Liszt's Sonata And The Curse Of Octaves
SG
With such a title, anything can only go downhill from here.
Warning: the following may be a tad too "jargon" for the non-musician,
and too "obvious" for the musician. Not having access to a score of
Liszt's Sonata will make the reading harder. However, here it goes:
Motto:
"He may be an Octavianus but he is no (Sid) Caesar" [Moriz Rosenthal on
Vladimir Horowitz. Or vice versa. No, it was Rosenthal.]
This is possibly slightly outside the main focus of this forum but,
then, as King Lear, the forgotten forefather of modern strip-tease, used
to say when his last piece of garment was about to be taken away by the
merciless storm: what the heck?
An excellent piano-teacher friend forwarded me an interesting inquiry:
how difficult are the octave-passages in the Liszt Sonata and what would
be the precise challenges they pose?
Well, one should start by saying what these octaves don't ask for. As
opposed to other Liszt works, the octave passages are not very long and
therefore, with the possible exception of the bars 55-92 passage, are
not necessarily a test in octaves-chords endurance to the extent some of
Liszt's operatic paraphrases or symphonic transcriptions can be.
However, if there's any truth to the proposition that there's no such
thing as easy music if high standards are to be applied, I find the said
passages *quite* challenging.
Measure 8: the first octave jump over a two-octaves space. Easy to do
with the second "G" octave in the *right* hand. However, as other
commentators have said (I would mention which one had I not forgotten),
this jump should not be helped with the right hand. (Well, not in public
performance anyway. In the studio recording, in the words of the
Ecclesiastes as quoted by a famous pickpocket, what the eye doesn't
seeth, theth pianistth getsth awayth withth). The very tension, risque
character of the physical gesture corroborates the nature of the musical
gesture -- out of the primordial muds and shadows, a new metaphysical
cycle of life and death has commenced. (Something similar, while it is
less difficult and quite different in ethos, can be said on behalf of
the beginning jump in Hammerklavier.) Well, not to overstate the
difficulty of the said jump (not as hard as, say, Mephisto-Waltz played
speedily), but I've seen pianists in recital getting a cute, clusterish
G F G or so rather than a clean G. Often because of sheer nervousness,
I'd say.
The theme itself (m. 9-13): not very difficult, however rarely do I hear
it shaped beyond the generic forte (often too loud already, often too
even). Here one can already hint to what is truly difficult about the
octave passages in Liszt's Sonata, in general: combining speed,
accuracy, clarity with thematic understanding and articulatory (or is
that articulative in Oxfordian English?) acumen. Observing Liszt's
written-in dynamic indications just shan't be enough. (I will admit even
in the absence of torture that I find Ernst Levy's performance
particularly apt to demonstrate in concrete performance how the whole
shebang should go.)
M. 55 et seq: the initiated chordal canon presents pedaling difficulties
-- m. 56, a stronger coloration of the dotted-half chord in the right
hand would ask for a longer pedal, but that would render the left hand's
motif messy, so probably the pianist should negotiate shorter pedals,
while playing the chord as loud and unshrill as the high register of the
piano allows for. From a musical point of view, m. 59-60, as well
as 65-66, represent "parentheses" -- horizontal (rather than vertical)
embellishments of the main theme, which means they shouldn't exceed in
sheer volume of sound, despite being more resonant through their
inherent texture, the level of m. 55-56 and 61-62. The urtext has a
rinforzando in m. 61 and all editions have an fff in m. 67 -- which is
usually overlooked because the pianist gives all he can in m. 55
already, like the drunken groom when the moment of truth has finally
arrived.
These two pages are a mechanically difficult and musically complex
passage. The main technical challenge of bars 59-58 and the similar ones
consists in playing each first note out of the groups of four not only
louder but also "deeper", longer, with some "armweight feel", despite
having to "take off" right away for the crispier, shorter,
more-wrist-enacted three following double octaves of each group. It is
out of this differentiation that Liszt creates the transitional thematic
material hidden in the lower octaves following m.72. With the pianist
already tired by all that work, Liszt doesn't give him a break, but
takes him right away into the Erlkoenig-like passage of repeated octaves
-- m. 81, in which the main difficulty is to create autonomy of
movement, dynamics and articulation between the middle, legato thematic
line [doubled in the left hand] and the ideally much lighter, detached
repeated octaves. (Hint: trying to use less pedal and shorter pedal in
this passage, with "honest", finger-tips connection of the modal theme
can make the passage sound different, if not better necessarily.)
The second inversion C Major -- B Major-based sequence starting in
m. 205 presents mainly a speed challenge. The passages in the left hand
(m. 205, 207, 213, and 215 [note in m. 215 the urtext triple forte which
some editions don't have***]) are not too complicated -- slightly
chromaticized scalar groupings. However, playing them really fast, clear
and light enough (quarter-note to 160 or higher is a good tempo, I
think), while the right hand is busy with some chords which, rather than
happily banged out, should project their having originated from the
main-theme, is rather difficult for lesser virtuosi. Sofronitsky was
surely not one of the latter [lesser virtuosi], but his recording of the
Liszt Sonata, as I remember it (don't have it here) presents a rather
odd -- and musically unmotivated, in my opinion -- slow-fast-slow-fast
pattern for m. 205-206-207-208. (Mind you, I cherish that interpretation
very very much beyond my own nitpicking.)
_________________________________
***In this writer's opinion, the pianist should only project in
performance of the whole sonata only one *real* triple and only one
*real* quadruple forte -- m. 395 and 709 respectively. However, Liszt's
triple forte in the mentioned moment -- m. 215 -- *may* be connected to
the rather abrupt presence of a B Major modulation -- the B
Major which shall constitute the key of the late climax.
_________________________________
The octave passages in the left hand starting with m. 221 are not very
hard, but they need to be played with as much variation of touch as
possible. Somewhat harder is the widening-jumps-passage in m. 229-232 --
in which, in this writer's opinion, the "stubborn" C Sharp needs to be
emphasized more than the span-increasing lower line. The reason? I find
a correspondence between that C Sharp and the D-crowned chord which
follows in m. 232 -- it's a bit like a C# C# C# C# C# C# . . . C# ^D^
[finally] rhetorical device.
The octaves in the left hand starting with m. 263 are cleverly written,
not too difficult and musically effective. I think Busoni liked them
very much, as similarly written left hand octave passages can be
encountered in a number of Busoni compositions, the Carmen Sonatina and
Busoni's own coda for Liszt's E Major Polonaise emphatically.
That both Liszt and Busoni flirted with the organ [the musical
instrument is what I am talking about, honni soit qui mal y pense]
throughout their careers should count as another possible explanation,
insofar one can find plenty of that '20th century Fox is proud to
present "The Flying Feet" ' writing in organ composers.
The double-octaves passage going on from m. 590 to m. 594 is
mechanically comfortable. The main musical challenges are to make the
listener hear that the fragment is derived from the main theme, and
(especially) to play out for all it's worth Liszt's quite clever
interplay between the traditional metrical arrangement and the
subtle metrical displacement of the pattern -- it is a 13-notes pattern
[only twice completed], which allows for an unsettling irregularity to
instill itself in the listener's
perception.
The famous pre-climax passage (m. 700, note ff preceding fff) is as hard
as the pianist is prepared to make it. It can be played "decently" by
many, but "decent" ain't gonna be enough (as Mae West kept telling her
producer, but was he listening?). Hearing that section played truly
fortissimo, prestissimo, shining, and fuocoso assai, with a pedaling
which should be both transparent in texture and quasi-orchestral in
resonance, is a rarer live event, in this listener's experience, than
one may suspect. It also feels good when the pianist finds time, in all
that excitement, to underline both the G# and the D# [Liszt accentuates
in the score only the D#] in m. 682 and 684 -- the elements of the major
mode which finally break the ubiquitous diminished seventh of the main
theme into a minor [but harmonically major-sounding] seventh.
(Unnecessary) conclusion: while perhaps not containing the very ultimate
octave-passages in terms of sheer "athletic" challenge within Liszt's
piano work, I dare say that the unique *combination* of technical and
musical challenges posed by a high-standards interpretation of the B
Minor Sonata has few correspondents in the piano literature, to the
extent I know it. (Don't invest in that extent and you'll be never
disappointed.)
regards,
SG
Dan Koren
Octaves are a blessing (even if sometimes in disguise).
It's the ninths that are curses....
dk
"SG" <sam6...@earthlink.com> wrote in message
news:88DQb.22971$q4....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Kapelli
"The School of Octave Playing" by Theodor Kullak
I've been learning from this and it makes a fantastic effects, but we must
practise it with completely loose wrist.
Matthew燘. Tepper
be typed in news:88DQb.22971$q4....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:
Those octaves in the Liszt Sonata are, in fact, what I was working on when
the tendons in my right hand flamed up.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
War is Peace. ** Freedom is Slavery. ** It's all Napster's fault!
LaVirtuosa
Ragards,
******Val
SG <sam6...@earthlink.com> wrote in message news:<88DQb.22971$q4....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>...
SG
LaVirtuosa wrote:
> A lovely expose. We need more of this kind of thing.
Speak for yourself!! ( :
> Regards,
>
> ******Val
Val, I am concerned. Only six stars?? What happened to the others?!?
regards,
SG ( :
SG
Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
> Those octaves in the Liszt Sonata are, in fact, what I was working on when
> the tendons in my right hand flamed up.
Sorry to hear that -- really. Especially as piano is such an easy
instrument to play, if one applies a "natural", relaxed, economical
technique . . . I do have some back troubles, but they were not
*provoked* by playing.
regards,
SG
Dan Koren
She gave one or two to Clark
to help him stand out.
dk
Ian Pace
>
>
> With such a title, anything can only go downhill from here.
> Warning: the following may be a tad too "jargon" for the non-musician,
> and too "obvious" for the musician. Not having access to a score of
> Liszt's Sonata will make the reading harder. However, here it goes:
>
>
> Motto:
> "He may be an Octavianus but he is no (Sid) Caesar" [Moriz Rosenthal on
> Vladimir Horowitz. Or vice versa. No, it was Rosenthal.]
>
>
> This is possibly slightly outside the main focus of this forum but,
> then, as King Lear, the forgotten forefather of modern strip-tease, used
> to say when his last piece of garment was about to be taken away by the
> merciless storm: what the heck?
>
>
> An excellent piano-teacher friend forwarded me an interesting inquiry:
> how difficult are the octave-passages in the Liszt Sonata and what would
> be the precise challenges they pose?
>
>
> Well, one should start by saying what these octaves don't ask for. As
> opposed to other Liszt works, the octave passages are not very long and
> therefore, with the possible exception of the bars 55-92 passage, are
> not necessarily a test in octaves-chords endurance to the extent some of
> Liszt's operatic paraphrases or symphonic transcriptions can be.
>
of Funerailles, the Fourth or Sixth Hungarian Rhapsody, Schubert Erlkonig
(in some ways harder, certainly at the metronome mark, than the Liszt
transcription), the culmination of the March in the transcription of the
Beethoven-Liszt Ninth Symphony, the Trio section of the Scherzo of the Sixth
Symphony, or various passages in some of the more obscure Liszt works. The
bars 55-92 passage isn't so hard in terms of stamina, but it's layout at the
keyboard makes it more of a challenge in terms of accuracy than the
pupportedly more brilliant outbursts of octaves at the Prestissimo near the
end.
>
> However, if there's any truth to the proposition that there's no such
> thing as easy music if high standards are to be applied, I find the said
> passages *quite* challenging.
>
>
> Measure 8: the first octave jump over a two-octaves space. Easy to do
> with the second "G" octave in the *right* hand. However, as other
> commentators have said (I would mention which one had I not forgotten),
> this jump should not be helped with the right hand. (Well, not in public
> performance anyway. In the studio recording, in the words of the
> Ecclesiastes as quoted by a famous pickpocket, what the eye doesn't
> seeth, theth pianistth getsth awayth withth). The very tension, risque
> character of the physical gesture corroborates the nature of the musical
> gesture -- out of the primordial muds and shadows, a new metaphysical
> cycle of life and death has commenced. (Something similar, while it is
> less difficult and quite different in ethos, can be said on behalf of
> the beginning jump in Hammerklavier.) Well, not to overstate the
> difficulty of the said jump (not as hard as, say, Mephisto-Waltz played
> speedily), but I've seen pianists in recital getting a cute, clusterish
> G F G or so rather than a clean G. Often because of sheer nervousness,
> I'd say.
>
a stave pointing upwards, and no corresponding rest in the top stave,
suggesting that this was intended to be played by the right hand. According
to Sharon Winklhofer - 'Liszt's Sonata in B Minor: A Study in Autograph
Sources and Documents', this replicates the notation in the final manuscript
draft of the work. The figuration went through several different version,
including one in which the left hand simply played a sustained low G on the
semiquaver/sixteenth note upbeat, tied onto the main note, whereas the right
hand would play a G below middle C which would be tied onto the G an octave
higher on the beat. The Hammerklavier is a more difficult question - have
only played this in concert once, where I confess I took the safe option of
taking the Bb major second inversion chord with the right hand (it was right
at the beginning of the concert). This was at the extremely fast metronome
mark of minim/half note = 138, at which it is near impossible to make the
initial Bb as short as a quaver/eight note if taking the figure with a
single hand. On the other hand, in a masterclass, I was quite insistent
that a student should take the opening Eb-F# octaves in Op. 111 with a
single hand, losing as it does otherwise much of the inherent tension (if
that could be convincingly emulated with two hands, maybe it would call for
a change of mind).
>
> The theme itself (m. 9-13): not very difficult, however rarely do I hear
> it shaped beyond the generic forte (often too loud already, often too
> even). Here one can already hint to what is truly difficult about the
> octave passages in Liszt's Sonata, in general: combining speed,
> accuracy, clarity with thematic understanding and articulatory (or is
> that articulative in Oxfordian English?) acumen. Observing Liszt's
> written-in dynamic indications just shan't be enough. (I will admit even
> in the absence of torture that I find Ernst Levy's performance
> particularly apt to demonstrate in concrete performance how the whole
> shebang should go.)
>
the to the accented D at the beginning of the next bar. However, when it
comes to the group of triplets leading to the E at the beginning of the
following bar, matters are a little more complicated. The method patented
by Horowitz is essentially to play the triplets and the E as a daemonic
descent that isn't so much 'shaped' by an emphasis on the final octave. In
this, Horowitz gives an indication of the untethered quality he brings to
much of the work later on, exceeding any sort of para-classical bar-oriented
discipline that might otherwise be enacted. Other players do this
differently, though, as a means of presenting this as a more obvious 'theme'
characterized by it's melodic and rhythmic shape, rather than an entrance
into the engulfing octave-dominated texture of later.
>
> M. 55 et seq: the initiated chordal canon presents pedaling difficulties
> -- m. 56, a stronger coloration of the dotted-half chord in the right
> hand would ask for a longer pedal, but that would render the left hand's
> motif messy, so probably the pianist should negotiate shorter pedals,
> while playing the chord as loud and unshrill as the high register of the
> piano allows for.
The chord would have course of sounded less shrill on most of the pianos
that Liszt knew.
> From a musical point of view, m. 59-60, as well
> as 65-66, represent "parentheses" -- horizontal (rather than vertical)
> embellishments of the main theme, which means they shouldn't exceed in
> sheer volume of sound, despite being more resonant through their
> inherent texture, the level of m. 55-56 and 61-62.
Could equally well be seen as 'extensions' as 'embellishments', which
wouldn't necessarily imply any diminution in volume, perhaps even an
increase if one wants to underline this structural quality. The first of
each group of four has an accent but no wedge, maybe a good reason for using
pedal on these notes, which can extend even a little beyond into the
subsequent second octave. Or those wishing to underline a supposed embedded
melody might pedal the whole group so as to emphasize the line joining these
accented octaves. This needn't necessarily conflict with the 'sempre
staccato ed energico assai' at bar 73, as for various reasons the use of a
staccato touch will surely affect the net result in terms of timbre and
texture.
The urtext has a
> rinforzando in m. 61 and all editions have an fff in m. 67 -- which is
> usually overlooked because the pianist gives all he can in m. 55
> already, like the drunken groom when the moment of truth has finally
> arrived.
>
Indeed. and the passage in Eb is more extended than those that preceded it.
I find this sort of spelling out of a structural device on Liszt's part a
little banal, though.
>
> These two pages are a mechanically difficult and musically complex
> passage. The main technical challenge of bars 59-58 and the similar ones
> consists in playing each first note out of the groups of four not only
> louder but also "deeper", longer, with some "armweight feel", despite
> having to "take off" right away for the crispier, shorter,
> more-wrist-enacted three following double octaves of each group. It is
> out of this differentiation that Liszt creates the transitional thematic
> material hidden in the lower octaves following m.72.
But ultimately this hidden material amounts to an elaborated type of scale,
leading to Liszt's favoured pivotal device of the diminished 7th. This is
what makes me wonder about the merits of making too much of this. The
different approaches of sustaining the first with the pedal and/or
sustaining it manually, with a different mode of attack allowing the
performer to hold the notes most of the way until the next notes, will
certainly have an a effect upon the final result.
> With the pianist
> already tired by all that work, Liszt doesn't give him a break, but
> takes him right away into the Erlkoenig-like passage of repeated octaves
> -- m. 81, in which the main difficulty is to create autonomy of
> movement, dynamics and articulation between the middle, legato thematic
> line [doubled in the left hand] and the ideally much lighter, detached
> repeated octaves. (Hint: trying to use less pedal and shorter pedal in
> this passage, with "honest", finger-tips connection of the modal theme
> can make the passage sound different, if not better necessarily.)
>
Question of the pedal in this passage is one of the most interesting ones.
If one considers the parallel passage from the Piu mosso at bar 555, pedal
is marked here - just one marking until another at the shift to the repeated
E minor triad. In terms of what the 'damped timpani strokes' from the
outset of the piece and onwards signify in terms of degree of
dryness/resonance, this passage above all makes me question my basic
convictions (that they should be relatively short and sharp for most of the
piece, often in contrast to the surrounding material, even maybe with some
degree of non-sustained playing (not held through the bar with the pedal) in
bar 367 onwards and similarly afterwards - though the wedges might simply
indicate a technical factor here to ease the leap upwards, by analogy with
bars 105 onwards, where pedal is marked; also with some pedal release at the
mighty climax in bars 701 and 703). So might we assume that by analogy with
bars 555 et seq, bars 81 onwards should be played with a fair amount of
pedal? Or on the other hand maybe the timbral qualities of each passage are
contrasting? The latter option might be suggested by the fact that Liszt
makes much of contrasting articulations in different statements and
developments of the same theme (not least the 'Theme 2' of bars 8 onwards),
so contrasting styles of pedalling might also be appropriate?
>
> The second inversion C Major -- B Major-based sequence starting in
> m. 205 presents mainly a speed challenge. The passages in the left hand
> (m. 205, 207, 213, and 215 [note in m. 215 the urtext triple forte which
> some editions don't have***]) are not too complicated -- slightly
> chromaticized scalar groupings. However, playing them really fast, clear
> and light enough (quarter-note to 160 or higher is a good tempo, I
> think), while the right hand is busy with some chords which, rather than
> happily banged out, should project their having originated from the
> main-theme, is rather difficult for lesser virtuosi. Sofronitsky was
> surely not one of the latter [lesser virtuosi], but his recording of the
> Liszt Sonata, as I remember it (don't have it here) presents a rather
> odd -- and musically unmotivated, in my opinion -- slow-fast-slow-fast
> pattern for m. 205-206-207-208. (Mind you, I cherish that interpretation
> very very much beyond my own nitpicking.)
>
When first learning this piece nearly 20 years ago, this always seemed one
of the most tricky passages, especially with the B major octaves in bar 213
onwards. Have found that a raising of the wrist in both hands at the very
end of bars 213/215, followed by a lowering in the subsequent bar, aids
fluency and continuity tremendously. But the slow-fast-slow-fast pattern
can be very dramatic, allowing for a Cziffra-like precipitato in the even
numbered bars.
> _________________________________
> ***In this writer's opinion, the pianist should only project in
> performance of the whole sonata only one *real* triple and only one
> *real* quadruple forte -- m. 395 and 709 respectively. However, Liszt's
> triple forte in the mentioned moment -- m. 215 -- *may* be connected to
> the rather abrupt presence of a B Major modulation -- the B
> Major which shall constitute the key of the late climax.
> _________________________________
>
> The octave passages in the left hand starting with m. 221 are not very
> hard, but they need to be played with as much variation of touch as
> possible. Somewhat harder is the widening-jumps-passage in m. 229-232 --
> in which, in this writer's opinion, the "stubborn" C Sharp needs to be
> emphasized more than the span-increasing lower line. The reason? I find
> a correspondence between that C Sharp and the D-crowned chord which
> follows in m. 232 -- it's a bit like a C# C# C# C# C# C# . . . C# ^D^
> [finally] rhetorical device.
>
Also worth noting that here the first of each group of four retains the
wedge, unlike in the earlier passages in 59-60, 65-66, etc.
>
> The octaves in the left hand starting with m. 263 are cleverly written,
> not too difficult and musically effective. I think Busoni liked them
> very much, as similarly written left hand octave passages can be
> encountered in a number of Busoni compositions, the Carmen Sonatina and
> Busoni's own coda for Liszt's E Major Polonaise emphatically.
> That both Liszt and Busoni flirted with the organ [the musical
> instrument is what I am talking about, honni soit qui mal y pense]
> throughout their careers should count as another possible explanation,
> insofar one can find plenty of that '20th century Fox is proud to
> present "The Flying Feet" ' writing in organ composers.
>
An extremely brilliant passage (and the corresponding one in bars 650-672).
One common pianistic effect I have often heard employed is to play the
higher group of left octaves quite dry and unpedalled, then in contrast use
the pedal when they shift down the octave to create a particular type of
deep bass roar (much beloved of many Russian players!). Of course the lower
octaves could be played just as powerfully but without turning boomy, on
most of the pianos Liszt knew. But a more interesting contrast seems
implied by the score, whereby the first four right hand chords are marked as
crotchets/quarter notes with wedges, followed by the slurred group, then
wedged quavers/eighth notes followed by rests. The use of more pedal in
alternate bars tends to rather obliterate the possibility for a contrast
here, which otherwise could allow for a more pointed and short attack in
bars 270 onwards
>
> The double-octaves passage going on from m. 590 to m. 594 is
> mechanically comfortable. The main musical challenges are to make the
> listener hear that the fragment is derived from the main theme, and
> (especially) to play out for all it's worth Liszt's quite clever
> interplay between the traditional metrical arrangement and the
> subtle metrical displacement of the pattern -- it is a 13-notes pattern
> [only twice completed], which allows for an unsettling irregularity to
> instill itself in the listener's
> perception.
>
Certainly makes 'musical' sense, but on the other hand I remain drawn to
Horowitz's 1930s recording, which breaks every rule in this respect, playing
these octaves primarily for the dramatic effect of their cumulation,
unrelieved by much in the way of 'shaping'. Hard to say why, and Horowitz
breaks every 'rule' one might posit; the total effect of the whole
performance is both electric and coherent, though.
>
> The famous pre-climax passage (m. 700, note ff preceding fff) is as hard
> as the pianist is prepared to make it. It can be played "decently" by
> many, but "decent" ain't gonna be enough (as Mae West kept telling her
> producer, but was he listening?). Hearing that section played truly
> fortissimo, prestissimo, shining, and fuocoso assai, with a pedaling
> which should be both transparent in texture and quasi-orchestral in
> resonance, is a rarer live event, in this listener's experience, than
> one may suspect. It also feels good when the pianist finds time, in all
> that excitement, to underline both the G# and the D# [Liszt accentuates
> in the score only the D#] in m. 682 and 684 -- the elements of the major
> mode which finally break the ubiquitous diminished seventh of the main
> theme into a minor [but harmonically major-sounding] seventh.
>
Again a question that goes to the heart of interpretative aesthetics. This
thematic transformation occurs anyhow, and after all the incessant
repetitions of this theme previously, few listeners would have a problem
perceiving it - does one necessarily have to spell it out? Once more,
Horowitz subsitutes more obviously 'pianistic' concerns for more
'analytically instructive' ones. Sandor could play this passage at a tempo
to match that of Horowitz, effortlessly and if anything with even more
sustained power (at least compared to what comes across on Horowitz's
admittedly rather primitive recorded sound), but was more insistent on the
'shaped' approach to them at the same time. But Horowitz's relentlessness
brings its own qualities.
Perhaps the biggest technical challenge is to maintain momentum in the
left-hand octaves in the leaps of a tenth. Horowitz does this without
slacking but can be rather splashy here and in other places.
>
Some other thoughts: the slurring is very precise and in some places
resembles Beethoven more than Chopin. Almost without fail the first and
subsequent appearances of 'Theme 3' in bar 13 onwards and similar places are
articulated as if the first slur over the triplet led across the bar onto
the first of the repeated notes. I suspect Busoni might have fingered this
4-3-2, 2-2-2-2, which helps preserve a certain separateness. Also the next
descending scaling figure is almost always slurred onto the subsequent two
wedged notes; once more, I think a more distinct emphasis on the first of
these (which needn't imply a gap preceding) can add to the rhythmic
insistency, but this involves a degree of downbeat accentuation that has
become very unfashionable in most post-Chopin schools of piano playing.
Liszt was acutely aware of the distinction between the long line and shorter
phrase units, and applies both in equal measure throughout the work - indeed
this dialectic forms, in my opinion, one of the central conceits of the
work. A certain homogeneity in this respect is something that reduces some
of the tension in the recordings of Richter and Pollini, for example.
And what is one to make of the portato markings when the repeated notes of
the outset are transformed into a lyrical theme at bar 153, cantando
espressivo? Do these signify a type of tenuto, or a slight degree of
separation/distinctiveness (perfectly possible while using a fair degree of
pedal, of course, more about type of attack than literal separation),
whereby the theme begins a little tentatively then blooms in the following
bar, returning to a degree of tentativeness in bar 156?
Some of the reports of Liszt's teaching suggest that he was quite insistent
on the final low C in bar 753 be held with the pedal right the way through
to the final B octave. Kenneth Hamilton talks about this in his Cambridge
handbook on the work, but can't accept such an interpretation. Liszt's
pianos with their quicker decay would make the net effect of holding the
pedal throughout the chord changes less blurring than on our modern
instruments. Here the third pedal is worth considering if one wants to
sustain this note - personally I would do this then release it upon the B
major chords. Then of course that famous last note, which we've done to
death in other threads! :)
Ian
Ian Pace
"Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Xns947ABB141A2...@207.217.77.205...
> SG <sam6...@earthlink.com> appears to have caused the following letters
to
> be typed in news:88DQb.22971$q4....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:
>
> Those octaves in the Liszt Sonata are, in fact, what I was working on when
> the tendons in my right hand flamed up.
>
usually occurs as a result of either excessive use of the hand and fingers,
or of the forearm and upper arm, to the exclusion of the other components
which then become fixed. In this section, with its predominance of black
notes, it's worth considering changing the position of the wrist within
groups of octaves on successive black notes, again to avoid fixation and
consequent stiffness and fatigue.
On a totally different matter, I wonder if Liszt would have embellished
anything while playing this piece, and in what manner? There's a recording
by Earl Wild of the Petrarch Sonnet No. 123 in which he introduces an extra
melodic line towards the end (detailed in his edition of the work); such a
thing might be criticized from some quarters as excessive poetic license,
but to me suggests something like the sort of embellishments that are
reported to have been common in the period (maybe a little like the descant
parts that Chopin was reputed to add when some of his students played his
works). When Wild changes a minor theme to being in the major key (!) near
the end of his recording of the Robert le Diable fantasy, one does start to
have some questions about the limits of creative license, though!
Best,
Ian
Peter Lemken
> Some of the reports of Liszt's teaching suggest that he was quite insistent
> on the final low C in bar 753 be held with the pedal right the way through
> to the final B octave. Kenneth Hamilton talks about this in his Cambridge
> handbook on the work, but can't accept such an interpretation. Liszt's
> pianos with their quicker decay would make the net effect of holding the
> pedal throughout the chord changes less blurring than on our modern
> instruments.
I doubt that. Liszt in his later, numerously documented teaching years in
Weimar had a new Bechstein at his disposal, a concert grand not too
different from what we know as a concert grand today.
Peter Lemken
Berlin
--
Der Pünktliche, der Kartenbesorger und vor allem der Platzfreihalter ist
immer der Idiot. Wechsle die Seite oder lebe damit.
-- kro in de.alt.talk.unmut
Ian Pace
"Peter Lemken" <spam.f...@buerotiger.de> wrote in message
news:bv07id$m696m$1...@ID-31.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Ian Pace <i...@ianpace.com> wrote:
>
> > Some of the reports of Liszt's teaching suggest that he was quite
insistent
> > on the final low C in bar 753 be held with the pedal right the way
through
> > to the final B octave. Kenneth Hamilton talks about this in his
Cambridge
> > handbook on the work, but can't accept such an interpretation. Liszt's
> > pianos with their quicker decay would make the net effect of holding the
> > pedal throughout the chord changes less blurring than on our modern
> > instruments.
>
> I doubt that. Liszt in his later, numerously documented teaching years in
> Weimar had a new Bechstein at his disposal, a concert grand not too
> different from what we know as a concert grand today.
>
>
them all, as unselectively as he chose music to transcribe); many of the
others he played frequently (including the Bosendorfer, Streicher and Erard
pianos he owned at the time of writing the Sonata) did indeed have this more
rapid decay compared to pianos of now (even Bechsteins of the late 19th
century didn't have such a brilliant sheen in the treble as we are now used
to).
Best,
Ian
Gerrie Collins
> With such a title, anything can only go downhill from here.
> Warning: the following may be a tad too "jargon" for the non-musician,
> and too "obvious" for the musician. Not having access to a score of
> Liszt's Sonata will make the reading harder. However, here it goes:
[SNIP - a long and precise 'musicological' essay]
An absolutely thorough and insightful (so what else is new?)
investigation of the dilemma implied in your title. Reminds me of a
similar 'argument' involving this work and another that I participated
in on a piano forum.
When you said this:
-- "The theme itself (m. 9-13): not very difficult, however rarely do
I hear it shaped beyond the generic forte (often too loud already,
often too even). Here one can already hint to what is truly difficult
about the octave passages in Liszt's Sonata, in general: combining
speed, accuracy, clarity with thematic understanding and articulatory
(or is that articulative in Oxfordian English?) acumen." –-
you defined the problem in *10* words, but your proof delivered in
copious pertinent detail leaves no proverbial stone unturned. Worthy
of a preface to future editions!
Gerrie
LaVirtuosa
thinking of this in terms of Liszt-Bach...the last part of the
transcription of the Fugue from the Fantasy and Fugue in g minor for
organ. On actually listening to a Bach passage like this as played by
the feet of Marie Clair Alain, it's sort of a "splat" sound, not
staccato in the least, and not especially fast. Sort of like a big
fart.
Of course the lower
> octaves could be played just as powerfully but without turning boomy, on
> most of the pianos Liszt knew. But a more interesting contrast seems
> implied by the score, whereby the first four right hand chords are marked as
> crotchets/quarter notes with wedges, followed by the slurred group, then
> wedged quavers/eighth notes followed by rests. The use of more pedal in
> alternate bars tends to rather obliterate the possibility for a contrast
> here, which otherwise could allow for a more pointed and short attack in
> bars 270 onwards
> >
> > The double-octaves passage going on from m. 590 to m. 594 is
> > mechanically comfortable. The main musical challenges are to make the
> > listener hear that the fragment is derived from the main theme, and
> > (especially) to play out for all it's worth Liszt's quite clever
> > interplay between the traditional metrical arrangement and the
> > subtle metrical displacement of the pattern -- it is a 13-notes pattern
> > [only twice completed], which allows for an unsettling irregularity to
> > instill itself in the listener's
> > perception.
Sort of a rolling, tumbling sensation, leading to a sort of
pronouncement. This section reminds me faintly of Don Juan fallng to
the feet of the Commendatore...
What interests me the most about this passage is what can be done with
the chords--there's something about playing each chord with the two
hand that reveals a sort of an orchestral, brass-section "tutti" sound
which can then be imitated by the right hand alone-otherwise, the
fifth finger might take over and compromise that. It's almost a
slight, barely perceptable unevenness in the chords which gives them
the tutti effect this way.
> >
> Some other thoughts: the slurring is very precise and in some places
> resembles Beethoven more than Chopin. Almost without fail the first and
> subsequent appearances of 'Theme 3' in bar 13 onwards and similar places are
> articulated as if the first slur over the triplet led across the bar onto
> the first of the repeated notes. I suspect Busoni might have fingered this
> 4-3-2, 2-2-2-2, which helps preserve a certain separateness.
I've never though of separating it that way, but it's an interesting
point. I always thought you could roar right into the group of 4. It
is marked as a triplet, that's for sure. I've just simply ignored
that and took license.
Also the next
> descending scaling figure is almost always slurred onto the subsequent two
> wedged notes; once more, I think a more distinct emphasis on the first of
> these (which needn't imply a gap preceding) can add to the rhythmic
> insistency, but this involves a degree of downbeat accentuation that has
> become very unfashionable in most post-Chopin schools of piano playing.
> Liszt was acutely aware of the distinction between the long line and shorter
> phrase units, and applies both in equal measure throughout the work - indeed
> this dialectic forms, in my opinion, one of the central conceits of the
> work. A certain homogeneity in this respect is something that reduces some
> of the tension in the recordings of Richter and Pollini, for example.
>
> And what is one to make of the portato markings when the repeated notes of
> the outset are transformed into a lyrical theme at bar 153, cantando
> espressivo? Do these signify a type of tenuto, or a slight degree of
> separation/distinctiveness (perfectly possible while using a fair degree of
> pedal, of course, more about type of attack than literal separation),
> whereby the theme begins a little tentatively then blooms in the following
> bar, returning to a degree of tentativeness in bar 156?
To me, this is like a vocal articulation-as if, in art song or opera,
interjecting a smooth legato passage with emphatic enunciatiions, or
an extra push withh the breath.
>
> Some of the reports of Liszt's teaching suggest that he was quite insistent
> on the final low C in bar 753 be held with the pedal right the way through
> to the final B octave. Kenneth Hamilton talks about this in his Cambridge
> handbook on the work, but can't accept such an interpretation. Liszt's
> pianos with their quicker decay would make the net effect of holding the
> pedal throughout the chord changes less blurring than on our modern
> instruments. Here the third pedal is worth considering if one wants to
> sustain this note - personally I would do this then release it upon the B
> major chords. Then of course that famous last note, which we've done to
> death in other threads! :)
Yes, and in another place, near the end--just after the double scale--
beginning
at the "un poco animato"--Just catching the first left hand note in
each measure with the middle pedal while leaving all the other notes
quite dry, releasing it in the second half of each measure.
Digressing from octaves for a minute, concerning the transition in
the double scale just preceeding, I see no reason to change the
distribution of the notes in the scale before diving into the animato
(the score which I have suggesting that the right hand assumes all of
the thirds after it plays the gx. I don't think that's necessary
except at the very end--it ruins the sizzle).
The repeated chords which come just before that ominous sat not in the
piece, marked PPP, need special handling. In my imagination, they
must be distant church bells as heard from Hell.
************Val