INJURED in Chopin's Name?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- Annique Göttler of the RUclips channel Heart of the Keys recently published a recording of Chopin's etudes. In the lead-up to that moment, she released two videos that are worth examining more closely from the perspective we cover on this channel: historical tempo reconstruction. Is Chopin's tempo for the first etude intended to be really that challenging? And what about our human capacities? If playing for three hours in a recording studio already results in a forced break with signs of overuse and inflammation, is it not time to reconsider our approach? And on a broader level, should we reconsider our interpretation of what the composer truly had in mind? It must be something different from what we currently think.
--
🙋Join our Patreon community and help us create more content▶ / authenticsound
--
📩Stay informed! Join our mailinglist (yes we have one too!) 👉bit.ly/as-maili...
--
📱 Website: ▶www.authenticso...
'Reawakening' by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. www.scottbuckley.com.au
'There Was A Time' by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. www.scottbuckley.com.au
'Yellow' by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. www.scottbuckley.com.au
'Reverie' by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. www.scottbuckley.com.au
This is a very well made video. Sensible, logical - made by an obvious serious student of music and piano. Excellent.
I refuse to believe that people from the 19 century would buy scores that requires 7 to 8 month to learn to play a single piece. And those composers were one of the best sellers of their times. I doubt a housewife that wasn't a virtuoso and only played in early 19 century Pianos, that were lighter, I know, but weren't built to sustein the tuning for longer time (without the later metal plate invented), would buy those pieces, and we know that they were the main focuses of the sheet music market of that time.
Even Mozart noted that pianists played his music too fast.
@@chlorinda4479 You’re Right. It was about Vogler. I didn’t realize he didn’t like him that much lol. He also said this about Aloysia Weber. “She played my difficult sonatas at sight, but slowly, without missing a note. On my honor, I would rather hear her play my sonatas than Vogler.”. Not sure if she was just practicing the sonatas or not; the source wasn’t clear about that. I also found that he said in some letters that he had little respect for a composer who wrote presto and then played the piece allegro. So anyway, I guess he really had something against Vogler. It’s a lot of fun to read about these things.
There are plenty of pianists who would be perfectly able to do what Annique did whilst not experiencing what seemed to be a very temporary physical discomfort. It is no joke that the piano is a physically demanding instrument and playing 4 hours of very technically demanding pieces is especially demanding. Many people have expressed the idea that it is important to have technique that allows for essentially constant performance and some people seem to have achieved this.
Bottom line, the fact that Annique experienced temporary exhaustion after 4 hours of more or less constant piano playing shouldn't do anything near supporting your conclusion.
Yeah and also the thing about the horrendous thumbnail.
I’d like to think I have a pretty decent technique, but as a rule I never go longer than 45min-1hr without a break. I had a background music gig several months ago where I played for three hours- while I didn’t suffer any injury I was definitely fatigued and took a day or two off after. Playing for four hours at a time, no matter how flawless your technique is, probably isn’t advisable…
@@zulice4341 I don't think it is either and in my example I of course meant taking short breaks, which I believe Annique did during her session.
Ok, now what you can add to the other arguments of the video? The quotes from Liszt's pupil etc.
And all the other evidence he proposed?
So many of Chopin's waltzes (like Waltz No.4, Op.34 No.3) sound much more joyous and are perfect tempo for dancing when played at exactly half the tempo the modern performers do. Waltzes were meant for dancing back then, weren't they? And you can't dance at those manic tempos.
Thanks! Really interesting to see that there is a continuum of proof of greater and and greater speed.
Annique can play as fast as she wants...But I'm still going to digitally cut her tempo in half ( or adjust to what makes sense to me ) and enjoy it on my level.
Sorry but I wonder how many people still don't get it ! Injuries come from WRONG TECHNIQUE=WRONG WAY OF USING YOUR BODY TO PRODUCE THE SOUND (Which actually IS of the most conplex task in the art of piano playing) and NOT FROM SPEED. Sorry but this is ridiculous!
Yes. I’m so sorry for Wims fighting the Windmills. He is such a gifted player. But completely devoted and blinded by his own cult. He understands everything always in a way it fits his utopia.
Btw, Schumann hurt himself back in the day through insane practice methods. Surely not because it was too difficult to play in Wims sleepy tempi. Everybody can get exceptionally fast if they follow learning good working technique with the goal for effortless execution. Also Chopin himself teaches incredible technique wich works perfectly for insane tempi without hurting yourself.
Relax Wim, don’t be so uptight, and you’ll see, playing fast is the opposite of tightening up! You have to constantly avoid tightening up otherwise you won’t execute a fast tempo.
Nobody disagrees with this, but attempting to play at faster speeds leads to worse techniques hence more injuries. It's not ridiculous, it's so commonly seen in pedagogy that it's in almost every major composer's biographies (speed and injury).
Also, faster speed likely means more practice, which means more usage of your hands. Our hands are not perfect machines, they degrade with use. To say that injury ONLY comes from wrong techniques is laughable, in my opinion.
The one thing nobody is mentioning is the fact that the modern piano is a literal tendonitis machine. Even with great technique you risk injury every time you play the piano which is why I only play instruments with a light action.
@@ChristianBurrola reasons why the Harpsichord is superior ;) The piano is a very physical instrument.
At certain tempi any technique is the wrong technique, because you're not meant to play at those tempi at all. You're ridiculous.
A few facts:
Chopin composed his studies according the pianos of the time which have a far lighter touchweight than modern pianos. This is because the hammers were lighter and the action contributed less friction to the process. Thus for example, it was possible to reach MM 160 in the revolutionary etude - which is impossible on today's pianos.
Insufficient appreciation of this fact has led some pianists to attempt speeds that are inappropriate for the modern instrument and are thus likely to lead to injury. There are certain editions of the etudes available (for instance the old Edition Peters) that seem to recognise this and therefore do not give the original MM numbers. Instead they give numbers that are about 2/3rds or in some cases 3/4 of the originals.
This is a good practice in my opinion but it does not mean that it was the composer's intention and it does not mean that that the original MM numbers actually *mean* half of what they are ordinarily taken to mean.
not impossible at all to reach 160. however you need to understand how your shoulder arm and forearm and wrist and finger works
@@kakoou3362 If 160 is possible on a modern piano, then it should be easy to find a video of someone playing it at that speed. As far as I am aware, none exists. Happy to be proved wrong if you can post one.
@@MrNewtonsdog ruclips.net/video/6G7ed2uiYhM/видео.htmlsi=qQfIXLCCFazKNDiM
Both Hofmann and Rachmaninoff considered Anton Rubinstein the greatest. And anton Rubinstein thought piano playing was better in the past. Thats why I disagree with the claim that things were slower in the past. I find it impossible to reach or surpass the artestery of this level on this recording with half of this speed, creating nuanced pianistic effects. Friedman was also one the pianist who was influenced by anton rubinstein. Modern pianists are simply worse than those in the past with very few exceptions.
Your thumbnail is not considerate and is misleading. It reveals your intent and you earning views at the cost of Annique’s sharing of music is quite sad. You are implying to viewers that Annique is leading others to injure themselves. Her videos go into details on technique to prevent injury but you don’t mention that at all. Poor technique causes injury, not speed. If you are honest, you would keep your argument but replace your thumbnail with one that doesn’t accuse Annique. That was a cheapshot. You were so direct in the thumbnail but you didn’t directly talk about it in the video, again that is cheap and a bit cowardly.
Welcome to social media!
I'm starting to feel there's a problem in Wim's videos. Months ago, I commented that he should discuss annique's channel and maybe interview her for her opinions on the metronome markings on Chopin's work. He ignored the comment and went ahead and made this exploitative video instead. His channel is starting to seem like a conspiracy channel, and he presents it that way as well, so he can get clicks. Why not go out and interview people, scholars, and pianists and ask them their opinions instead of trying to sell some sort of hypothesis he has on metronomes and try to sell his very, very slow versions of piano sonatas.
I am actually surprised they would risk their physical health to play Chopin. Chopin! The dude is physically sick for most of his life, he privately laments he can't play his pieces like Liszt, and develops techniques to mitigate hand injury due to his main job as a piano teacher. How can you injure yourself playing pieces composed by a man who can't play his own works for over half an hour at a time and developed techniques to mitigate hand injury while playing!?!?
yes, well.. let's not paint Chopin as born crippled or something. he was certainly in very good form when he was writing his etudes. his romanticized "weekling" phase comes towards the last years of his life..
that's not to say i think the Cmaj etude should be played at a 170..
I sincerely hope that Mrs (Ms?) Göttler suffers no permanent injury from her efforts in recording these etudes at her chosen tempo. It would be a terrible shame for everyone, not in the least for herself, to have such an event stop her from doing what she clearly enjoys, namely play beautiful music.
Wim, you have presented here yet another good argument for the whole beat metronome practice being used alongside single beat in this era of music, thank you.
Right?? The pain she is talking about happened to my prof too and he got tendinitis and couldn't play for years, he literally had to retrain his fingers how to move
I hope that sooner or later some great courageous pianist will record these etudes (on two CDs!) respecting the original metronomes. Try talking to Ivo Pogirelich; I don't know if he knows about it, but he likes to play slowly...
ALSO I don't know if I've ever told you this before but when I was doing Czerny etudes with my first teacher, she told me the metronome marks were to be read in double beat. My first teacher studied in London with Matthay, and went to the Royal College of Music to study a second degree in organ. She was studying there about 100 years ago now. Her college professors told her that Czerny's metronome marks were to be read in what you call double beat or whole beat. She told me this before Google existed. In fact she stopped teaching in 1995 and died in January 1997 aged 88.
This alone isn't absolute proof of your WBMP theory (which I know you didn't make up because I heard about it from another book in the late 90s), but it is an interesting anecdote especially in context of the metronome marks on etudes.
This is nothing. My college instructors and their uneducated students permanently damaged my hearing from electric amplification. It is very common. Permanent damage. From ensemble playing inside the rehearsal rooms. And guess what. No one discusses this or cares to address the root of the problem or the simple solution.
So you listened to music so close that you damaged your ears?
@@classicgameplay10 stupid reply.
My friend who plays double bass had this problem when he was a teen. They always had him standing near the speakers and he had permanent hearing loss in his left ear and partial loss in his right.
huh how is that even relevant
@@maleahlock one of the undergrad music tutors was previously a flute player before switching to piano. she admitted she had developed ear problems and no longer played the flute (but didnt go into detail). turns out ear damage is very common with piccolo players and flute players. no instructor or professor ever mentions this or ever offers the obvious safety practices to avoid this. permanent damage. music academia acts in completely irresponsible and harmful ways to students.
Excellent!! amazing Master Class!!
My teacher forced me to practice Hanon at a relatively fast tempo and I hated it. When I couldn’t play these exercises at the tempo goal he set, the lesson would stop and we then spent the next 20 minutes figuring out why my fingers couldn’t move fast enough.
Did this teacher play at the speed he was proposing you to do ?
@@classicgameplay10 He could, I think, since he could play the "winter wind" etude very coompetently. When I protested about practicing Hanon because I felt funny in my right arm, he told me that a lot pf people couldn't handle Hanon and falsely attributed hand injuries to practicing Hanon.
Sounds like the teacher should be sued in civil court for abuse.
The Hanon Virtuoso Pianist exercises where for short periods of time, just as scales or arpeggios weren’t meant for excessive speed, but rather for daily practice for ten to 20 minutes at most. Similarly to athletes performing warm up exercises, before a game to prevent injury.
I think you may want to consider getting a new teacher...
And by the way listen to Argerich's recording of Op. 10 No. 1 it's one of the very best versionsbof this piece and it's noth FAST and EXTREMELY MUSICAL. That's the whole art: to make sth fast that is still musical
Yes, that recording is absolutely beautiful.
It is also spot on the metronome mark.
Every pianist wants to put something of themselves into the music they play/interpret. A good handful of the best and most famous pianists have and have had exceptional technique, and they use this to add something to the music. So long as it doesn't take anything away from the music, I quite like it. Sometimes it's an amazing feat that few people can do, like climbing Mount Everest. Musical technique constantly evolves over time. Why not use it when you got it? :) Music that was too difficult to play 100 years ago is standard repertoire today. That doesn't mean we should always just play everything faster, but sometimes it fits. Like Beethoven "Moonlight" last movement, I don't think Beethoven would have minded if he heard Valentina play it.
I believe Chopin was deliberately out to destroy as many pianists as possible... ;-) That was his raison d'étre...
So interesting! Great.
"But the Liszt that I heard in *1876* and thereafter […] has been surely equalled, if not surpassed, in technic and tone by the *several* pianists of the present." In 1876 Liszt was 65-years old and almost 30 years after he retired as a concert pianist in 1847. So yes, it is perfectly plausible that some finest pianists in 1924 played better than retired virtuoso in the last decade of his life. [11:09] I’ll tell you more, 30-year old Liszt could also easily outperform and surpass his 65-year old self. And if 48 years later only several young pianists were able to match or surpass the technique and tone of 65-year old Liszt we can only imagine what he was capable of in his prime. The point of the whole paragraph is being deeply misinterpreted. Rosenthal refers to the general progress and the overall raise of the *average* level of pianism. He presumes that Liszt would be delighted to witness the vast amount of piano virtuosi, capable of playing his music, but at the same time he would still be the best among them. That thought is comprised in the first sentence (which was omitted and not cited because in itself it contradicts what the following argument was intended to prove): _Liszt, if he lived today would probably be the greatest of living pianists_
[8:00] "Opus 10 had just been realised, so we can assume that he hadn’t spent years studying them". No, but he spend years on perfecting his technique beforehand (with a daily 4-5 hour routine of technical exercises) which allowed him to approach those pieces with great advantage. And most likely he didn’t sight-read them but had practiced them for weeks.
[15:05] "The composer explicitly notates Legato, this means the opposite of light arpeggios". In what way legato is contradictory with playing light? Chopin was known for his preferance for smooth, singing legato (inspired by Italian bel canto) although he had all different types of touch and articulation at his disposal (and that he demanded from his students). He advised them to practice scales in all different configurations of dynamics and articulations. Also, the F[orte] indication is placed closely to the first octave (in some editions right above) which may suggest that it indeed refers to the bass. And creating legato effect shouldn’t be a problem (in any dynamics) given that whole bars are ought to be played with sustain pedal.
And about the accents? If we adhere to a strict and literal approach to the musical text (that is proposed on this channel) they should only be performed in the first two bars.
You forgot that Liszt heard his pupils playing his pieces many times during his teachings. If they were playing it too slow compared to him when he was in his prime, he would let them know it,don't you think?. Come on. You are questioning the quotes from a guy who talked with Liszt for hours about music and the art of Piano. Do you really think that they never talked about how fast their contemporary pianists were playing? Or about how fast Liszt was when he was young? REALLY, DUDE? You think that the guy just saw a old Liszt playing and concluded that he always played like that? That he never asked "How fast you were when you were young, master?"
It is noteworthy that in these comments all those discussing who has better technique seem to be focused only on the speed of performance. Usually faster is regarded as higher in the table of worth.
This Etude in historical tempo sounds much better than that fast tempo.
We may not fully know but I think that the metronome at 176BPM was there for a reason and I read by in the book titled 'Chopin' by Adam Zamoyski that Chopin himself stated that his technique was equal to Thalbergs, I cannot remember which page but surely Chopin was a great virtuoso but in a different style to Liszt, and if Liszt is to be remembered as the greatest piano virtuoso of all time that must mean during then he played Chopins etudes at their written tempo (176BPM maybe even more), and if Chopin was transported to today he could maybe just match the best concert pianists out there when he was in his prime, but not also in sheer technique but in sheer musical genius as well. Who knows to be honest ill wait for a time machine and go check it out.
Thank you so much Wim. We are constantly bombarded with how people think this music must be played and it can make one feel defeated before they even start. You give us all encouragement and inspiration to continue working and growing, and I really appreciate it so much! 🙂⭐❤🙏🏼
But isn't it he who pedals how it MUST be played, or at least implies it through the "composers intention"?
Outstanding video! I learned so much!!! You are a brilliant educator, pianist, entertainer, and presenter. Thank you so much!
Holy moly - the greatest pianists and composers played it like that?!?! I should be selling more tickets - and i'm not experiencing anything like 'lisztomania'.
@@1389Chopin Liszt's music is still highly virtuosic even with a bit slower tempo. You also need to have in mind that Liszt's and Thalberg's piano technique was revolutionary for that time, so that added to the shock factor.
Well done...
Wim, there is a huge problem in piano teaching right now. Tempo is something to do with it, but there is a problem in the teaching of technique as well. I'm really happy to talk with you about what it is. There is also the culture of practicing for 8 hours a day, and students are taught that if they don't practice that much they won't reach the standard required. It's a huge subject that embraces tempo, tone production, tension in performance, and how very few of us are willing to stand up and say no, this is not acceptable anymore. The other problem is pianists are being taught to make their arms very heavy and push a lot of weight through in order to produce "enough" sound, which pushes so much tension through the arm and hand that the only possible outcome is injury.
What's worse is we've known that this is an avoidable problem for decades, but the conservatoires are not willing to buck the trend. Teachers are scared to look into this problem. I got injured at college and I spent a loooooooooooong time thinking about why. I don't get injured when I play now and haven't for a long time but I can tell you exactly what is happening.
It’s unfortunate that you’ve had some encounters with bad teachers, but in my experience this is not a cultural issue. I was lucky enough to have a technique-focused teacher early on (especially because I was a late starter with a deficient technique) and sought out the same when I pursued graduate studies. I attended conservatory and I haven’t seen this nefarious world where teachers pressure students to play music for which they are not prepared technically- this is counterproductive to long term development.
Using the weight of the arm, with appropriate flexibility and looseness of the wrist, does not create tension, and in fact is really the best way to avoid it on the 9ft monsters we play today.
@@zulice4341 yes some arm weight is necessary but I’ve observed some pretty horrendous teaching. My first teacher was good thankfully so I was set up before reaching conservatoire
Using the weight of your arm is the only way to play without tension. Using arm weight does not mean pushing weight through your arms though, calling that weight would actually be weird. Actively pushing into the instrument is a bad thing, but resting on top of it with your whole weight is the key as well as maintaining a wrist stable enough so that it doesn't collapse under that weight.
What will cause injury though is if you only use your fingers. Doing this for one doesn't produce any real tone because your fingers are weak and 2nd leads to injury, because your fingers are weak.
A good general rule of thumb is that if it sounds good, you are most likely doing something right.
@@viggojonsell9754 I know that using arm weight doesn’t mean pushing but I will say I’ve seen this pushing taught so many times. In colleges.
I think you make a perfect case for the historical metronome practice! If just someone from the music establishment would pick up your argument or at least enter a serious discussion!
I love Annique's interpretation of Chopin, however I would also love to see what she could do with them at "Wim Winter" speed. Many of the videos on this channel reveal the extra charms that appear in music when it's played a little slower (i.e. matching the composer's intentions).
In my own personal playing (as an untrained amateur), it has certainly made a lot of classical music much more approachable. Beethoven's sonatas, and Chopin's etudes are still a challenge, but not an unattainable impossibility.
Bernhard Ruchti has recorded the opus 10 in double beat on a modern piano. They sound great. I have the Chopin etudes performed by Claudio Arrau, Earl Wild and Murray Perahia, I honestly, rarely listen to them. As great as those pianists are, it's just a buzz of notes while you wait for the warhorse pieces. The double beat recordings actually make the less interesting etudes at single beat enjoyable. And the warhorses gain even more "oomph!"
@@chlorinda4479 Plenty of amateurs can play Chopin's etudes and Beethoven, LIszt and Rachmaninoff. Just look at Paul Barton's RUclips channel as an excellent example. He played the entire Goldberg Variations and Balakirev's Islamey all of the Chopin etudes, much LIszt even the late Beethoven Sonatas. He's a portrait painter for a living. The point of the video is that attempting to play the etudes at twice the intended speed of the composer is not accomplishing anything except creating injuries. The other option is claiming that playing at 20-25 percent slower than the composer indicated is acheiving the composer's intentions.
@@chlorinda4479 Well, Paul doesn't make a living as a concert pianist. And your statement was that an amateur trained or untrained can't play Chopin's etudes. And the fact is, to play an etude or even a large scale work simply takes longer for a disciplined amateur to "get into the fingers." Charles Cooke's famous book "Piano Playing for Pleasure" demonstrated how he was able to eventuallly engage in some very advanced works from a well disciplined one hour practice session per day. The touring virtuoso works up a selection of repertoire and repeats it several times a week for a year or two. And they may need to have up to 60 concertos in their repertoire in some cases.
It's a totally different physical load filled with stressors that is divorced from actually playing the music itself in a reasonably artistic way. The "double beat" method is only a segment of the discussion. I find it coherent and reasonable and I have yet to see a rebuttable that illustrates why according to single beat, 70% of the demanded speed is acceptable and considered artistic while 50% is considered unacceptable when it is tied to pedagogy but not when it is done in practice as in many standard repertoire items.
@@chlorinda4479 Well I thought the question was not why it's not acceptable, but if it's really the truth of historical practice... but never mind I think it's my poor understanding of English as some of them pointed out to me.
@@chlorinda4479 To clarify, I'm not saying a touring virtuoso can't play in a reasonably artistic manner. I'm stating an amateur can play in a reasonably artistic manner with advanced works in their repertoire with far less practice than a touring virtuoso. I'm also stating that a touring virtuoso regimen is more about being in an endurance test than an artistic approach. Give Marc Andre Hamelin or Yuja Wang six months to just focus on one program recital for one weekend's performance and heor she will be able to throw much more into their artistic vision and still be able to do quite a lot of other musical or non-musical activities, like the composer/pianists who wrote the stuff. And if whole beat is the true way to play certain earlier composers, they can focus more of their speed playing on modern composers who are definitively single beat.
I don't know what you mean by the "proper" tempo and how you must exclude the whole beat hypothesis. On the one hand, we have people being told to ignore the "proper" tempo indications by the composers and on the other we have people injuring themselves in attempting to reach the tempo markings and then we have two slower ranges. The whole beat method which takes into a account an alternative understanding of the composer's intentional use of the metronome and then there's a fairly random 20-25% faster than whole beat with an occasional use of whole beat tempos which is also 20-25% slower than the composer's indication if single beat was truly the composer's intention.
Beyond that we have the speculation that Chopin, Liszt, Henselt, Alkan et al actually could play and intended notes to be played at these amazing speeds because the actions on pianos have gotten slower and we also have the "broken metronome" idea. I simply find the whole beat hypothesis to be a compelling argument and it coheres very well. If the single beat advocates could actually put together a coherent argument that actually was consistent and less speculative in ways that are diametrically opposed, I would match them up and see if Beethoven or Chopin indeed did make more sense in single beat. So far, despite the tradition I was raised in, whole beat makes more sense forensically speaking than the imagined ideal of single beat speculations.
Thank you for this. Im practicing this etude and never heard of tempo 104! Very good to know that its relative
What's the difference between a real reality check and a false one?
hero worship.
excellent video
It is unbelievable how can the whole Pianist industry could fail so terribly in reading metronome beats, as if the pieces they are interpreting are from the times of ancient Egypt or Greeks. There has been no disconnect in piano tradition, then how can the world be so off and refuse to correct or face the problem?? The slow playing you showed sounded very musical and beautiful.
There is a vast amount of ignorance and ego in the artistic worlds. That's a dangerous mix. Record producers like celebrities and celebrities need to make a splash to sell records and people then imitate the celebrities who are already unusual. So the unusual can have a wider impact than a more subtle artistry. My piano teacher use to warn me not to exclusively listen to Horowitz because he did extraordinary things and deviated from the text and played in an exaggerated manner that could cause injuries. Especially since his pianos were adjusted to emphasize his kind of playing. But virtually every young pianist of a certain age goes through a "Horowitz phase" and tries to imitate his effects. Some get injured, some stop before they are injured. Another interesting analogy could be made of the fashions of the day. Modesty for both men and women today is almost unheard of, so dressing to be attractive conceptually is a far cry different from a century ago.
@@chlorinda4479 That's a bit of a Straw Man argument. 2 points. First, whole beat presto / prestissimo tempos can be demonstrated that show speeds of 12 notes per second. That's pretty much all the ear can distinguish before things become a blur. Second point, Liszt's creativity was in his imagination not in inimitable speed. Claudio Arrau discussed that in the Liszt school, a trill needs to be thought out as to whether it's slow, fast, a mixture of both, measured, loud, soft or any other of many considerations. Listen to the comparison in this video between Arrau and Stephen Hough playing the same piece. ruclips.net/video/oeV-UOU5UrY/видео.html
If there is no disconnect in the piano tradition then why did Rachmaninoff (who shared a few years of living with old Liszt) play at modern tempi? When exactly did this cataclysmic change in tempo reading change and if it did why is it not common knowledge? Considering Rachmaninoff's performances we can draw the conclusion that he and his contemporaries read metronome markings according to our modern view, this most likely includes Tchaikovsky too since Rachmaninoff played his music in front of him. Exactly when is this supposed to be different from Liszt and Chopin?
@@viggojonsell9754 Rachmaninoff never lived with Liszt. His cousin Alexander Siloti was a student of Liszt's. Siloti's daughter pointed out that Rachmaninoff played more slowly in his private playing than his public playing. Horowitz related a story in which Rachmaninoff after hearing Horowitz told him that he was playing too fast and was losing the music. Horowitz replied that he needed to make a sensation because he was afraid to go back to Russia. Rachmaninoff understood. And finally, watch the video in which Wim relates what Moriz Rosenthal stated about LIszt marveling at Rosenthal's speed and Rosenthal saying that his own speed was being surpassed by the students of the 1930s. Rosenthal said his tempo of Liszt's Don Juan Fantasy would be considered tame.
@@gerry30 I didn't mean Rachmaninoff lived with Liszt, but he was born in 73 and Liszt died in 86 thus making Rachmaninoff a teenager at the time of his passing. Knowing this really isn't difficult.
I know the story of Horowitz playing the Tchaik concerto but I highly doubt he played it TWICE as fast as it was supposed to, if it was we would have known and if it was I highly doubt the audience would have appreciated it.
Rachmaninoff must have read metronome markings the way we do today and as such my question still remains when this switch or break occured and why it is so damn hard to hear any pianists throughout history reference it explicitly.
My teacher made me try to reach the "usual" velocity of a few chopin études (e.g. op. 10 nr. 2 and nr. 3), I never injured myself, because it was just a hobby, but I lost a lot of fun, and my fingers and hands did get some real pain. I'm definitely going to revisit the études now, ca. 10 years later, using the original tempo.
This is interesting. I saw an interview with Seymour Bernstein (by Ben Laude) about Chopin. Seymour said that Chopin's piano had an octave physical width that was as wide as today's piano 7th. The keys were narrower. There was speculation that perhaps Chopin's music was easier to play with a narrower octave. What's more, Seymour saw the cast of Chopin's hand and noted that it was not big. I wonder what other dynamics are in play as we think about Chopin's piano music. On a different but related note, I saw a masters class by Jorge Bolet and a student playing one of the Rachmaninoff piano concertos. Bolet stopped the student to tell him that if he played the piece at that tempo that no orchestra could keep up with him. He told the student he needed to play it slower for the sake of the orchestra. Another video I saw was about how Rachmaninoff himself played the piece (they played his recording) and not how he wrote it! They showed how Rachmaninoff actually played it differently than he wrote it for others to play. I think there are a lot of things in motion on how pieces today are played and should/could be played. So, this video is very interesting. I sent an email to Ben Laude to suggest they watch your video and interact with it. Thanks.
in a way I think also diet and physical activity play a huge role in musicians recovery, and both are not taken into account at all, maybe since musicians have no formal education at all in those topics. But it is well known how much can those things combined help, people into sports are trained to take their performance to the best possible, and benefit also from their training, faster muscle/tendon recovery, better bone structure, sharper reflexes, many aspects that only can develop properly once the right nutrients are available for the body to make good use of them along with exercise that encourages the body to function to its best.
There is no need to be thin, or have a strong build, simply the body develops and maintains with certain essential nutrients, and there is also more supplements that cane ease recovery and finally hormonal improvement result of exercise encourages healing. There is research about that for those who are interested. Even doctors would demand people to go through physiotherapy sessions so that the body can heal better and stronger.
My main interest is to help my body to function best possible, and meeting my daily nutrient requirements as also training and getting informed about supplements have helped me tremendously.
I agree that wrong or extensive practice can cause permanent damage that then limits the ability to play - I have personal experience with this - practicing up to 8 hours/day - and can no longer play faster pieces/movements at (normal) tempo. As an example, I previously was able to play the third movement of the Moonlight Sonata at 'normal' tempo. Now, the allegretto is my limit...well, unless I use whole beat, then I can still play the third movement. ;)
FWIW, what I believe I did that caused the injury was to try to adjust my finger movement because I thought it looked "un-tidy" in a video. IOW, I tried to make my fingers move in the way I wanted them to LOOK while playing, not in the way they wanted to move. So my advice is to play in whatever way is most comfortable for your hands/fingers/body. How it sounds is important; how it looks is not.
Re whole beat: I find the discussion interesting and the work being done quite impressive. I don't agree with it, especially when dealing with Beethoven, whose life/music I have studied since I was 15 years old. But it is important to listen to alternate views of any subject. You can learn something regardless whether you end up agreeing with the specific conclusion.
I'll pay Annique a 100$ if she plays Chopin's etudes in whole beat.
She probably can't...
Good morning to everybody.
Etude op10, n.1 is the piece that even the great Vladimir Horowitz never performed in public.
You study it for 2 hours and you need a break to go to the bathroom. It's gone. You have to start all over from the beginning. Perahia suffered a serious injury when he pushed his hands to imitate some things that Horowitz did.
I am not in a position to give advices but the one thing I ve learnt over all these years is to play slow, to be humble with these acrobatic exercises.
Piano playing is like training your dog. Some use punishment and violence. They have quick effect to the dog. Some others, prefer patience, reward and to give time. When my hands cannot do something, there is a reason always. Don't push them abnormally, don't punish them.
Let through the racional study, your neuromuscular system to find the optimal way by itself. The only technique that evolves is the natural technique. It's just need more time.
2:15 are u f serious? XD
I see that actual musicality and a proper tempo is shocking to ignorant audiences who have been accustomed to clownish performances at breakneck pace.
I am so grateful for your videos. You have helped me to feel like I no longer need to emulate professionals and mostly just enjoy playing. When I was young Ithought I had to push myself mercilessly too. But now I am able to play for enjoyment - And for esthetic purposes and expressiveness, to be honest. with the skills I built up when I was younger but with realistic expectations.
Wonderful video, Wim! Full of compassion for your fellow musicians, and for those from the past whose works are so routinely distorted (I might even say butchered) by the modern obsession with speed. Ah well. It shall be a long time before this is corrected--if ever. Meanwhile, keep up your good fight. I believe you have many secret admirers along with the more outspoken ones.
Excellent video. When I saw Annique's video (may she live forever and her office chair remain speedy) I was shaking my head. Thank you for adding your expertise and knowledge 😊
I see your point but the tempo was more than likely no slower than 3 quarters of the speed pieces are played today
Hey Wim. Aren't you a little bit of a part of the problem ? When you idealize the music of Bach or Beethoven and suggest that today there are not composers on their level, aren't you bringing this mysthique universe of the eighteeen and nineteen century ?
In this video Wim actually de-idealizes Chopin and Liszt. A lot of the mystique of those composer revolves around their unattainable, supernatural virtuosity, which Wim clearly refutes here.
@@robertklein-oo9nm im talking about how Wim describes their skills as composers, not as players.
Very well-argued! Musicians have to understand once and for all, the difference between virtuosity for its own sake, and musicality. If they ignore all musical aspects written in the notes and intended by the composer, for the sake of winning a 'car-race', they cannot call themselves musicians, just technicians...
Is Annique Göttler just a 'technician'?
Can we not just accept that some music is written to be played very fast and that some really talented people can do it in a beautiful and musical way?
Incredible video. Bravo.
It's pretty difficult to argue against documentation and first-hand facts; but the irrational detractors will regardless.
Will they offer their own data and evidence? Nope. They will just repeat the "Big Lie" of single-beat because their egos cannae handle a world where musicianship trumps some farcical definition of virtuosity as if speed were the be all and end all of being "the best" on the keys.
On a side note: Musicians are also athletes to an extent. Those of us who have figured out that diet and exercise are required for the job have found that the music can only be as good as the brains and muscles of the person manipulating the levers.
I think there's a genre out there of elite althetics on a keyboard; however, those afficionados will need to look more at the physics than the maths on this one. It is fun to play fast, but never to pretend that this agility is what the orignial composers of that age intended. There is ample evidence to discount such rubbish! Chopin's music when played correctly according to Chopin himself is a way to ascend to the heavens. By anchoring us to the physical world of velocity, we won't get there.
This video is amazing because the player herself asks questions that her own experiences cannae answer. She will eventually adopt the correct view when she finally agrees with the evidence that Wim uses here in this video. Don't complain that your face is wet when you continue to spit into the wind!
Be well, everyone!
If you actually check comments on WW's videos, you will be able to find that almost all videos have comments contain disprove WW's arguments with good evidence. Maybe you can explore them first.
@@minkyukim0204well here I thought Wim censored every negative comment. You guys have to make up your mind...
@@JérémyPresle well some have survived apparently…
@@chlorinda4479 ,
There are two ways to read a pendulum, which "The Maelzel's Metronome ["MM"] we have seen is itself a species of pendulum".
One method explained in the evidence you produce from this article, written in 1817, is beats per minute, which the author himself errs in stating "second" [pg. 223, 2nd column, line 51, 5th word]; he should have said minute. This is the "single-beat" interpretation.
The second method, which is from physics and is Mersenne's method, which Wim has explained and is correct in explaining Mersenne's method, is revolutions per minute. This is the "whole-beat" interpretation.
This video suggests that the player, Annique, is having difficulty managing the "beats per minute" interpretation. Wim has posited that Chopin himself c. 1830's must have used "revolutions per minute" because of the several pieces of corroborating historical written evidence. The "104" reference in "single-beat" is quite illustrative of this point as it is within 15% (faster) of Chopin's "whole-beat" interpretation.
Your use of this 1817 article is too early to be used to apply to Chopin's interpretation. The "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy is not acceptable here. Chopin could very easily have used either one, and the unless you have "current 1830's evidence" that contradicts what Wim has found, your 1817 article isn't a proof that Chopin "must have interpreted the MM in 'beats per minute'".
It is my opinion based upon physics and clockworks that the 1817 article's interpretation of "beats per minute" instead of "revolutions per minute" is in error. The former physics concept has a formula that's been in use since the "proportion" was converted into an "equation", viz.: T=2[PI]*(L/g)^0.5. To find beats per minute, the T value must be divided into 120, which is the beats per minute of T=1 second. The latter idea of clockworks is that the pendulum must still follow the physics formula in order to move one "pin" [Maelzel used the French "pinwheel" escapement] for each revolution. This is en fait how all machines are measured. Please check the "tach" on your car's engine, for another example.
It is agreed that two methods to read a pendulum exist, and to state that just because someone had an opinion that the beats per minute must be used in 1817 does not translate to Chopin's obvious use of revolutions per minute in the 1830's.
Thank you.
@@minkyukim0204 I have reviewed every one of Wim's videos, and the question that there are two methods to interpret a pendulum do exist. Wim states and has provided evidence that this beats per minute intepretation is in error for this video and any others that he has made. Physics is also against the beats per minute interpretation as the formual in physics doesn't support a beat per minute interpretation. Do a test yourself. Make a seconds pendulum of some 39" or almost one metre, and plug the values into the physics formula. You will then see with your own eyes the error.
Be well.
Imagine making a career out of being unable to play fast, and calling everyone else an idiot for playing „wrong tempo“.
I love your channel. I think you do a lot of justice to Chopin's work. In this way it sounds so musically, so in the spirit of a glummy person like Chopin in the spirit of the romantic era, instead of the circus, malabaristic way the nowadays performers plays his work. Dankeschoen.
Chopin never was (?) and never will be “circus music” (well, maybe I can picture a lady or woman in a tight fitting white glittery bespangled costume, complete with a tall hat or headdress feather, standing on a horse to some of it! 😂
How exactly would one of the most bombastically brilliant etudes for the piano be circus music? Liszt comes closer and that was pretty much intentional he IS ridiculous but Chopin never was.
There is nothing wrong with "fast" music, a lot of notes doesn't make something less musical and sadly due to videos like this I think the idea that speed equals not musicality is spreading even if that isn't Winters intention.
I suppose the whole beat thing is a somewhat interesting high level debate but it is not some kind of card that can be thrown out on the table to completely discredit any music which is fast.
Yes @@viggojonsell9754 that is what I said.
@@Bova13 well Winters suggests playing half tempo, something that really cannot be said to be fast. I also expressed my disliking for this kind of content, you most certainly didn't so what exactly is it that we agree on?
@@viggojonsell9754 as P.T.Barnum said “there’s a sucker born every minute”. I won’t get sucked into a maelstrom of argument with you because you have no sense of humor
Thank you very much. When i saw Annique's video when she released it i couldn't stop myself to think "that is because you are playing it twice as fast"... I played this etude back in 2003 with my small hand and it wasn't playfull at all for me (but i did it at about 110-120)... Another important issue in all 1810's era and maybe even Beethoven is the use of the "Hairpin" as a way of accelerando and ritardando and not a dinamic mark. For dinamics they write crescendo or diminuendo. If you ear Frederic Lamond (Liszt student) playing for instance "Un sospiro" you will ear that he follows every hairpin as a way for changing the tempo and not just the dinamic. Even Rubinstein was very meticulus with this, just ear his "Barcarolle" of Chopin and you will ear the detail he uses the hairpin to modify the tempo and the phrasing. All the etudes have lots of hairpins, the revolutionary etude stats with hairpins in every tempo (that in some editions were corrected to accents), i think it's fair to say that the etudes were ment to be played much slower but the hairpins allow us to modify the tempo and the phrasing so we don't sound like we have just swalloed a metronome. Chopin didnt't like students to memorise his music because of all the information in the score and that included knowing every hairpin as an expression marking and not just dinamics... Think of that... Once again thank you for your videos!
The worst teaching in the world is probably to "push through the pain" or the "no pain, no gain" idea.
Yeah for the piano, which is why only incompetent teachers do so.
@@viggojonsell9754 Or old teachers, people often teach what worked for them. But that doesn't mean it will work on everyone or that there is one correct method. Godowsky would practice endlessly and only achieved what he wanted after hours. That was probably due to his inability to get into a relaxed state until he exhausted himself emotionally at the keyboard. Clementi did the coins on the wrists. Liszt developed his technique with an attitude of muscular development. Alan Walker believes it was developed out of his transcriptions while his technical exercises were a composition done late in life. Rachmaninoff like Hanon of all things.
It has been a while since I’ve seen a video from you. This is a very good one, making me recall an injury from over practicing I suffered circa 1978, in which a nodule was raised on and in the tendon of my right hand, while I was in graduate school for physics the second time (Perhaps I should have been reading physics and mathematics in the library instead ? …. By the way I am the former « dougR » as RUclips has renamed my channel for some unknown reason…). I particularly liked the « Gilded Age » remark, reminding me of “Only a Bird in a Gilded Cage ». The nodule drove me to the University infirmary, where all the MD advised was this “this is the kind of thing where we just say « Smack it with a Bible » »…. To me, incompetent medicine or advise
Good arguments presented in this video, well-edited, and I would argue, convincing.
❤
Great summary of logical arguments and reasoning and well said.
I see chlorinda is working overtime to discredit you and your work again. Incapable of looking outside her tunnel view. 🤣
No one can reach it or only through YEARS of study, but Liszt could do it in weeks or months. Hilarious to think people actually believe this makes sense. 🙄 A technically inferior music instrument after only a few decades of human skill development. We mastered playing the piano after a few decades and then got worse at it almost 150 years later…MAGA cult like reasoning really.🤔
There are twelve year old children on RUclips playing Chopin etudes waaaay faster than whole beat.
But Liszt, a grown man, a great virtuoso who practised like a maniac couldn't do it?
And 'a few decades of human skill development'
?? More like centuries.
Keyboard music didn't start from scratch with Beethoven.
You don’t think there might be a reason Liszt is one of the most legendary musicians of all time?
@@zulice4341 liszt was a great pianist and composer no one denies this...yet he was a human being just like you and me. Attributing unnatural abilities to a revered individual is not uncommon...but very irrational at best to solve a problem of unplayable music.
@@solesius If you think Chopin is unplayable, I’d suggest listening to more Chopin (preferably starting with the students of Liszt and grand-students of Chopin). These performances and other primary sources will tell you more about 19th-century performance practice than a RUclips channel.
@@zulice4341 Yes certain pieces of Chopin are too fast to play and too fast to make any musical sense if you are even able to reach that speed. Guess you missed this historical fact and the whole point of this video. If you can’t follow his musical markings, fingerings etc. You are doing something wrong obviously. But again, keep denying a well documented FACT for the past 150 or so years. Doesn’t actually make the problem go away. People can get (sometimes poorly researched) PHD’s on the metronome problems…guess they are researching something that doesn’t exist…
Glad to see your video.
It would be an interesting experiment for a renowned pianist like Marc Andre Hamelin who no one could question his technical facility and have multiple recordings done for comparison. Single beat and whole beat recordings on both a modern concert grand and a period recreation from Chopin's era. I'll fund it if I ever become vastly wealthy.
I am an American that passed my Swiss Boards as a Chiropractor. Early on I had a shoulder injury which forced me to have an operation. Due to a medical error after the operation, I've suffered multiple operations. And I've rehabilitated my shoulder after each operation and modified drastically my techniques. Because of this, I've developed a special attention for the shoulder and the arm and hand. I have a different reaction to these videos.
First of all there are 30 seconds of exercises to stabilize and strengthen the low back. Every day.
People say 30 seconds can't change anything, but if they start they can see the results. And I can see the results if one does 0 seconds per day.
Then there is the shoulder and arms. I have a video with the exercises and treatments.
Oh My Aching Bach.
BTW I just started playing the piano a year ago. I closed my office trying to chase the Transitional Village dream which was a nightmare. And my fight for the climate has led me to be crushed by the oil lobby in Switzerland. Bastards.
Unpopular opinion: we shouldn't focus on tempo marks and should instead focus on making music.
which is basically the same thing - the tempo dictates the character of the piece - hence the exercise of figuring out what the composer had in mind, hence the reason why he gave those MMs.
You can make whatever music you want. But to make music that the composer had intended for us to play, you need to know the tempo.
True. Totally agree. Annique is fantastic.
Injuries are horrible but it's much more complex than it's made out to be in this video.
Some people play incredibly fast without getting injuries while others hurt themselves even though they don't play very fast at all.
I don't think Mr W is an expert on this and he shouldn't make it into a simple question of people playing 'too fast' and use it as an argument for whole beat.
I don't think the video is intended to be an exhaustive review of the causes of injuries, but rather a demonstration of the incorrect attitude taught by teachers, conservatories and universities. In the quest for incorporating all of the characteristics indicated in the sheet music, at the alleged prescribed tempo, a pianist will very easily bring an undue amount of tension into their playing. That coupled with an attitude that they can't go a day without practice leads to a failure to allow the injury to properly heal and it's then compounded with more practice. I was a late beginner and now, decades later, when I encounter a new composer or piece of music, I can feel the strain in my hands because I learn with a lot of tension in my hands. But I only practice new pieces for short periods of time and give myself a comparatively long time to recover and I practice very slowly. When I come back to that same section of the piece, the tension is gone. If I practiced consistently like Annique, I'd have permanently injured myself long before she did owing to her youth. And, if Wim is correct, most of the problems people are desperately trying to avoid are due to an incorrect understanding of tempo indications coupled with a desire to be flashy in the speed department.
Wow In this video everyone gets enough infos to create their ideas. Bravo Wim!
Leave Annique alone! Leave her alone!
😆
Hero worship is a rough road.
I love Annique bro, but we need this for us to learn more.
😂
What is wrong with this dude.
Two things. But before that, this are just thoughts based on hunches, not historical facts or evidence.
I’m not convinced if the beat theory is right, nevertheless:
1) I agree, indeed the tempo proposed is too extreme and probably is not what Chopin intended
2) Whatever real tempo Chopin intended is just a guideline, meaning it doesn’t have to be the tempo one plays it at.
If we believe that the purpose of the etude is that of training the fingers such that they reach proficiency at handling the technique proposed by the composer, then it makes sense that the goal of every etude is to gain power and speed.
The etudes should be practiced slowly and sped up until the player cannot play it faster meaning until he/she compromises on clarity and stability.
Since everyone is different, different bodies, different hands, etc. It wouldn’t be surprising that some would achieve a higher speed without compromsing clarity at the same etude.
But that doesn’t mean that person has better technique or more talent.