For me the wording "Chopin competition" always seems like olympics: the winner is who plays the fastest. I play jazz, where the ultimate goal is finding your own voice, and we never play exactly the same twice. When I hear pianist graduating from high schools, universities I feel like they are coming from a factory from the assembly belt: everybody plays the same way, thinks the same way. Thats why I admire Wim and his team members, who dare to be different. Yes they are going back to the roots and try to be authentic, but the same time preserving some humanity in every performance. Before knowing Wim I thought I'm wrong playing Bach too slow, but he confirmed to me I'm right. So he inspired me to record WTC1 on synthesizers and other modern instruments. Again I have to say thanks for Wim! Keep the good work Wim and Authentic sound!
The jury of the Liszt, Chopin etc. competition always complains that we see "playing machines" today but no musicality. Quite often, the first prize is not awarded. They are also looking for music, not acrobatism.
I appreciate your comment. Finding a voice in classical music is hard because we are working with an age-old repertoire that, for all its inspiration and beauty and depth, has been played to death. It is so well known that to stray much from the printed page smacks of indulgence, rightly or wrongly. Jazz has more freedom in that regard, usually working with a melody and some progressions as a foundation upon which to build a composition in real time. In jazz you do not have a monolithic two-hundred year old composition to deconstruct first.
when I saw the thumbnail for Ben's video I immediately thought of authenticsound... It would be so interesting to hear a conversation between you two, or at least some mention of wbmp by tonebase.
We can literally hear how a student of Chopin’s most important student recorded Chopin’s music to finally settle the “debate” on tempo. Oh wait, he literally already did that in Laude’s video.
A joke came into my mind. It's at the end! (some explanation before, you can skip it) The pace marks do have some dimension. They are not random numbers, but they do have some clear meaning. If it is told that you have "quavers=72", this means that you want to have 72 quavers per MINUTE. They cannot mean any other thing, can they? And I called these pace marks, not metronome marks, it is an intentional use of the word. This is independent of the movement of the dirigent's stick or the ping-pong ball or anything else. It is even independent from the metronome itself. The metronome just helps you giving 72 ticks per minute, if you want. Or you can use a non-ticking pendulum (as Bartók did, e.g.) or anything else, but you have the information that the performance is considered as fast as you have 72 quavers per minute. ------------------- The joke. An emergency call arrives to the ambulance. "Help me, I feel very bad! I've been lying since 10 minutes and my pulse is still 85!" -- "Don't panic, 85 is not that much either." -- "Aber doch, it is indeed! It is 85 according to Wim's Whole Beat Theory!!!"
Actually your joke is spot on. During the baroque era the understanding of heartbeat (and of pulse) was very different from today. We all agree that the heartbeat is formed by the systole and diastole. But at that time the systole (or diastole) was equal to one full modern heartbeat.
@@JérémyPresle I am just amazed how the term "full beat" emerged here. :) Pulse means we measure the pressure peak in the veins, typically below the thumb. I am uninformed about any "baroque way" to do this differently. But regardless to what we measure, what we tell is in "number per minute" quantitatively. Qu=72 means we have 72 quavers in a minute. Not 36. :)
@@JérémyPresle Really - baroque hearts beat at half the rate of modern hearts? Really? Honestly? Wow!!! But wait - of course, we all know that in the baroque era one minute lasted for two modern minutes. Don't we?
Friederike Müller-Streicher is a very important source about Chopin (over 500 pages of letters). Since her letters were published only in 2018 Eigeldinger didn't include them in his book (Chopin pianist and teacher). He only had acces to Niecks extremely limited (only a couple of pages) resume of her letters. To ignore this info today is quite problematic, as many passages from her letters greatly enhance (and sometimes contradict) the image we get from Eigeldingers book.
Thank you for giving the link to Koczalski's performance. I hope people listen to it, not as a tempo control officer with the score and a metronome, but with their ears and emotions. There are conflicting accounts of whether Chopin played "in strict time" or with a lot of rubato. Why not both: use rubato (in both senses, bel canto rubato and structural rubato, which is the expressive employment of ritardandi and accelerandi) while maintaining the underlying rhythmical (not metronomic) pulse? This is what Koczalski does. At 27:25, you can, if you wish, read the Streicher/Niecks quote as meaning strict tempo (unless rit. or accel. is specified in the score). But you can instead notice that it is only *misplaced* rubato and *exaggerated* ritardandos that Chopin hated, and these are precisely the faults of "lingering and dragging".
I am not sure the literature supports your view nor does the music require any sort of lingering or dragging except where indicated if played with the original use of the metronome.
@@petertyrrell3391 Music never requires lingering or dragging! Those are faults. (especially dragging). You seem not to have understood my comment at all. As for literature, for a start read Czerny on the performance of Chopin's works (Op.500 Part IV).
@@DismasZelenka I think you should do some reading, but without prejudice. Isn't the fault in Koczalski's performance is the presence of lingering and dragging(?).
Chopin’s Rubato was the left hand steady keeping time in tempo, and the right hand was free of the meter, which his students related, you still see this into the early 20th century in piano roll performances and later recordings of music in all genres of of serious music symphonic works, opera, and piano, even Judy Garland’s performance of Somewhere Over The Rainbow from the Wizard of Oz.
I think what Wim is doing is important, but I think also he sometimes muddles his own message, or what I perceive it to be. That is, trying to find an explanation for metronome markings from the early 19th century that are so fast that virtually no one actually plays the music at those speeds. It need not, and I have never heard Wim say it, imply that the answer to that question would dictate the ONLY way to play the music. Even those who are unconvinced by Wim's evidence do not play the compositions in question at those speeds, even if they could; in practice, genuine single-beat performances are rare. The vehemence of the detractors therefore has always baffled me. What actually is at stake here? It brings to mind Sayre's law: "Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low."
Exactly: pulse of 44 per minute (original metronomes didn't go below 50). One big problem with WBMP is that it ignores the melody and concentrates on the small notes in the accompaniment. On early pianos, taking the MM as half of what it should be results in the long melody notes fading into nothing while the accompaniment thumps on. It seems that Mr Winters has given up responding to points made by commenters on his videos, apart from awarding hearts to those praising him. I think this is a shame. His channel deals with interesting questions that deserve discussion.
When I saw Ben Laude's video I thought.. 'ui ui ui cruising for a bruising'.. then.. 'bread for Wim's teeth'.. (the content, not the guy) and after watching this.. 'hitting the nail on the head' (like every video on this channel). I think my brain is turning English.
23:00 "well, that's not written in the score". Isn't it? What do the words 'espress. dolce' right at the beginning suggest? Then look at the unusual phrasing of bar 4, and the sudden f. that ends the second beat. Would it be natural to sing this in strict tempo? So I think you are wrong. Every musician would feel the need for some rubato and some slowing down in that measure. The places where Chopin has specified poco ritard., poco rall., poco rubato, when you look at them, are precisely places where the player would not automatically feel the need for tempo modification. That is why Chopin has written the words on the score. Perhaps Koczalski overdoes it. I have read that he was sometimes criticized for excessive rubato. But it is a matter of degree, not of yes/no.
@@DismasZelenka Then there’s the quote from his student about keeping strict tempo in the left hand and the rubato in the melody free from the beat yes a paraphrase of the choir master-conductor. However, self expression not withstanding. More than a few passages about a similarity to Mozart’s form of Rubato, sometimes written out in a repeated passage. Then there’s the quote,"everyone is amazed that I can always keep strict time. What these people cannot grasp is that in tempo rubato in an Adagio, the left hand should go on playing in strict time. With them the left hand always follows suit." that refers to the Adagio, but is that Tempo or a short double meaning. In J S Bach’s Time as found in Kreb’s copy circa 1722, WTC Pt 1 in the WTC in the Word Adagio In JSB’s hand should be interpreted as a call to improvise, and not to change tempo from the Froberger tradition/usage it’s also found in the Bb Major prelude where a change in tempo would be illogical or out of place. Fermatas on notes or chords at the close of a passage likewise also instruct in short hand to improvise. There’s two manuscripts of a J S Bach fugue on theme of Albinoni one with the Fermata on chord and another variant all work out 32nd noted arpeggios, before the conclusion. How much of this was back and forth traveled between the German speaking lands, before his stay in Eisenach ( friendship with J S Bach’ father) Pachelbel’s prior post was in Vienna, at Saint Stephen’s Cathedral.
I thought something was wrong with me when I started hearing the ever increasing speed of piano performances. Glad to know it wasn't me. I thought much music had lost its meaning due to excessive tempi. Thank you.
I can't give an exact quote from Eigeldinger's book, but the sense is this: probably Chopin's most brilliant pupil, Carl Filtsch (who died at a very young age) played one of Chopin's pieces (a scherzo, I think) in front of the master, and Chopin commented: this is not what I had in mind, but you can go as far as possible in this direction
I think that whole beat was used in the time of Chopin. However, this nocturne sounds extremely slow in whole beat, and it is difficult for me to envision the musicality that Chopin would have had in mind at that tempo. That said, at the single beat tempo, it becomes impossible (or at least unmusical) to play the fast notes in time. Ironically, I think the ideal tempo for this piece (if you’re going to keep it steady) is about 8th=100, which is what Koczalski averaged in his very un-steady recording.
but then what about the tempo that Chopin gave? Keep in mind, we are conditioned heavily to hear music as we expect it to hear. Just try this nocturne a few weeks in whole beat and you'd be surprised!
@AuthenticSound Hi Wim! Thanks for the reply. I’ll take you up on the challenge. I’ll play this in whole beat for 2 weeks, then report back with my thoughts.
I play this Nocturne regularly. I've never followed the tempo mark which is way too fast but tried it at 66, then I found it very laboured. I don't think Chopin would have played it like that. As usual, I get the feeling he played it at 20% above his tempo mark (assuming it was 66 as we understand it today) and the tempo mark he gives is just for a beginner / the average pianist to practise. I do wonder if pianist like Chopin & Liszt then pushed tempo's higher in their own performances, thus starting the ever increasing tempo's leading us to today's performances. I wonder if they realised this at the time? Probably not!
the fact that a metronome mark is an accurate tempo indication seen as ideal for the piece no matter who is playing it, is a solid fact. There is not even a beginning to deny that. But, to your second point, how did musicians or even the composers themselves played their pieces? That's subject for a separate research. We do know from many composers that they valued their tempos a lot and in general you read many advices to strictly follow those indications. But our research essentially focuses on how to read those metronome marks. And there is no doubt. To your point of difficulty regarding the 66: that is a very common feeling - I struggled years myself. Best advice is: try it for some weeks, even months. And you will see it will work.
Why are you so obsessed with tempo indications? seems like you are a prescriptivist who is too much in his head. First and foremost music needs to be lived and felt in the heart. Then the appropriate tempo will take care of itself. Whatever it might be at the end of the day. Every effective interpretation is a good interpretation. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
Everyboby wants to rush. Rush, and rush, not to play a beautiful melodi in sintoni with the heart, what chopin did in his time. I listen some guys (not you) in 0,75x on RUclips, I confess. Its not so good (they vary de rhitm everywhere), but its berter than in 1x
Thank you for this videos. Ben Laude is not on Tonebase anymore and this video is on his regard already. Bar 6 of op. 9 nº2 has a crescendo and an hairpin at the same time. Those are the places where the tempo could flutuate and are very well documented by Chopin, in a very carefull use of the hairpin, with a totally diferent role than the dinamics signs like crescendo and diminuendo. So, op 9, just before Études op 10... And the Études are floded with hairpins, some of them poorly edited has accents (like in the revolutionary étude). So yes we should take in consideration WBMP but also tempo flutuations of haipins. The book "Chopin vu par ses élèves" has this side of a "strict tempo" composer, but on the other hand there are also quotations on how Chopin would sit at the piano and demonstrate diferent interpretations of his works. If he saw his students very worried in the day of the performance he would encourage them to be free in the interpretation because he was very srtict in his lessons wich sometimes caused his students to block. Also important the quotation about Chopin's premiére of the Barcarolle where he played the last page pianíssimo where it was marked FF and FZ. Chopin also didn't like students to memorise the score because he felt it had too much information on it. In my opinion, if you count hairpins has agogic marks, slurs (chopin was very strict with slurs and would breath and sometimes take his hands out between slurs) and expression signs, it is a lot to take in to do it stricly. So, the videos i wich you would comment are more towards the use of haipins (tonebase has some important ones). Knowing where the tradition really started is very importante since it has been poorly named has "the Brahmsian hairpin" when i see evidence of it in Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin, Liszt, Mendelsohn, Schumann and of couse Brahms himself... Sorry for the long comment but i belive it's a very important subject to adress when dealing with tempo markings or flutuations. This is the video you should be commenting: ruclips.net/video/pRLBBJLX-dQ/видео.html
So it says 132 that means we have to put the metronome on 66 right? Ok maybe they counted 2 beats, but why then denote the number of HALF beats per minute on the scale of the metronome?? That is like putting 200 on the speedometer, when the car is actually driving at 100 km/h. The notes you play at 16:40 dont really sound 'presto' to me.
Leave the metronome at 132, and now your metronome splits the beats for you. Or cut it in half if you prefer. It’s a tool, use it to serve you. Metronome marks are there to tell you the time, the speed.
@DismasZelenka I always leave my drum beat in single beat, or faster. It helps me keep a better time. If I'm playing quarter note 60 , I set the machine/metronome to 120 or 180. It's much easier to hear the beat.
While I acknowledge that you have a popular channel and do not want to destroy the business (at least: it is about classical piano music!), I have to say that the all audio sources show quite an equivocal understanding of Chopin's tempi, which is roughly the same tempo as today. They give no place for tempo "woodoo". In the 1970s, when the whole beat/half speed theory emerged first, these recordings were not easily available or not mostly, available at all. With these recordings, the things have a way different enlighting. One can say (and many say indeed) that "OK but". However, the sources go back very close to Chopin (and Beethoven). There was Moscheles (student of Albrechtsberger and Salieri; editor of Beethoven); there was Mikuli (teaching assistant and editor of Chopin), and we can hear recordings of their FIRST generation students. Not one, but several indeed: Michalowski (student of both Moscheles and Mikuli), Rosenthal, Koczalski etc. You can hear recordings of many students of Clara Schumann as well. Mikuli, Chopin's teaching assistant taught Koczalski and Friedman the very same way as he did tutor the students when Chopin was too ill to give a lesson... Koczalski had kind of the same traning that a late student who wanted to learn from Chopin, but had no luck and always had to meet the assistant instead ... but the living Chopin's assistant! And these guys knew that they have great responsibility in preserving the authentic Chopin style, and their recordings will be references. Could have been maverick players among them (there were _always_ mavericks...), but such a homogeneous understanding that we hear from them just excludes that any of them was a "maverick". Look, ALL these guys play the same speed - same speed or even a bit faster than today. Not one of them says "let's play just a little bit slower this, our Master Mikuli played everything two times slower, we are on the wrong track clearly and eventually...", no. There is a vast massive evidence that what we hear in these first Chopin-recordings just preserved very authentic details (e.g. unnotated phrasing things that are concordantly performed the same way by these "historically indirectly informed" pianists -- and they preserved the tempi defititelly). Also, Chopin wrote some pieces for the Liebhabers (it's clear), and other pieces for the professionals (it's clear again. He wrote the Op 10 Etudes for himself to study new piano playing techniques that he used in the Piano Concertos, but were insanely difficult for himself, too!). So, yes, there are difficult pieces, and there are pieces that collect all these difficulties together intentionally. You cannot tell that you slow these down to half speed and it's good because Liebhabers can then play it, because it is not for Liebhabers. How many notes per a second: listen to the Op 10 No 12 c minor Etude played by Cziffra: he is playing 20 notes in a second. It's a bit blurry when it is that fast, but anyways: great musicians like András Schiff always teach at the masterclasses that there are parts where you want notes, and other parts where the notes are unimportant, you want to hear gestures, so "do not be Czerny" - as Schiff tells usually. In essence: 20 notes per sec is doable. Not for Liebhabers, but... let's forget the Liebhabers when they must not come in the picture. And finally, we see that the contemporary speed (and the speed of all historical recordings) is doable for a trained pianist today. You are telling that the steam trains arrived and then the playing sped up to twice pace... and no one in that old times could play today's tempi. If you stick to this interpretation, you say that the steam train taught pianists to play twice as fast as earlier, and this way, the trains were the best piano teachers! Hm, hm. I am very far from being convinced. :) :/
I agree in everything you said and can't add much. Just the evidence of a student of Chopin himself, Friederike Müller, a young, very talented Viennese noble woman who went to Paris in 1839 to find a renowned Piano teacher. She had Liszt, Thalberg or Chopin in mind, but hoping for Chopin (he was still sick in Mallorca/Nohant at the time of her arrival). She did manage to become his student in Oct 1839 eventually and for the following 6 years. Her letters home are fantastic, describing every little moment that she experienced during her classes with Chopin. Her writings are incredibly insightful, lively, clear sighted and extremely detailed. Descriptions of Chopins flat, his looks, his manners, day-to-day life, long quotes of everything he said to her and others, his demanding, yet sweet and endearing nature, how handsome he was (she was a little smitten by him), mentioning Sand all the time, people that came to visit, coffee he offered, even describing his hairstyle. And of course, in detail, she described his classes, his instructions, his own marvellous play style, his "strange" unique fingering, his strictness, the difficulties to satisfy him. Those letters are a huge treasure for music history and Chopin research. Unfortunately, for now, they can only be read in the original language (in German) because they only have been rediscovered a few years ago and published in a great big book (which I own). But the Chopin Institute in Warsaw works on an English translation, because those letters are such marvels. I'm saying all that, because Frl. Müller commented several times in her letters on Chopin's playing speed when playing his own pieces, and it was usually "faster" (sometimes even "much faster") than she was used to from listening to his music played by other pianists. She expressed surprise about that, but seemed to love his faster pace. (Keeping in mind, this was in his lifetime, still a very active musician, teacher and composer!). Unfortunately, "fast" or "very fast" is no valid measuring method and pretty subjective when having nothing to compare it to. But it also does not give me the slightest impression that Chopin played his music at half the speed of the pupils of his students. I still haven't read all of her letters, there are nearly 200 and they are long. I'm still hoping for something in them, telling us more precisely at which speed Chopin actually played himself. But there was also Liszt, who did teach Chopin's music to his students, knowing Chopin's play style extremely well, there was Berlioz, Schumann, so many other great peers. Non of them later mentioned that Chopin's music was played "too fast". (It was, occasionally, only mentioned, that his music was played "too corny! Too much Rubato!") There was Cortot, Rosenthal... and so many more. Their playing speed simply cannot be explained by the fashion of the time, as Winter argued when I pointed out to him the many students of Chopin (and Liszt).
@@Seleuce I was very glad to read your comment and to learn about these letters! Great finding, thank you to let me know about it! Can I order the book somewhere? I understand German, the original text is even more valuable for me than an English translation. :)
@@Seleuce Just another observation come into my mind, composers tended to play their own works even faster than their metronome marks. We hear on recordings that Brahms played faster than his metronome marks; Prokofiev played faster, Rachmaninov played faster, Debussy played faster, Bartók played faster... and contemporaries of Beethoven also tell that he played very fast and energetic, uncomparable to any of his students -- even the students. So I think that the faster-than-metronome-mark speeds that we hear in these first Chopin recordings indeed reflect the same pattern: the composer playing the works faster than his own metronome marks.
A recording by a student or student of a student is not a proof or even evidence for the absence of whole beat metronome practice. Musicians sped up the tempi of composers already early in the 19th century, and being a pupil of chopins pupils doesnt make you immune to the temptation of showing of your technical prowess - which was made more and more paramount for virtuosi over the course of the next 100 years.
@@123Joack Not proof. There is no proof here, but conclusive evidence. This is what I mentioned the "Yes, but" issue. However, having all the recordings of all students of the composer's assistants who recorded the pieces that they learned from this assistant, and all playing exactly the same tempi - which is the same as written on the score in "X pace per minute" convention: as massive _evidence_ as a mountain... :)
Have you ever considered that besides impossibly fast speeds, there are also impossibly *slow* speeds, or at least, improbably slow speeds. Consider Beethoven's "Yorckscher Marsch", or any other maching music for that matter. The tempo is 'half note=120" or "allegro". According to WBMP that would effectively be cut in half. But human anatomy kind of makes this impossible I'd argue, as we have kind of a natural speed of walking. Consider these soldiers marching on the beat of Beethoven's march, how would that work? They would have to take a pause after each step: ruclips.net/video/tebpJoyF3e4/видео.htmlsi=Q8hHFvgWShwlsKYQ&t=26 You can see the effect if you watch the movie at speed 0.5. No way people would walk that slowly. It would be like ... tal ... king ... at ... half ... speed. See my point.. So we have a paradox here, at least. Alternatively, if you can show that there was also a change in military practice, it would be a way to further prove your theory. Maybe they used to walk two steps per beat?...
I'd say that nowadays it is not as it was before. You can get to master any instrument and because maybe of the nature of "beauty", it will not be relevant at all. There will be the professional musicians improvising a video on the streets, dressing as common people, playing their best and still people around will go on with their lives. Parents at the presentation of their kids will be happy to hear the noisy violins of their children and applaud, because that is beautiful for them, their sons/daughters making music, or showing how much they have improved. The same parents will still ignore that musician playing at a train with his 15000 dollar violin. Pretty much, the same happens at a contest, the best qualified judges will likely, see that what is beautiful for them and applaud it. It is not relevant anymore that music follows rules and standards from the past for a competition. Maybe if music is played that way something special can be appreciated but still to compete nowadays is not the same as then. Musicality is a concept as many others likely to have changed. I as a musician, despite my wish to become successful as an artist, trust mostly my judgement about what is beautiful to me, what sounds best to me, and being aware that there is plenty more outside of my musical education/level makes me richer and potentially might get my music to grow. European classical training is not an option for me right now, I do not like the sound I would get with it, but it is undeniable that the technical ability from it would benefit me still. People competing are simply putting their work value on the hands of people that might not appreciate it. Maybe as a beauty pageant contest, the effort from women dieting, exercising, etc, might not be enough for a couple judges with their ideas of what is beautiful. I myself think that a square is a beautiful piece of art, but the many will expect to find rather a complex drawing, or the same piece (a square) presented in a more appealing way, so that they can see it worthy of being seen as actual art. At the same time, I do that myself, placing a black square properly at a certain place might get it to stand out more, changing the size, even giving the piece a name can have a huge impact of how much of "art" it will be so to say.
Regarding the WBMP in general, it does seem true to me, and I think it makes a lot of sense that the evidence for it is relatively indirect. This is because it seems futile to write about the status quo of something as trivial as the use of a metronome. However, I would expect there to be direct mention and discussion of the transition from whole- to single beat, whenever that change occurred. So, my question is: when did this transition happen, and where is the documentation? Groetjes, Love your videos.
Then you are saying (by implication )that amateur pianists in 1800 were able to do what you see at 16:50 of this video. And somehow with all our developed technique and instruments, not even the fastest pianists of today would be able to replicate that. Interesting perspective
@@albertosanna4539 Op.299 was written for pianists who wanted to "rise above mediocrity". Mediocrity isn't a term of abuse; it is the level an amateur would reach, one who didn't want to aspire to the heights of virtuosity. Wim Winters is playing like a good intermediate amateur pianist of the 1830s, at the level somebody trained quite intensively in Czerny's Piano School Part I for a year might reach in their second year. He has a long way to go before he can be called a virtuoso.
@DismasZelenka well then I guess that (according to your own logic) even Lang Lang, Lisitsa and Wang and all the other virtuoso pianists of today are mediocre since they cannot play those czerny etudes in single beat. Thank you for the information
@@albertosanna4539 Have these top pianists been invited onto AuthenticSound to demonstrate whether they could reach Czerny's MMs? Since none of them were trained on fortepianos, they might need to adjust their technique to suit the instrument. Have you, personally, tried to work towards the MMs for Czerny's Etudes? Are you really satisfied with Wholebeat tempi? If you can get to even 90%, then you are certainly a long way from mediocrity!
Je parierais qu' il y a des gens qui dirait « Formidable » « Encore » « Épatant » en entendant vos bouts de Czerny à des tempos accélérés et ridicules. :-) Courage, M. Wim Winters.
I saw Ben's video when it came out - Very interesting. I asked an AI about how much of the Chopin Competition is technique. This is reply: "While there's no definitive percentage, experts generally agree that a significant majority (likely over 50%) of the Chopin Competition is judged on technical ability due to the demanding nature of Chopin's music, which heavily features complex fingerwork, intricate rhythms, and rapid passages requiring exceptional dexterity and control." I assume the other components would be more focused on things like artistry, musicality, presentation, entertainment, etc.
I wonder if there will be a whole beat theory in 100 years about watching RUclips in 1.5x
This is good. 😂
For me the wording "Chopin competition" always seems like olympics: the winner is who plays the fastest. I play jazz, where the ultimate goal is finding your own voice, and we never play exactly the same twice. When I hear pianist graduating from high schools, universities I feel like they are coming from a factory from the assembly belt: everybody plays the same way, thinks the same way. Thats why I admire Wim and his team members, who dare to be different. Yes they are going back to the roots and try to be authentic, but the same time preserving some humanity in every performance. Before knowing Wim I thought I'm wrong playing Bach too slow, but he confirmed to me I'm right. So he inspired me to record WTC1 on synthesizers and other modern instruments. Again I have to say thanks for Wim! Keep the good work Wim and Authentic sound!
The jury of the Liszt, Chopin etc. competition always complains that we see "playing machines" today but no musicality. Quite often, the first prize is not awarded. They are also looking for music, not acrobatism.
@@historicalpiano yeah well, we all saw what happened to Pogorelich.
I appreciate your comment. Finding a voice in classical music is hard because we are working with an age-old repertoire that, for all its inspiration and beauty and depth, has been played to death. It is so well known that to stray much from the printed page smacks of indulgence, rightly or wrongly. Jazz has more freedom in that regard, usually working with a melody and some progressions as a foundation upon which to build a composition in real time. In jazz you do not have a monolithic two-hundred year old composition to deconstruct first.
@@historicalpiano And if they are striving for Chopin's metronome speeds in single-beat, a machine-like sound is all you are going to get!
when I saw the thumbnail for Ben's video I immediately thought of authenticsound... It would be so interesting to hear a conversation between you two, or at least some mention of wbmp by tonebase.
Ben Laude is not with Tonebase anymore.
We can literally hear how a student of Chopin’s most important student recorded Chopin’s music to finally settle the “debate” on tempo. Oh wait, he literally already did that in Laude’s video.
Mi compa con problemas de atención:
A joke came into my mind. It's at the end! (some explanation before, you can skip it)
The pace marks do have some dimension. They are not random numbers, but they do have some clear meaning. If it is told that you have "quavers=72", this means that you want to have 72 quavers per MINUTE. They cannot mean any other thing, can they? And I called these pace marks, not metronome marks, it is an intentional use of the word.
This is independent of the movement of the dirigent's stick or the ping-pong ball or anything else. It is even independent from the metronome itself. The metronome just helps you giving 72 ticks per minute, if you want. Or you can use a non-ticking pendulum (as Bartók did, e.g.) or anything else, but you have the information that the performance is considered as fast as you have 72 quavers per minute.
-------------------
The joke.
An emergency call arrives to the ambulance. "Help me, I feel very bad! I've been lying since 10 minutes and my pulse is still 85!" -- "Don't panic, 85 is not that much either." -- "Aber doch, it is indeed! It is 85 according to Wim's Whole Beat Theory!!!"
Actually your joke is spot on. During the baroque era the understanding of heartbeat (and of pulse) was very different from today. We all agree that the heartbeat is formed by the systole and diastole. But at that time the systole (or diastole) was equal to one full modern heartbeat.
@@JérémyPresle I am just amazed how the term "full beat" emerged here. :) Pulse means we measure the pressure peak in the veins, typically below the thumb. I am uninformed about any "baroque way" to do this differently. But regardless to what we measure, what we tell is in "number per minute" quantitatively. Qu=72 means we have 72 quavers in a minute. Not 36. :)
@@JérémyPresle Really - baroque hearts beat at half the rate of modern hearts? Really? Honestly? Wow!!!
But wait - of course, we all know that in the baroque era one minute lasted for two modern minutes. Don't we?
Friederike Müller-Streicher is a very important source about Chopin (over 500 pages of letters). Since her letters were published only in 2018 Eigeldinger didn't include them in his book (Chopin pianist and teacher). He only had acces to Niecks extremely limited (only a couple of pages) resume of her letters. To ignore this info today is quite problematic, as many passages from her letters greatly enhance (and sometimes contradict) the image we get from Eigeldingers book.
Thank you for giving the link to Koczalski's performance. I hope people listen to it, not as a tempo control officer with the score and a metronome, but with their ears and emotions. There are conflicting accounts of whether Chopin played "in strict time" or with a lot of rubato. Why not both: use rubato (in both senses, bel canto rubato and structural rubato, which is the expressive employment of ritardandi and accelerandi) while maintaining the underlying rhythmical (not metronomic) pulse? This is what Koczalski does.
At 27:25, you can, if you wish, read the Streicher/Niecks quote as meaning strict tempo (unless rit. or accel. is specified in the score). But you can instead notice that it is only *misplaced* rubato and *exaggerated* ritardandos that Chopin hated, and these are precisely the faults of "lingering and dragging".
I am not sure the literature supports your view nor does the music require any sort of lingering or dragging except where indicated if played with the original use of the metronome.
@@petertyrrell3391 Music never requires lingering or dragging! Those are faults. (especially dragging). You seem not to have understood my comment at all. As for literature, for a start read Czerny on the performance of Chopin's works (Op.500 Part IV).
@@DismasZelenka I think you should do some reading, but without prejudice. Isn't the fault in Koczalski's performance is the presence of lingering and dragging(?).
Great points about marking 'poco' but not 'molto', and also about Allegros not leaving any space for Prestos.
Chopin’s Rubato was the left hand steady keeping time in tempo, and the right hand was free of the meter, which his students related, you still see this into the early 20th century in piano roll performances and later recordings of music in all genres of of serious music symphonic works, opera, and piano, even Judy Garland’s performance of Somewhere Over The Rainbow from the Wizard of Oz.
I was waiting for this video on Ben Laude’s new series! As I mentioned in a comment in another video. Really good video as always!
I think what Wim is doing is important, but I think also he sometimes muddles his own message, or what I perceive it to be. That is, trying to find an explanation for metronome markings from the early 19th century that are so fast that virtually no one actually plays the music at those speeds. It need not, and I have never heard Wim say it, imply that the answer to that question would dictate the ONLY way to play the music. Even those who are unconvinced by Wim's evidence do not play the compositions in question at those speeds, even if they could; in practice, genuine single-beat performances are rare. The vehemence of the detractors therefore has always baffled me. What actually is at stake here? It brings to mind Sayre's law: "Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low."
It's Andante with four beats/bar, not twelve Mr W. Just look at how the left hand is written.
Exactly: pulse of 44 per minute (original metronomes didn't go below 50). One big problem with WBMP is that it ignores the melody and concentrates on the small notes in the accompaniment. On early pianos, taking the MM as half of what it should be results in the long melody notes fading into nothing while the accompaniment thumps on.
It seems that Mr Winters has given up responding to points made by commenters on his videos, apart from awarding hearts to those praising him. I think this is a shame. His channel deals with interesting questions that deserve discussion.
When I saw Ben Laude's video I thought.. 'ui ui ui cruising for a bruising'.. then.. 'bread for Wim's teeth'.. (the content, not the guy) and after watching this.. 'hitting the nail on the head' (like every video on this channel). I think my brain is turning English.
Thank you! I listen to these while doing household chores so I don't mind the length or the repetition of information.
23:00 "well, that's not written in the score". Isn't it? What do the words 'espress. dolce' right at the beginning suggest? Then look at the unusual phrasing of bar 4, and the sudden f. that ends the second beat. Would it be natural to sing this in strict tempo?
So I think you are wrong. Every musician would feel the need for some rubato and some slowing down in that measure. The places where Chopin has specified poco ritard., poco rall., poco rubato, when you look at them, are precisely places where the player would not automatically feel the need for tempo modification. That is why Chopin has written the words on the score.
Perhaps Koczalski overdoes it. I have read that he was sometimes criticized for excessive rubato. But it is a matter of degree, not of yes/no.
@@DismasZelenka Then there’s the quote from his student about keeping strict tempo in the left hand and the rubato in the melody free from the beat yes a paraphrase of the choir master-conductor. However, self expression not withstanding. More than a few passages about a similarity to Mozart’s form of Rubato, sometimes written out in a repeated passage. Then there’s the quote,"everyone is amazed that I can always keep strict time. What these people cannot grasp is that in tempo rubato in an Adagio, the left hand should go on playing in strict time. With them the left hand always follows suit." that refers to the Adagio, but is that Tempo or a short double meaning.
In J S Bach’s Time as found in Kreb’s copy circa 1722, WTC Pt 1 in the WTC in the Word Adagio In JSB’s hand should be interpreted as a call to improvise, and not to change tempo from the Froberger tradition/usage it’s also found in the Bb Major prelude where a change in tempo would be illogical or out of place. Fermatas on notes or chords at the close of a passage likewise also instruct in short hand to improvise. There’s two manuscripts of a J S Bach fugue on theme of Albinoni one with the Fermata on chord and another variant all work out 32nd noted arpeggios, before the conclusion.
How much of this was back and forth traveled between the German speaking lands, before his stay in Eisenach ( friendship with J S Bach’ father) Pachelbel’s prior post was in Vienna, at Saint Stephen’s Cathedral.
As always, I'm still there at 43:59. Not much to comment on this one, so I'll just mention that I'm eagerly awaiting the publication of the book.
I've waited years for you to misspeak and say "Karl Marx". Today, I got my wish
You have to talk to Ben or the tonebase guys at some point, that would probably be one of the most interesting interviews on the site
we would love to!
The Jury would reward the players who played like, wait for it, like the Conservatories, University Music Schools churn out or mass produce.
I thought something was wrong with me when I started hearing the ever increasing speed of piano performances. Glad to know it wasn't me. I thought much music had lost its meaning due to excessive tempi. Thank you.
I can't give an exact quote from Eigeldinger's book, but the sense is this: probably Chopin's most brilliant pupil, Carl Filtsch (who died at a very young age) played one of Chopin's pieces (a scherzo, I think) in front of the master, and Chopin commented: this is not what I had in mind, but you can go as far as possible in this direction
2:50 Ben Laude is no longer with Tonebase. He left tonebase right after I joined 😢
I think that whole beat was used in the time of Chopin. However, this nocturne sounds extremely slow in whole beat, and it is difficult for me to envision the musicality that Chopin would have had in mind at that tempo. That said, at the single beat tempo, it becomes impossible (or at least unmusical) to play the fast notes in time. Ironically, I think the ideal tempo for this piece (if you’re going to keep it steady) is about 8th=100, which is what Koczalski averaged in his very un-steady recording.
but then what about the tempo that Chopin gave? Keep in mind, we are conditioned heavily to hear music as we expect it to hear. Just try this nocturne a few weeks in whole beat and you'd be surprised!
@AuthenticSound Hi Wim! Thanks for the reply. I’ll take you up on the challenge. I’ll play this in whole beat for 2 weeks, then report back with my thoughts.
I play this Nocturne regularly. I've never followed the tempo mark which is way too fast but tried it at 66, then I found it very laboured. I don't think Chopin would have played it like that. As usual, I get the feeling he played it at 20% above his tempo mark (assuming it was 66 as we understand it today) and the tempo mark he gives is just for a beginner / the average pianist to practise. I do wonder if pianist like Chopin & Liszt then pushed tempo's higher in their own performances, thus starting the ever increasing tempo's leading us to today's performances. I wonder if they realised this at the time? Probably not!
the fact that a metronome mark is an accurate tempo indication seen as ideal for the piece no matter who is playing it, is a solid fact. There is not even a beginning to deny that. But, to your second point, how did musicians or even the composers themselves played their pieces? That's subject for a separate research. We do know from many composers that they valued their tempos a lot and in general you read many advices to strictly follow those indications. But our research essentially focuses on how to read those metronome marks. And there is no doubt. To your point of difficulty regarding the 66: that is a very common feeling - I struggled years myself. Best advice is: try it for some weeks, even months. And you will see it will work.
@@AuthenticSound Many thanks for taking the time to reply. I will try playing it at 66 for some weeks as per your advise and see how I feel.
Excellent presentation.
Whole Beat Metronome Principle is inevitable!
Why are you so obsessed with tempo indications?
seems like you are a prescriptivist who is too much in his head. First and foremost music needs to be lived and felt in the heart. Then the appropriate tempo will take care of itself. Whatever it might be at the end of the day. Every effective interpretation is a good interpretation. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
Everyboby wants to rush. Rush, and rush, not to play a beautiful melodi in sintoni with the heart, what chopin did in his time. I listen some guys (not you) in 0,75x on RUclips, I confess. Its not so good (they vary de rhitm everywhere), but its berter than in 1x
Imagine a jazz music played in light speed in XXII century... That's the same.
No need to go into the future to hear jazz at lightning speed.
Listen to Charlie Parker playing bebop in the forties.
Thank you for this videos.
Ben Laude is not on Tonebase anymore and this video is on his regard already.
Bar 6 of op. 9 nº2 has a crescendo and an hairpin at the same time. Those are the places where the tempo could flutuate and are very well documented by Chopin, in a very carefull use of the hairpin, with a totally diferent role than the dinamics signs like crescendo and diminuendo. So, op 9, just before Études op 10... And the Études are floded with hairpins, some of them poorly edited has accents (like in the revolutionary étude). So yes we should take in consideration WBMP but also tempo flutuations of haipins.
The book "Chopin vu par ses élèves" has this side of a "strict tempo" composer, but on the other hand there are also quotations on how Chopin would sit at the piano and demonstrate diferent interpretations of his works. If he saw his students very worried in the day of the performance he would encourage them to be free in the interpretation because he was very srtict in his lessons wich sometimes caused his students to block. Also important the quotation about Chopin's premiére of the Barcarolle where he played the last page pianíssimo where it was marked FF and FZ.
Chopin also didn't like students to memorise the score because he felt it had too much information on it. In my opinion, if you count hairpins has agogic marks, slurs (chopin was very strict with slurs and would breath and sometimes take his hands out between slurs) and expression signs, it is a lot to take in to do it stricly.
So, the videos i wich you would comment are more towards the use of haipins (tonebase has some important ones).
Knowing where the tradition really started is very importante since it has been poorly named has "the Brahmsian hairpin" when i see evidence of it in Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin, Liszt, Mendelsohn, Schumann and of couse Brahms himself...
Sorry for the long comment but i belive it's a very important subject to adress when dealing with tempo markings or flutuations.
This is the video you should be commenting:
ruclips.net/video/pRLBBJLX-dQ/видео.html
So it says 132 that means we have to put the metronome on 66 right? Ok maybe they counted 2 beats, but why then denote the number of HALF beats per minute on the scale of the metronome?? That is like putting 200 on the speedometer, when the car is actually driving at 100 km/h. The notes you play at 16:40 dont really sound 'presto' to me.
"Presto" in the sense it was understood in the early 19th. C.
@@petertyrrell3391 Allegretto?
Leave the metronome at 132, and now your metronome splits the beats for you.
Or cut it in half if you prefer. It’s a tool, use it to serve you. Metronome marks are there to tell you the time, the speed.
@@ExtraCrispyBitsWhy would you need to split the beats?
@DismasZelenka I always leave my drum beat in single beat, or faster. It helps me keep a better time. If I'm playing quarter note 60 , I set the machine/metronome to 120 or 180. It's much easier to hear the beat.
While I acknowledge that you have a popular channel and do not want to destroy the business (at least: it is about classical piano music!), I have to say that the all audio sources show quite an equivocal understanding of Chopin's tempi, which is roughly the same tempo as today. They give no place for tempo "woodoo".
In the 1970s, when the whole beat/half speed theory emerged first, these recordings were not easily available or not mostly, available at all. With these recordings, the things have a way different enlighting.
One can say (and many say indeed) that "OK but". However, the sources go back very close to Chopin (and Beethoven). There was Moscheles (student of Albrechtsberger and Salieri; editor of Beethoven); there was Mikuli (teaching assistant and editor of Chopin), and we can hear recordings of their FIRST generation students. Not one, but several indeed: Michalowski (student of both Moscheles and Mikuli), Rosenthal, Koczalski etc. You can hear recordings of many students of Clara Schumann as well. Mikuli, Chopin's teaching assistant taught Koczalski and Friedman the very same way as he did tutor the students when Chopin was too ill to give a lesson... Koczalski had kind of the same traning that a late student who wanted to learn from Chopin, but had no luck and always had to meet the assistant instead ... but the living Chopin's assistant! And these guys knew that they have great responsibility in preserving the authentic Chopin style, and their recordings will be references. Could have been maverick players among them (there were _always_ mavericks...), but such a homogeneous understanding that we hear from them just excludes that any of them was a "maverick". Look, ALL these guys play the same speed - same speed or even a bit faster than today. Not one of them says "let's play just a little bit slower this, our Master Mikuli played everything two times slower, we are on the wrong track clearly and eventually...", no. There is a vast massive evidence that what we hear in these first Chopin-recordings just preserved very authentic details (e.g. unnotated phrasing things that are concordantly performed the same way by these "historically indirectly informed" pianists -- and they preserved the tempi defititelly).
Also, Chopin wrote some pieces for the Liebhabers (it's clear), and other pieces for the professionals (it's clear again. He wrote the Op 10 Etudes for himself to study new piano playing techniques that he used in the Piano Concertos, but were insanely difficult for himself, too!). So, yes, there are difficult pieces, and there are pieces that collect all these difficulties together intentionally. You cannot tell that you slow these down to half speed and it's good because Liebhabers can then play it, because it is not for Liebhabers.
How many notes per a second: listen to the Op 10 No 12 c minor Etude played by Cziffra: he is playing 20 notes in a second. It's a bit blurry when it is that fast, but anyways: great musicians like András Schiff always teach at the masterclasses that there are parts where you want notes, and other parts where the notes are unimportant, you want to hear gestures, so "do not be Czerny" - as Schiff tells usually. In essence: 20 notes per sec is doable. Not for Liebhabers, but... let's forget the Liebhabers when they must not come in the picture.
And finally, we see that the contemporary speed (and the speed of all historical recordings) is doable for a trained pianist today. You are telling that the steam trains arrived and then the playing sped up to twice pace... and no one in that old times could play today's tempi. If you stick to this interpretation, you say that the steam train taught pianists to play twice as fast as earlier, and this way, the trains were the best piano teachers!
Hm, hm. I am very far from being convinced. :) :/
I agree in everything you said and can't add much. Just the evidence of a student of Chopin himself, Friederike Müller, a young, very talented Viennese noble woman who went to Paris in 1839 to find a renowned Piano teacher. She had Liszt, Thalberg or Chopin in mind, but hoping for Chopin (he was still sick in Mallorca/Nohant at the time of her arrival). She did manage to become his student in Oct 1839 eventually and for the following 6 years. Her letters home are fantastic, describing every little moment that she experienced during her classes with Chopin. Her writings are incredibly insightful, lively, clear sighted and extremely detailed. Descriptions of Chopins flat, his looks, his manners, day-to-day life, long quotes of everything he said to her and others, his demanding, yet sweet and endearing nature, how handsome he was (she was a little smitten by him), mentioning Sand all the time, people that came to visit, coffee he offered, even describing his hairstyle. And of course, in detail, she described his classes, his instructions, his own marvellous play style, his "strange" unique fingering, his strictness, the difficulties to satisfy him.
Those letters are a huge treasure for music history and Chopin research. Unfortunately, for now, they can only be read in the original language (in German) because they only have been rediscovered a few years ago and published in a great big book (which I own). But the Chopin Institute in Warsaw works on an English translation, because those letters are such marvels.
I'm saying all that, because Frl. Müller commented several times in her letters on Chopin's playing speed when playing his own pieces, and it was usually "faster" (sometimes even "much faster") than she was used to from listening to his music played by other pianists. She expressed surprise about that, but seemed to love his faster pace. (Keeping in mind, this was in his lifetime, still a very active musician, teacher and composer!).
Unfortunately, "fast" or "very fast" is no valid measuring method and pretty subjective when having nothing to compare it to. But it also does not give me the slightest impression that Chopin played his music at half the speed of the pupils of his students. I still haven't read all of her letters, there are nearly 200 and they are long. I'm still hoping for something in them, telling us more precisely at which speed Chopin actually played himself.
But there was also Liszt, who did teach Chopin's music to his students, knowing Chopin's play style extremely well, there was Berlioz, Schumann, so many other great peers. Non of them later mentioned that Chopin's music was played "too fast". (It was, occasionally, only mentioned, that his music was played "too corny! Too much Rubato!") There was Cortot, Rosenthal... and so many more. Their playing speed simply cannot be explained by the fashion of the time, as Winter argued when I pointed out to him the many students of Chopin (and Liszt).
@@Seleuce I was very glad to read your comment and to learn about these letters! Great finding, thank you to let me know about it! Can I order the book somewhere? I understand German, the original text is even more valuable for me than an English translation. :)
@@Seleuce Just another observation come into my mind, composers tended to play their own works even faster than their metronome marks. We hear on recordings that Brahms played faster than his metronome marks; Prokofiev played faster, Rachmaninov played faster, Debussy played faster, Bartók played faster... and contemporaries of Beethoven also tell that he played very fast and energetic, uncomparable to any of his students -- even the students. So I think that the faster-than-metronome-mark speeds that we hear in these first Chopin recordings indeed reflect the same pattern: the composer playing the works faster than his own metronome marks.
A recording by a student or student of a student is not a proof or even evidence for the absence of whole beat metronome practice. Musicians sped up the tempi of composers already early in the 19th century, and being a pupil of chopins pupils doesnt make you immune to the temptation of showing of your technical prowess - which was made more and more paramount for virtuosi over the course of the next 100 years.
@@123Joack Not proof. There is no proof here, but conclusive evidence. This is what I mentioned the "Yes, but" issue. However, having all the recordings of all students of the composer's assistants who recorded the pieces that they learned from this assistant, and all playing exactly the same tempi - which is the same as written on the score in "X pace per minute" convention: as massive _evidence_ as a mountain... :)
Volodos and Hamelin should both record some of the Czerny's works.
Have you ever considered that besides impossibly fast speeds, there are also impossibly *slow* speeds, or at least, improbably slow speeds. Consider Beethoven's "Yorckscher Marsch", or any other maching music for that matter. The tempo is 'half note=120" or "allegro". According to WBMP that would effectively be cut in half. But human anatomy kind of makes this impossible I'd argue, as we have kind of a natural speed of walking. Consider these soldiers marching on the beat of Beethoven's march, how would that work? They would have to take a pause after each step: ruclips.net/video/tebpJoyF3e4/видео.htmlsi=Q8hHFvgWShwlsKYQ&t=26 You can see the effect if you watch the movie at speed 0.5. No way people would walk that slowly. It would be like ... tal ... king ... at ... half ... speed. See my point.. So we have a paradox here, at least. Alternatively, if you can show that there was also a change in military practice, it would be a way to further prove your theory. Maybe they used to walk two steps per beat?...
I'd say that nowadays it is not as it was before. You can get to master any instrument and because maybe of the nature of "beauty", it will not be relevant at all.
There will be the professional musicians improvising a video on the streets, dressing as common people, playing their best and still people around will go on with their lives.
Parents at the presentation of their kids will be happy to hear the noisy violins of their children and applaud, because that is beautiful for them, their sons/daughters making music, or showing how much they have improved. The same parents will still ignore that musician playing at a train with his 15000 dollar violin.
Pretty much, the same happens at a contest, the best qualified judges will likely, see that what is beautiful for them and applaud it. It is not relevant anymore that music follows rules and standards from the past for a competition.
Maybe if music is played that way something special can be appreciated but still to compete nowadays is not the same as then. Musicality is a concept as many others likely to have changed.
I as a musician, despite my wish to become successful as an artist, trust mostly my judgement about what is beautiful to me, what sounds best to me, and being aware that there is plenty more outside of my musical education/level makes me richer and potentially might get my music to grow. European classical training is not an option for me right now, I do not like the sound I would get with it, but it is undeniable that the technical ability from it would benefit me still.
People competing are simply putting their work value on the hands of people that might not appreciate it.
Maybe as a beauty pageant contest, the effort from women dieting, exercising, etc, might not be enough for a couple judges with their ideas of what is beautiful.
I myself think that a square is a beautiful piece of art, but the many will expect to find rather a complex drawing, or the same piece (a square) presented in a more appealing way, so that they can see it worthy of being seen as actual art.
At the same time, I do that myself, placing a black square properly at a certain place might get it to stand out more, changing the size, even giving the piece a name can have a huge impact of how much of "art" it will be so to say.
Regarding the WBMP in general, it does seem true to me, and I think it makes a lot of sense that the evidence for it is relatively indirect. This is because it seems futile to write about the status quo of something as trivial as the use of a metronome. However, I would expect there to be direct mention and discussion of the transition from whole- to single beat, whenever that change occurred. So, my question is: when did this transition happen, and where is the documentation?
Groetjes,
Love your videos.
There is direct evidence for the single-beat understanding of metronome indications throughout the nineteenth century. WBMP never existed.
Then you are saying (by implication )that amateur pianists in 1800 were able to do what you see at 16:50 of this video. And somehow with all our developed technique and instruments, not even the fastest pianists of today would be able to replicate that. Interesting perspective
@@albertosanna4539 Op.299 was written for pianists who wanted to "rise above mediocrity". Mediocrity isn't a term of abuse; it is the level an amateur would reach, one who didn't want to aspire to the heights of virtuosity. Wim Winters is playing like a good intermediate amateur pianist of the 1830s, at the level somebody trained quite intensively in Czerny's Piano School Part I for a year might reach in their second year. He has a long way to go before he can be called a virtuoso.
@DismasZelenka well then I guess that (according to your own logic) even Lang Lang, Lisitsa and Wang and all the other virtuoso pianists of today are mediocre since they cannot play those czerny etudes in single beat. Thank you for the information
@@albertosanna4539 Have these top pianists been invited onto AuthenticSound to demonstrate whether they could reach Czerny's MMs? Since none of them were trained on fortepianos, they might need to adjust their technique to suit the instrument.
Have you, personally, tried to work towards the MMs for Czerny's Etudes? Are you really satisfied with Wholebeat tempi?
If you can get to even 90%, then you are certainly a long way from mediocrity!
44:00 I am still here
Je parierais qu' il y a des gens qui dirait « Formidable » « Encore » « Épatant » en entendant vos bouts de Czerny à des tempos accélérés et ridicules. :-) Courage, M. Wim Winters.
I would, if he had played it himself, even at 90% of the full speed.
I saw Ben's video when it came out - Very interesting.
I asked an AI about how much of the Chopin Competition is technique. This is reply: "While there's no definitive percentage, experts generally agree that a significant majority (likely over 50%) of the Chopin Competition is judged on technical ability due to the demanding nature of Chopin's music, which heavily features complex fingerwork, intricate rhythms, and rapid passages requiring exceptional dexterity and control."
I assume the other components would be more focused on things like artistry, musicality, presentation, entertainment, etc.
At last, I know Mikuli’s first name! And he isn’t Japanese! Or is he?!!
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Mikuli
I like the concept of a mace rather than a pendulum, as it makes a sound only on the downbeat
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Eigeldinger
Man I hope pianists start following this channel and attempt it as it was intended by the composer...
First!!!