Etudes - Performance vs Development

[steve jones]

Hi,

So Im reading some directions on the Chopin Etudes, and its all fascinating stuff - telling me what I will learn from each particular piece, and how I must play and practice it etc. But what struck me is how contrary this information was to how alot of professionals actually perform them!

Op10 No3 would be a PERFECT example (and No6). Looking at the score, I see that virtually no pedal is directed at all. Maybe this is for clarity of the individual voices? Or perhaps it is test the pianist's ability to articulate the voices correctly? Or BOTH! But this is not how I see people performing it - often they use the pedal liberally through out the entire piece. And to my ears, this sounds nice! It doesnt ruin it at all.

So it occurs to me...

Why do we learn Etudes? For technical and musical development, or because we just love and want to play the piece? And surely, how we learn, practice and ultimately perform the piece should be governed greatly by how we answer this question, right?

Another perfect example might be Op25 No10. Some additions direct way more pedal that others. And I see MANY performers cheating on this one (not holding notes for their full duration). This is fine if we are learning the piece because we like it, so long as we can archieve a desirable sound. But if we are using the piece as a study, then surely this is defeating the object?

What are your thoughts on this?

How do you tend to treat such pieces?

What is your opinion on people who 'cheat' in order to perform the piece better?

SJ

[mike_lang]

I see "Greetings." from debussysymbolism on the horizon...

[Mozartian]

---

[steve jones]

My god, who the hell did I get 1087 posts?! 

lol

SJ

[the_duck]

i've heard some people mention that they learn the chop studies TWO ways- one with the most technically beneficial fingering, and a second additional  way which they find easiest to get to a concert standard. i've heard this specifically related to op.26 no.6, but i haven't tried this method (or this piece) myself, so i can't say if it works or not!

[nicco]

Op10 No3 would be a PERFECT example (and No6). Looking at the score, I see that virtually no pedal is directed at all. Maybe this is for clarity of the individual voices? Or perhaps it is test the pianist's ability to articulate the voices correctly? Or BOTH! But this is not how I see people performing it - often they use the pedal liberally through out the entire piece. And to my ears, this sounds nice! It doesnt ruin it at all.

Actually, this etude is meant for practicing finger legato.

[leucippus]

This is fine if we are learning the piece because we like it, so long as we can archieve a desirable sound. But if we are using the piece as a study, then surely this is defeating the object?

I don't believe in playing any piece in a way that doesn't sound good for the sake of a "study".  I believe in only learning to play in ways that sound good.  If that's considered "cheating" more power to it.

In short, I don't believe in attempting to duplicated any printed sheet music.  I don't view sheet music in that way at all.  I view sheet music as nothing more than "shorthand" notation for preserving and passing down the idea of the music behind it.  When people get side-tracked into trying to perfectly duplicate written score I personally believe that they have gotten lost on a tangent to the real purpose of playing "music".

Many will argue with my philosophy, but they'll have to argue with themselves because I'm not listening. 

If you want to hear sheet music played precisely the way it is written, just type it into a MIDI squencer.  It's as simple as that.

[steve jones]

Actually, this etude is meant for practicing finger legato.

Indeed it is. But that is NOT how many perform it.

Does it sound better played finger legato? Is that direction there to make the work 'sound' a certain way, or rather to make it more of a test to play? Indeed, if you were learning the piece for technical gains, then playing it all without pedal would reap way more benefit.

You see what Im getting at?

SJ

[steve jones]

i've heard some people mention that they learn the chop studies TWO ways- one with the most technically beneficial fingering, and a second additional  way which they find easiest to get to a concert standard. i've heard this specifically related to op.26 no.6, but i haven't tried this method (or this piece) myself, so i can't say if it works or not!

Thats makes sense. Learn it first as a study, draw out all that can be gained. THEN relearn it with easier fingering and pedalling to raise the performance level.

I can see alot of people working like that, yes.

SJ

[steve jones]

I don't believe in playing any piece in a way that doesn't sound good for the sake of a "study".  I believe in only learning to play in ways that sound good.  If that's considered "cheating" more power to it.

In short, I don't believe in attempting to duplicated any printed sheet music.  I don't view sheet music in that way at all.  I view sheet music as nothing more than "shorthand" notation for preserving and passing down the idea of the music behind it.  When people get side-tracked into trying to perfectly duplicate written score I personally believe that they have gotten lost on a tangent to the real purpose of playing "music".

Many will argue with my philosophy, but they'll have to argue with themselves because I'm not listening. 

If you want to hear sheet music played precisely the way it is written, just type it into a MIDI squencer.  It's as simple as that.

True, very true!

But remember, the Etude is a study. And its important to play is written in order to reap the full benefits.

That is really what this topic is about - playing the music for technical gain vs musical appreciation.

SJ

[pianistimo]

using sparing pedal seems better than too frequent.  also, there are many ways to use the pedal.  it's an art in itself.  i learned that i was putting it down before the note was 'sealed'  - if you use a slight delay - things sound cleaner.  also, faster and shorter foot movements.  very slight and very much right around the exact area of dampening.  sometimes, pedalling two or three times quickly to 'evaporate' too much sound.

[thierry13]

You should LEARN the etude the way it was meant to be worked on, and then perform it the way it sounds best.

[steve jones]

using sparing pedal seems better than too frequent.  also, there are many ways to use the pedal.  it's an art in itself.  i learned that i was putting it down before the note was 'sealed'  - if you use a slight delay - things sound cleaner.  also, faster and shorter foot movements.  very slight and very much right around the exact area of dampening.  sometimes, pedalling two or three times quickly to 'evaporate' too much sound.

Oooo, like ABS for the piano? I like!

Actually, my pedalling seems to be alright. It came quite naturally to be honest. I learned a Chopin Waltz, and now I pretty much do it instinctively. I tend to play note BEFORE hitting the pedal slightly. Dont think Iv ever done it at the exact same time.

Infact, when Im watching vids I tend to keep an eye on the pianists knee so I can see when and where they are pedalling! lol. Has become quite an obsession of mine, hehe.

And I must admit, I actually like using alot of pedal. Obviously never at times when it will blur a voice and destroy a harmony, but I do tend to you quite alot. I would use it more than it is directed in my edition of the Chopin Etudes, were it not the fact that I try to learn them as written for the technical gains.

Btw, I would add that I cant properly play ANY of them yet! They are so damn difficult... which I surpose is the point.

SJ

[mike_lang]

You should LEARN the etude the way it was meant to be worked on, and then perform it the way it sounds best.

Agreed - my favorite edition of the études is that of Alfred Cortot.  Many times in his advice and exercises for practice, he distinguishes between what will be good for practice (often times certain fingerings) and what will be better for performance.  For example, in the "thirds" étude, it is good to practice 13-24, but, at least in my case, it is more realistic in performance to use 23-15.

Of course, there are always those who say that you should never do in practice what you don't want to do in performance.  I think this holds true outside the category of études.

Best,
Michael

[fiasco]

I believe that Etudes are primarily for technical development, especially the Chopin.  I've always thought that one should adhere more strictly to what is on the page in a Chopin etude than, say, in a Ballade.  And although they do sound great, they should, this is consistent with Chopin's writing.  But only a select few actually sound like real "pieces" and not exercisey etudes (10/3, 25/10)  None of the Chopin etudes have the scope of Liszt's Mazeppa or Wilde Jagd, because they are more technically specific, and should be played as so.

Consider a Stanley Kubrick film versus a Lars Von Trier.  One should play etudes like a Kubrick movie, 200 takes on each scene until it is perfect.  Play the ballades with wilder interpretation.  This is why I prefer John Browning's recording to Cziffra's.  Cziffra may be a better musician overall, but I like the crisp exactness of Browning's playing when it comes to the etudes.

[richy321]

This is the perspective I use in addressing this and similar practice questions:

The Chopin Etudes have a dual purpose: (1)  As a vehicle for developing and testing specific technical skills and (2) as character pieces for the musical pleasure of the player and other listeners. 

All the variables of your practice regimen, including pedalling, should depend on what the purpose is uppermost at the time.  Personally. I try to abstain from pedalling in the early stages of practice in order to better hear the details of my playing, expecially the releases.  Then, after I am confident I am playing correctly as written, I apply pedalling for overall aesthetic satisfaction.  But I would feel that I were depriving myself of the full benefit of the Etude if I didn't practice it sans pedal first.

Incidentally, I find that the performances that impress me the most, such as Arrau's and Luganski's, tend to be sparing with the pedal, letting the full spectrum of different finger touches come through clearly.
 

[pianistimo]

hmm. must go listen to some john browning chopin.  i think i heard him play beethoven - but i didn't know he played chopin well, too.  and of course, arrau.  not heard lugansky. 

jacque-ives thibeaux is supposed to be a good chopin interpreter.  playing on the original broadwood piano.  not sure how his etudes are.

actually pollini comes to mind for me.  it is so hard, as someone mentioned, to make them into concert pieces without a lot of confidence.  after all, for most people, they sound like * (bad air). 

[steve jones]

Pollini did a very good job on them imo. On a technically level, Gavrilov is pretty stunning. Im not sure I like his interpretations so much though. Yundi Li seems to be absolutely by the book - I think he reproduces whats on the page better than anyone else Iv heard recordings of. But obviously, if you're after creative interpretation, then that would put him at the bottom of the pile!

SJ

[zheer]

  Ashkenazy recordings were the first i heard, remember thinking the guy was super-human. Cortot, is also very good.

[henrah]

I have Cortot's, and the recording quality annoys me

But the interpretations themselves are wonderful! Especially of 25/6 and 10/3.

[liszt-essence]

I don't believe in playing any piece in a way that doesn't sound good for the sake of a "study".  I believe in only learning to play in ways that sound good.  If that's considered "cheating" more power to it.

In short, I don't believe in attempting to duplicated any printed sheet music.  I don't view sheet music in that way at all.  I view sheet music as nothing more than "shorthand" notation for preserving and passing down the idea of the music behind it.  When people get side-tracked into trying to perfectly duplicate written score I personally believe that they have gotten lost on a tangent to the real purpose of playing "music".

Many will argue with my philosophy, but they'll have to argue with themselves because I'm not listening. 

If you want to hear sheet music played precisely the way it is written, just type it into a MIDI squencer.  It's as simple as that.

I couldn't agree more with you on that point.

Whenever I compose a piece for the piano and write it down on sheetmusic, this problem becomes evident. When reading sheetmusic, I have to rely on intuition and personal taste.

[ihatepop]

Hi,

So Im reading some directions on the Chopin Etudes, and its all fascinating stuff - telling me what I will learn from each particular piece, and how I must play and practice it etc. But what struck me is how contrary this information was to how alot of professionals actually perform them!

Op10 No3 would be a PERFECT example (and No6). Looking at the score, I see that virtually no pedal is directed at all. Maybe this is for clarity of the individual voices? Or perhaps it is test the pianist's ability to articulate the voices correctly? Or BOTH! But this is not how I see people performing it - often they use the pedal liberally through out the entire piece. And to my ears, this sounds nice! It doesnt ruin it at all.

So it occurs to me...

Why do we learn Etudes? For technical and musical development, or because we just love and want to play the piece? And surely, how we learn, practice and ultimately perform the piece should be governed greatly by how we answer this question, right?

Another perfect example might be Op25 No10. Some additions direct way more pedal that others. And I see MANY performers cheating on this one (not holding notes for their full duration). This is fine if we are learning the piece because we like it, so long as we can archieve a desirable sound. But if we are using the piece as a study, then surely this is defeating the object?

What are your thoughts on this?

How do you tend to treat such pieces?

What is your opinion on people who 'cheat' in order to perform the piece better?

SJ

My teacher told me that certain pieces are meant for pedal, and the composer does not put the sign as he assumes that the performer would have the good sense to understand that the piece needs pedal.

Etudes are for training up your fingers to tackle tecnicaly difficult pieces.

ihatepop

P.S. This is my 300th post!

[avetma]

Chopin turned etudes into romantic pieces to perform in front of audience. It is not the same to play Czerny or Chopin/Liszt/Rach/Scriabin/Alkan etc.
That's why everyone gives his personal touch on performance of etude so they sound better. It is concert piece and not pure study.

[henrah]

It is concert piece and not pure study.

I'd say they're studies in practice, but can be concert pieces in perfomance (and practice for a performance).

I don't think you'd gain as much as you could from an etude if you didn't practice it as a study, i.e. gain from it every technical aspect that can possibly be derived from it to your best ability. Obviously if you want to perform them, then you should practice them differently; but I don't think that you should exclude practicing them as studies if you want to solely perform them.

After all, studying comes before performing doesn't it?

[pianowelsh]

Concert etudes were always designed with the dual aspect. However we have to realsie they werent seen as starter pieces when they were concieved the were designed as finishing off pieces for the virtuoso to display his technical control..it was anticipated that you would already have studied your millions of Czerny studies and Hanon and Beringer etc, your Clementi and Crammer etc so that the concert etude literature was to develop new technical devices for special effects OR for showing the culminatin of your fingerwork etc. Naturally as they were designed for performance the musical aspect of these had to be first class .. now some are clearly better than others but its a generalsied rule. So a 'good' concert/transcendental etude should naturally develop your technical growth it should also give you scope to express. There is no division..but often because of the mechanical difficulties..we have to practice in such a way as to subvert the technical difficulty first before we can truely get the measure of an etude in the artistic sense.

[ihatepop]

I see "Greetings." from debussysymbolism on the horizon...

You do, hes back. I was chatting with him today.

ihatepop

[pianowelsh]

I once heard a Brilliant masterclass by the world renowned jean-bernard Pommier...He said 'Do you play what you practice Or do you practice what you play?' - the poor student looked really embarresed. but actually its quite profound. The comment was made in regards to a specific section where the student was asked to repeat a passage, he did so without pedal having pedalled it before. JB asked 'why?' the unsuspecting student said something like so I can hear better what my fingers are doing. JB said (i forget) long the lines of perhaps the audience would also like to hear same?? He explained then that the pedal transforms the piano from being in the living room to being in the mountains and we have to thing carefully how we control everything...Kinda like a pilot at the controls.  I tell you I still remember that class and I was only 9 at the time!