Do you generally prefer slower of faster tempos?

[opus10no2]

I purposely only put 2 options there to polarise voters.

Time is relative in music, some people would say they prefer slower tempos to 'savour' the music, and on the contrary some would say slower tempos rob the music of life.
Some also simply prefer slower tempos because their brain can't cope with the high flow of musical information.
Also like many people, I am sick of the fast=superficial - slow=profound idea that many people seem to have, it's really just infantile.

[franzliszt2]

Unmusical post once again. How can anyone possibly say I prefer fast over slow without knowing what piece?

[opus10no2]

Well, see, of course it depends on the piece, but people will instinctually opt for one option over the other one anyway.

More often than not, for example for me, I prefer faster than average tempos, this is my musical taste.

[ted]

It seems to me that the perceived speed of piano sound and the actual speed the hands and fingers are working are, in any case, two different things. All notes played are usually not of equal importance. Because of its lack of sustaining power, slow orchestral effect with the piano can sometimes only be achieved by finger work which is very rapid. So, for instance, a rag might produce an aural impression of speed, even though the fingers are actually doing much less than they are in, say, a piece such as Ricordanza or Chasse Neige. The perceived musical pace of these latter is slow, despite the furious pace of the background orchestral figuration.

I therefore think that any alignment of profundity with either physical activity or perceived speed of musical sound is completely false.

[opus10no2]

That's true, but the topic title uses the word 'tempo'.

A slow piece can have alot of 'fast notes', but the general pulse may be only walking pace..

And it is true that the piano by it's own nature being *just a piano*, variety of sound and texture has to be created with varying figurations, often involving fast passagework.

This is actually one of the most interesting things about piano music to me, the fact is that in no other area of music is there such a variety of figuration - ie- notes to decorate other more important notes.

Figuration is the solo instrument's answer to orchestration and arrangement, and it can be just as fascinating as both of those.

[ted]

Okay, as far as the original question goes then, that is to say regarding perceived tempo, I like variety and have no particular preference one way or the other.

I agree that physical figuration is fascinating, and I do not hesitate to use it as a generator of ideas during improvisation, but that is a separate topic.

[opus10no2]

It is a seperate topic, but repeated figurations, and actually limitations in general, can be a great stimulus to invention.

Observe Chopin's etudes, one basic idea per etude, and so much done with it.

The solo violin, cello, lute, and flute works of Bach are also incredibly interesting music, often mainly just one line of music, but his invention was stimulated by this 'limitation' to produce utterly remarkable music, and expand the possibilities of those forms.

[ramseytheii]

Well, see, of course it depends on the piece, but people will instinctually opt for one option over the other one anyway.

More often than not, for example for me, I prefer faster than average tempos, this is my musical taste.

I think people will either opt for extremes or not, not everything faster, or everything slower.  Schnabel for instance played fast movements very fast, and slow movements very slow.  The same could be said about Richter, and Gould.  The only pianist I can think of who played everything in one direction was Arrau, who played pretty much everything slower than we're used to hearing it.

Walter Ramsey

[pianistimo]

i think whatever speed is semi-comfortable.   you can play too fast and not have any sort of 'definition.'  just like a tv that loses resolution.  on the other hand - there are people who can play extremely fast and keep their pedalling clean - and the lines flowing.  for etudes - obviously you want them as fast as they can be and still sounding beautiful.

on the other hand, there is a danger to playing too fast or slow in slower music.  too fast robs it of the sentimentality - and too slow makes it dead in the water. 

to me - music is all about 'illusion.'  you can give the illusion of many things.  including even speed.  i mean - you can play fast - but you can play much lighter when you play fast - and it doesn't have to be hard.  so difficult music isn't fast music.  actually, imo, the most difficult thing in a pianists 'bag' is to make a piece have coherence throughout.  to have a 'plan' and to make sense - and for the piece to make utter sense from the first to the last note.  as if someone was acting or speaking or dancing.  a fluidity.

[desordre]

 Dear Opus:
 Sorry I didn't read all along, but I think I understand your point. However, I guess that are a problem behind this "polarization", as you said: musicians sometimes are not intelligent in their choices and their goals. Let me explain.
 First, one must know his own limitations and qualities, and take advantage of them, not the opposite. One example: Chopin's Prelude 16. It's far from being the most difficult piece by him, but it have a harsh problem: it must be fast as hell. There are no excuses, no explanations, no "theory": either you play it presto con fuoco or you don't play it. It happens a lot with Liszt. How many times did you heard his Sonata "subplayed"?
 Second, but even more important, is the ignorance about style. Bach is first in this rank. I really can't stand players (not only pianists) that want to show their fingers with his music. What can be more boring than a very fast fugue? When you listen to such a performance, you don't have the time to enjoy the polyphony, the subtle counterpoint technique, the harmonic nuances, etc etc, because the performer choose to play it too fast. Yes, it can be impressive to see the control or whatever, but Bach's music it's not about virtuosity (although it is f***ing hard).
 Anyway, I just can talk for myself, and I really believe in create a repertory that I can handle and do with it what I really want, regarding its own limits.
 Best!