Notation question: "L"
Deepak Subburam
I am running across a sprinkling of these symbols in Debussy's Reverie
on the third page - can't find out what they mean. Each precedes a
note and looks like a tall L and is found rotated/inverted as well.
I didn't want to wait till I see my piano teacher next week to find
out!
Also, how do you play/what's the idea behind notes marked staccato in
a piece meant to be played with pedal? (there are a few in the Reverie
piece)
Thanks,
Deepak
Greg Presley
a bit like brackets to set off phrases. In the second instance (staccato
with pedal) you have to erase a lot of what you probably have been taught
or have as preconceived notions. Staccato can be both a sound (short,
dry), and a touch (plucked, detached). Phrases can be accomplished with
finger legato, but also with detached notes sustained by pedal. Imagine
someone playing a vibraphone. The mallet, by necessity, has to bounce off
the keys, but the sound sustains and is still able to make a recognizable
phrase. There is a difference in sound between a detached note pedalled,
and notes held down while the pedal is being used. Debussy was much more
careful in notating these kind of things than most piano composers, who
wrote phrase marks indiscriminately, whether meant to be played with
finger legato or not. Greg
LstPuritan
on the third page - can't find out what they mean. Each precedes a
note and looks like a tall L and is found rotated/inverted as well. >>
Hi.
These L and inverted L markings are indicators for which hand plays a note. I
don't know of any name for these; if there is a note or group of notes in the
bass clef with an L that sweeps below it, that means that the right hand plays
those. If the upside-down L rises above notes in the treble clef, then the
left hand plays those. They are suggestions that one hand plays notes from the
other clef.
<< Also, how do you play/what's the idea behind notes marked staccato in
a piece meant to be played with pedal? (there are a few in the Reverie
piece) >>
A group of slurred notes with dots over each is not staccato; the meaning is
that they are to be played _portato_, which technically means holding each note
for 3/4 of the given value. If I remember correctly, in Reverie the
alternating D minor/E major chords are marked this way 5 or 6 measures before
the key signature change: the beginning of the middle section. Each chord
should be carefully half-pedaled and released before the next to allow each
chord to be emphasized with near-silence inbetween.
--Justin
eromlignod
later music. Like Justin said, it indicates a staccatto-type
striking of the key yet sustained by the pedal.
OK, now I get to get on my soapbox. There has always been a
myth about how much control you have over the envelope of a note
on the piano. In reality, once you have applied an impetus to
the hammer and it is sent sailing into motion, you no longer
have control over it. The volume that you will get from the
string is strictly dependent upon the velocity of the hammer
(neglecting the una corda pedal). I think a lot of this
misnomer has to do with the fact that musical notation was
originally intended for string and wind instruments. Marks like
accents and sforzandos don't really have much meaning on the
piano except to play them with a louder attack. With other
instruments they imply a certain type of envelope (loud and
suddenly soft) that is simply not practical with the piano.
So we have instructors to this day who preach about how you
address the note and how this affects the tone quality, etc. I
think this is where this "pedalled staccatto" comes from.
I interpret it as if it were a tiny accent. The note should be
sightly pronounced but not dominant. If addressing the note in
a staccatto fashion helps you achieve this sound then go for it.
Don
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
LstPuritan
striking of the key yet sustained by the pedal. >>
I won't interfere with your soapbox speech about tone control, but I didn't say
that the slurred notes with dots indicate a staccato striking of the key yet
sustained by the pedal.
I said that it is _not_ stacatto, it is _portato_. This does mean holding the
note for 3/4 of the normal value, and since the notes are quarter notes played
rather slowly, they are held quite a bit longer than if they were stacatto. If
you try to half pedal the section of reverie the original post was referring to
after striking the notes stacatto, it won't work. The idea is to let up on the
pedal just enough to let the dampers eliminate some of the sound while holding
the keys for 3/4 the value of quarter notes.
--Justin
Greg Presley
LstPuritan wrote:
I had to go to the score to see what you were talking about. There are two
different uses of staccato in this piece. One occurs in a d major section, and the
left hand goes down in elements of a d major chord as the right hand plays an
ostinato figure. This is most definitely staccato (by touch) with pedal holding
down throughout.(The clue is the d and F# that have to be sustained from the
beginning of the measure) Later on in the same page there are little chords in
groups (dmin, e maj, dmin. emaj) marked staccato with a slur over them .These are
to be played portato as you described. Sorry, I should have looked at the score
before answering this one. Greg
LstPuritan
before answering this one. >>
Me too... The section you were referring to (Reverie: measure 37-38) I see
needs no pedal change as it's all D major and thus, the portato can be played
staccato as you said with no change in the sound produced. This is convenient
since going (1-3)-5-1-2-5-5(or 3) is the fingering I would use.
I only remembered the part that I see now is measure 51-52, and more
consideration is required since the pedal has to change to some extent for each
chord, and one has to decide how this true portato is accomplished. Same with
the marcato chords in measure 92-93.
--Justin
Deepak Subburam
> since going (1-3)-5-1-2-5-5(or 3) is the fingering I would use.
I was using (1-3)-1-2-5-1-5 and found the above fingering a little
(i.e. *very*)crazy at first sight though just now I realized where it
is coming from. I've never done 'half-pedalling' before, but I think I
understand what Justin said and will try that.
> the marcato chords in measure 92-93.
I hadn't come to that, but if I had I would be wondering how to play
that too! A little research into marcato has yielded 'marked,
stressed' - and I remember asking my teacher about that notation
sometime and I think he said that it meant in between legato and non
legato. I guess I should interpret it as what my teacher said + a
little accent? (and in this particular case, with pedal, just the
little accent)
Deepak
Greg Presley
Pretender wrote:
> I'm diving in because I'm not satisfied with the explanations given
> thus far regarding the staccato markings. I'm working on 2nd
> Arabesque, which has similar markings to Reverie, so I'm particularly
> interested in the discussion so far.
>
> I've just read a very short biography of Debussy by Jonathon Brown in
> which he criticises many contemporary performers for over-pedaling
> Debussy. Here's his summation of this debate:
>
> "A performer of Debussy's music -- the chamber and piano music most of
> all -- if faced with a plain dilemma. One approach is the creation of
> a wash of sound evidently apt if that is how one sees Impressionism,
> as a haze with soft or indistinct edges. The other is a clarity and
> precision that would more usually be associated with the harpsichord
> textures in Rameau or Couperin. In general, it seems likely that
> Debussy preferred the later -- and that performers have not followed
> this."
I think it varies by the piece and the intent. The earlier Debussy works,
which include Suite Bergamasque, and pour le piano( pieces
self-consciously imitating some baroque aspects) and later,some of the
estampes, images, and preludes which either imitate Baroque, or, in some
cases, Spanish music, are clearly meant to be cleanly articulated. But if
you have pieces named veils, sails, fog, waves, sunken cathedrals,
goldfish, reflections in the water, etc., you are dealing with music that
has vague outlines and "overlapping brushstrokes" I think the performer
should look at the title, look at the piano figuration, look at the
indications, look at the pedal markings (if any) then make decisions based
on all this information. In contrast to the opinion of the author quoted
above, there is a famous anecdote about Debussy at the Paris Conservatory
in the harmony class of Cesar Franck. Franck was encouraging Debussy,
saying "modulate, modulate, modulate" to which Debussy replied, "what if
I'm enjoying the key I'm in." I guess the point I'm making is that there
was Debussy of the slightly neo-classical bent, and Debussy, the all-out
sensuous impressionist who did want washes of sound. Just listen to La
Mer, and you can hear how he accomplishes this orchestrally. Greg
Tjako van Schie
Mozart. At first I could not believe this, as the styles are so obviously
different. But later I discovered how true my teacher is. I used to play
Debussy with quite a lot of pedal-down, as the harmomy could tolerate a lot
acoustically. But this indeed blurs the transparancy of the sound. Now I
have adapted and refined my pedalling a lot. Even in pieces like Voiles,
Poissons d'Or, or Feux d'artifice, or Suite Bergamasque one should try to
'use' the pedal, instead of pushing it down. When one 'uses' the pedal very
carefully and with great subtility, and when one tries not to mix up two
adjacent melodical notes and/or harmonies, one gets a very transparent
sound, which indeed is very similar to the sound which many Mozart pieces
need. This makes the music much more difficult to perform however, as the
ear constantly has to listen to the clearness of the musical line, as well
melodically as harmonically, and the foot is *never* resting for long on the
pushed pedal. I personally also use a lot of fast pedalling and
half-pedalling, as well in Mozart as in Debussy.
It is a nice and educative exercise to play "La fille aux cheveux de lin"
for example (not too difficult in notes) with almost no pedal at all!
Try only to use only your fingers on the keyboard to obtain a fluid legato
and nice harmonious bindings. And pay attention to the 16th notes, which
should not overlap or blur! Very difficult! But much nicer if you'll
succeed. (Of course you would need some pedalling for binding between some
harmonies, but just try it only on the very last moment of the previous
harmony - after the last melodical note in that harmony- until the start of
the next. Lift the pedal as soon as you've reached the new harmony.)
regards,
--
Tjako van Schie
Dutch pianist, composer & teacher at the Amsterdam Conservatory
tjakov...@castel.nl or tj...@operamail.com
http://users.castel.nl/~schic02
(Info on me, music, cd's, concert programs, compositions, Bach-Stuff,
articles, links, a quiz, a fugue contest, and much more ... feel free to
visit!)
"Greg Presley" <gpre...@iea.com> schreef in bericht
news:393375A7...@iea.com...
LstPuritan
the only one the library had, and it was very thin. The author spent a
lot of time discussing the shape of Debussy's life and the fluctuation
in his motiviation and output, but apart from very general comments
like the one I quoted, he didn't discuss individual pieces in detail.
What would you recommend? >>
For an in-depth look at individual Debussy piano works with some good
commentary about correspondances between Debussy's music and parallel movements
in other areas of the arts I recommend:
Images; The Piano Music of Claude Debussy. By Paul Roberts. ISBN
0-931340-97-7.
It's not quite a biography—more a 350 page guide to most of Debussy's piano
pieces with regard to performance practice, excerpts from Debussy's letters and
testimony from those who heard him play, and a bit of scholastic background
about the Expressionist versus Symbolist approach to playing Debussy and the
literary, cultural, and visual influences in the language of Debussy's music.
--Justin
Greg Presley
> Have you heard any of the recordings of Debussy playing his own works?
> I haven't been able to find them on CD yet.
>
> -Clint
What I have heard are some examples of piano rolls that recorded Debussy's
playing. These ought to be available. As a matter of fact, Debussy
recorded la Cathedrale Engloutie and the recording is valuable because it
explains the strange metrical problem of the piece (the 3/2 measures are
twice as fast as the 6/4 measures - in other words, he plays them as 3/4
measures). Even many concert performers are unaware of this aberration. And
he uses plenty of pedal, some of the other posters' responses not
withstanding.
Greg Presley
>
> > and nice harmonious bindings. And pay attention to the 16th notes, which
> > should not overlap or blur! Very difficult! But much nicer if you'll
> > succeed. (Of course you would need some pedalling for binding between some
> > harmonies, but just try it only on the very last moment of the previous
> > harmony - after the last melodical note in that harmony- until the start of
> > the next. Lift the pedal as soon as you've reached the new harmony.)
> >
> > regards,
> > --
> > Tjako van Schie
>
> Tjako:
> Thank you so much for the above ...
> Far, far too often Debussy {in particular} is thought of as an excuse
> for absolutely sloppy and abusive pedalling; totally ruining what *was*
> music in the process :(
> Transparency a la Mozart -> Positively Correct!
> Cheers,
> V.
I am concerned that these two posts might leave the impression to the
less-experienced players on the newsgroup that the correct performance of Debussy
involves very little pedal. I don't think that that is what these posters meant,
and in fact, nothing could be further from the truth! The correct performance of
Debussy's music, as recorded in his own performances and in the many French
pianists who heard him play and then recorded the music themselves (eg Marguerite
Long, Robert Casadesus, etc.) involves tremendous amounts of pedal, both for the
sustenance of the harmony as well (and probably even more importantly) to create a
variety of colors in the sound. The key is careful pedaling, which really means
careful listening. The problem is that a young pianist, or even an older one
encountering Debussy's music for the first time, might not even know what sounds
go together and what sounds do not. In many cases a teacher or knowledgable
listener needs to demonstrate or correct until the student's ears learn what is
stylistically appropriate.Transparency, yes, but color, yes also. Debussy is not
Mozart, and should not sound like Mozart. In the use of the piano, he is a
successor to Liszt and Chopin, and as in the music of those piano composers, it is
ALL about the pedal - and the correct use of the pedal. Greg
Tjako van Schie
Greg, I agree almost completely with you.
Debussy definitely is not Mozart. I just tried to explain that actually both
Mozart and Debussy need very careful pedalling, in order to avoid
'blurring', and in order to get transparency. In Mozart too much pedalling
is more obvious causing this 'blurring'. I agree that one should play
styilstically, and in Debussy simply the atmosphere of the harmonies is of
bigger complexity, and so is the amount of 'going together' of notes. One
should experimentate a lot in order to learn to hear what's done and what's
not-done. You are quite right about the color. Pedalling carefully in
Debussy certainly helps to 'enrich' the tone color and quality, but i.m.o.
the *main* source (nucleus) of tone color still is in the toucher on the
keyboard, not in the pedal. The pedal just 'warms' it up, and gives
resonance, and more 'soul' to the notes, or works more like an acoustical
parameter. And don't be afraid: the notes which Debussy wrote certainly
guarantee different music than those from Mozart. :)
regards,
--
Tjako van Schie
Dutch pianist, composer & teacher at the Amsterdam Conservatory
tjakov...@castel.nl or tj...@operamail.com
http://users.castel.nl/~schic02 or http://hotyellow98.com/tjako
Radu Focshaner
> (Of course you would need some pedalling for binding between some
> harmonies, but just try it only on the very last moment of the previous
> harmony - after the last melodical note in that harmony- until the start of
> the next. Lift the pedal as soon as you've reached the new harmony.)
Time to ask for a free "consultation".
I use the pedal (not to the bottom) to bind "harmonies", chords from the
last note to the begining of the new one. It is kind of "instinctive". I
suspect I also do this to cover large jumps. Anyway, I read somewhere
that when hands are "up" , the pedal is "up" too - which leaves me with
no option to perform the jumps.
I also tend to avoid pedaling and , to fake it, I keep keys pressed
down - not according to the score . For example I keep down the first
note of an Alberti bass or keep down for a few moments the notes of a
broken chord. Is this a VERY bad practice ? I also press the pedal after
the sign on the score, sometimes as late as a beat. Perhaps these are
some habits from my dark past as I do this almost unconsciously.
Radu
P.S.I know that someday I'll have to go to a teacher for I do not see
how I will manage to learn pedalling.
Tjako van Schie
A simple pedalling exercise: first practise VERY SLOW, then speed up this
exercise gradually until you master the coördination completely.
Count regularly from 1 to 4 continuously and perform the next actions:
Start with pedal down!
1. press down a note
2. lift the pedal
3. press down the pedal
4. lift the finger
1. press down a different note with the same finger!
2. lift the pedal
3. press down the pedal
4. lift the finger
etc.
In this way you learn to play legato with the pedal.
Now a bit more difficult: (faster pedalling)
count from 1 to 8 (like before) but start a bit faster than the previous
exercise and perform the next actions:
start with pedal down again!
1. press down a note
2. lift the pedal
3. (do nothing, only listen)
4. (do nothing, only listen)
5. (do nothing, only listen)
6. (do nothing, only listen)
7. press down the pedal
8. lift the finger
repeat from 1.
If you got the idea, then you'll notice that foot and finger are not really
synchronous.
In fast tempo the pedal is lifted a tiny fraction after the finger went
down, and that the pedal goes down a tiny fraction before the finger is
lifted. You now can apply this to playing harmonies legato with the foot.
Let me know if it's clear and if it helps.
(Oh... b.t.w. what you do with Albertin basses is not wrong all the time.
You can suggest pedalling that way without using your foot.)
good luck with the exercises,
NB. payments for this online lesson only by sending cash to me :)
--
Tjako van Schie
Dutch pianist, composer & teacher at the Amsterdam Conservatory
tjakov...@castel.nl or tj...@operamail.com
http://users.castel.nl/~schic02
(Info on me, music, cd's, concert programs, compositions, Bach-Stuff,
articles, links, a quiz, a fugue contest, and much more ... feel free to
visit!)
"Radu Focshaner" <ra...@writeme.com> wrote in
news:39362A...@writeme.com...
Radu Focshaner
>
> Radu, (& maybe others....?)
Thanks.
> (Oh... b.t.w. what you do with Albertin basses is not wrong all the time.
> You can suggest pedalling that way without using your foot.)
Well, it is simpler than pedalling and does not mess the right hand.
> NB. payments for this online lesson only by sending cash to me :)
Why don't you sell your CD's via AMAZON or some "secured" site (to
accept credit cards) ?
BTW - Copyright topic. You posses a CD which is out of "print" and you
make an offer to sell "copies" of it for 15$. Is this a copyright
infringement ? ( Just joking ).
Tjako van Schie
news:393632...@writeme.com...
| Why don't you sell your CD's via AMAZON or some "secured" site (to
| accept credit cards) ?
Radu,
FYI, my Bach-Goldberg cd and my "water"-cd are both available online on the
internet and can be ordered with use of credit card:
Surf to http://www.cddiscovery.com/main_SchieBachGoldberg.html for the
Bach-cd, and to
http://www.cddiscovery.com/main_SchieWater.html for the Water-cd.
(cddiscovery is my reseller on the net, I don't rely on Amazon.com.)
The yiddish cd with ghetto music is out of stock, already for 2 years, and
EMI simply refuses to rerelease that important documentary cd. Pity.
Sorry, I don't want to advertise in a newsgroup, but Radu brought this up.
Tom Shaw
I believe that reducing the pedal/hand coordination problem to its bare
bones like this is equivalent to using Hanon to dispense with the chore of
reading the music whilst practicing finger dexterity. The problem of
combining pedal and keyboard manipulation together is very difficult for a
beginner, IMO.
TS
Tjako van Schie wrote in message <8h483t$j2k$1...@feed.castel.nl>...
>You can suggest pedalling that way without using your foot.)
>
>--
>Tjako van Schie
>Dutch pianist, composer & teacher at the Amsterdam Conservatory
>tjakov...@castel.nl or tj...@operamail.com
>http://users.castel.nl/~schic02
>(Info on me, music, cd's, concert programs, compositions, Bach-Stuff,
>articles, links, a quiz, a fugue contest, and much more ... feel free to
>visit!)
>
Michael Haslam
able to find a tempo that "worked" throughout. Reading your post prompted me
to look at the score. I suppose I should try to find this Debussy recording to
understand this 3/2 6/4 business. Until then could you explain how to tell
which bars are 3/2 and which are 6/4? Is it like this:
mm 1-6: 6/4
mm 7-13: 3/2
mm 14-21: 6/4
mm 22-83: 3/2
mm 84-end: 6/4
?
Are there other examples of Debussy being so cryptic?
regards
MJHaslam
LstPuritan
able to find a tempo that "worked" throughout. Reading your post prompted me
to look at the score. I suppose I should try to find this Debussy recording to
understand this 3/2 6/4 business. Until then could you explain how to tell
which bars are 3/2 and which are 6/4? Is it like this:
mm 1-6: 6/4
mm 7-13: 3/2
mm 14-21: 6/4
mm 22-83: 3/2
mm 84-end: 6/4 >>
Almost. Measure 13 is back to 6/4. The doubling of tempo is for measures 7-12
and 22-83.
<< Are there other examples of Debussy being so cryptic?>>
Prelude 4, Book I. The time signature is 3/4 with a 5/4 written in parens
between the two 3/4 indications. Some measures have an extra two beats set off
from the first 3 by a vertical dotted line. Trying to decide where the apex of
the phrase is and the purpose of the extra two beats is difficult. Debussy
didn't make it any easier by slurring the second, third, and fourth beats of
the opening measure across an imaginary barline. There are no pedal
indications either. This is about as cryptic as any Debussy piece I've seen.
--Justin
Michael Haslam
Book I as comparable to the Cathedrale problem. The 3/2-6/4 problem is impossible
to solve with conviction unless you have information additional to what Debussy
chose to give to the performer in the printed score. The 3/4 (5/4) problem is
interpretative and doesn't require a *correct* answer, merely a convincing one.
Regards
MJHaslam
LstPuritan
4,
Book I as comparable to the Cathedrale problem. The 3/2-6/4 problem is
impossible
to solve with conviction unless you have information additional to what Debussy
chose to give to the performer in the printed score. The 3/4 (5/4) problem is
interpretative and doesn't require a *correct* answer, merely a convincing one.
>>
The 3/2-6/4 has a correct answer when the definition of correct is "how did the
composer intend this to be played?" because we can listen to Debussy play the
piece himself. If there weren't any recordings by Debussy or first hand
accounts of what 3/2-6/4 meant, we wouldn't know the correct answer.
In my opinion, Debussy had something very specific in mind when he wrote
3/4(5/4) and I don't know of any "correct" way to phrase and pedal the piece.
It's not primarily a rhythmic problem, and I find it impossible to solve the
problem with conviction. I still think both pieces, though, are cryptic in
different ways.
--Justin
Michael Haslam
unequivocally and inexplicably wrong in terms of everything I know about western
classical music. Is there any other example of any composer since the advent of
recording/piano rolls being so contrary?
Regards
MJHaslam
LstPuritan
unequivocally and inexplicably wrong in terms of everything I know about
western
classical music. >>
I'm sure Debussy's composition teacher would agree. Parallel 4th and 5ths
blurred together with no pedal change? Yes, that is not anything from the
common practice era, at least in the West.
<< Is there any other example of any composer since the advent of
recording/piano rolls being so contrary? >>
Contrary to what?
Satie wrote music without barlines. Many composers stopped using key
signatures because the harmony was no longer diatonic: Scriabin, Schoenberg and
friends, to name a couple. The 20th century is filled with examples of music
contrary to the standards of the common practice era.
I'm not sure what you mean by contrary.
--Justin
Michael Haslam
I'll try again. Is there any other example of a major composer since 1850 not
indicating a doubling of tempo (a halving of the length of a minim [half note])?
I'm not talking about controversial harmonic language (that may be transcended in
a couple of decades) which is still completely understandable and executable but a
transgression of the basic composer/performer contract whereby the composer makes
clear his/her intentions to the performer, who might be on the other side of the
world but armed with musicianship, a piano and the printed score can give an
accurate rendition of the composer's intentions.
Regards
Michael
LstPuritan
I'll try again. Is there any other example of a major composer since 1850 not
indicating a doubling of tempo (a halving of the length of a minim [half
note])? >>
Are you hoping someone will say "no," and that Debussy's 6/4=3/2 is the most
outrageous, confusing, and insane performance indication in all of music?
Ok. No.
<< I'm not talking about controversial harmonic language (that may be
transcended in
a couple of decades) which is still completely understandable and executable
but a
transgression of the basic composer/performer contract whereby the composer
makes
clear his/her intentions to the performer, who might be on the other side of
the
world but armed with musicianship, a piano and the printed score can give an
accurate rendition of the composer's intentions. >>
How about---
Karlheinz Stockhausen
Preface to "Klavierstucke":
"The tempo of each piece, determined by the smallest note value, is 'as fast as
possible.' When the player has found this tempo and determined it
metronomically, all the more complicated time proportions must be accurately
replaced by equally proportional changes of tempo, based on the specific
relation between the original smallest note value, the previous metronomical
determination, and the new proportion."
Breach of composer/performer contract?
How about Cage's "Chance" or "Random" music where the performer must also becme
the composer by interpreting graphical notation and creating his own version of
music only suggested by Cage?
What about Tom Johnson's Septapede, 159 phrase fragments to be arranged by the
performer ad lib, and each fragment may be repeated as many times as the
performer likes, at any tempo?
When a composer's intentions are for a performer to execute his own intentions,
is that still within the contract? Can a composer present a precisely
innacurate rendition of his lack of intentions?
--Justin
Michael Haslam
LstPuritan wrote:
> << > I'm not sure what you mean by contrary.
>
> I'll try again. Is there any other example of a major composer since 1850 not
> indicating a doubling of tempo (a halving of the length of a minim [half
> note])? >>
>
> Are you hoping someone will say "no," and that Debussy's 6/4=3/2 is the most
> outrageous, confusing, and insane performance indication in all of music?
>
> Ok. No.
Is it not comparable to writing "doppio movimento" (or some such) and meaning "the
same speed"?
> << I'm not talking about controversial harmonic language (that may be
> transcended in
> a couple of decades) which is still completely understandable and executable
> but a
> transgression of the basic composer/performer contract whereby the composer
> makes
> clear his/her intentions to the performer, who might be on the other side of
> the
> world but armed with musicianship, a piano and the printed score can give an
> accurate rendition of the composer's intentions. >>
>
> How about---
>
> Karlheinz Stockhausen
> Preface to "Klavierstucke":
>
> "The tempo of each piece, determined by the smallest note value, is 'as fast as
> possible.' When the player has found this tempo and determined it
> metronomically, all the more complicated time proportions must be accurately
> replaced by equally proportional changes of tempo, based on the specific
> relation between the original smallest note value, the previous metronomical
> determination, and the new proportion."
>
> Breach of composer/performer contract?
This sounds like my approach to performing many different pieces of the standard
repertoire.
> How about Cage's "Chance" or "Random" music where the performer must also becme
> the composer by interpreting graphical notation and creating his own version of
> music only suggested by Cage?
>
> What about Tom Johnson's Septapede, 159 phrase fragments to be arranged by the
> performer ad lib, and each fragment may be repeated as many times as the
> performer likes, at any tempo?
Given that these examples are manifestly altering the concept of
composer/performer and, indeed, the concept of "accurate rendition" the fact that
the instructions on how to perform the music form part of that music (and
generally come bound with the "music") render them outside the situation with
regard to Debussy.
> When a composer's intentions are for a performer to execute his own intentions,
> is that still within the contract? Can a composer present a precisely
> innacurate rendition of his lack of intentions?
Not sure.
Regards
MJHaslam
Greg Presley
LstPuritan wrote:
> << I suppose my point is that the notation of la Cathedrale is deliberately,
> unequivocally and inexplicably wrong in terms of everything I know about
> western
> classical music. >>
>
> I'm sure Debussy's composition teacher would agree. Parallel 4th and 5ths
> blurred together with no pedal change? Yes, that is not anything from the
> common practice era, at least in the West.
>
> << Is there any other example of any composer since the advent of
> recording/piano rolls being so contrary? >>
>
I've felt a little guilty since bringing this up in the notation post. Having
composed a bit in my time, I've found that what is clear in one's mind is not
always what comes out on the page. I was supposed to write a sarabande in the style
of Bach once for a harmony class. I used 3/4 time signature, and the piece came out
in the requisite number of measured. But to the listener the piece was in 4/4. I
had (not deliberately) placed the harmonic changes in places that did not conform
to 3/4 time, but because of the slowness of the tempo, I didn't even notice. It
sounded very Bach-like - it just wasn't a sarabande! Trying to reconstruct
Debussy's thinking, I can imagine that he wanted the 3/2 measures, (in which most
of the note values are half notes) to feel and sound weighty and ponderous, and the
6/4 measures (which are written mostly in quarters or smaller denominations) to
sound more fluid and with a forward momentum. Having organized this idea in his
mind, he probably just didn't notice that the 6/4-3/2 alternation made the half
notes twice as slow as the quarters. In this piece, that "correct" reading of the
note values sounds ridiculous when played, because the motion literally stops
whenever the music comes to those half notes, like a bad driver using a stick shift
for the first time - eerch, vrroom, eerrchh, vroom. But I have often felt that
these types of mistakes happen elsewhere. The first intermezzo by Brahms, op. 117,
(the Scottish folk song) has a pretty middle section, but the transition between
that middle section and the return to the original theme, always, no matter who
plays it, sounds twice as slow as my ear wants it to go. And I honestly suspect
that Brahms did the same thing as Debussy - just sort of momentarily spaced the
actual relation of the note values. I think he did record some piano rolls, but I
don't think he performed that piece, unfortunately, to prove or disprove my theory.
And again in Brahms, there are many places where the time signature has nothing to
do with where the metrical accent falls. Likewise in Schumann. The last movement of
the piano concert has whole pages where to read the parts and accent the downbeat
as normal is absolutely impossible. I didn't discover this until I went to
accompany a soloist one year, and after one disastrous rehearsal ended up having to
spend an entire afternoon rebarring the "misbarred" pages.
Also look at the opening 3 pages of Carmina Burana sometime. Absolutely
unequivocably wrong wrong wrong. To the ear, this can only be barred one way. Two
measures of 3/2 and three measures of 2/2. (that pattern repeated several times)
Instead, he has the entire thing written in 3/4, where it is a complete accident to
have an accent match the downbeat of a 3/4 measure. (And Orff designed one of the
most widely taught courses in music for European schools - much of it based on
rhythm!)
Reassuring to think that composers are human too! Greg
LstPuritan
most
> outrageous, confusing, and insane performance indication in all of music?
>
> Ok. No.
Is it not comparable to writing "doppio movimento" (or some such) and meaning
"the
same speed"? >>
You do have a point. I can only offer a theory: it's well-known that Debussy
worked with his publishers to create an artistic and eye-pleasing effect in the
score. It was a kind of graphic symbolism that had to look right on the
page, as if the notation itself was a component of the music. The basic pulse
of the 3/2 measures is the same as the pulse of the 6/4 measures, and it's not
really a doubling of tempo in the sense that one feels the piece speeding up;
it really is a change of note value. Visually, the transition from the first
measures to the "bells" really looks like a change of mood. Imagine if this
section were written in quarter notes; looking at the score, there would be no
visual difference setting those "bell" octave measures apart from the rest of
the piece. In the second change, measure 22, if the note values weren't
changed and those quarter notes were written as eighth notes, it would imply
some grouping: 3 groups of 2, 2 groups of 3, or one groups of 6, when as
quarter notes no such metrical implications are made as each quarter note
stands alone. It would clutter the measures with the half notes written as
quarter notes with a doubled tempo. The appearance would be a change of pulse,
when I think Debussy wanted to keep a relatively symmetrical and uniform number
of notes spaced evenly throughout each measure and even through the piece as a
whole.
Just a possibility.
<< > "The tempo of each piece, determined by the smallest note value, is 'as
fast as
> possible.' When the player has found this tempo and determined it
> metronomically, all the more complicated time proportions must be accurately
> replaced by equally proportional changes of tempo, based on the specific
> relation between the original smallest note value, the previous metronomical
> determination, and the new proportion."
>
> Breach of composer/performer contract?
This sounds like my approach to performing many different pieces of the
standard
repertoire. >>
Obviously. I think it's lesson two or three in Bastein's piano learning
series... and it was the first thing Chopin taught his pupils about rhythm and
tempo.
<< Can a composer present a precisely
> innacurate rendition of his lack of intentions?
Not sure. >>
Me neither.
--Justin
LstPuritan
(the Scottish folk song) has a pretty middle section, but the transition
between
that middle section and the return to the original theme, always, no matter who
plays it, sounds twice as slow as my ear wants it to go. And I honestly suspect
that Brahms did the same thing as Debussy - just sort of momentarily spaced the
actual relation of the note values. >>
So I'm not the only one who hears things as wrong when played as notated. The
3 low chords that occur twice at the very end of Chopin's G major ballade
between the scale runs, when played as written, sound way way too fast to me,
even with a riten. as written. What I think Chopin intended was to return to
the original tempo, largo, with these chords played at the same tempo and
rhythm as the right hand in measures 6-7. This can be justified by seeing how
the 6 notes that follow the slow chords at the ends contain the same notes as
the the right hand 6 notes (in a different order) in measure 8-9 that are
repeated 6 times in 13 measures. Only the F# leading tone is omitted in the
final measures lest one expect resolution too soon to g; instead in measure
253-4 the Bb (3rd) replaces the leading tone of the exposition and in measure
257-8 to derive the 6 notes take first D as a repetition of the first note of
the phrase in 253 and add the right hand tones in measure 8 augmented 3 scale
notes. The result is similar to measure 14. What the scheme for the end of
the first ballade was, I suspect, is recalling measures 1-9 three times with a
scale in place of measure 1-5, the largo chords in place of measures 6-7, and
two variations of measure 8-9/14-15 with the 3rd and 5th of g minor defined,
respectively. All that's left is the root, which is provided forcefully after
the double octave descending run. When the tempo is aligned, I clearly hear an
echo of the first 9 measures in the last 15.
At least, that's how I've justified playing the 3 chord groups at the end so
dreadfully slow. It's not just theatrical, IMO, not that any of my teachers
have listened or cared.
--Justin
Radu Focshaner
>
> Satie wrote music without barlines.
Not new - already found in Baroque music.
LstPuritan
>
> Satie wrote music without barlines.
Not new - already found in Baroque music >>
Yes.
--Justin