Aleksander Michałowski (1851-1938): Chopin - Prelude in Cmin

[smithsherman]

Dear Erwin,You've changed your point.You're arguing simply for it's own sake...again.

Boring!

[pianopera]

What a weak reply. Yes I'm arguing for its sake because you can't come up with *anything* valid. Your point is...none whatsoever.

[smithsherman]

It's not possible to ascertain a "final" or "Authroritative" version from an aural tradition,wherein the chief element is to be subjectively spontaneous...continually.

Therefore...scores remain just vague clues.

[pianopera]

It is this ignorant, relativating attitude that creates monstrous interpreters à la Lang Lang.

Only when you are able to follow the score 100% exact (and only very few can do this) you can take more liberties.

[smithsherman]

Nothing Relativistic here.You're engagin in reductionism...in theoretically reducing playing to just sleuthing.I notice that you can't refrain from the insults either....

[pianopera]

Hmmm...sleuthing, insults?

If you are really a "professional classical musician" then your way of saying "scores remain just vague clues" is *very* suspicious, to put it mildly.

Let me remind that you that until deep in the 19th century it was considered an insult to the composer if you played and performed a pianopiece WITHOUT the score.

If you read attentively the accounts of pupils of Liszt and Chopin, you'll be surprised how scrupulously they wanted them to follow the score.

[smithsherman]

Dearest Erwin,You're a conservatory trained musician.And as such...you take the view of the interpretor as a kind of Ultra-Dutch- Ascetic-Self Removing Calvinistic Protestant Sherlock Holmes.Fine...Certainly since the rise of Conservatories this has been a prevailing view...But not during the time of Chopin and Before was any such notion...(Classical)...indeed it was ...(farsical).

[pianopera]

Dear Smith, this reply makes me even more suspicious. If you write something like this, it seems that you're looking for a safe-conduct to justify or cover up your own poor knowledge and to get a hold on your obvious musical frustrations/limitations. Not backing up your erratic theories by giving solid historic, musicological proofs, but create a cheap opposition: Conservatory-trained, not Conserv.-trained. That has *zero* to do with my views on this subject, it is a ridiculous simplification.

[pianopera]

Many great musicians of the 19th Century helped to establish institutions that are now called Conservatoires. Regarding the strictness in first following the score as expressed by Chopin and Liszt, go read a few books (e.g. Methuen-Campbell and Lachmund).

I repeat (and maybe I fall on deaf ears again)the score is the starting point from the classics/Beethoven on, only when you can truly INTERPRET it, after analyzing, and know the differences in styles, you can take more liberties.

[camaysar222]

By the way, note how Michalowski takes mms 9-11 an octave higher than written (speaking of liberties).

[pianopera]

Yes, you're right, I heard it too...maybe he took the recording-session not very seriously, as it was a relatively new means in 1905. Would he have done if he'd known that the whole world could hear this liberty 100 years later?

[camaysar222]

By 1905, recording was pretty well established (check out Methuen-Campbell's historical piano discography). And listen to the much greater liberties taken in much later piano recordings! No doubt Michalowski felt that he was being true to the taste of the day, and no serious pianist would feel that the taste of his day was doomed.

[pianopera]

Michalowski was a pianist from Warsaw and not very well-known, even isolated. I'm quite sure that he didn't play liberties just to meet the taste of the day. But of course he made arrangements, like the Waltz in Db major.

Anyway there could be many reasons for various pianists to handle the score much more freely. Sometimes it was just a practical one because of the limited space of the discs. Busoni and D'Albert didn't like the studio and played sometimes with indifference.

[camaysar222]

pianopera, I didn't say what I did about taste to imply that he was consciously keeping to a certain "taste". Only that he felt "safe" in taking the liberties, and that (most of) his contemporaries would not say it was "outrageous". But even in 1905, some would surely have disagreed with his alteration... maybe even someone like Hofmann!

[pianopera]

camaysar:

1) Liszt-edition is mentioned in S. Sitwell's famous Liszt biography.

2) This recording of 1905 belongs to the earliest acoustic recordings available. I think only in the last years of the 19th century the first commercial recordings (first on cylinder) were starting to get known. Must have been the first acquaintance for M.?

3) Pedalling: take prelude 16. Right in the beginning it is indicated three full bars by Chopin...

cont.

[pianopera]

...cont. Should we ignore because we know that Pleyel sounded thinner? Or should we use 1/2 or 3/4 pedal? Or pedal for each bar, depending on acoustics? Difficult to decide...

[camaysar222]

Hi pianopera. Re: your 1): I've never seen a Liszt ed, nor heard of it before. Sounds intriguing!

2): It was early, but past the "novelty" stage. But novelty or not, I'm sure he played as he normally would, and was aware that the recordings would represent his artistic vision.

3): At a fast clip, one could even observe his pedaling today, but I'm sure most would at least half-pedal during the passage. C's ms has 2 pedals to the bar crossed out for the first 2 measures of the 3!

[pianopera]

Correction: makes YOU even more suspicious.

[camaysar222]

Whether or not Liszt had the score before him, Chopin's complaints about the liberties Liszt took with his music are well known. Rubinstein was also a stickler for accuracy when he taught Hofmann. But when Hofmann questioned him about his own liberties, Rubinstein told him something to the effect that "when you are an artist, then you may play as I do... if you can!"

[camaysar222]

We can agree that one must know the score, and be an all-around sophisticated artist before one may deviate from it. This is just common sense.

[pianopera]

I completely agree with your words.

[suzettegm]

"just" sleuthing??? Except for "love war and Beethoven" your comments hardly goad me. But here...I feel something stirring again. YOU TRY "just" sleuthing..and THEN get back to me. See? I'm even using CAPS :))"just" sleuthing...:(( I'll count to ten then...

[pianopera]

Dear Josette, yes, it seems that I touched a sour spot...

It is my experience that people who preach that scores are not that important...just can't read notes properly.

Yours the Ultra Dutch Ascetic etc etc.

[suzettegm]

Hey...us Dutch protestants died for a Good Cause!

[smithsherman]

You were a Jew back then!

[suzettegm]

Yes, I was . But I guess I'm a Ultra-Dutch- Ascetic-Self Removing Calvinistic Protestant Sherlock Holmes now :))I used the past tense unwittingly. BTW: nothing to do with scores, as far as I'm concerned.Now...time to remove myself here.

[smithsherman]

You...an Ascetic?....Even Erwin who fancys himself one...can't quite make the cut.You're very bad Ascetic-material.Now sleuthing,is another issue....

[suzettegm]

Okay...no more "just" sleuthing then. Now who's doing all this thumbing here. Let's get out.

[smithsherman]

Thumbing sounds deliciously sinful

[truecrypt]

Yes, Chopin used to work and "polish" his pieces even after publishing... I have difficulties relying on Chopin students' statements. Mikuli is a special case though - I like his edition.

[pianopera]

Mikuli's Source-Critical Edition is indeed quite good.

Apart from Henle and Wiener Urtext we have Scholz (Peters) and the more Critical Editions by famous musicians as Liszt and Debussy.

Jan Ekier must also be good but I don't know it very well.

Paderewski is maybe not so reliable. Klindworth, Friedman and Brugnoli (Ricordi) are even worse. Then we have the teaching editions like Joseffy and Cortot.

A complete Fascimile Edition of the "Polish Polisher" is now being prepared in Poland.

[truecrypt]

There is also Polish facsimile edition of the major works by Chopin. I have ballades and preludes, but there is more. When you see Chopin's own writing, it's a completely different perception. One can actually feel how precise and sophisticated Chopin was in his writing!

[pianopera]

Must go look for that!

I hope that one day all of Chopin's existing autographs will be available online.

[camaysar222]

Yes, truecrypt, the facsimiles are great. I have the Preludes and Barcarolle. I also recently got a b minor Sonata, in a new Narodowy Chopin Institute series edition, unfortunately somewhat reduced in size, and not as classy as the famous first series. Don't you wish Chopin had not crossed out so well?!

[truecrypt]

yes, exactly! makes the whole process of creating this music painfully clear! Also, I personally started to appreciate Chopin's marks much more - his writing was extremely precise and detailed. The pedal is an exception, of course - he simply indicated where it should be, but how - it's a separate case! ;)

[camaysar222]

We could have a very long discussion about pedalling! Chopin marks peds as if it is to be lifted before the following pedaled note, that is, no "syncopated" pedal. Some (M. Rosenthal) believe that C did not know of sync. pedal, and that it was discovered later. I don't see how this is possible. I suppose it can be done, but not always, as this very Prelude! If u consult yr facsimile, you'll see that the only ped mark is to link the last 2 c minor chords!

[truecrypt]

Of course Chopin used pedal the most sophisticated way and left only very rough indications in his autographs. He also widely used "fingers' pedaling" - certain keys would be held longer to create the pedal effect. F.e. if you recall the opening figuration in Barcarolle - Chopin used to hold f#-a#-c# notes no. 4, 6, 7 with fingers while changing half pedal. Creates clear Fis dur without an extra dissonance because of g#. Try it - sounds wonderful!

[camaysar222]

Yes, it's very harmonious! I guess he kept it up until the figuration change (I'm flipping through my first French edition... no one ever sees my old music but me, so I may as well brag about it here, where it can be appreciated!), at m 10, where he'd be holding an octave A# with F# in between, though that does sound rich. The striking thing, in light of what you say, is that Chopin's published (and ms) pedaling is expressly interrupted during the 16th

[camaysar222]

(2) notes, though he has some nice cross-bar pedaling. Hmm... might there be a lesson here? Yes, you say, the lesson is: we're not Chopin! Ha! Well anyway, if one does something terribly original like that, he'd better understand Chopin! This is why I love Friedman's personal touches. Sometimes wild, but we always sense a Chopin spirit... though occasionally "unleashed", rather than demonstrated.

[truecrypt]

BTW if you are interested in different editions (which is a fascinating subject to research) take a look at Klindworth too. In term of text it's probably not the best, but phrasing, "hidden voicing", fingering - extremely interesting and inspiring.

[camaysar222]

Indeed, truecrypt.  I've inspected various Klindworth editions in the library over time, but don't own any. I should really start getting them into the house to join the other editions of Chopin works here, and give a closer look.

[camaysar222]

Is there a Liszt edition that slipped by me? I don't think so.

Re: Friedman, his edition is valuable for variants he includes as played by Rubinstein, etc. The Friedman is a mix of scholarship and romantic style. Friedman, liberties and all, was a magnificent Chopin player (and a Pole). Debussy used the Friedman edition as a model for his own.

[pianopera]

I've read somewhere that Liszt edited some Chopin works like Ballades and Etudes, maybe it's not a complete edition though.

Regarding Friedman, H. Neuhaus thought that his (F's) fingerings in this edition were very bad.

[camaysar222]

I've never heard of a Liszt edition of any work of Chopin. Maybe you are referring to Liszt's arrangement of 6 of Chopin's songs; "My Joys" and "The Maiden's Wish" used to be popular.

As for Friedman's fingerings, granted, they could be unorthodox. You can be sure that Friedman had a good, musical reason for them (the easiest fingering is not always the best). He was making a statement, rather than choosing the best "average" fingering.

[camaysar222]

But fingerings are personal. Is there a pianist who follows all the fingerings in any single edition, without making allowances for his personal preferences? Probably not. Friedman's sometimes quirky fingerings give great insight into the correlation between fingering and expression, even if we don't always put them into practice.

[pianopera]

Camaysar: regarding fingerings, it is fair to say that we should try to follow the specific aesthetics and style of a composer, not that of the editor (even if the editor is a great interpreter).

In Beethoven we don't play chromatic scales with all five fingers -- but in Liszt we do. It is important for understanding Chopin's pianostyle to know and try out his own original notated fingerings, often with a specific musical effect in mind.

[camaysar222]

I hear you, pianopera. But as the piano evolved, so did the technical approach. In Louis Adam's Methode du Doigté (ca. 1804) broken thirds on white keys (RH) are 2-4-2-4-2-4-2-4 etc. That was the accepted fingering then. No modern pianist would play that way now, except perhaps an ultra-purist.

[camaysar222]

Also, Chopin did not finger all his music. Look at the 1st eds of the etudes, for ex. (all Chopin 1sts available online). Some are carefully fingered, others not at all. Editors filled the gaps, and offered alternatives, which Chopin would, in principle, have surely understood. As Sasha Gorodnitzki said, "I don't care if you use the back of your hands!"

[d60944]

Yes but we know there were also teaching copies with fingerings handwritten in by Chopin, as well as passed on by his pupils. Pachmann, in interview, also described a few techniques (such as "Chopin trill" finger positions) which he considered to have been passed on by Chopin. In some cases, editors can really know better than we think we do when we are confronted with Urtext...

[pianopera]

In the Budapest Edition of the Etudes the fingerings of Chopin are in italics. I don't say that every pianist should copy them, but at least they should be tried, just like the fingerings of Liszt or Rachmaninoff.

[camaysar222]

I agree completely, pianopera. After all, trying Chopin's fingerings does bring us closer to Chopin! And let's face it, his fingerings are good. But we are under no compulsion to adopt them for our own playing. As an example... I don't always use his same-finger slides to adjacent notes. Another fingering pet-peeve (not Chopin): trills with alternating fingers... too fussy!

[d60944]

Hehe. I play all my Haydn broken thirds with that fingering! Haydn frequently marks the pairs slurred and there really is no other way to get the right effect (maybe 1-3-1-3-1-3 etc?). Whether the lack of such slurring detail in music of a little later, like Beethoven or even Cherubini, represents performance practice and fingering changing, or in fact that it was assumed as "given" and therefore unnecessary to notate is moot. All a bit off topic here maybe, but interesting.

[camaysar222]

Yes, d60944. I shouldn't have said "no one would play...". The 2-4-2-4-2-4 fingering does give a certain clarity and evenness. And in your Haydn 2-note slurs example, the 2-4 fingering would be a good choice. But my point is ... it depends on the effect desired and the personal equipment.

[pianopera]

That's a completely different, purely technical matter. I was talking about a specific fingering that belongs to a certain musical style or to create a certain musical effect.

A famous example is "Mazeppa" of Liszt where the 2-4 2-4 is prescribed and where it is "inadmissable to facilitate the fingerings as contrary to Liszt's ideas" (Liszt-pupil Von Sauer).

[camaysar222]

Yes, I agree... there are special cases where unorthodox fingerings are used for certain effects. Your Mazeppa example perfectly illustrates what I mentioned previously: "the best fingering is not always the easiest".

[camaysar222]

By the way, I see nothing wrong with playing (RH from c) 1-2-3-4-1-2-3-1-2-3-4 etc. in a Beethoven chromatic passage, such as near the conclusion of the last mvt of the Moonlight. leading to the trill on a-b. Would you really say that this is an absolute obstacle to a correct interpretation? It may actually add to the upward sweep. "Never say never" :)

[pianopera]

No, that fingering is ok! It would only be strange though to also use the *fifth* (so 1-2-3-4-5 1-2-3-4-5 etc) like in so many chromatic passages in fast Liszt pieces (f.e. Chasse Neige).

[pianopera]

At 00:24 he plays Eb, not E natural like in so many editions.

[truecrypt]

There is E natural in Chopin's autograph but by some evidence he simply forgot to write a flat sign. Actually both sound great, but E natural is more dramatic!

[pianopera]

Yes, somehow my musical intuition tells me to play E natural!

It is amazing that in e.g. the Henle or Wiener Urtext of the Preludes and/or Mazurka's there are many unlogical things (unlogical from a musical point of view), probably due to the fact that there are so many (different) sources that there was no good selection. It was so hard for Chopin to write a "final" version of a piece - we always have to keep that in mind!

[camaysar222]

The correct note is E flat. Chopin pencilled it into his pupil Jane Stirling's copy, and it is in the English edition, which came after German and French. E flat sounds better as it is a better resolution for the plagal cadence which is already preceded by a C major (seventh) chord (as dominant 7th of iv). It also allows for the following bar, of all major chords, to sound more expressive.

[camaysar222]

The French and German editions also do not re-naturalize the D in the next-to-last measure (missing also in the autograph for France and Germany)... a mistake similar to the missing re-flatting of the E in m 3. The English edition also corrects the D.