumstances may alter the deep meaning of a musical work.
I started listening to early recordings of pianists and was shocked how wildly different they sounded compared to almost everyone today. Some of it is due to recording limitations (they would have to play loud for the recording to actually pick it up) but to me it felt like musicians took a lot more liberties with the pieces than they do now. I can still hear the differences in current interpretations but it’s always really interesting to see what musicians have previously done with pieces. I’m not sure whether the internet has been good in this regard- obviously it makes this music way more accessible and it’s great to be able to hear basically anything I want on a whim, but part of me also kind of wishes that people would take more risks when interpreting a piece. I’ve been playing piano for a long time but I didn’t really start exploring different interpretations of pieces I liked until recently. I was really surprised when I heard Rachmaninoff play Chopin’s 3rd ballade, and the tempo almost sounds like it’s flexing wildly or something, especially in the coda. That evolved into a really off topic ramble but tldr I kinda wish we’d hear more varying interpretations of classical music.
Debussy made this recording of Clair de Lune, and 13 other pieces, onto a set of 6 rolls using a Welte-Mignon reproducing piano, also known simply as a "Mignon." The Mignon was unique in that it recorded the nuances of a player's performance, including dynamics and pedaling, thus the result can be far more expressive than the more typical player-piano roll reproductions. Debussy was delighted with the quality of the result, and wrote in a letter to Edwin Welte, "It is impossible to attain a greater perfection of reproduction than that of the Welte apparatus. I am happy to assure you in these lines of my astonishment and admiration of what I heard."
Trying to comprehend the 106 years of time between then and now. Imagine all the moments this song has experienced. Withstood the test of time and reached us today through means that nobody back then could have imagined.
I've been playing this piece for near 15 years with more than one teacher -- It never crossed my mind to look up Debussy himself playing it! This is a game changer. He emphasizes things I didn't expect. I plan to listen to this many more times and create a sound closer to his than the modern interpretations. It's shocking that the modern ones all sound alike and no one plays it the way he did! It's much more... chaotic... than I expected
You must keep in mind that he was recorded using piano rolls, of which were limited. Meaning he likely couldn’t elongate phrases as much as he’d like, else the roll would end preemptively
Agree!! Mom played this my entire childhood, now daughter plays it (skipped a generation in me). It's interesting to hear how he plays it...much more chaotic. "Moonlight" maybe for Debussy has many changing luminations and intensities.
For those wondering why it's fast in comparison to modern recordings, Debussy actually gave the instructions "très expressif" (very expressive) at the start of the piece, I.e play it how you want - what speed, what rhythm, what dynamics, what tone... This is merely Debussy's representation of Clair de Lune, and not sounding like a stuck up, but it's one of the most interesting yet beautiful I've ever heard.
Yeah the common interpretation is the most popular but it doesn’t mean it’s the correct or the only one. If anyone else played this way, they would receive endless hate, but as it’s debussy it’s ok.
Andante is “walking speed”, which isn’t necessarily slow. There’s a lot of eighth and sixteenth notes in this piece, which give it a unique vivacity. It’s not a song to fall asleep to, though I’ve heard some renditions with such a slow tempo that it’s excruciatingly boring to sit through.
Which then means it's supposed to be the right way to play it Edit: wow this is the most likes I've ever gotten on a RUclips comment and I don't even agree with it anymore
PRETTYCATLOL I absolutely agree. That is why I expressed it sounds hectic KNOWING SLOWER VERSIONS. So is that really how Debussy intended it to be played? There was something in the comments about damaged piano rolls (or whatever this is called).
@@BRNRDNCK no, it's a joke. like if i saw a video of lebron james playing basketball in the street, i would say "this guy's good, he should play professional basketball"
This was the first performance of Clair de Lune to really move me. Debussy knew exactly when to push and when to pull back, how to pace and where to hesitate. This piece just became exponentially more interesting to me. Thank you, Claude.
Chauvin write out 5 pages of words, read them about 5 times, and then repeat them exactly. Thats how it is with music, its a language, not only an art.
I don't hear any rushing at all anywhere, because all Debusst's accelerandos and tempi changes in generall make perfect if somewhat personal sense musically and expressively... Suggestion: Listen and Learn!!!
Since this was recorded more than a decade after it was written by Debussy, do you think it might be different from how he originally played it? Much like a lot of artists play their biggest hits very differently live in concert, for example how Freddie Mercury performs his biggest hits live is so different from the original record to keep it fresh for him. I imagine he would have played this piece thousands of times and heard hundreds of interpretations therefore might've wanted to put a different interpretation out there.
That's plausible. You might adjust tempo, phrasing or change the feel in certain places. It has a loose feel here of someone familiar with their own composition obviously but it doesn't feel played with the same reverence or conscious poise as other top pianists would play what is now a classic. It's less melancholy and nostalgic and simply a short pretty piece about the moonlight.
It is true that there are often different interpretations of the composer. I personally know modern composers that when you look at the sheets it's written a little differently. THOUGH - I remember someone said that in the epoch of impressionism and the early 20's the recording was different and that is the reason behind the radical liberty of the rythm
Great point! Some authors think of an "ideal version" for a recording; a version to which others will refer. Other authors will just play however they feel. There isn't a simple answer, in my opinion.
Historical Significance In the same way that countless pianists play The Entertainer up-tempo when Joplin explicitly put on the sheet music, 'NOT FAST'.
I don't, I am sorry to say and I love this piece. How sure are we that the original composer actually played it this way. It is too fast for me and there is no emotion at all. I have heard several interpretations from moderate tempo to the slowest possible tempo for this piece. This rendition did not evoke the atmosphere of moonlit skies or moonlit scenes for me.
I can understand why people enjoy this song with a slower tempo, but remember that Debussy is an impressionist. I think the idea behind this piece, especially in the mid section, is to fill a room with music, not slowly played single notes. The sound that comes out of the piano when it's played at this speed is completely different and creates a different mood. I think Debussy was going for this.
Cus academics cant play without the paper and its too fuckin fast to use them... The academics always see only blocks cus they didnt learn from their ear, they only read, do not listen to music. This is music no fuckin rethoric
Gotta say, at first I didn’t like this version. But as it went on I realized how natural and almost improvisational it sounds with him playing it. I’ve never heard someone play it like that before. It truly is a treat to hear a great piece played by the person who wrote it.
I see a lot of people dissing his interpretation, or saying that he played it fast because piano rolls (which is the method through which Debussy recorded this piece) had limited space, but that’s plainly untrue. Each piano roll he did in 1913 had ample enough space for multiple pieces so there’s no reason to believe that’s why he’s speeding up. This interpretation is really cool and it’s amazing how every different performer of this piece flows with it in a different way. There’s enjoyment to be found in every interpretation :)
Speed depends on who you listen to. This is perfectly lovely and gives the piece an ethereal feel. All interpretations have something to offer... which is part of the genius of Debussy
if you ever want insight on the elitism within the music community, all you have to do is look at all the comments of people saying that DEBUSSY is playing his own composition wrong and too quickly.
Yep 100% true I went to a piano concerto at the Milan Conservatorio....90% of the audience were old rich snobs in real fur...who passed out after the first ten minutes, but then passed judgements on the performer in the interval LOL
First, just because he wrote it does not mean that his interpretation is 'right', it's interesting sure but there's no reason to assume it is be better than any other musician's interpretation of it; Second, there is nothing 'elitist' about not liking the tempo - why would that be 'elitist'? That strikes me as an ad hominum;
I call BOOLLSHEET. first, it's a troll. Is not Debussy playing, but an amateur. You got played. And second, it is a very weak amateur player. Is this still the best version? Better than Lang's or Kissin's. These normies iq's are truly entertaining, LOL.
I would agree if only Pressler's interpretation never existed. His performance was just as emotional and mellifluous, truly fast and slow tempo can be played for this piece
Fabricio Guido I think that the composer is not even the best performer of is music, because sometimes another musician can see something different in the score, for example the tempo. (Sorry for my english, i'm 16 and from italy)
whydoievenbothertoputthishere Debussy recorded his playing onto a piano roll, which was then played back much later to get what we hear here. there was audio recording equipment in his time but it wasn't very good so if he had recorded to that directly the sound would be low quality. the style is his but what you hear was played by a piano on its own from the piano roll he recorded to
Debussy: Plays Clair de Lune at the double of the usual speed: Piano Virtuosos: That's not the way you should play it. Beethoven: Plays the 3rd movement of the Moonlight Sonata at half of the usual speed: Piano Virtuosos: That's not the way you should play it.
@@Qrayon no, it's Presto Agitato --- I do think a lot of performers use this piece to show off their skillz, so they might be pushing the tempo a bit, but certainly not doubling it (I haven't heard any anecdotes about how Beethoven played it)
My piano teacher used to tell me that "presto" means "the sky's the limit" as to how fast it should be played. However, I think the 3rd movement of Moonlight Sonata sounds better if it's played at less than maximum speed.
Him playing is how I always interpreted Clair de Lune; it's nostalgic, not melancholy. It's reminiscing beauty, the past, appreciate the present and the movement of the night. It's moving. Amazing we have this recording.
Can we also acknowledge that perhaps Debussy intended the piece to be played quickly? I mean after all he wasn’t a baroque or classical player, he was an impressionist, his music was meant to invoke feeling, often of nature and more often of water. And in the way he plays the piece in this recording I can hear that, so maybe instead of saying it’s cause he was running out of time, which I can admit that also might be the case, can we also think that we have our interpretations of his piece incorrect, and Debussy as the composer intended it to be this way. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Isn't it wonderful? After all, he had the thought in his head and the feel of the music in his mind and he interpreted what he felt in his composition. M. Debussy, I don't care what you did you are a hero and your interpretation is just right for me.
I was confused as to how the audio quality was so good for such an old recording until I realized thanks to the comments and then a little internet scouring that this is a piano roll recording. So glad that this technology was around back then so we could hear this amazing piece of art played by its creator! Kinda adds a little touch to an already ethereal song.
If you've ever listened to old recordings of Caruso, the accompanying piano sounds so horrendous it makes me appreciate this technology used at the same time. To bad it couldn't have been done for voice.
@@gnamp Yes, if you’re going to be pedantic about it. What I meant, obviously, is that it’s not an audio recording. It’s more like a MIDI sequence in modern music. It’s actually closer to sheet music than it is to an audio recording. Anyway, it means that it can be played back on a modern piano and recorded using modern recording technology. Which is what happened here.
@@gnamp Of course it's accurate. When did I say it wasn't? I was replying to the comment that said it was "amazingly clear", and explaining why. Old fruit.
To all the people saying Debussy had a shortage of time into this: you're wrong. It's pure speculation made up by people who can't accept that Debussy had a different view on a work than Lang Lang. I see these arguments under every video of old recordings. Even in Rachmaninov recording of his 3rd concerto people, who apparently cannot understand freedom, wrote big paragraphs of comments of complete bullshit on Rachmaninov taking fast tempos because he was nervous. Nervous. In a studio recording. Choosing the wrong tempo for the whole concerto. *IN A STUDIO RECORDING* If you want the reasons why in this case it's bullshit I'll give them, but I can assure you already that the same company in the same years was doing much longer piano rolls. There's plenty of very old recording out there and you will find as a constant that when Saint Seans or Ysaye (or anybody, just quoting some you easily can find) wanted to be expressive they almost never made use of extreme slow tempo. Much more often rubato was employed but never in the exaggerated way is used nowadays. If you can find the recording of Havanaise made by Seant Sains with an old french violinist (sorry I can't retell the name rn) you will listen to a very fast and staccato rendition of a piece that everybody nowadays plays softly and gently... because they've been told it's french music and it has to be softly seductive. Same happens with Stravinskij's firebird which nowadays is always overly dramatic and Stravinskij himself apparently "rushes" through the ending. In conclusion just listen to this, and if you can only feel that it's too fast I'm sorry but I think you are a little bit too closed minded the poetry of the light rubato and tempo changes Debussy employed here. Music is freedom, we already have too many assholes sitting as judges in international competitions telling us where to use rubato and when to vibrate and when to play loud and when not. We don't need people on the internet reminding everybody that the time signature on paper is different. If anything these ancient recordings are a testament to the freedom of music, which should never be just playing the notes as written. Don't hear the recording, listen to the music.
There is something special about hearing a composer with their own work - SO much can be learned about melody, harmony, and the "painting" of notes that invoke a musical landscape. Lots of fearlessness in this performance - and too many other performers attempt to do unnecessary things in their own performing... too much worrying going on in most cases, and not enough artwork being accomplished.
Most other versions render it too sleepy and letargic, as if it were not about moonlight but about death (- no wonder it is beloved to be performed by geriatrics while Debussy was only 28 years old when he wrote this rather romantically virile piece); This particular rendition is believably about moonlight; it expresses melancholy WITHOUT excessive old-age nostalgia, it is very impressionistic without being overly sentimental or "precious" about itself; not self-serious which is why I personally love this version; it is also not a "schoolboy" straightforward or simplistic, nor particularly easy to play at this speed - i.e. a proper companion to Chopin and Liszt as it should be.. Cheers! .
I can't be the only one who likes the slow interpretation AND the faster interpretation? This interpretation (that of Debussy himself smh) is evocative and full of feeling. It has faster moments, but also slightly slower moments. To me it has a more playful feeling, a bit happier. The slower interpretations (evidently the more commonly preferred ones nowadays) have a melancholy charm, maybe with a sadder more sombre feeling. Who gives a shit?
Exactly, it's much like Bach prelude on the cello, Yo Yo ma of the 90s played it very slow and it has a romantic quality to it. Meanwhile Rostropovich played it quickly and it feels like a beautiful run through the woods. I love both for different situations
When a work of superior human art like this comes into existence and is then played by different people, it will sound and feel good in any tempo, style, interpretation. It only proves the geniality of it. Moreover I would like to say that if this is the interpretation of the composer, it must have the original feeling he was trying to convey. What I feel is that he was trying to materialize the energy one feels when the full moon is shinning bright, illuminating the dark and scary night thus putting darkness aside and bringing a new day (after a day) where one can be awaken, energized and full of love. That is why his interpretation feels more energetic and fast (my two cents). Nevertheless Debussy is pure genius!
actually I both like the fast and the slow version, the only thing I don't like is when pianist start slooooow and that get fast as hell. That really drives me mad
When I was still a young rock musician, I hated classical music... until I heard this song coming over the radio. I was so immediately stunned by its sheer beauty, that I stopped some stranger to tell me the name of it. I've been a Debussy fan ever since.
I never expected to hear Debussy play anything. If I had something "clever" to write here, it has been completely erased by this wonderful performance.
Same with me and I’ve been playing since 5 years old Cadek Conseratory Chattanooga Tennessee. Harold Cadek voice Doris Doe. Leading mezzo Soprano in New York City. Metropolitan Opera
The change in tempo gives it an air of gentle excitement, which makes sense when you think that one of the most romantic things one can do in the moonlight is walk with the one you love. The upbeat tempo matches the heart.
Found it very interesting to read all the comments on Debussy’s performance, his interpretation of his own work! The socially accepted performances always made me feel like it was something meant for listening to while you fell asleep, ethereal, dreamy and falling softly slowly like a sleepy drizzle. Maybe since I only heard this at night, floating from my father’s bedroom radio, it was a natural expectation. But now listening to Debussy’s performance at 3am in the morning, sleepy and wanting to fall back asleep, I appreciate the refreshingly energized interpretation as something to be enjoyed in the morning with a cup of piping tea spiced with a zest of orange, toast and honey, stimulating the soul with vigor and freedom to make the day my own! CHEERS!
David Dorsey: I'm betting that's exactly what the Great Man would have wanted you to do. It's an interpretation of the sounds of moonlight in a clear sky at midnight, if there are such things. So, he succeeds in his aim when he put his thoughts to music. What do you all bet me we'll now have a discussion on the sound of moonlight at midnight. The wheres and wherefores....!
@@waterbe3564 that is simply false what you said, the piano rolls had space for multiple songs, he played it this way because that is how he wanted it to be played
I never knew there was a recording of him playing this. It feels like each note flies from his soul. The music is dynamic, brilliant full of passion and played as it was intended to be played. My wish is to have this played when I die, for me it is a little piece of heaven. 🎼🎼🎼🎼🎼
@@StrangePerson69 Can you explain to me how it works? I'm not sure I get it...The piano rolls is a machine which "reads" sheet music, right? So we're not hearing Debussy playing at all, just listening to a machine reproducing the notes he wrote on the sheet, right? It's not a recording, is it?
@@logannslm1593 the video description has a complete explanation, but, to be short, Debussy played it on a special piano which records what notes are being played. This is then used to create rolls of perforated paper, which are inserted in a special piano which can read them. This video is a modern recording of an old piano playing one of these rolls. Debussy apparently loved how close to the original these rolls got, so he recorded some of his works.
It's saddening to see people dissing the tempo or dismissing it as a byproduct of limited technology (piano rolls, even though the piano rolls he used had more than enough time). You may dislike the tempo, but it doesn't mean his interpretation is wrong. Debussy was someone who wanted his pieces to sound like they were improvised, so it's plainly obvious that he'll have different interpretations (note the use of rubato and rhythmic changes). I'm also disheartened by those who dismiss his playing as lacking emotion or feeling simply based on the fact that the tempo is faster than they're used to. His performance is most definitely full of emotion and expression. This situation reminds me of people criticizing Heifetz for his fast tempos and lack of emotion, even though well-respected figures/violinists who personally heard Heifetz speak volumes of the emotion contained Heifetz's playing. Debussy is expressing such raw emotion into this performance and nobody appreciates it for what it is. Truly a shame.
I'm glad you're someone who can accept others have opinions about the music without dismissing them as something silly like "snobby" or "elitist". I agree that you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss a different interpretation just because of one feature of the music. It all takes immense skill and any version where they're able to play at this level should be taken with the seriousness it deserves. However, whether it's just because of what I'm used to or something else, I still do prefer the more "traditional" way of playing at a slower tempo.
@@theoe354 I can completely understand why people prefer the slower, modern interpretation because it's the most popularized way of playing it. When I first listened to this, I was also put off by the tempo. The way Debussy plays here though, is actually a lot closer to his desired tempo if we use a metronome. He marks the score as Andante Très Expressif which from some research means a "walking-pace" that implies "easy-going" and "expressively" which really helped me put into perspective what sort of sound Debussy was going for. Clair de Lune was also previously named Promenade Sentimentale which I believe has to do with some dancing, but promenade also means "walk" which is a little neat because it sort of reflects his marking. It made much more logical sense to me that Clair de Lune is played at this tempo after I realized that this is a story of dancing, like the original poem. They're dancing, but with that sense of melancholy and sadness hidden underneath. I personally think today's slower tempo doesn't best represent Debussy's intent, though it doesn't mean that a slower tempo is bad.
Learning to listen to 'fast' interpretations takes a bit of getting used to. The people saying they don't hear emotion just aren't used to faster music. I am in love with this version and I feel there is bounds and tons of emotion. The low hanging fruit of musical opinions: it's too fast therefor i can't feel the emotion
I've heard that a piece of music only truly played once. Isn't it nice to think that instead of repeating himself, he played as authentically and true to heart as possible for posterity? Just lovely.
It has been interpreted so many ways and I was surprised to hear the composers intended tempo. This is always glorious to hear, no matter who plays it, but especially surprised to hear Debussy play it himself. Thank you for this gift.
Achille-Claude Debussy interprété par lui-même, une surprise pour moi. J'apprécie cette belle oeuvre romantique qui m'inspire une agréable nostalgie et me touche dès les premières notes.
In spite of numerous eccentricities, strange rubato, odd tempo changes, etc., in the end, in the hands of its composer, Claude Debussy, the piece emerged as beautiful, interesting and also somehow deeply moving, ...all more so than I had ever experienced before.
I listened it many times, and I can say I'm with you. What he experienced we can nothing but imagine. But his execution is solid, harmonious, flying, as a moon lover would do to bring life to its aiméé. Far from being a lullaby, it's exciting and warm he put WARMTH into the quicly escaping moon reflections....
Finally, someone saying something truly meaningful.. This moment, carried out by Debussey, has become so dear to my life experience. I am so happy to read your comment.
Speed up because (Out of paper) ??? Really ? Debussy recorded 14 pieces onto six rolls in Paris on or before November 1, 1913. According to Debussy enthusiast Steve Bryson's Web site, the composer was delighted with the reproduction quality, saying in a letter to Edwin Welte: "It is impossible to attain a greater perfection of reproduction than that of the Welte apparatus. I am happy to assure you in these lines of my astonishment and admiration of what I heard. I am, Dear Sir, Yours Faithfully, Claude Debussy."
Jonathan Marion Debussy’s remarks speak to the fidelity of reproduction of sound via the Welte-Mignon process. This has nothing to do necessarily with its ability to allow a performer to properly convey their preferred tempi, however. It is quite likely that Debussy did have to tailor his tempi according to the amount of paper he had at his disposal. While this may sound unlikely to us, it is important to keep in mind that the materials needed for recordings of any kind in the early 20th century-be they acoustic or via the Welte-Mignon process-were not exactly cheap. Therefore, performers had to work within the limitations of early sound reproduction.
@@echorrhea If he had to speed up his pieces in order to make them fit, he would not have been happy about it. You can find many Welte-Mignon pieces on youtube that are considerably longer.
Owen White It was played this fast. If you listen to earlier recordings, it was played rather faster than it is today. (If anything, most pianists drag the thing morbidly nowadays.) Marius-François Gaillard, a pioneering champion of Debussy who was the first to publicly perform cycles of the complete piano works, actually plays this about 10 seconds 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿. Musicians simply had a different idea of “slowness” a century ago than they do now. Also, the score doesn’t indicate any metronome markings. So what Debussy actually meant by “Andante” (which likely has nothing to do with the “Adagio” or even “Grave” typical of present-day pianists) is left to the performer to guess.
Mnnvint They are longer because the pieces themselves were longer and, thus, required more paper, but that didn’t mean the materials allocated for these sessions allowed performers excessive license to slow down either. Mahler’s piano rolls, for example, exhibit tempi considerably faster for the works in question than are standard today. Also, your expectations of what would make performers “happy” to hear are founded upon present expectations of sound fidelity. Over a century ago, sound reproduction was still in its infancy. The Welte-Mignon process, flaws and all, would have sounded like a miracle compared to the then wretched state of acoustic recordings. So of course Debussy would have been happy. Had he managed to live at least until the advent of electric recording, however, he likely would have changed his tune. The remarkable advances in recording that would be made only a decade after his death alone would’ve stretched his imagination.
To everyone complaining about the tempo: Someone who would not know Clair de Lune and would listen to this recording would just be amazed by the piece. We are just used to hear it very slow.
Maybe, just perhaps...we've all been hearing it played at a slower tempo than Debussy wanted it to be played. There have been recordings of it that, to my ear were too slow. It is still something that stops me in my tracks when I hear it. I'm gobsmacked to be able to hear the originator of it and it matters not a jot if I love the movement of it and the mental picture it brings me.
The entire feeling of the piece changes when played this fast. It's amazing how it almost sounds like a different song with a whole different feeling. The slow version is ethereal and dreamy, the fast version is full of energy and feels like a rushing river. A beautiful piece no matter how you play it.
Giving this gem a 👍🏻 seems shamefully inadequate and insulting. We are so lucky to hear this man perform his beautiful creation a century later on RUclips. Magical.
This song always gave me the image of a person in their last days pondering through all the beautiful moments in their life as the curtain slowly closes. And it makes me cry every time.
I've always hated how slow Claire de Lune was played; it was just another piano lullaby. But it's so beautiful now- so much passion! Thank you Debussy!
Niet Ali-A, Niet Ali-b maar Ali-c No. What I meant is that how does bad technology = Faster piano roll recordings? It's not necessarily faulty. There needs to be proof to uphold this argument? What part of the piano roll is bad that causes it play faster?
This interpretation is so alive, lyrical and expressive. Thank you SO much for sharing this. It gives us a fresh insight into the composer and his music.
I LOVE to hear composers performing their own works. It's pretty rare in many cases and impossible in other cases. But here . . . it's just our good fortune.
Love hearing this piece in its proper speed. Most other versions render it too sleepy and letargic, as if it were not about moonlight but about death (- no wonder it is beloved to be performed by geriatrics while Debussy was only 28 years old when he wrote this rather romantically virile piece); This particular rendition is believably about moonlight; it expresses melancholy WITHOUT excessive old-age nostalgia, it is very impressionistic without being overly sentimental or "precious" about itself; not self-serious which is why I personally love this version; it is also not a "schoolboy" straightforward or simplistic, nor particularly easy to play at this speed - i.e. a proper companion to Chopin and Liszt as it should be.. Cheers! .
The original, very much has undertones of syncopated jazz & is all around more a happy tune, a celebration of the night. There is clearly an explosive yearning in the melody and keystrokes. Amazing. Beautiful. One of my ever favorites.
From the horse's mouth! Extremely interesting to hear his own interpretation of the piece, more dramatic and fluid than one usually hears it. Not just some serene marble-like moonlight, but also passion and turmoil under it: there are some Van Gogh fists against the merciless sky here! The more I listen to this, the more I'm also seized by the raw emotion of the piece. No modern pianist, to my knowledge, brings out that same despair: this is flesh, lunatic 'horror' and reality. To me, this is a prayer from a man who has nothing to hide, and nothing to lose. He sees the Seine in moonlight, where so many people have drowned themselves. He feels la cathédrale engloutie within him. He is at one with his soul. And no teacher has ever, never, taught him how to interpret and feel this nocturne: Mon coeur mis à nu...
Valid remark. It could be a trick. The excellent quality of the sound, for one, is suspicious. Never thought that it could be a make-believe, but it's actually quite possible. That said, who on earth would come up with an interpretation like this? No serious pianist even of that time would have dared to relate so "freely" to the written text!
this song brings tears to my eyes everytime i hear it. it feels like loving something so much to the point that you’re drowning. and not just romantically. like when you’re in nature and you feel this heavenly feeling of belonging and comfort. like you arent alone.
i expected it to be unique but not this different, wow! makes you think which other pieces we're interpreting really differently than what the composer intended. beautiful performance, beautiful melody
There is a considerable fanbase for early recordings made before the 1940s due to how radically different interpretations were. Other modern listeners might call these old performances gaudy, and would probably cringe at the huge liberties performers took with the original pieces.
Debussy heard music in his head that no one had heard since the beginning of time. His influence is still felt today. All musicians today ow a debt of gratitude to this genius
A lot of people commenting here say that, he played it faster for the recording. Well, I am not convinced. From what I experienced, older pianists seem to have different interpretations of tempos, from post WW2 pianists. Take Chopin's Berceuse for example. I fell in love with that piece and searched for as many versions as I could and I found that older pianists played it faster - for example Horszowski or Moiseiwitsch, who both were students of Leszetycki (student of Czerny himself, who might have actually heard Chopin play Berceuse). Feels to me like pianists taught and influenced by the masters from the 19th century liked to play a bit faster. Ravel also criticized slow and sentimental interpretations of his Pavane for a dead princess (the famous story: it's a "pavane for a dead princess", not a "dead pavane for a princess"). So I wouldn't be surprised if Debussy actually played it a tempo he wanted it to be played. Just my thoughts.
@Snow2ice My music teachers told me andante means slow, but I know that it does mean walking, so I guess it's just a matter of how slow or how fast you walk.
@Snow2ice Joke? I have a pretty good sense of humor, but where's the joke? O.k. So it's just a matter of whether you want to walk 56 beats per minute, 88 bpm, or something in between. My teacher did not like metronomes, and told me not to use one. Too mechanized, not human enough. I doubt he lived to the time of drum machines and computerized music; I'm sure he wouldn't have been pleased.
@Snow2ice Yes, I know what metronomes are for. My teacher never used one, and he was against them. I guess you are not capable of slowing down without one, and you can't actually play the piece without one; but I can. By the way, I'm a professional piano player and have been since before you were born.
@Snow2ice I understand, but I have always practiced without a metronome. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with using a metronome, and I'm sure the benefits you describe are real, but as I said, my teacher did not think they were a good idea even for practice. Yes, of course I agree that you don't have to be slow to be expressive. By "professional" I mean I make my living playing the piano (or I did until this bogus shutdown). Btw the correct spelling in your context is "piece," not "peace" or "peice." PS: I graduated university with a bachelor of arts degree.
There seems to be a knowing intention in this performance, at this resting tempo. It is more crisp and precise. As though Debussy were kneading the keys in comfortable, careful and deliberate expression. I can breathe ever more deeply.
Im amazed by how differently i interpret this GIANT'S piece... i will endeavour to capture this interpretation from now on. It almost sounds rushed but i love it - its frenetic! Like he cant get it out quick enough! You'll never be forgotten Claude! I played this to my children when they were babies. They will never unremember!
@BigPig this was recorded in Odessa, Ukraine, in 05.05.1988 by a student named Andriy Pavlovski who later became an engineer and left piano. Not hard to guess why, the kid could not get Clair de Lune right. The dude pulled this prank and later outted himself as a troll on Reddit. What you are seeing is a copycat work on trolling. Search for it on reddit and you might still find the discussion over all this BULLSHIT you low iq normies are so quick to embrace, no matter how bad the actual playing is.
How much time has passed since 1913...relationships formed and lost...loved ones come and gone ...families started and ended. This song brings out the best of all those memories.
When Debussy plays it, it is joyful, vibrant, exciting, very much in love, I can almost hear his joyful eyes gazing on the woman he loves. Think of Paris, at night, under the moon light, and the gorgeus lady he describes beautifully with the melancholic notes. But when others play it, it is melancholy, despair, beautiful but tragic, unrequited love..
Le immagini e le emozioni che mi evoca il brano suonato da lui stesso sono di una potenza indescrivibile. Dinamico, entusiasmante, magico, moderno...Le note in certi punti si inseguono, si accavallano, si confondono in un caos naturale a dir poco stupendo. Grande.
![5 Minutes On... Debussy - Clair de Lune | Daniel Barenboim [subtitulado]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XiWfPJLp2ko/mqdefault.jpg)
Congratulations Debussy, you played yourself
underrated comment
underrated comment right there
quite literally
You played yourself literally.
De 🅱️ussy
If it didn’t say Debussy played it everyone would be hating on the speed
Yee right, pretty sure if it's not him they'll hate the rendition.
True
As choral singer who used to perform composers works conducted by them, then others, I've come to the conclusion that composers are not always the best interpreter of their own works. In some cases yes, but often not. Think about it. If they spent most of the time by themselves composing, and not performing in front and audience, and add the fact that they've obsessed on the piece for hours and hours/days/weeks/months, they probably get bored with the original tempos, and try to add a fresh interpretation to it after playing a zillion times.
@@tactus72 true
@@tactus72 Based.
Crazy this guy has the same name as Debussy
очень эмоционально""
Looks the same too
Jameson Richards plays the same too
@@LegendDragonFist same vibes as well
Damn bro I need to shit
Debussy’s version: rapidly yet gently falling in love with a fluttering heart
Modern version: reminiscing a relationship that ended with bittersweet memories
That's about right.
That's a neat interpretation
Claire de Lune refers to a poem by Paul Verlaine; my copy of the score has an excerpt translated as, "...they go to charming masques and bergamasques Playing the lute and dancing and somewhat sad beneath their fantastic costumes." Debussy's version captures this mood quite a lot better than most modern versions I've heard, imo.
I agree instantly with your comment!
I am thinking about how this is making me feel... and you have made it so easy for me!!! :)
very well interpreted!!
the modern version too slow
I'm glad Debussy is still around to share this with us
This comment wasted me lol
Should we tell him?
Matthew Peters nah
@@magilunedecelestia Mon Dieu!
Let's keep quiet.
😁
the actual reason it’s so fast is because it’s recorded on a roll that has limited time for recording, so playing it fast is the only way to get through the whole thing
was it a wax roll?
@@ADN1996 Most likely yes
Change playback to 0.75 and its perfect
Yall fucken dumb its not called a roll its called a cylinder that was produced by edison labortories and are ment to b played on phonographs early types of cylinders that were produced from 1880s-1900 were wax then after from 1901-1929 they were made out of celluloid (a early type of plastic) then there was victor and berliner which made discs that were usually made outta shellac but some early berliners were made outta wax too
Phonographs*
I like the speed. It feels like the music is pouring out of him.
I agree. I meant he reason for such speed is due to the piano rolling running out, but it still gives it this "infinite" feeling
That´s the way I like to hear it. He knows best. A lot of the other pianist means apparently, that they can play it better than the composer and play it like it is a lullaby with pauses the wrong places.
agreed
best comment on this video
Molybdenum Rose The way this guy plays is so natural that i have the feeling that he composed it.
*ONLY* Debussy himself could play it like this, because if anyone else did it, they would be surrounded with people telling them no, no, you played it *wrong*. But nobody can tell Debussy that he played his own piece wrong. So he plays it however he damn well pleases. Something to be learned about trust here, I think.
Gosh, it's always validating for me to come back to this video and hear how the man himself apparently played it. This is the tempo I go for too but I'm always a bit self conscious that seemingly more authoritative people might criticize me for it. To be fair though, I'm sure I play everything too fast LOL. This one just happens to be correct.
Well... this shows-for me- that even sometimes the composers do not entirely see all the dimensions that their work is able to have. Michelangelo, Abbado... other times, other circumstances may alter the deep meaning of a musical work.
I started listening to early recordings of pianists and was shocked how wildly different they sounded compared to almost everyone today. Some of it is due to recording limitations (they would have to play loud for the recording to actually pick it up) but to me it felt like musicians took a lot more liberties with the pieces than they do now. I can still hear the differences in current interpretations but it’s always really interesting to see what musicians have previously done with pieces.
I’m not sure whether the internet has been good in this regard- obviously it makes this music way more accessible and it’s great to be able to hear basically anything I want on a whim, but part of me also kind of wishes that people would take more risks when interpreting a piece. I’ve been playing piano for a long time but I didn’t really start exploring different interpretations of pieces I liked until recently. I was really surprised when I heard Rachmaninoff play Chopin’s 3rd ballade, and the tempo almost sounds like it’s flexing wildly or something, especially in the coda.
That evolved into a really off topic ramble but tldr I kinda wish we’d hear more varying interpretations of classical music.
Debussy didn't play it. This was played by Suzanne Godenne. The title in the video is wrong, Debussy never recorded Clair de lune.
@@modern-piano-arrangements Ah! Good to know. Well I appreciate her wonderful performance.
Debussy made this recording of Clair de Lune, and 13 other pieces, onto a set of 6 rolls using a Welte-Mignon reproducing piano, also known simply as a "Mignon."
The Mignon was unique in that it recorded the nuances of a player's performance, including dynamics and pedaling, thus the result can be far more expressive than the more typical player-piano roll reproductions. Debussy was delighted with the quality of the result, and wrote in a letter to Edwin Welte, "It is impossible to attain a greater perfection of reproduction than that of the Welte apparatus. I am happy to assure you in these lines of my astonishment and admiration of what I heard."
nice primary source thank you
Thank you, Marianne for this important information. It's certainly valuable to our understanding that it's most likely the correct speed.
This is really interesting, thank you!
I had no idea that there was a reproducing piano that included dynamics and pedaling capabilities..
@@richarddowney1972 all the other male pianos want it too
Trying to comprehend the 106 years of time between then and now. Imagine all the moments this song has experienced. Withstood the test of time and reached us today through means that nobody back then could have imagined.
Very nicely put .
Sasha Reaper You get It. Amazing, isn’t it?
Pseudo-deep
r/im14andthisisdeep
The most antidepressant piece of piano music ever lived.
This has to be one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever composed.
I totally believe that this was channeled from the angelic realms. Perfection.
Agree to that....one other is Liszts Liebestraum. Both incredibly beautiful!
I totally agree. Absolutely beautiful
To me, this is the best one. The feeling it shows is exactly the same feeling I feel inside me since I was born.
@@56chevydog Beautiful comment.
I've been playing this piece for near 15 years with more than one teacher -- It never crossed my mind to look up Debussy himself playing it! This is a game changer. He emphasizes things I didn't expect. I plan to listen to this many more times and create a sound closer to his than the modern interpretations. It's shocking that the modern ones all sound alike and no one plays it the way he did! It's much more... chaotic... than I expected
You must keep in mind that he was recorded using piano rolls, of which were limited. Meaning he likely couldn’t elongate phrases as much as he’d like, else the roll would end preemptively
Chaotic...emotion
Agree!! Mom played this my entire childhood, now daughter plays it (skipped a generation in me). It's interesting to hear how he plays it...much more chaotic. "Moonlight" maybe for Debussy has many changing luminations and intensities.
Maybe that’s just how he was feeling that day
@@TheFlawless321 🤣
For those wondering why it's fast in comparison to modern recordings, Debussy actually gave the instructions "très expressif" (very expressive) at the start of the piece, I.e play it how you want - what speed, what rhythm, what dynamics, what tone... This is merely Debussy's representation of Clair de Lune, and not sounding like a stuck up, but it's one of the most interesting yet beautiful I've ever heard.
well, near everyone else is saying he was running out of paper to record with. though it's VERY beautiful and does give those instructions
""adante très expressif" at the beginning, actually.
@@c-n1v that is also true
Yeah the common interpretation is the most popular but it doesn’t mean it’s the correct or the only one. If anyone else played this way, they would receive endless hate, but as it’s debussy it’s ok.
Andante is “walking speed”, which isn’t necessarily slow. There’s a lot of eighth and sixteenth notes in this piece, which give it a unique vivacity. It’s not a song to fall asleep to, though I’ve heard some renditions with such a slow tempo that it’s excruciatingly boring to sit through.
If it really is him, then it is interesting how fast he plays it..
nv
eenayeah Uhum
Which then means it's supposed to be the right way to play it
Edit: wow this is the most likes I've ever gotten on a RUclips comment and I don't even agree with it anymore
It is! Seems hectic almost, knowing slower versions. Strangely though, it seems more impressionistic as well.
PRETTYCATLOL I absolutely agree. That is why I expressed it sounds hectic KNOWING SLOWER VERSIONS.
So is that really how Debussy intended it to be played? There was something in the comments about damaged piano rolls (or whatever this is called).
this guy's good, he should compose
He’s a famous composer. You didn’t know?
@@BRNRDNCK no, it's a joke. like if i saw a video of lebron james playing basketball in the street, i would say "this guy's good, he should play professional basketball"
Zachary Valdes I know lol just messin with ya
@@BRNRDNCK oh lol. guess i took your joke about my joke too seriously.
WOW this is a mess
This was the first performance of Clair de Lune to really move me. Debussy knew exactly when to push and when to pull back, how to pace and where to hesitate. This piece just became exponentially more interesting to me. Thank you, Claude.
So true. This is an absolute revelation to me. So tired of these people who put rubato all over the place and try to put "feeling" into it.
Almost like he wrote it! (heavy sarcasm)
@@BlackHayateTheThird oMg hE Did MaKE tHe pIece (heavy sarcasm)
First name terms, eh?
It's so relaxing to play. An amazing song that never sees time.
He speeds up because he was running out of paper. Used to happen with cylinder recordings a lot
Ohhh I see all these comments fart sniffing about how it's better fast but this makes more sense
tell me more...
correct
ferociousgumby Running out of paper. lol
Chauvin write out 5 pages of words, read them about 5 times, and then repeat them exactly. Thats how it is with music, its a language, not only an art.
his wife must've been telling him dinner was ready mid-way through the piece
JayTee she killed her self with a gun..
I don't hear any rushing at all anywhere, because all Debusst's accelerandos and tempi changes in generall make perfect if somewhat personal sense musically and expressively... Suggestion: Listen and Learn!!!
Sensei -Sama he had more than one wife
Hahaha good one
Even funnier
I like this tempo. The fast parts make me think of twinkling stars or the gentle trickling sounds of a garden fountain.
Perfect comment.
That's the gayest damn thing I've ever heard a straight man say!
I think aleksa is a girl
@@caitgems1 yes... I’m a girl. Don’t assume someone’s sex/gender haha!
Aleksa is a nickname short for Aleksandra for context :)
@@aleksap5459 I'm sorry but I don't know how to adjust for errors, perhaps I could ask Siri
Since this was recorded more than a decade after it was written by Debussy, do you think it might be different from how he originally played it? Much like a lot of artists play their biggest hits very differently live in concert, for example how Freddie Mercury performs his biggest hits live is so different from the original record to keep it fresh for him. I imagine he would have played this piece thousands of times and heard hundreds of interpretations therefore might've wanted to put a different interpretation out there.
That's plausible. You might adjust tempo, phrasing or change the feel in certain places. It has a loose feel here of someone familiar with their own composition obviously but it doesn't feel played with the same reverence or conscious poise as other top pianists would play what is now a classic. It's less melancholy and nostalgic and simply a short pretty piece about the moonlight.
It is true that there are often different interpretations of the composer.
I personally know modern composers that when you look at the sheets it's written a little differently.
THOUGH - I remember someone said that in the epoch of impressionism and the early 20's the recording was different and that is the reason behind the radical liberty of the rythm
Just as last year, I might have replied smartly; now I will say “boner balls”
Great point!
Some authors think of an "ideal version" for a recording; a version to which others will refer. Other authors will just play however they feel. There isn't a simple answer, in my opinion.
I would say yes, because he'd critique the original and tweak that to make the perfect piece of what he had imagined in his mind. I like this.
Does anyone else see the star in his eye?!
Jacqueline Lockwood great now I can’t unsee it
ah well, stars are part of the night sky, light of the moon & all that! Btw, who are the Beginner Bros?
yeah so what?
Jacqueline Lockwood it was just a joke good observation it’s just that now I’ll always see it as there’s a star in his eye 😂
Ironically when I hear this song I just think of stars
His view of playing this piece is so unique and different from other interpretations, it's not played in the way you expect. I like it
I fully agree it is beautiful.
Historical Significance In the same way that countless pianists play The Entertainer up-tempo when Joplin explicitly put on the sheet music, 'NOT FAST'.
I don't, I am sorry to say and I love this piece. How sure are we that the original composer actually played it this way. It is too fast for me and there is no emotion at all. I have heard several interpretations from moderate tempo to the slowest possible tempo for this piece. This rendition did not evoke the atmosphere of moonlit skies or moonlit scenes for me.
WHATEVER GOES FOR ME it is him
WHATEVER GOES FOR ME he wrote a piano roll so thats saved and played via i think machine, it really is him
I can understand why people enjoy this song with a slower tempo, but remember that Debussy is an impressionist. I think the idea behind this piece, especially in the mid section, is to fill a room with music, not slowly played single notes. The sound that comes out of the piano when it's played at this speed is completely different and creates a different mood. I think Debussy was going for this.
Carl Smith of course he was “going for this.” he wrote it himself for Christ’s sake
Cus academics cant play without the paper and its too fuckin fast to use them... The academics always see only blocks cus they didnt learn from their ear, they only read, do not listen to music. This is music no fuckin rethoric
I'm thinking it's because he had to speed it up so it would fit in one recording
You cant rly call Debussy an impressionist. Even he himself stated that he disliked the label of “impressionist”. He didnt like being called that
Debussy was vehemently opposed to the suggestion that his music was "impressionistic." He always maintained that his music was an "expression."
Gotta say, at first I didn’t like this version. But as it went on I realized how natural and almost improvisational it sounds with him playing it. I’ve never heard someone play it like that before. It truly is a treat to hear a great piece played by the person who wrote it.
We’re lucky to be able to hear this
@@jimmerskrimmerfriddet3246 really
For me the only one who's able to play it too is Daniel Barenboim.
Yes, you've got it. The feeling of improvisation. Reflections from the water even more so.
the others play slow and boring
I see a lot of people dissing his interpretation, or saying that he played it fast because piano rolls (which is the method through which Debussy recorded this piece) had limited space, but that’s plainly untrue. Each piano roll he did in 1913 had ample enough space for multiple pieces so there’s no reason to believe that’s why he’s speeding up.
This interpretation is really cool and it’s amazing how every different performer of this piece flows with it in a different way. There’s enjoyment to be found in every interpretation :)
It’s faster that what we are used to but it’s also very fluent.
How about He just felt like it at that moment. Spontaneous interpretation of one's own work is simply an artistic joy.
Speed depends on who you listen to. This is perfectly lovely and gives the piece an ethereal feel. All interpretations have something to offer... which is part of the genius of Debussy
He never recorded this song on piano rolls
Maybe he had to record multiple pieces or something on a limited number of rolls?
How does he play without moving
Telekinesis
He's just that good
His hands move, just his face stands still
just like the music it self - magical
Piano Roll, 1913
He’s dead
if you ever want insight on the elitism within the music community, all you have to do is look at all the comments of people saying that DEBUSSY is playing his own composition wrong and too quickly.
right
I could not say it better
Yep 100% true
I went to a piano concerto at the Milan Conservatorio....90% of the audience were old rich snobs in real fur...who passed out after the first ten minutes, but then passed judgements on the performer in the interval LOL
First, just because he wrote it does not mean that his interpretation is 'right', it's interesting sure but there's no reason to assume it is be better than any other musician's interpretation of it; Second, there is nothing 'elitist' about not liking the tempo - why would that be 'elitist'? That strikes me as an ad hominum;
@@stephenf5136 Right, it's certainly not elitist. Probably k p is misusing the word and means something like "arrogant". Not sure.
The speed and flow of the original is breathtaking... After listening to so many renditions, I don't think there's any more passionate than this one.
Indeed!
Absolutely
I call BOOLLSHEET. first, it's a troll. Is not Debussy playing, but an amateur. You got played. And second, it is a very weak amateur player. Is this still the best version? Better than Lang's or Kissin's. These normies iq's are truly entertaining, LOL.
I concur.
I would agree if only Pressler's interpretation never existed. His performance was just as emotional and mellifluous, truly fast and slow tempo can be played for this piece
Honestly this is the best performance I've heard of this piece. Well, who can beat the composer anyway?
Fabricio Guido I think that the composer is not even the best performer of is music, because sometimes another musician can see something different in the score, for example the tempo. (Sorry for my english, i'm 16 and from italy)
Cho seong jin made it
Did they have recording equipments back in those days??? Prolly not prolly just some dude who plays this like years after
whydoievenbothertoputthishere Debussy recorded his playing onto a piano roll, which was then played back much later to get what we hear here. there was audio recording equipment in his time but it wasn't very good so if he had recorded to that directly the sound would be low quality. the style is his but what you hear was played by a piano on its own from the piano roll he recorded to
johnnycochicken does piano roll capture the degree of impact and other subtle features of playing? This didnt sound like it to me.
Debussy: Plays Clair de Lune at the double of the usual speed:
Piano Virtuosos: That's not the way you should play it.
Beethoven: Plays the 3rd movement of the Moonlight Sonata at half of the usual speed:
Piano Virtuosos: That's not the way you should play it.
Did Beethoven really play the 3rd movement of Moonlight Sonata at half the usual speed?
@@Qrayon no, it's Presto Agitato --- I do think a lot of performers use this piece to show off their skillz, so they might be pushing the tempo a bit, but certainly not doubling it (I haven't heard any anecdotes about how Beethoven played it)
My piano teacher used to tell me that "presto" means "the sky's the limit" as to how fast it should be played. However, I think the 3rd movement of Moonlight Sonata sounds better if it's played at less than maximum speed.
The most accurate rendition of the 3rd mvmt in my opinion is in a movie about Beethoven
This is the scene
ruclips.net/video/wI7Ookr4-gU/видео.html
@@Qrayon There is a stupid movement that says everymusic from the classical to the romantic era is played now at double the speed it should be played
Debussy: "Music is the space between the notes."
Also Debussy:
Two words: piano roll.
It's not often that a RUclips comment makes me laugh out loud. Well done good sir
@@erichuang7524 yeah that's how he recorded it. Your point?
Morbid Manatee Time is limited on a piano roll, mate.
Ikr
Him playing is how I always interpreted Clair de Lune; it's nostalgic, not melancholy. It's reminiscing beauty, the past, appreciate the present and the movement of the night. It's moving. Amazing we have this recording.
Love your interpretation 👏🏾 thanks 🙏🏽
I agree. I have a friend who used to play it much like Debussy did at the end of our evenings. Just beautiful. 💛
Can we also acknowledge that perhaps Debussy intended the piece to be played quickly? I mean after all he wasn’t a baroque or classical player, he was an impressionist, his music was meant to invoke feeling, often of nature and more often of water. And in the way he plays the piece in this recording I can hear that, so maybe instead of saying it’s cause he was running out of time, which I can admit that also might be the case, can we also think that we have our interpretations of his piece incorrect, and Debussy as the composer intended it to be this way. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Dude its written in description, it was recorded on piano roles which were really short and you had to play piece really fast
@@kestrel3509 Having to play pieces fast because of piano rolls does not mean pieces are not meant to be played fast. Are you an NPC?
its because the time is limited.
you see, the recording can only take so much time.
Well it’s because he had limited time. Also, he wasn’t a fan of being called an impressionist.
I acknowledge that you didn’t call it a song. !
Pianist: "Who tf is this guy? He's playing it wron- oh wait a second, oh no" *identity crisis initiates*
lol! I know, I hate the way he plays it. Tant pis pour moi.
AAAAARRGHHH!
Same's with rachmanninoff
Isn't it wonderful? After all, he had the thought in his head and the feel of the music in his mind and he interpreted what he felt in his composition. M. Debussy, I don't care what you did you are a hero and your interpretation is just right for me.
@@jacz08 Nope! It's not a he, it's a she. The musician's name is Suzanne Godenne. The uploader has incorrectly identified the musician as Debussy.
I was confused as to how the audio quality was so good for such an old recording until I realized thanks to the comments and then a little internet scouring that this is a piano roll recording. So glad that this technology was around back then so we could hear this amazing piece of art played by its creator! Kinda adds a little touch to an already ethereal song.
Yes, the first digital music is over 100 years old. It still sounds exactly the same as it did then, as a MP3 will in 80 years.
The clarity and nuances are remakable
If you've ever listened to old recordings of Caruso, the accompanying piano sounds so horrendous it makes me appreciate this technology used at the same time. To bad it couldn't have been done for voice.
MP3 in 80 years on what media? Most digital media won't last a couple decades. Those "Lifetime" dvds are interesting though
An amazingly clear recording using 100-year old technology.
It’s not a recording. It’s a piano roll. So the recording technology is modern. That’s why it’s clear.
@@TheRealPaulCaplin A piano roll is a type of recording.
@@gnamp Yes, if you’re going to be pedantic about it. What I meant, obviously, is that it’s not an audio recording. It’s more like a MIDI sequence in modern music. It’s actually closer to sheet music than it is to an audio recording. Anyway, it means that it can be played back on a modern piano and recorded using modern recording technology. Which is what happened here.
@@TheRealPaulCaplin Pedantic? This is an accurate record of how Debussy played. Measure twice and cut once, Old Fruit.
@@gnamp Of course it's accurate. When did I say it wasn't? I was replying to the comment that said it was "amazingly clear", and explaining why. Old fruit.
To all the people saying Debussy had a shortage of time into this: you're wrong.
It's pure speculation made up by people who can't accept that Debussy had a different view on a work than Lang Lang.
I see these arguments under every video of old recordings. Even in Rachmaninov recording of his 3rd concerto people, who apparently cannot understand freedom, wrote big paragraphs of comments of complete bullshit on Rachmaninov taking fast tempos because he was nervous.
Nervous.
In a studio recording.
Choosing the wrong tempo for the whole concerto.
*IN A STUDIO RECORDING*
If you want the reasons why in this case it's bullshit I'll give them, but I can assure you already that the same company in the same years was doing much longer piano rolls.
There's plenty of very old recording out there and you will find as a constant that when Saint Seans or Ysaye (or anybody, just quoting some you easily can find) wanted to be expressive they almost never made use of extreme slow tempo. Much more often rubato was employed but never in the exaggerated way is used nowadays.
If you can find the recording of Havanaise made by Seant Sains with an old french violinist (sorry I can't retell the name rn) you will listen to a very fast and staccato rendition of a piece that everybody nowadays plays softly and gently... because they've been told it's french music and it has to be softly seductive.
Same happens with Stravinskij's firebird which nowadays is always overly dramatic and Stravinskij himself apparently "rushes" through the ending.
In conclusion just listen to this, and if you can only feel that it's too fast I'm sorry but I think you are a little bit too closed minded the poetry of the light rubato and tempo changes Debussy employed here.
Music is freedom, we already have too many assholes sitting as judges in international competitions telling us where to use rubato and when to vibrate and when to play loud and when not. We don't need people on the internet reminding everybody that the time signature on paper is different.
If anything these ancient recordings are a testament to the freedom of music, which should never be just playing the notes as written.
Don't hear the recording, listen to the music.
"Don't hear the recording, listen to the music" I like that
Sad that we wait till folks die so we can argue over "what they meant". Vita brevis, ars longa.
Your comment deserves a thousand likes.
Thank you
I play guitar but I read through the entire comment even though I can't understand most of the things you say nor the points you make😂
There is something special about hearing a composer with their own work - SO much can be learned about melody, harmony, and the "painting" of notes that invoke a musical landscape. Lots of fearlessness in this performance - and too many other performers attempt to do unnecessary things in their own performing... too much worrying going on in most cases, and not enough artwork being accomplished.
Most other versions render it too sleepy and letargic, as if it were not about moonlight but about death (- no wonder it is beloved to be performed by geriatrics while Debussy was only 28 years old when he wrote this rather romantically virile piece); This particular rendition is believably about moonlight; it expresses melancholy WITHOUT excessive old-age nostalgia, it is very impressionistic without being overly sentimental or "precious" about itself; not self-serious which is why I personally love this version; it is also not a "schoolboy" straightforward or simplistic, nor particularly easy to play at this speed - i.e. a proper companion to Chopin and Liszt as it should be.. Cheers! .
!! This is not a recording by Debussy. Debussy never recorded Clair de Lune!
I can't be the only one who likes the slow interpretation AND the faster interpretation? This interpretation (that of Debussy himself smh) is evocative and full of feeling. It has faster moments, but also slightly slower moments. To me it has a more playful feeling, a bit happier. The slower interpretations (evidently the more commonly preferred ones nowadays) have a melancholy charm, maybe with a sadder more sombre feeling. Who gives a shit?
One of the best comments under this video. I completely agree
Exactly, it's much like Bach prelude on the cello, Yo Yo ma of the 90s played it very slow and it has a romantic quality to it. Meanwhile Rostropovich played it quickly and it feels like a beautiful run through the woods. I love both for different situations
Good musicians known how to play with the tempo and metrics.
When a work of superior human art like this comes into existence and is then played by different people, it will sound and feel good in any tempo, style, interpretation. It only proves the geniality of it. Moreover I would like to say that if this is the interpretation of the composer, it must have the original feeling he was trying to convey. What I feel is that he was trying to materialize the energy one feels when the full moon is shinning bright, illuminating the dark and scary night thus putting darkness aside and bringing a new day (after a day) where one can be awaken, energized and full of love. That is why his interpretation feels more energetic and fast (my two cents). Nevertheless Debussy is pure genius!
actually I both like the fast and the slow version, the only thing I don't like is when pianist start slooooow and that get fast as hell. That really drives me mad
When I was still a young rock musician, I hated classical music... until I heard this song coming over the radio. I was so immediately stunned by its sheer beauty, that I stopped some stranger to tell me the name of it. I've been a Debussy fan ever since.
Same with me. This one "got me" and haunted me. I can't say that I'm a fan of classical music, but I'm a fan of this.
Come on! There can't be more sheer beauty than rock music!
I never expected to hear Debussy play anything. If I had something "clever" to write here, it has been completely erased by this wonderful performance.
Same with me and I’ve been playing since 5 years old Cadek Conseratory Chattanooga Tennessee. Harold Cadek voice Doris Doe. Leading mezzo Soprano in New York City. Metropolitan Opera
The change in tempo gives it an air of gentle excitement, which makes sense when you think that one of the most romantic things one can do in the moonlight is walk with the one you love. The upbeat tempo matches the heart.
Found it very interesting to read all the comments on Debussy’s performance, his interpretation of his own work! The socially accepted performances always made me feel like it was something meant for listening to while you fell asleep, ethereal, dreamy and falling softly slowly like a sleepy drizzle. Maybe since I only heard this at night, floating from my father’s bedroom radio, it was a natural expectation. But now listening to Debussy’s performance at 3am in the morning, sleepy and wanting to fall back asleep, I appreciate the refreshingly energized interpretation as something to be enjoyed in the morning with a cup of piping tea spiced with a zest of orange, toast and honey, stimulating the soul with vigor and freedom to make the day my own!
CHEERS!
He makes you feel the power and brilliance of moonlight, which is not always dim and vague.
David Dorsey : Beautifully said. You’re a poet.
David Dorsey: I'm betting that's exactly what the Great Man would have wanted you to do. It's an interpretation of the sounds of moonlight in a clear sky at midnight, if there are such things. So, he succeeds in his aim when he put his thoughts to music.
What do you all bet me we'll now have a discussion on the sound of moonlight at midnight. The wheres and wherefores....!
I like his rendition because it shows how he intended it to be heard.
I don't think it is. This was recorded on a piano roll and it has a limited time to record so he had to play fast.
@@waterbe3564 each piano roll he did had enough space, he just wanted it to be this way buddy
@@waterbe3564 not your precious claire de lune
@@waterbe3564 that is simply false what you said, the piano rolls had space for multiple songs, he played it this way because that is how he wanted it to be played
1. its not Debussy, but a troll
2. the playing is PURE SHIT.
3. how about your opinion NOW? lol
i find it off putting that the picture suddenly gets closer at 3:28
That scared the living shit outta me
People always find something to bitch about.
profd65 you just did that
@@mmrssx
No, I was making an observation, shit for brains.
profd65 and so was i
he's such a genius. this piece is so beautiful.
I never knew there was a recording of him playing this. It feels like each note flies from his soul. The music is dynamic, brilliant full of passion and played as it was intended to be played. My wish is to have this played when I die, for me it is a little piece of heaven. 🎼🎼🎼🎼🎼
It’s a piano roll, not a recording. However, I agree with everything else.
@@StrangePerson69 Can you explain to me how it works? I'm not sure I get it...The piano rolls is a machine which "reads" sheet music, right? So we're not hearing Debussy playing at all, just listening to a machine reproducing the notes he wrote on the sheet, right? It's not a recording, is it?
@@logannslm1593 the video description has a complete explanation, but, to be short, Debussy played it on a special piano which records what notes are being played. This is then used to create rolls of perforated paper, which are inserted in a special piano which can read them.
This video is a modern recording of an old piano playing one of these rolls. Debussy apparently loved how close to the original these rolls got, so he recorded some of his works.
It's saddening to see people dissing the tempo or dismissing it as a byproduct of limited technology (piano rolls, even though the piano rolls he used had more than enough time). You may dislike the tempo, but it doesn't mean his interpretation is wrong. Debussy was someone who wanted his pieces to sound like they were improvised, so it's plainly obvious that he'll have different interpretations (note the use of rubato and rhythmic changes). I'm also disheartened by those who dismiss his playing as lacking emotion or feeling simply based on the fact that the tempo is faster than they're used to. His performance is most definitely full of emotion and expression. This situation reminds me of people criticizing Heifetz for his fast tempos and lack of emotion, even though well-respected figures/violinists who personally heard Heifetz speak volumes of the emotion contained Heifetz's playing. Debussy is expressing such raw emotion into this performance and nobody appreciates it for what it is. Truly a shame.
I'm glad you're someone who can accept others have opinions about the music without dismissing them as something silly like "snobby" or "elitist".
I agree that you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss a different interpretation just because of one feature of the music. It all takes immense skill and any version where they're able to play at this level should be taken with the seriousness it deserves. However, whether it's just because of what I'm used to or something else, I still do prefer the more "traditional" way of playing at a slower tempo.
@@theoe354 I can completely understand why people prefer the slower, modern interpretation because it's the most popularized way of playing it. When I first listened to this, I was also put off by the tempo. The way Debussy plays here though, is actually a lot closer to his desired tempo if we use a metronome. He marks the score as Andante Très Expressif which from some research means a "walking-pace" that implies "easy-going" and "expressively" which really helped me put into perspective what sort of sound Debussy was going for. Clair de Lune was also previously named Promenade Sentimentale which I believe has to do with some dancing, but promenade also means "walk" which is a little neat because it sort of reflects his marking. It made much more logical sense to me that Clair de Lune is played at this tempo after I realized that this is a story of dancing, like the original poem. They're dancing, but with that sense of melancholy and sadness hidden underneath. I personally think today's slower tempo doesn't best represent Debussy's intent, though it doesn't mean that a slower tempo is bad.
The point is: he had never recorded Clair de Lune on whatever technology available then
Learning to listen to 'fast' interpretations takes a bit of getting used to. The people saying they don't hear emotion just aren't used to faster music. I am in love with this version and I feel there is bounds and tons of emotion. The low hanging fruit of musical opinions: it's too fast therefor i can't feel the emotion
I've heard that a piece of music only truly played once. Isn't it nice to think that instead of repeating himself, he played as authentically and true to heart as possible for posterity? Just lovely.
It has been interpreted so many ways and I was surprised to hear the composers intended tempo. This is always glorious to hear, no matter who plays it, but especially surprised to hear Debussy play it himself. Thank you for this gift.
This is one of the most elegant pieces in modern civilization.
This is the only version that has ever made me feel things.
Adrastea: That's because it's the composer, the creator of it, wants it played and seen. I agree totally.
There's no way you're serious.
lol its an amateur troll you effin NORMIE.
@@williamtaittinger4529 Why so angry? Let us normies have our ignorant fun.
@@tanushreeb yeah you are right. My patience with normies is very limited but you are right, lol
Achille-Claude Debussy interprété par lui-même, une surprise pour moi. J'apprécie cette belle oeuvre romantique qui m'inspire une agréable nostalgie et me touche dès les premières notes.
instantly the best version I've ever heard.
I guess that’s better than having a lag for you to decide so...!
I agree
when he picks up the tempo the first time I can see moonlight dancing on the tips of leaves and water - just beautiful.
There is something haunting about hearing this. It’s absolutely beautiful.
This is sublime - I love hearing it at the speed he, the composer himself, plays it. Gorgeous!
In spite of numerous eccentricities, strange rubato, odd tempo changes, etc., in the end, in the hands of its composer, Claude Debussy, the piece emerged as beautiful, interesting and also somehow deeply moving, ...all more so than I had ever experienced before.
I listened it many times, and I can say I'm with you. What he experienced we can nothing but imagine. But his execution is solid, harmonious, flying, as a moon lover would do to bring life to its aiméé.
Far from being a lullaby, it's exciting and warm he put WARMTH into the quicly escaping moon reflections....
Well said.
@@cookaboorra - Thankyou for that lovely appreciation of this special performance...very well put, indeed.
Finally, someone saying something truly meaningful.. This moment, carried out by Debussey, has become so dear to my life experience.
I am so happy to read your comment.
"In spite"?! I would rather say "because of". There is nothing odd, nothing strange, of course it is eccentric, but only from our modern view point.
Speed up because (Out of paper) ??? Really ?
Debussy recorded 14 pieces onto six rolls in Paris on or before November 1, 1913. According to Debussy enthusiast Steve Bryson's Web site, the composer was delighted with the reproduction quality, saying in a letter to Edwin Welte: "It is impossible to attain a greater perfection of reproduction than that of the Welte apparatus. I am happy to assure you in these lines of my astonishment and admiration of what I heard. I am, Dear Sir, Yours Faithfully, Claude Debussy."
Jonathan Marion Debussy’s remarks speak to the fidelity of reproduction of sound via the Welte-Mignon process. This has nothing to do necessarily with its ability to allow a performer to properly convey their preferred tempi, however. It is quite likely that Debussy did have to tailor his tempi according to the amount of paper he had at his disposal. While this may sound unlikely to us, it is important to keep in mind that the materials needed for recordings of any kind in the early 20th century-be they acoustic or via the Welte-Mignon process-were not exactly cheap. Therefore, performers had to work within the limitations of early sound reproduction.
It’s just not played this fast lmao. Look at the sheet music and the tempo of the piece.
@@echorrhea If he had to speed up his pieces in order to make them fit, he would not have been happy about it.
You can find many Welte-Mignon pieces on youtube that are considerably longer.
Owen White It was played this fast. If you listen to earlier recordings, it was played rather faster than it is today. (If anything, most pianists drag the thing morbidly nowadays.) Marius-François Gaillard, a pioneering champion of Debussy who was the first to publicly perform cycles of the complete piano works, actually plays this about 10 seconds 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿. Musicians simply had a different idea of “slowness” a century ago than they do now.
Also, the score doesn’t indicate any metronome markings. So what Debussy actually meant by “Andante” (which likely has nothing to do with the “Adagio” or even “Grave” typical of present-day pianists) is left to the performer to guess.
Mnnvint They are longer because the pieces themselves were longer and, thus, required more paper, but that didn’t mean the materials allocated for these sessions allowed performers excessive license to slow down either. Mahler’s piano rolls, for example, exhibit tempi considerably faster for the works in question than are standard today. Also, your expectations of what would make performers “happy” to hear are founded upon present expectations of sound fidelity. Over a century ago, sound reproduction was still in its infancy. The Welte-Mignon process, flaws and all, would have sounded like a miracle compared to the then wretched state of acoustic recordings. So of course Debussy would have been happy. Had he managed to live at least until the advent of electric recording, however, he likely would have changed his tune. The remarkable advances in recording that would be made only a decade after his death alone would’ve stretched his imagination.
To everyone complaining about the tempo: Someone who would not know Clair de Lune and would listen to this recording would just be amazed by the piece. We are just used to hear it very slow.
You're probably right. Unfortunately, I have definitely heard it a few times before. Lol
Maybe, just perhaps...we've all been hearing it played at a slower tempo than Debussy wanted it to be played. There have been recordings of it that, to my ear were too slow. It is still something that stops me in my tracks when I hear it. I'm gobsmacked to be able to hear the originator of it and it matters not a jot if I love the movement of it and the mental picture it brings me.
3:30 Loving the closeup they do on Debussy’s photo, like he’s looking at all the piano snobs and saying “Your move”.
U want a close up of me
This heavenly musical work by the great Claude Debussy so wonderfully soothes the soul of the listener...
I worship it and often dearly need it...
The entire feeling of the piece changes when played this fast. It's amazing how it almost sounds like a different song with a whole different feeling. The slow version is ethereal and dreamy, the fast version is full of energy and feels like a rushing river. A beautiful piece no matter how you play it.
Giving this gem a 👍🏻 seems shamefully inadequate and insulting. We are so lucky to hear this man perform his beautiful creation a century later on RUclips. Magical.
!! This is not a recording by Debussy. Debussy never recorded Clair de Lune!
This song always gave me the image of a person in their last days pondering through all the beautiful moments in their life as the curtain slowly closes. And it makes me cry every time.
Debussy is really something. He’s the type of person who can fill your head with dreams.
I've always hated how slow Claire de Lune was played; it was just another piano lullaby. But it's so beautiful now- so much passion! Thank you Debussy!
Check out Victor Borge then, he plays it like somebody is chasing him.
You're welcome- debussy
scronchman 01 What?
Shawn Ho Yee Jing this is a replay not a recording
Niet Ali-A, Niet Ali-b maar Ali-c No. What I meant is that how does bad technology = Faster piano roll recordings? It's not necessarily faulty. There needs to be proof to uphold this argument? What part of the piano roll is bad that causes it play faster?
It’s magical. I can envision Debussy at the piano, lost in concentration as he plays his own piece.
This interpretation is so alive, lyrical and expressive. Thank you SO much for sharing this. It gives us a fresh insight into the composer and his music.
!! This is not a recording by Debussy. Debussy never recorded Clair de Lune!
@@TheUltimateLegend7 Fascinating. Thanks for letting us know.
Why do 329 people dislike this when a man is playing his own music? lol.
who knows
😂😂😂😂
Neurosis
@@roserosewater it's his own song!
Probably because it failed to please them. (You can't please everybody, even if you're Debussy.)
I LOVE to hear composers performing their own works. It's pretty rare in many cases and impossible in other cases. But here . . . it's just our good fortune.
Love hearing this piece in its proper speed. Most other versions render it too sleepy and letargic, as if it were not about moonlight but about death (- no wonder it is beloved to be performed by geriatrics while Debussy was only 28 years old when he wrote this rather romantically virile piece); This particular rendition is believably about moonlight; it expresses melancholy WITHOUT excessive old-age nostalgia, it is very impressionistic without being overly sentimental or "precious" about itself; not self-serious which is why I personally love this version; it is also not a "schoolboy" straightforward or simplistic, nor particularly easy to play at this speed - i.e. a proper companion to Chopin and Liszt as it should be.. Cheers! .
yory teperman Excellent points, great comment!
The original, very much has undertones of syncopated jazz & is all around more a happy tune, a celebration of the night. There is clearly an explosive yearning in the melody and keystrokes. Amazing. Beautiful. One of my ever favorites.
Until I heard this I was no fan of the tune. THIS is so very sweet, and like a late summer night along a lake or bay.
Bob Van Wagner W
beautiful
You were no fan of the tune? What are you, a poofter or something?
i’m imagining this and it’s so accurate
Mark Godfrey no need to be snobby
It's a strange change but I kinda really like it, doesn't feel as depressing to me. Feels magnificent
From the horse's mouth! Extremely interesting to hear his own interpretation of the piece, more dramatic and fluid than one usually hears it. Not just some serene marble-like moonlight, but also passion and turmoil under it: there are some Van Gogh fists against the merciless sky here! The more I listen to this, the more I'm also seized by the raw emotion of the piece. No modern pianist, to my knowledge, brings out that same despair: this is flesh, lunatic 'horror' and reality. To me, this is a prayer from a man who has nothing to hide, and nothing to lose. He sees the Seine in moonlight, where so many people have drowned themselves. He feels la cathédrale engloutie within him. He is at one with his soul. And no teacher has ever, never, taught him how to interpret and feel this nocturne: Mon coeur mis à nu...
Valid remark. It could be a trick. The excellent quality of the sound, for one, is suspicious. Never thought that it could be a make-believe, but it's actually quite possible. That said, who on earth would come up with an interpretation like this? No serious pianist even of that time would have dared to relate so "freely" to the written text!
We are so blessed, when we can hear how the artist himself interprets the piece of music we love so well
*he surely got all debussy back in the day*
PAAHAHAHAHAHHA
Love me some bussy (boy pussy).
Finish on the bach, never finish on Debussy
good one
You’re stupid
If you can play it slow, you can play it fast!
Intresting
Sacrilegious
AmAzInG
Amazing
Ling Ling 40 Hours
Composer plays himself - and so perfectly, simply amazing. A real treasure !!!
this song brings tears to my eyes everytime i hear it. it feels like loving something so much to the point that you’re drowning. and not just romantically. like when you’re in nature and you feel this heavenly feeling of belonging and comfort. like you arent alone.
i expected it to be unique but not this different, wow! makes you think which other pieces we're interpreting really differently than what the composer intended. beautiful performance, beautiful melody
There is a considerable fanbase for early recordings made before the 1940s due to how radically different interpretations were. Other modern listeners might call these old performances gaudy, and would probably cringe at the huge liberties performers took with the original pieces.
Debussy heard music in his head that no one had heard since the beginning of time. His influence is still felt today. All musicians
today ow a debt of gratitude to this genius
Un des airs les plus beaux!
chargé d'émotions ,
De nostalgie...
Quelle inspiration
Claude était véritablement
En dialogue avec Dieu...
Beauty and Sorrow in one! Can’t help but to cry every single time it plays! 👑❤️🔥🔥
Sublime version. We are lucky to hear this from him
A lot of people commenting here say that, he played it faster for the recording. Well, I am not convinced.
From what I experienced, older pianists seem to have different interpretations of tempos, from post WW2 pianists.
Take Chopin's Berceuse for example. I fell in love with that piece and searched for as many versions as I could and I found that older pianists played it faster - for example Horszowski or Moiseiwitsch, who both were students of Leszetycki (student of Czerny himself, who might have actually heard Chopin play Berceuse).
Feels to me like pianists taught and influenced by the masters from the 19th century liked to play a bit faster.
Ravel also criticized slow and sentimental interpretations of his Pavane for a dead princess (the famous story: it's a "pavane for a dead princess", not a "dead pavane for a princess").
So I wouldn't be surprised if Debussy actually played it a tempo he wanted it to be played.
Just my thoughts.
@Snow2ice My music teachers told me andante means slow, but I know that it does mean walking, so I guess it's just a matter of how slow or how fast you walk.
@Snow2ice Joke? I have a pretty good sense of humor, but where's the joke?
O.k. So it's just a matter of whether you want to walk 56 beats per minute, 88 bpm, or something in between.
My teacher did not like metronomes, and told me not to use one. Too mechanized, not human enough. I doubt he lived to the time of drum machines and computerized music; I'm sure he wouldn't have been pleased.
@Snow2ice What grade am I? I'm a high enough grade to know how to spell "piece."
@Snow2ice Yes, I know what metronomes are for. My teacher never used one, and he was against them.
I guess you are not capable of slowing down without one, and you can't actually play the piece without one; but I can.
By the way, I'm a professional piano player and have been since before you were born.
@Snow2ice I understand, but I have always practiced without a metronome. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with using a metronome, and I'm sure the benefits you describe are real, but as I said, my teacher did not think they were a good idea even for practice. Yes, of course I agree that you don't have to be slow to be expressive.
By "professional" I mean I make my living playing the piano (or I did until this bogus shutdown). Btw the correct spelling in your context is "piece," not "peace" or "peice."
PS: I graduated university with a bachelor of arts degree.
Wow this is so totally different, the lilt and swing of it... it blows me away
Beautiful , magical , otherworldly
There seems to be a knowing intention in this performance, at this resting tempo. It is more crisp and precise. As though Debussy were kneading the keys in comfortable, careful and deliberate expression. I can breathe ever more deeply.
Im amazed by how differently i interpret this GIANT'S piece... i will endeavour to capture this interpretation from now on. It almost sounds rushed but i love it - its frenetic! Like he cant get it out quick enough! You'll never be forgotten Claude! I played this to my children when they were babies. They will never unremember!
This recording is remarkable for 1913
guffaw
oh really? but its not debussy playing it is an amateur. And op is trolling people. This was recorded in 1988 by a student.
@BigPig this was recorded in Odessa, Ukraine, in 05.05.1988 by a student named Andriy Pavlovski who later became an engineer and left piano. Not hard to guess why, the kid could not get Clair de Lune right. The dude pulled this prank and later outted himself as a troll on Reddit. What you are seeing is a copycat work on trolling. Search for it on reddit and you might still find the discussion over all this BULLSHIT you low iq normies are so quick to embrace, no matter how bad the actual playing is.
How much time has passed since 1913...relationships formed and lost...loved ones come and gone ...families started and ended. This song brings out the best of all those memories.
Beauty, suspended in timelessness.
How priveledged we are to hear it
from the mind and fingertips of its
creator.
So gentle and very special
When Debussy plays it, it is joyful, vibrant, exciting, very much in love, I can almost hear his joyful eyes gazing on the woman he loves. Think of Paris, at night, under the moon light, and the gorgeus lady he describes beautifully with the melancholic notes. But when others play it, it is melancholy, despair, beautiful but tragic, unrequited love..
Le immagini e le emozioni che mi evoca il brano suonato da lui stesso sono di una potenza indescrivibile. Dinamico, entusiasmante, magico, moderno...Le note in certi punti si inseguono, si accavallano, si confondono in un caos naturale a dir poco stupendo. Grande.
His rhythmic freedom is amazing. I wish I'd heard this back in high school when I was playing this.
Merry Christmas, 2019 with Debussy, Clair de Lune
You all can’t just appreciate the music and chill - I’ve played This song since 1972. A masterpiece !
INCREDIBLE, never did I think there was recorded tapes on Debussy playing. Unbelievable