Busoni the pianist

[mikey6]

I just listened to Mr. Busoni playing the Norma Fantasy (Liszt).  Whilst it does contain some of the msot amazing technical feats I've ever heard - his octaves are probably the fastest on record - that was pretty much the best I could say about it.
His melody generally get's swamped by the millions of notes and his rhythm is fairly unstable.  However there are reasons to justify these things - the recording quality is not great and old school pianists generally had a lot slacker reagrd for strict rhythm.  But he does actually reduce a few bars to half their length, not waiting through the sliences.
Whilst I did like it, it's odd that he can play with such allowance.  If he were playing today, would such playing be acceptable?
Which draws me to another point (sorta) - everyone has the image of Liszt as the ultimate pianist, but is that judging by piano standards today? coz if Busoni's playing is anything to go buy, how many people would actually like it? Just some thoughts...

[thalbergmad]

It is very interesting to muse how pianists like Liszt would fare in a modern Piano Competition.

When we here pianists like Busoni and even more so Rosenthal, we get an idea how he must of sounded.

I would wager if Liszt were alive today and entered the Thaikovsky Competition, he would not get past the first round.

Only my opinion.

[stevie]

the fastness is an illusion, the piano rolls are sped up

[g_s_223]

In his own time, I think Busoni had a reputation for coolness and precision, at least compared to the other more "individual" sorts of players around then. One might say, a Pollini avant la lettre, so to speak...

[JP]

the fastness is an illusion, the piano rolls are sped up

Its as simple as that..

[ramseytheii]

It's hard to really judge Busoni as a pianist, since to my knowledge no actual recordings of him exist, only several piano rolls in various states of decomposition.   I don't know much about the technology of converting those rolls into use onto a modern piano and recording them, but if you listen to Busoni's recording of the G major Chopin prelude, you will be convinced it is not such a reliable method.  There is no way he played so poorly, and it msut be rather due to some decaying in the roll, which is not unusual (a while back the famous "Miss Texas plays Chopin scherzo" or whatever, proved to be just such a thing). 

But, we do have recordings of such contemporary pianists as Schnabel and Rubinstein, who regarded Busoni as the greatest pianist they knew.  Also high praise comes from Nadia Boulanger, and we have much evidence of her musical criticism and taste (she also made recordings, mainly as a conductor, sometimes pianist).  These rolls therefore cannot really serve to adequately create a picture of him as a pianist.

And to answer the question about how well he or Liszt would fare in today's competition circuit is really impossible.  I don't think it is like asking the question, how much is $1000 from the year 1900 worth today?   We know of great pianists that lost competitions, even pianists with an all-powerful charismatic hold over audiences of all sophistication.  The same could be true for Liszt and Busoni, but it means rather much more that their contemporaries held them in the highest esteem.

Arthur Friedheim, one of Liszt's students, wrote this about a related question:

"Liszt's technique has been the subject of much discussion and conjecture on the part of those who never heard him.  Was it so prodigious, and has it been equalled since?  The answer is that it was truly prodigious but that in certain respects it has not only been equalled since, but also surpassed.  Moriz Rosenthal and Leopold Godowksy went beyond Liszt in specialized phases of mechanisme.  However, while Godowksy's chief metier was dexterity of fingers and Rosenthal concentrated on brilliance and power, Liszt shone in every department of technique and probably never has been approached as a builder of 'orchestral' climaxes, overwhelming masses of sound and exciting effects."

Walter Ramsey

[stevie]

(a while back the famous "Miss Texas plays Chopin scherzo" or whatever, proved to be just such a thing). 

hahaha where did you hear that?!

that was an awesome recording!

[mikey6]

the fastness is an illusion, the piano rolls are sped up

I don't entirely understand the piano roll thing.  How do they record it? I read somewhere that they have to guess the speed of the performance but they can read dynamics and some nuances.

[stevie]

I don't entirely understand the piano roll thing.  How do they record it? I read somewhere that they have to guess the speed of the performance but they can read dynamics and some nuances.

listen to them, they are impossibly fast

its like hearing about some guy in the 19th century who could run 100m in 6 seconds....

[m]

I don't entirely understand the piano roll thing.  How do they record it? I read somewhere that they have to guess the speed of the performance but they can read dynamics and some nuances.

It is a special player piano, with mechanism set to punch holes in a roll of paper. The length of the hole is equal to duration of the sound, the width is equal to sound's strength. Depending on how advanced the system was, the thing could give up to 7 (!!!) gradations of the sound volume. There was a special track for pedaling. However, the pedal was limited only to full one, i. e. there was no pedal gradations--quater, half, or pedal vibration, whatsoever.

The feeding mechanism was based on a mechanical turning mechanism, driven by a spring coil. No speed stability, whatsoever. The speed deviation due to lack of electronic feedback loop could reach at least 100% within one roll, resulting in highly uneven rhythmic pulse. If you listen for rolls of Rachmaninov or Horowitz and compare them to existing acoustic recordings you'll understand what it means.

There were no standards for speed of feeding, so when the roll is played on another player piano, one could only guess what was the original speed. It is basically like a music box, with holes instead of pins. Run it any speed you wish and it will respond with ugly sound, having nothing to do with original musical intentions.

Personal touch, special artistic aura, art of pedaling, or simply rhythmic stabilty--everything left outside.

Enough said...

[Stolzing]

Personal touch, special artistic aura, art of pedaling, or simply rhythmic stabilty--everything left outside.

Sounds like my playing

[rob47]

here's a clip of Busoni playing the presto part from Liszt's Don Juan fantasy.

the speed is quite legendary.

https://s43.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=3FH27YW8BTGKJ1S4OLPNQBGHH7

[mikey6]

Thanks Marik, that clears up quite a bit.

[lostinidlewonder]

The opinion on Busoni's compositions are very varied, but on his skill as a pianist, all critics back then where unanimous, he was one of the few world famous pianists whose musicianship allowed him to be classed with Rubinstein, Liszt.

His interpretations of the classics still brought sharp criticisms, and he wrote to one of his critics defending himself;

"You start from false premises in thinking that it is my intention to modernize the works. On the contrary, by cleaning them of the dust of tradition I try to restore their youth, to present them as they sounded to people at the moment when they first sprang from the head and the pen of the composer."

"The Pathetique was an almost revolutionary sonata in its own day, and ought to sound revolutionary. One could never put enough passion into the Appassionata, which was the culmination of the passionate expression of its epoch. When I play Beethoven, I try to approach the liberte, nervosite and humanite which are the signature of his compositions, in contrast to those of his predeccessors. Recalling the character of the man Beethoven a what is related of his own playing, I have built up for myself an ideal which has been wrongly called 'modern' and which is really no more than 'live'. I do the same with Liszt, and oddly enough people approve in this case, though the condemn me in the other."

Busoni was ruthless when he interpreted Chopin, shocking all who has become accustomed to the delicate, tender and dreamy style that most pianists used for most of the works. Many of Chopin's compositions however Busoni never touched like the Mazurkas, but he was very fond of the Preludes. His intellectual approach to his art, which rigorously excluded popular sentimentality, accounted for his failure to please many of his listeners.

Eccentricities in his interpretation of the works of old masters often offended and even horrified a great number of those who attened his concerts, but not many people could resist to be impressed by his fantastic technique, amazing agility and infinite variety of tone-colour. Professor Dent says in his biography of Busoni:

"He played the first prelude of the Bach Fourty Eight and it became a wash of shifting colours, a rainbow over the fountains of the Villa d'Este; he played the fugue, and each voice sang out above the rest like the entries of an Italian chorus, until the last stretto, the subject entered like the trumpets of the Dona nobis in the Mass in B-minor, though in the middle of the keyboard, across a haze of pedal-held sound that was not confusion but blinding clearness."

His Liszt was a great joy to hear, but the majority of Chopin's compositions he murdered, very impressively, with a blunt instrument. Somebody once said that he played the Trio of the Funeral March like a cornet solo; a statement to which another horrified listeners added "outside a pub." Busoni use to say "If you honestly believe that the melody is beautiful, you must sing it with all the fullness of your voice."