sustain pedal in Bach?
Futron
Greetings!
I have been following this group for a few days and I am impressed with
how
knowledgeable most of the participants seem to be. I have a question for
you
all.
I can understand right off that many of you might object to the whole idea
of
playing Bach on the piano in the first place, but for those of you who
don't
object, my question is about using the sustain pedal.
I was taught from a very young age that one simply didn't use any pedal
when
playing Bach. I am an amateur who dreams of someday becoming a concert
artist, even if late in life. I have recently embarked on a quest to learn
the
entire WTC. Having used the piano's pedals all my life, I found the need
to go
as far as strapping my legs to the piano bench to resist the temptation to
"smooth over" some passages where my manual legato has failed me. After
all,
"cheating" will not help me play well enough to perform publically some
day.
I began to explore contemporary recordings of WTC. I was very impressed by
Glenn Gould (no pedal there!) who tried to give the different voices
distinctive characters rather than striving to keep any one voice from
being
emphasized over another, as I was taught. (He also pressed the tempi to
their
extremes, sometimes way over the edge for me because they often stripped
the
music of much of its sonorous beauty. Landowska, by comparison, drove me
crazy by playing sometimes unbearably slow!)
Then, out of curiosity, I picked up Keith Jarret's WTC and was shocked
because
I could swear he was using pedal. Apart from this, his interpretations
were,
in my opinion, rather uninspired and over-rated; he should have stayed
within
his jazz genre. However, the recording left me questioning what I was
taught
so many years ago about using pedal with Bach.
So, (sorry about the long-winded preface) my question is: what is the
contemporary position among academics, professionals, etc., about the use
of
the sustain pedal when playing Bach on the piano?
Chris O'Rourke
Bernard S. Greenberg
Futron wrote:
>
> Greetings!
>
> I can understand right off that many of you might object to the whole idea
> of
> playing Bach on the piano in the first place, but for those of you who
> don't
> object, my question is about using the sustain pedal.
I'm not a concert artist, but I play Bach on the organ
and harpsichord all the time. On occasion, I play Bach
on the piano, but it is rarely my choice. When I do,
I say 'use it as a piano', and I find that the sustain
pedal often adds to the beauty of the performance, used
tactfully and meaningfully, of course.
To say "Bach would have never have done so" is as meaningless
as to say "it is more like a harpsichord that way." If you're
going to play Bach on the piano, play Bach on the piano. It
is sort of like asking, "what is the appropriate tax category
for illegal earnings?"
If you're going to render some composition on some instrument
other than the one for which it was intended, or on which
it is usually heard (see http://www.basistech.com/bach/clavier.htm),
play the instrument as it intended to be played.
If you're going to play Bach on the Theatre Organ, avoid trying
to make a Wurlitzer sound like an Arp Schnitger; play it
like what it is, not like trying to be something it isn't.
Just one person's opinion....
Bernie
Bill Rea
Futron (fut...@aol.com) wrote:
:
: I was taught from a very young age that one simply didn't use any pedal
: when
: playing Bach.
:
: the sustain pedal when playing Bach on the piano?
Bach was a very flexible musician. The piano was invented during his
lifetime, but it took many years to develop into the modern instrument.
The piano has a sustainer pedal for a good reason. To state the obvious,
a piano is not a harpsichord, so don't try to play it like one.
I can't believe Bach himself would be so doctrinaire as to say,
``Getten sie die foot offen der pedal ven sie play my musick!''
But on the other hand, his keyboard music was written in such
a way as to not need a pedal. I use the pedal very judiciously.
Mostly I don't use it at all, but there are occasions when
the music sounds, to my ears, better with a few touchs of the pedal.
Go with the flow, enjoy, I'm sure Bach won't mind.
--
Bill Rea, Computer Services Centre, \_ E-Mail b....@csc.canterbury.ac.nz
Private Bag 4800 </ or cct...@csc.canterbury.ac.nz
University of Canterbury, /) Phone 64-3-364-2331
Christchurch, New Zealand (/' Fax 64-3-364-2332
The goodness of coffee is proportional to the square of the distance to
spring water.
Kjetil Helstrup
Ben Crick wrote:
>
> In article <19970515192...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, fut...@aol.com
> (Futron) wrote:
> > So, (sorry about the long-winded preface) my question is: what is the
> > contemporary position among academics, professionals, etc., about the use
> > of
>
> composition thumb- and toe-pistons when playing Bach's organ works. I
> believe Bach would have made full use of today's mechanical and electrical
> aids to registration and performance. Some neo-baroque organs have a
> "Brustwerk" with moveable doors which can be opened or closed by an
> assistant whilst playing. I prefer to play Bach with the box fixed open, and
> use manual registration only; but for a piece like the Passacaglia and Fugue
> in c it is impossible to bring off a performance without ugly gaps unless
> one has an assistant at the console. The Trinity College Cambridge organ has
> no mechanical aids to registration, so a console assistant has to be
> provided.
>
> The sustain pedal on the Piano removes the dampers from the strings. This
> enables all the strings to vibrate in sympathetic vibration, thus enriching
> the harmonic structure of the notes struck. The pedal has to be released and
> re-applied "on the beat" (Legato pedalling) to avoid muddying the texture
> (like playing the organ in an over-resonant building like Gloucester
> Cathedral in the UK).
>
> Since I'm quite sure that Bach would have used the Plectra selection pedals
> on the Harpsichord, I can be sure he would have used the Sustain pedal on
> the modern piano when appropriate.
>
Plectra selection pedal????????????
What on earth is that? I'm quite sure Bach had never heard of it!
Do you mean the registration pedals of the Neupert/Sperrhake monsters?
In that case they were certainly unknown to Bach, and they are quickly
disappearing again nowadays.
Anyway, I'm also in favour of allowing as much pedal as the player
wishes
in Bach as well as anything else.
Kjetil
> --
> Ben Crick <ben....@argonet.co.uk> ZFC S
> Acorn RiscPC 700, 37 MB, not yet StrongArm, USR 14.4
> Coming to you from Birchington near Margate in Kent.
Jon-o Addleman
On Thu, 15 May 1997 16:01:36 -0400, "Bernard S. Greenberg"
<b...@basistech.com> wrote:
>To say "Bach would have never have done so" is as meaningless
>as to say "it is more like a harpsichord that way." If you're
>going to play Bach on the piano, play Bach on the piano. It
>is sort of like asking, "what is the appropriate tax category
>for illegal earnings?"
I love that analogy!!!! LOL...
Jsb1441
Having read the last six messages it would seem everyone is in favor of
using the sustaining pedal while playing Bach at the piano. I am not,
though I don't feel zealous about my position. But I do recommend that you
abstain from using any pedal while trying to perfect your technique. When
you have achieved a good legato without the pedal then feel free to color
with the pedal. That's my two cents. What a wonderful goal you have
chosen.
John
Bernard S. Greenberg
Ben Crick wrote:
> The sustain pedal on the Piano removes the dampers from the strings. This
> enables all the strings to vibrate in sympathetic vibration, thus enriching
> the harmonic structure of the notes struck. The pedal has to be released and
> re-applied "on the beat" (Legato pedalling) to avoid muddying the texture
> (like playing the organ in an over-resonant building like Gloucester
> Cathedral in the UK).
OTOH, "over-resonant" is a value-relative predicate upon
performance spaces. I think it is -precisely- the sonic allusion to
organ music in a resonant building, the passing crossing of
dissonant notes a little smeared in time, which gives the sustain
pedal its worth in Bach (all previous arguments about degreem taste,
technique, and learning, etc still hold).
Bernie
Ben Crick
In article <337C0C...@cmr.no>, Kjetil Helstrup <kje...@cmr.no> wrote:
> Plectra selection pedal????????????
> What on earth is that? I'm quite sure Bach had never heard of it!
> Do you mean the registration pedals of the Neupert/Sperrhake monsters?
> In that case they were certainly unknown to Bach, and they are quickly
> disappearing again nowadays.
The (modern) harpsichords I have seen have up to three sets of plectra per
manual; hard 8ft; soft 8ft; medium 4ft. There is also a manual coupler
"shift". Pedals are provided to select which sets of plectra to use; rather
like the pedals on a modern concert harp, but for a different purpose. The
late Lady Susi Jeans had a two manual and pedal harpsichord in her home
(Cleveland Lodge Dorking, now the home of the Royal School of Church Music).
I remember her playing Bach on it at a demonstration recital for the Organ
Club (of Great Britain), but I don't remember who the manufacturer was.
The one-manual "harpsichord" or Clavichord is the instrument for which the
WTC "48" were written; but they sound great on the piano too.
Ben Crick
In article <337C6C37...@basistech.com>, "Bernard S. Greenberg"
<b...@basistech.com> wrote:
> OTOH, "over-resonant" is a value-relative predicate upon
> performance spaces. I think it is -precisely- the sonic allusion to
> organ music in a resonant building, the passing crossing of
> dissonant notes a little smeared in time, which gives the sustain
> pedal its worth in Bach (all previous arguments about degreem taste,
> technique, and learning, etc still hold).
I agree entirely, Bernie. Anyone who has had to play organ in a "dead"
acoustic knows how difficult it is to achieve a great performance. But the
decay phase from full organ final chord release to silence in Gloucester
Cathedral is something like 30 seconds. That is really over the top for
resonance! The music "floats" about and is terrific for ethereal ambience,
but hopeless for definitive performance.
Poasune
If the English positioned their organs so that the pipes have a direct
line to the listener, rather than in clerestory chambers, the 30 second
decay would not be so much of a problem. Anytime an organ is placed at a
90 degree relationship to a room, you already have a problem in clarity.
Before the Oxford Movement, the English builders had a capital idea of
placing the organ on the rood screen. But since Henry Willis, you can't
get organs out of chambers. If you want proof, consider the Albert Hall.
At one time it had a definite echo, which prompted George Bernard Shaw's
famous quip about any composer who had his work premiered at the Albert
Hall deserved to have it heard twice. But the organ, all 4 manuals and
some 150+ high and low pressure stops of it, can and is heard clearly
because it is in the room, and not stuffed in some chamber. 19th century
English instruments have some lovely sounds and notable features, but when
it came to where to put the thing, they could have used some advice from
Walter Holtkamp. And to their credit modern English builders have.
Regards,
John Bateson
Poasune
Hmmm. This deserves some thought. A modern piano is so far from the sound
of a harpsichord or clavichord that I personally believe that trying to
play Bach's WTC a la harpsichord is an exercise in frustration. But, one
should try, if for no other reason than learning the technique. Otherwise
one might be temped to substitute the sustenuto pedal for a good finger
legato. Then you get Bach filtered through Rachmaninoff.
I used to be a terrible purist about this, in fact at one time I would
have said don't play Bach on piano AT ALL!. But then with Bach medium is
not the message. There is something indistructable about his music, so
much so that it survives in transcription much better than other
composers. What we like to hear in Bach is how he put the notes together,
and that can come through in a variety of medium. But, saying this, it's
still preferable to hear it on the instrument he intended. Thus the organ
music is still best heard on the organ, the music for Violin Solo on a
violin, etc. even though Bach himself transcribed some of these works for
other instruments. And in the case of the organ music, it's important6 to
hear what Bach's music does with the organ. (I'll be happy to discuss
this with anyone). So, play the Well Tempered Clavier on a Steinway, or
prefereable a Bosendorfer,
and enjoy. It's better to have Bach playing on something, than not at
all.
Regards,
John Bateson.
A. J.
I did so because for most of my life I could play Bach only on the
piano, as that was my instrument of study and I had infrequent access to
earlier ones. Since that was how I was going to enjoy and express the
music, I played it the way I knew to play my instrument. Since trying
organ I have found the answer to the heavy use of pedal I developed as a
kid to attain sustained notes on piano. Wow!
----------------------------
http://www.basistech.com/ajl
Ben Crick
In article <19970517025...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, poa...@aol.com
(Poasune) wrote:
> If the English positioned their organs so that the pipes have a direct
> line to the listener, rather than in clerestory chambers, the 30 second
Gloucester Cathedral Organ is housed in antique cases (chaire case, 1579;
main case, Harris, 1666) free-standing on the Choir Screen in the middle of
the building, halfway between the floor and the ceiling. Behind the facade,
the pipes are positioned on new Werkprinzip chests. Only the Swell and Solo
divisions are enclosed in "chambers". Incidentally the organ was donated
early this century by Lord Horlick, the proprietor of the famous malted milk
beverage of that name (since rebuilt). Perhaps the pseudo-Gothic colouring
of the show pipes and the muddy acoustic led to the phrase "to make a
Horlicks" of something! As a schoolboy I heard the then organist (Sumsion)
play the "St Anne" Fugue in Eb. He took it at a gentle speed, so the
counterpoint was discernible. At the end, I watched his shoulders (visible
over the parapet of the organ loft) as he released the final chord with a
great shrug. 30 seconds later, it finally stopped reverberating around the
cathedral; or rather, merged into the background "buzz" which is always
present in that building.
The Willis organ in the Albert Hall is currently being rebuilt on a rolling
programme so that it remains playable throughout the (seven year?) period of
the rebuild contract. As a boy, I remember the famous Albert Hall echo
bouncing down from the roof, which was a paraboloid dome in shape: the
perfect reflective surface. Various experiments were made with inverted
sound absorbent "mushrooms" of different sizes and heights suspended from
the roof (so as to avoid mechanical tuned frequencies). The result is that
the infamous echo has been totally suppressed. About ten years ago I
attended a joint recital by Carlo Curley on the Allen Digital Organ (set up
on the orchestra staging) and Christopher Dearnley (then organist of St
Paul's Cathedral London) on the Willis. They ended with an arrangement for
two organs (antiphonally, with climactic tutti) of Widor's Toccata from his
5th Organ Symphony. Stunning!
When new churches or cathedrals are being built, there is always a clash of
interest between the architect and the organ builder. This often results in
the organ being shoe-horned into a chamber halfway up the wall of the north
side of the Choir. Truro Cathedral is a case in point.
Thank you John. Interesting post.
Victor Y
I am curious to know if anyone has heard a recording of the B-flat minor
prelude (WTC 1) without the sustain pedal being used liberally.
I think it would sound terrible on the piano without the pedal.
Bernard S. Greenberg
Hear hear.
Bernie
j...@shelby.com
After playing Bach on the piano, harpsichord, and organ for 30 years I
wanted to comment on a new possibility: the synthesiser. My Kurzweil
PC88 keyboard has extremely realistic harpsichord, piano, etc. sounds.
The harpsichord sound is so real that you can hear the plectrums going
back into place when you lift your fingers off the keys.
But an unexpected bonus is the fact that the keyboard's touch sensitivity
is programmable. The sustain pedal works on the harpsichord, as well as
the ability to play forte or piano. You can play the harpsichord exactly
the same as a piano. It's quite bizarre but it turns out to be really
beautiful.
In my experience, harpsichords have a very light touch, as do most
synthesisers. But the Kurzweil has a weighted-action piano touch. It is a
strange feeling to be playing the harpsichord on a piano keyboard, with
touch sensitivity and a sustain pedal. I just love it.
And the reverse is also possible. You can disable the sustain pedal and
touch sentitivity of the piano, so it plays like a harpsichord. You don't
have to tie your legs to the chair to keep from using the sustain pedal,
legato becomes mandatory.
And I thought Bach was difficult to play without the sustain pedal until I
tried Scarlatti...
Regards,
Jan Hanford
The J.S. Bach Home Page
http:/tile.net/bach/
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Futron
Victor Y asked if anyone knew of a recording of the b-flat minor prelude
from WTC 1 w/o liberal use of the sustain pedal:
The Glenn Gould recording, I believe, but I could be wrong. Could someone
else who has it give it a listen and tell us what they think?
His interpretation of the e-flat minor prelude (WTC 1) is another good
example.
Chris O'Rourke
Jim Michmerhuizen
"Bernard S. Greenberg" <b...@basistech.com> writes:
>"over-resonant" is a value-relative predicate upon performance spaces.
This has got to be the only newsgroup in the alt.music.* hierarchy where
one could post an expression like this and live to tell about it ;^>
--
--
Regards
Jim Michmerhuizen jam...@world.std.com
The Residence is at http://world.std.com/~jamzen/
Jim Michmerhuizen
jsb...@aol.com (Jsb1441) writes:
>But I do recommend that you
>abstain from using any pedal while trying to perfect your technique. When
>you have achieved a good legato without the pedal then feel free to color
>with the pedal.
One of the strongest reasons to avoid pedal in strongly contrapuntal
textures is, in my experience, that pedal DEPRIVES me (didn't mean to
shout, let's try that again) *deprives* me of articulation. Legato, in
Bach, is only one among many degrees of connectedness. At his best,
Gould was capable of "saying things" by articulation alone, in ways that
nobody else - not even Landowska - approaches. Pedal is simply *not*
compatible with such ways of playing: not as principle, but as a matter
of simple brute physical fact.
Another commentator on this thread mentioned the Bb minor prelude from
book I as an example of something that needs pedal when it's played on
the piano. I agree entirely. But then why doesn't it need a "pedal"
when it's played on a harpsichord? What magic do the great
harpsichordists have that makes me feel like I'm hearing legato when I'm
not?
Ben Crick
In article <EAI9v...@world.std.com>, jam...@world.std.com (Jim
Michmerhuizen) wrote:
> Another commentator on this thread mentioned the Bb minor prelude from
> book I as an example of something that needs pedal when it's played on
> the piano. I agree entirely. But then why doesn't it need a "pedal"
> when it's played on a harpsichord? What magic do the great
> harpsichordists have that makes me feel like I'm hearing legato when I'm
> not?
Harpsichord and organ techniques are entirely different from piano
techniques. You emphasize a note on the organ by shortening its immediate
neighbours. The harpsichord has a percussive ictus as the plectrum rises; it
has another lesser ictus as the plectrum falls back past the string when the
note is released. This gives precise note-length definition on the
harpsichord. Even though the tone dies away exponentially and rapidly after
the note is struck, you still hear the note "end": enabling a perceived
legato effect. The frequently encountered pedal-points or long sustained
bass notes in the WTC have to be struck again and again on the first beat of
each bar in spite of the printed "ties", or they just die right away like
Sullivan's "Lost Chord" (not Jimmy "Schnozzle" Durante's version!).
Organ pipes have a starting transient "chiff" unless the pipe mouth has been
"nicked" to suppress it. There is also a decay transient as the pallet
closes and the wind supply fails. This is particularly noticeable when
playing on a single rank of low pressure lightly-voiced pipework. Lazy
organists who play on muddy combination-piston preselected ensembles, with
the Swell permanently coupled to the Great (shock horror!), just cannot give
an authentic account of polyphonic contrapuntal music. IMHO that is.
Philippe Panzini
How can you say that a synth has a good harpsichord sound - it makes me
doubt you ever touched one. I happen to have both a PC88 and a K2500XS
and neither machine comes even remotely close to sounding like the
1710 Mietke or the 1753 Taskin I have. Synthesizers have a loooong way
to go - yet maybe physical modelling will get use closer.
You fail to mention that on a proper harpsichord, the width of the keys
is
uneven within the octave, which is essential for the articulation.
I don't know what you mean by light touch either, as when a
double-manual
instrument is coupled, with the three sets of strings in action, the
action
is anything but 'light' - rather you feel the quills give you that
critical
resistance - another factor in articulation.
As far as pedal is concerned - the question was have we heard any
recording...
Since this is about the piano - I can only point to Glenn Gould as the
only
advocate of 'emasculating' the piano. Andras Schiff is not too heavy
either,
and while Sviatoslav Richter is more pianistic in his technique, his
lyricism
and sobriety are highly musical. Avoid Angela Hewitt (no wits) and Keith
Jarrett (incoherent).
Phil
WTC48
My, what a thread! I just read 21 responses, so I won't quote anything.
A few observations:
On the harpsichord (or organ) it makes no difference how you strike the
key: vertically, sideways, front or back, light or firm, all sound the
same as long as the key is depressed fully. Phrasing is achieved by
precise timing of the release. The piano, on the other hand, requires a
more or less vertical attack for evenness of tone. In highly polyphonic
music, this can be accomplished by using a lot of staccato, or a mixture
of staccato and legato that throws the various voices in relief. Glenn
Gould is the ne plus ultra of this approach. If you want to play legato,
the pedal can certainly be useful, especially in regard to increasing
one's options in fingering (e.g., playing consecutive white keys with the
thumb). I think one should experiment a good deal in practice, both with
and without the pedal, and be prepared to adjust to performance
conditions, both the room and the instrument.
Also, the harpsichord has a lot of resonance (or what my Korg digital
piano calls *surround*), which is similar in effect to that produced on
the piano by constant pedaling with very rapid changes, i.e., pedaling 8th
and even 16th notes rather than chord changes.
I have played Vol. I of the Well-Tempered Clavier in recital on both the
harpsichord and the organ, and intend to do so on the piano (not digital!)
at some time. No one instrument seems ideal for all the pieces, but if I
had to choose one, it would probably be the piano, because of its
flexibility. This flexibility, however, increases the number of choices
one has to make, which is probably why it is taking me 5 times as long to
get the piano recital ready!
Peter Fish (wt...@aol.com)
msha...@interlog.com
Let us not forget another wonderful harpshichord technique - the
arpreggiation of chords. Most chords should be rolled at varying
speeds, hardly ever struck together. This allows the player to
accentuate some beats/chords and not others. The piano does not accept
this effect as well.
MS
Jim Michmerhuizen
Philippe Panzini <ab...@dial.pipex.com> writes:
>People who learn organ technique know that
>how you *release* a note is as important as when you attack it, and that
>subtle timing difference is where all the expression goes into harpsichord
>playing (Glenn Gould mentions it - he learned Organ in Toronto).
Dead on. Did I mention that I recently put the passacaglia up on my
website? If you have access to some midi equipment, download the midi
files BWV582_1.mid (the passacaglia itself) and 582_2.mid (the fugue).
They use the techniques you describe here.
j...@shelby.com
In article <3383D3...@dial.pipex.com>,
Philippe Panzini <ab...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
> How can you say that a synth has a good harpsichord sound - it makes me
> doubt you ever touched one. I happen to have both a PC88 and a K2500XS
This kind of posturing is quite unnecessary and, it turns out,
inaccurate. Of course I've played a harpsichord. Several, in fact.
After all, I am a professional musician.
> and neither machine comes even remotely close to sounding like the
> 1710 Mietke or the 1753 Taskin I have. Synthesizers have a loooong way
Since I've gotten some personal email with questions about this, I wanted
to clarify that the Kurzweil keyboards do not "synthesize" the
harpsichord sound, they use digital samples taken from harpsichords. In
this regard, yes, they sound very real. No, they don't sound close to
your precious 1710 harpsichord, but I wouldn't expect them too. Even
recordings of harpsichords do a so-so job of reproducing them. The
actual beauty and nuances of a harpschord and only be heard live.
Frankly, the harpsichord samples from the Ensoniq EPS library are
superior to the Kurzweil. Regardless, the end result is that it sounds
remarkably real and is a lot of fun to play which is, I feel, the point
and was also the point of my original post.
Regards,
Jan Hanford
The J.S. Bach Home Page
Jim Michmerhuizen
fut...@aol.com (Futron) writes:
>I initiated this thread to find out where people stood on the issue of
>sustain pedal in Bach. I thank everyone who has responded and will confess
>that I agree with those who have said less is better, although I feel less
>guilty now about cutting loose on a sunny Saturday afternoon... : )
>I feel I must respond to Phil's recent response to Jan Hanson's post.
>In defense of Jan, let me first commend him for his courageous mentioning
>of the word "synthesizer" in this NG! <G> But further,
Oh my dear Futron, you have misjudged this newsgroup. Courage?
Synthesizer? Bernie Greenberg has a two-manual Allen digital organ in
his living room; Dave Grossman makes midi files; John Hamm has done a
synthesized-Bach collection; Dean Lampe does Bach synthesis too. In the
70's I ran something called The Boston School of Electronic Music, and
for the past seven years I've been building a collection of what will
eventually become the complete keyboard (organ and klavier both) works
on Bach in midi files, I hope. Visit Dave's website -- he can direct you
to all the other ones, including mine.
The *real* Bach and synthesis thread hasn't even *begun* yet... .
j...@shelby.com
> fut...@aol.com (Futron) writes:
>
> >I feel I must respond to Phil's recent response to Jan Hanson's post.
> >In defense of Jan, let me first commend him for his courageous mentioning
> >of the word "synthesizer" in this NG! <G> But further,
I am a her, thanks!
Jan Hanford
The J.S. Bach Home Page