"your piano teacher taught you wrong" An interesting if debatable take on how chords are "supposed" to be played

[Scott]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VPgg3armCI&feature=youtu.be

[SPAM- @xs4all.nl HvT]

Scott wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VPgg3armCI&feature=youtu.be

Thanks for the interesting URL! It strikes me that I prefer the non-HIP
version - even when the performer is the composer.

Henk

[M forever]

Why? Do you think Debussy didn't know how to play his own music?

[SPAM- @xs4all.nl HvT]

Hmmm. Debussy played his valse the way he liked best. I like other versions
better, for example Bavouzet's. Bavouzet may be musicologically wrong,
musically he's right IMO.

This isn't unusual. In Hamlet an actress plays the role of Ophelia these
days. This may not be HIP but it's certainly a vast improvement - and there
are many other artistic reasons not to copy faithfully the mise-en-scčne
etc. of the Bard
himself.

Henk

[Scott]

Do you really think if a person prefers an interpretation other than
the composer's own performance that it means that person doesn't think
the composer knows how to play his or her own music?

[Dufus]

>On Nov 17, 11:36 am, "HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Thanks for the interesting URL! It strikes me that I prefer the non-HIP
> version - even when the performer is the composer.

Thanks, Scott, and I almost completely agree with Henk. The HIP
version works for me only in the Schubert waltz, perhaps the Brahms
Intermezzo although both approaches seem equally effective in the
Brahms. The Mozart and Schumann were offensive.

Here is Fiorentino discussing and illustrating arpeggio :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POGeQDn-Q5g&feature=relmfu ( Part 4,
from 7:00 on )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g48Fa8UfQcI&feature=relmfu
( Part 5, all )

[Dufus]

>On Nov 18, 12:30 pm, "HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Bavouzet may be musicologically wrong,
> musically he's right IMO.

Debussy playing his "Cathedrale Engloutie" or Rubinstein ? Rubinstein
for me.

[MiNe 109]

In article <50a7cb1d$0$6953$e4fe...@news2.news.xs4all.nl>,

"HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:

I'm concerned with the piano roll transfers he uses as examples. Is
there another source for the Debussy?

Stephen

[M forever]

On Nov 18, 1:30 pm, "HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:
> M forever wrote:
> > On Nov 17, 12:36 pm, "HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >> Scott wrote:
> >>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VPgg3armCI&feature=youtu.be
>
> >> Thanks for the interesting URL! It strikes me that I prefer the
> >> non-HIP version - even when the performer is the composer.
>
> >> Henk
>
> > Why? Do you think Debussy didn't know how to play his own music?
>
> Hmmm. Debussy played his valse the way he liked best. I like other versions
> better, for example Bavouzet's. Bavouzet may be musicologically wrong,
> musically he's right IMO.

So you are saying Debussy was musicologically right, but but musically
wrong?

> This isn't unusual. In Hamlet an actress plays the role of Ophelia these
> days. This may not be HIP but it's certainly a vast improvement - and there

> are many other artistic reasons not to copy faithfully the mise-en-sc ne

> etc. of the Bard
> himself.

That's not a good comparison. A man playing a woman vs. a woman
playing a woman is a much more drastic difference than the fine
musical nuances we are talking about here.

[Scott]

On Nov 18, 5:38 pm, M forever <ms1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 18, 1:30 pm, "HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> > M forever wrote:
> > > On Nov 17, 12:36 pm, "HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > >> Scott wrote:
> > >>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VPgg3armCI&feature=youtu.be
>
> > >> Thanks for the interesting URL! It strikes me that I prefer the
> > >> non-HIP version - even when the performer is the composer.
>
> > >> Henk
>
> > > Why? Do you think Debussy didn't know how to play his own music?
>
> > Hmmm. Debussy played his valse the way he liked best. I like other versions
> > better, for example Bavouzet's. Bavouzet may be musicologically wrong,
> > musically he's right IMO.
>
> So you are saying Debussy was musicologically right, but but musically
> wrong?
>

I'm pretty sure it is not what is being said. There is no single
"musically right" way to play any piece of music. Musicality is
neither an objective quality nor a black and white/ yes or no
proposition. To say any one version of a piece is "musically right"
does not infer that all other versions are "musically wrong."

[Alan Dawes]

In article
<3bc9218a-45e3-48f2...@c16g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,

M forever <ms1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This isn't unusual. In Hamlet an actress plays the role of Ophelia
> > these days. This may not be HIP but it's certainly a vast improvement
> > - and there are many other artistic reasons not to copy faithfully the
> > mise-en-sc ne etc. of the Bard himself.

> That's not a good comparison. A man playing a woman vs. a woman
> playing a woman is a much more drastic difference than the fine
> musical nuances we are talking about here.

In Elizabethan times it would not have been a fully mature man playing a
woman's role but a prepubuscent male around 17 years of age which would
not have looked particularly odd.

Alan

--
alan....@argonet.co.uk
alan....@riscos.org
Using an Acorn RiscPC

[Lena]

On Nov 18, 4:21 pm, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> In article <50a7cb1d$0$6953$e4fe5...@news2.news.xs4all.nl>,

That's what I was thinking -- though that Debussy take may illustrate
the point, this might be something of an excessively perforated,
cylindrical form of Debussy...

L.

[Lena]

On Nov 18, 3:32 pm, Dufus <steveha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 17, 11:36 am, "HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:

> >
> > Thanks for the interesting URL!

Thanks from me, too. I loved the Schnabel portion (mainly for its
imagination, but the chords are okay too :) ).

> > It strikes me that I prefer the non-HIP
> > version - even when the performer is the composer.
>
> Thanks, Scott, and I almost completely agree with Henk. The HIP
> version works for me only in the Schubert waltz,

(I'm not sure HIP is quite the word in this context, but never
mind. :) )

I thought Schnabel's portion was fantastic. This kind of imagination
is all too rare...

Anyway, all "rolled" chords aren't the same... You can "roll", while
veering towards oiled-up lounge pianism, or go for tasteful, patrician
arpeggios. Beveridge Webster's Brahms is in the latter category...
(actually, they sound great to me).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKHohcXYFAA

(Thanks for this clip to where they should go.)

Lena

[Lena]

On Nov 19, 3:14 am, Lena <emswo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>  Beveridge Webster's Brahms is in the latter category...
> (actually, they sound great to me).
>

There's a certain lack of feng shui in that bit of writing. Sorry,
unforeseen editing problems.

L.

[SPAM- @xs4all.nl HvT]

M forever wrote:
>> Hmmm. Debussy played his valse the way he liked best. I like other
>> versions better, for example Bavouzet's. Bavouzet may be
>> musicologically wrong, musically he's right IMO.
>
> So you are saying Debussy was musicologically right, but but musically
> wrong?

Indeed. Debussy is the composer of this little piece. Whether he had any
intentions at all while composing it and whether he was aware of these
intentions while performing it, we don't know. We only know that he performs
it in the tradition of his days, which makes it a historical performance.

>> This isn't unusual. In Hamlet an actress plays the role of Ophelia
>> these days. This may not be HIP but it's certainly a vast
>> improvement - and there are many other artistic reasons not to copy
>> faithfully the mise-en-sc ne etc. of the Bard
>> himself.

> That's not a good comparison. A man playing a woman vs. a woman
> playing a woman is a much more drastic difference than the fine
> musical nuances we are talking about here.

The comparison shows that there is no relation between the quality of the
performance of a piece and the way it was performed by or with the approval
of it's creator.

Henk

[SPAM- @xs4all.nl HvT]

<g> There is more to a female Ophelia than just her looks ...

Henk

[Kip Williams]

Alan Dawes wrote, On 11/19/12 5:40 AM:

In an issue of his celebrated comic, The Sandman, Alan Moore wrote (and
Rick Veitch, I believe, illustrated) a rather good account of a
performance of "A Midsummer Night's Dream" commissioned by the Faerie,
and his handling of the cast, on and off the stage, rings very true to
life. The young boys who played the beautiful women were somewhat catty
behind the scenes, for instance. In the span of the story, Moore weaves
Will Shakespeare into the dream mythos of his series, and brings a real
Robin Goodfellow into the cast of traveling players for a night. Though
in a good mood and on fairly good behavior, you can see that the Good
Folk aren't anybody you'd really want to deal with � the Bard both gains
and loses from his commission.


Kip W

[William Sommerwerck]

>> I'm concerned with the piano roll transfers he uses as examples.
>> Is there another source for the Debussy?

> That's what I was thinking -- though that Debussy take may illustrate
> the point, this might be something of an excessively perforated,
> cylindrical form of Debussy...

Reproducing pianos do not reproduce every nuance of a performance. (For
example, I think the dynamics are terraced.) But I find it had to believe
they convert block chords into individual notes.

[Lena]

On Nov 19, 6:24 am, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
wrote:

> >> I'm concerned with the piano roll transfers he uses as examples.
> >> Is there another source for the Debussy?
> > That's what I was thinking -- though that Debussy take may illustrate
> > the point, this might be something of an excessively perforated,
> > cylindrical form of Debussy...
>

> Reproducing pianos do not reproduce every nuance of a performance. [...]

> But I find it had to believe
> they convert block chords into individual notes.

That's what "that Debussy take may illustrate the point" means, of
course (the point in this thread being the playing of the chords)...

The concerns expressed were about something else -- about judging
Debussy's playing by this excerpt. (Or at least that's what mine
were, though 'concern' might be too big a word.)

L.

[laraine]

On Nov 17, 10:33 am, Scott <S888Wh...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VPgg3armCI&feature=youtu.be

Interesting tape,
but two concepts being discussed.

One is starting one hand before
the other, in order to emphasize
both voices --used to be called
rubato, I believe. (Today, rubato
means something else.)

He, however, calls that rolled chords,

The earlier 20th-c examples he plays
include some older-style rubato,
but chords seem to be rolled
(arpeggiated) in unexpected
places too.

So a distinction is needed, but it
seems that both rubato and rolled
chords were used differently
in the past than they are today.

C.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Lena" wrote in message
news:9fa57c05-30b6-4452...@p22g2000vby.googlegroups.com...

---------------------------------------------------------------
There have always been questions as to whether reproducing pianos accurately
represent the pianists' performances. They could be edited, not just to
correct wrong notes, but to create difficult fingerings or passages the
pianists was incapable of.

[Kip Williams]

William Sommerwerck wrote, On 11/19/12 12:24 PM:

> There have always been questions as to whether reproducing pianos
> accurately represent the pianists' performances. They could be edited,
> not just to correct wrong notes, but to create difficult fingerings or
> passages the pianists was incapable of.

Gershwin memorably overdubbed his roll(s) of Rhapsody in Blue. To my
surprise, Alicia Zizzo managed to edit a version from the roll that can
be played by two hands, seemingly without sacrificing anything.


Kip W

[Kip Williams]

laraine wrote, On 11/19/12 12:18 PM:

I like how Paderewski explicitly indicates this in his Menuet. "This is
how -I- play stuff!" is the message behind the notation.

Piano roll or not, I still love his take on the Second Hungarian Rhapsody.


Kip W

[Matthew B. Tepper]

Kip Williams <mrk...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following letters
to be typed in news:RCuqs.16649$ET1....@newsfe02.iad:

And since there's only one of her, there were no Czerny exercises added.

--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers.

[William Sommerwerck]

>> There have always been questions as to whether reproducing pianos
>> accurately represent the pianists' performances. They could be edited,
>> not just to correct wrong notes, but to create difficult fingerings or
>> passages the pianists was incapable of.

> Gershwin memorably overdubbed his roll(s) of Rhapsody in Blue. To my
> surprise, Alicia Zizzo managed to edit a version from the roll that can be
> played by two hands, seemingly without sacrificing anything.

The Gershwin performance is combination of the solo piano part with a
transcription of the orchestral part. Columbia Masterworks produced a
recording in which the orchestral part's holes were pasted over, leaving a
decidedly brisk performance of the solo part. The orchestral part was
performed by a small jazz orchestra.

It was originally a quad SQ LP, and was later released in stereo on CD.

[Gerard]

William Sommerwerck <grizzle...@comcast.net> typed:

Just curious: how did you fix the missing '> ' in front of each quoted line?
By inserting them by hand? Or is there another fix that can be used?

[William Sommerwerck]

> Just curious: how did you fix the missing '> ' in front of each quoted
> line?
> By inserting them by hand? Or is there another fix that can be used?

By hand. It's annoying.

[Kip Williams]

William Sommerwerck wrote, On 11/20/12 3:56 PM:

The result was a thinner piano part than it should have been. Instead of
blocking what they saw as "orchestral" holes, they should have
concentrated on seeing that all the "piano" holes were left unobstructed.

I bought the recording almost as soon as it came out, and was thrilled
by its existence, as I had wanted to do something of the sort, but the
execution let me down. I should give it a go and see if I still feel
that way.


Kip W

[William Sommerwerck]

>> The Gershwin performance is combination of the solo piano part with a
>> transcription of the orchestral part. Columbia Masterworks produced a
>> recording in which the orchestral part's holes were pasted over, leaving
>> a decidedly brisk performance of the solo part. The orchestral part was
>> performed by a small jazz orchestra.

> The result was a thinner piano part than it should have been. Instead
> of blocking what they saw as "orchestral" holes, they should have
> concentrated on seeing that all the "piano" holes were left unobstructed.

I'm going only by what I remember from the liner notes. It seems odd they
would have made such a mistake. If you want, I can pull out the LP.

The cover art -- by Al Hirschfeld-- is almost worth buying the disk to get.
MTT conducts, while a ghostly Gershwin (incorrectly) plays a player piano.
(Note: A reproducing piano is not a player piano. The former makes an analog
recording. The latter is digital.)

[Kip Williams]

William Sommerwerck wrote, On 11/21/12 7:29 AM:

>>> The Gershwin performance is combination of the solo piano part with a
>>> transcription of the orchestral part. Columbia Masterworks produced a
>>> recording in which the orchestral part's holes were pasted over, leaving
>>> a decidedly brisk performance of the solo part. The orchestral part was
>>> performed by a small jazz orchestra.
>
>> The result was a thinner piano part than it should have been. Instead
>> of blocking what they saw as "orchestral" holes, they should have
>> concentrated on seeing that all the "piano" holes were left unobstructed.
>
> I'm going only by what I remember from the liner notes. It seems odd
> they would have made such a mistake. If you want, I can pull out the LP.

I'm going by what I heard, and I can pull out the LP myself. It doesn't
go into details on methodology, except to say they covered every hole
that represented an orchestra note. They left unstated whether they
refrained from covering holes that represented notes played by both
orchestra and piano, and it sounded thin to me.

> The cover art -- by Al Hirschfeld-- is almost worth buying the disk to
> get. MTT conducts, while a ghostly Gershwin (incorrectly) plays a player
> piano. (Note: A reproducing piano is not a player piano. The former
> makes an analog recording. The latter is digital.)

A reproducing piano doesn't really make a recording, it plays it, unless
they use the name also for the few in the studio that make the masters —
the usually cut a regular master, and sensors make some additional marks
on the master that are interpreted by technicians who add some holes
that give a limited number of gradations and other effects (like pedal,
and possibly attack) to the released roll. So I'm not sure I'd call that
analog, it's just digital with more states than merely On and Off.

The Hirschfeld cover's a wow, and it's at a good size on the LP. Three
Ninas.


Kip W

[William Sommerwerck]

> A reproducing piano doesn't really make a recording, it plays it, unless

> they use the name also for the few in the studio that make the masters �

> the usually cut a regular master, and sensors make some additional marks
> on the master that are interpreted by technicians who add some holes that
> give a limited number of gradations and other effects (like pedal, and
> possibly attack) to the released roll.

My understanding is that the "keystroke" is recorded as the continuously
variable (ie, analog) width of a painted line.

[Matthew B. Tepper]

Kip Williams <mrk...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following

letters to be typed in news:yE9rs.12546$s44....@newsfe11.iad:

One of the more interesting reproducing-piano-and-orchestra recordings was
the Grieg Concerto with Percy Grainger's roll (apparently patched up to
remove the orchestral portions), backed by the Sydney Symphony Orchestra
conducted by John Hopkins. This was issued as an LP by RCA stateside, with
some other Grainger items, a group of short works conducted by Stokowski.
There was also a disc of the Tchaikovsky PC #1, where Grainger's roll was
accompanied by Hopkins conducting the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra (with
Grainger's solo roll of "Waltz of the Flowers" from "Nutcracker" as the
filler), but so far as I am aware the LP was only issued in Australia.

[Kip Williams]

William Sommerwerck wrote, On 11/21/12 2:39 PM:

>> A reproducing piano doesn't really make a recording, it plays it,
>> unless they use the name also for the few in the studio that make the

>> masters — the usually cut a regular master, and sensors make some

>> additional marks on the master that are interpreted by technicians who
>> add some holes that give a limited number of gradations and other
>> effects (like pedal, and possibly attack) to the released roll.
>
> My understanding is that the "keystroke" is recorded as the continuously
> variable (ie, analog) width of a painted line.

Which is then interpreted by a technician who gives it a value from
something like 1 to 8.


Kip W

[laraine]

He had great style and elegance.

But this edition of the Menuet --
which markings? I have a very
non-urtextish edition.

I like the roll at the end where
the left hand reaches over to
hit the one note --good visual
effect, perhaps.

C.

[Kip Williams]

laraine wrote, On 11/21/12 11:06 PM:

> On Nov 19, 12:12 pm, Kip Williams <mrk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> laraine wrote, On 11/19/12 12:18 PM:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 17, 10:33 am, Scott <S888Wh...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VPgg3armCI&feature=youtu.be
>>
>>> Interesting tape,
>>> but two concepts being discussed.
>>
>>> One is starting one hand before
>>> the other, in order to emphasize
>>> both voices --used to be called
>>> rubato, I believe. (Today, rubato
>>> means something else.)
>>
>>> He, however, calls that rolled chords,
>>
>>> The earlier 20th-c examples he plays
>>> include some older-style rubato,
>>> but chords seem to be rolled
>>> (arpeggiated) in unexpected
>>> places too.
>>
>>> So a distinction is needed, but it
>>> seems that both rubato and rolled
>>> chords were used differently
>>> in the past than they are today.
>>
>> I like how Paderewski explicitly indicates this in his Menuet. "This is
>> how -I- play stuff!" is the message behind the notation.
>>
>> Piano roll or not, I still love his take on the Second Hungarian Rhapsody.
>

> He had great style and elegance.
>
> But this edition of the Menuet --
> which markings? I have a very
> non-urtextish edition.

I have it in several collections, none of them urtext. _Masterpieces of
Piano Music_ is where I played it from. He explicitly puts the bass note
ahead of the treble in several places — not in words, as my paragraph
above may seem to indicate.


Kip W