Tempest

[klm46]

How would you go about pedalling bb138-158ish of Beethoven's Tempest (op. 31 no.2).  Is the pedal supposed to be held throughout the recitative passage or changed with the harmony? Thanks

[pianistimo]

unless someone answers this asap - i'll be back and get out my book.  i think the prof before the last told me to hold it through the recit. and make it sound sort of dreamy.  it's a tricky kind of pedalling because you don't want it to sound mushy.  was it 1/2 pedal?  i have to go to the piano and try again.  i think it was full pedal at first and then you let off slightly - but not so much as to let go of all the sound.  basically ending with the 'remains' of the carried over harmonies.  it makes it have a very 'etherial' quality.

[comma]

Is the pedal supposed to be held throughout the recitative passage?

It is - at least in Beethoven's conception. What he had in mind is the sound of an instrument without dampers (like marimba for instance). But since the strings of Beethoven's piano did not sound as long as they do on modern instruments I would change the pedal partially and carefully from time to time.

--------------------

https://www.pianistenschule.de

[pianistimo]

yes!  i do very light pedalling through measure 138-141 because you are dealing with whole step intervals and not always chords.  but, in measure 142 - there's a pedal marking.  i would hold full pedal through the A major chord and switch to half at the point where you see the 'recitative'  (with slight quick pedal changes if it gets blurry - but not to the absolute stop- point of the damper.  below the damper point so that it simply clears a little sound and not the entire chord that you want to hold through).   then, not much pedal in the 'allegro' section.  and then, again full pedal on the 'largo.'  letting up slightly (maybe a bit of a 'slow flutter' pedal where you suddenly have the C mixed with the Db).  but, not so much as to lose the chord.  it's that etherial sound - but still clear - so you have to practice not losing the start chord - so definately play that full pedal - but hold over this sound in smaller quantities to hear the recitative clearly and before notes sound mushy make very slight movement to clear a bit of sound - but not entire harmonies.  it is this chromatic chaos that brings the 'tempest' it's passion.

[pianistimo]

when i played this before - so many years ago- i think i used the damper and una chorda somewhat together and then experimented with the sound.

but, today - i just went down to my piano and found that over the years i've been able to refine playing softly with just the fingers and how you place them on the notes - so my preference now would be to experiment with the sostenuto and the damper.

for instance, i played the sostenuto together with the damper on the first chord of the 'largo' and then, slowly let up on the sostenuto with my left foot.  leaving the A to be completely in the discretion of the damper foot pedal and carefully clearing any sound that is not necessary - but not so as to completely lose the chord at the beginning. 

maybe it depends on the particular piano - exactly what you do? 

[counterpoint]

The problem results from the difference between the pianos, which were used at Beethovens time, and the pianos, we have now. Actual pianos have very long sustained sound, so if you play the parts as Beethoven has written, it sounds very confusing on todays instruments.

I found a way to imitate the sound of older instruments with lesser sustained sound:

press down a cluster of notes (1 octave average, 2 octaves below the region of the melody line) silent with the palm of the flat left hand, then play the right hand normally without the pedal. The resonances of the cluster notes will give the effect of a light pedal.

That doesn't work on digital pianos

[pianistimo]

how would you effectively do this with the tempest (in the largo sections)?  you have to physically play the chord first - but could you then do something like this as the sound decays? 

or play the entire chord first (holding down each note as you go) and when you get to the top - THEN add the damper (or sost and/or damper) and gradually meld to just the light damper for the recitative.

(agreed that digital pianos aren't really for learning piano technique.  they are my way to record my playing - as my hubby hasn't recorded me on my piano - and, well, it is out of tune).

[iumonito]

The pedal marks are Beethoven's.  They shall be observed.

Also in Op. 37 and Op. 53.  They are supposed to be blurred.  Raise your hand if you have played this in a Broadwood.  These harmonies do blurr in the older instruments; it is a Vienese thing.  Think Brahms Op. 119 # 1.

[counterpoint]

how would you effectively do this with the tempest (in the largo sections)?  you have to physically play the chord first - but could you then do something like this as the sound decays? 

or play the entire chord first (holding down each note as you go) and when you get to the top - THEN add the damper (or sost and/or damper) and gradually meld to just the light damper for the recitative.

(agreed that digital pianos aren't really for learning piano technique.  they are my way to record my playing - as my hubby hasn't recorded me on my piano - and, well, it is out of tune).

It seems, that I didn't explain the silent pressing of the keys clearly enough.

1. I play the arpeggio chord normally with pedal.
2. Then I press the silent keys and let them down for the whole lento bars
3. Now I take the pedal away (almost no sound change)
4. Then I play the melody of the right hand.

[pianistimo]

just trying to get a handle  on what both of you are saying.  iumonito says = put the pedal down at the start of the arpeggio (and then leave on full pedal or move to half pedal)  and you are saying  possibly:

1. play arpeggio with pedal
2.  now, silent notes would be the same as arpeggiated notes (right?) or different notes?
3. remove pedal - allow the recitative to be 'ringing' the bells of the overtones

i will go try this. 

[counterpoint]

1. play arpeggio with pedal
2.  now, silent notes would be the same as arpeggiated notes (right?) or different notes?
3. remove pedal - allow the recitative to be 'ringing' the bells of the overtones

Not only press the notes of the arpeggio chord, but a wide cluster of notes (black and white keys) with the flat hand, silent of course 
So the dampers of these notes will lift away from the strings, the open strings will resonance with the notes of the chord and of the melody.

[pianistimo]

you're a genius.  why didn't i think of that.  i was shown some kind of technique like this for some other piece - but i never put two and two together on this. 

wait.  i don't want to be too negative here - but i have a problem.  i can't put down the notes without making sound - and i don't want to interrupt the already existing overtones by clearing the damper.  also, i think i have relatively little time to get this done between the last note E of the first measure of 'largo' and the next note A. 

ok.  what if i held the silent notes down and then tried to play the arpeggio.  i will go try this.

[pianistimo]

ok.  i play the first arpeggio there with lh and rh (three notes lh and three rh) or something like that.  so, i took  one simple note from lh (d) and one from rh (g) and silently held them down - then played arpeggio (much harder to do than before - but possible).  what a wonderful sound comes out of the overtones for the rest of the notes!  but, i do not totally leave the pedal off.  i move to 1/2 or very top level of pedal (surface?) by the A of the recit.  then all the notes sound very 'swirly.'

[counterpoint]

wait.  i don't want to be too negative here - but i have a problem.  i can't put down the notes without making sound

It's possible, if you press the keys very slow, needs some training, sure  


- and i don't want to interrupt the already existing overtones by clearing the damper. 


Okay, this is a little disadvantage, but they will be kept to a great part, if you choose the right silent keys

also, i think i have relatively little time to get this done between the last note E of the first measure of 'largo' and the next note A. 


I can't see, that there's so little time. The arpeggio notes will sound for a while anyway, in this time you can catch the sound with the silent keys.

It works perfectly for me. You can try it and use it if it works. Otherwise, play it like the rest of the world plays it  

[pianistimo]

i like the idea of pressing the notes silently BEFORE playing the arpeggio.  then, everything goes smoothly from there.  it does take some time to play those two notes silently - and it almost seems best to do them one after the other as quickly (and yet slowly as to not make a sound) and then the arpeggio.  to try to do it after the arp. and faster - risks making sound.

[ramseytheii]

Honestly I don't find this passage to be a problem, either personally or objectively.  But before I say why, I take a small issue with iumitono's comment: the philosophy of complete fidelity (phidelity) to the score is not an excuse not to think.  The fact that "Beethoven wrote it," or, more accurately, "According to the edition we have it would appear that Beethoven wrote it," does not make any issue such as this unquestionable.  And if it did, nobody would have bothered to find out how it actually sounded on Beethoven's pianos - because it wouldn't matter.

The solution I found to this passage is not half or light pedal, but rather a light touch, especially on the passing tones.  The dissonances that result from light passing tones and heavier melodic nuance are clear, audible, and beautiful.  The question here is, how to phrase - a sighing intonation from A to G, and then from D to C#, then G to F, all at different levels of intensity, because that is the nature of Classical phrasing.

Looking at this passage again I see how geniusly it is written.  The phrase as I described it above has as the center of its arc the high tones of the phrase, other than two Es which function as links.  Also note the different lengths of each note following the appogiatura: a quarter tied to a double-dotted eighth; a half note; and a quarter note followed by a rest.  The musical structure and poetic content are inextricably united.  On top of this, Beethoven added his own personal coloristic invention, the long, dissonant, atmospheric pedal which we find in so many of his works.  AND, it's a Recitative in the middle of a highly formal structure, but at the same time a development of the first theme.  Wondrous!

Walter Ramsey

[pianistimo]

very good points, too.  i take what everybody says - and kind of put it all together.  i think beethoven would have written that he didn't want pedal throughout the section (in recitative part) if he didn't want it to be a little 'etherial' - but we don't want it so extreme that the passing tones are equalized with the 'melodic' as you aptly put it.  i like the 'sighing' analogy a lot.  everyone here probably has a great rendition.  if only we could put examples up - the way each of us play it.  i still have my digital only - to record on - and thus could not give a decent example - although i can play it the way it sounds good to me.  there's always room for improvement, though.

if you return to a piece of music and play it the same way you did 20 years ago...what good is that.  i like the idea of experimenting more and more and see that you can almost write these experiments down (numbered system) as a scientist would and see what suits your impression of a continuous whole piece of music (using fairly even methods throughout the piece) and no surprise elements that seem to 'jolt' the piece out of context.  for instance, a sudden lack of pedal.  if i were to use NO pedal there in the recitative - i would also use no pedal in other places.  but, i think sparing pedal is what i like, personally.  it gives a sort of 'melodic' upper that just joining notes with the hand does not.  for one thing - it frees the strings to vibrate and obtain those 'overtones.'

[mikey6]

They are supposed to be blurred.  Raise your hand if you have played this in a Broadwood.

raises hand, well, not a broadwood but a Beethoven piano whose name escapes me at the moment.  Yes they do blur but no where near as much as the modern grand so that it's possible to get away with keeping the pedal down throughout the whole piece (think op.27 no.2)  Therefore some adjusting would have to be made in order to realise Beethoven's intentions.

[ramseytheii]

Yes they do blur but no where near as much as the modern grand so that it's possible to get away with keeping the pedal down throughout the whole piece (think op.27 no.2)  Therefore some adjusting would have to be made in order to realise Beethoven's intentions.

I object to the principle that the modern piano should be made to sound like an older, inferior instrument.  Also, I think in this case it is possible to use the pedal all the way through the recitative - no, I know it, because I've done it. 

Sometimes going back to the instruments of the time can bring revelatory experiences.  But we cannot forever be slaves to the limitations and timbres of those instruments.  And, at the risk of sounding mystical, there are such thing as spiritual intentions which are not necessarily literal intentions.

This is why the phrase "composer's intentions," makes me want to vomit every time i hear it.  This repulsive combination of vowels and consonants is used simply as an excuse to get away with murder, and also to get away without thinking, which is nearly as bad (suicide). 

For this example in particular, it is absurd to say that "Beethoven's intentions" defined a specific amount of reverberation time for the notes in the recitative passage.  This sonata was written in 1802, and his hearing was already going by 1800.  So how could he hear the decay of an inferior fortepiano down to the miniscul degree, enough for us to claim righteously that such a thing was his intention?  If it was, then we actually have no business playing the Tempest sonata on a modern piano, because in that case his intention was locked with no chance of reprieve to the instrument on which he was composing (never mind the most famous Beethoven quote, "What do I care for you and your damn fiddle?")

Or it creates a whole potential for postmodern irony.  If Beethoven's "intention" was inextricably locked with his instrment, then every time we play op.106 we should leave out those notes that weren't possible on any instrument that existed when he wrote the piece.  This would logically be in line with his intentions.

The very idea makes me want to scream.  It evades applying a probing, searching mind to any piece and deciding things for ourselves.  A corrective idea several decades ago for Romantic excess has become fossilized Dogma, and people wonder why all pianists seem to sound the same.  Terrible!

Walter Ramsey

[iumonito]

Walter, I feel we usually agree, so I think we are closer that it would appear in our approach to this question.

I come to Op. 31#2 with the advantage of 2 centuries of interpretation and the benefit of having heard this piece, and played it, many more times than Beethoven did.  I come with the disadvantage of having never heard Beethoven play, nor of being in his head.

Between Beethoven and me there are a bunch of black dots on lines and a few signs Beethoven left, like p here and there, largo, allegro, adagio, etc.  and pedal markings, which alas may as well could have been left out.  He also left a few fingerings, which I currently not understand and usually do not follow.

When I said "The pedal marks are Beethoven's.  They shall be observed."  I was half-jokingly quoting Schnabel (I think).  I agree one should be curious and creative, and would add that you should play it the way it sounds right to you.

That said, I find modern students, particularly teenagers, are too quick to dismiss the written instructions on the basis that it can be played another way.  So be it.  Blurry harmonies are historically accurate and stylistically appropriate here.  I think you agree, since you play it with pedal as written.

Those clusters and silent notes are anachronistic.  This is not Ligeti or Normal Dello Joio.

And I take exception that the fortepiano is an inferior instrument.  It just is a different one.  If you don't like them, don't play them.  When I play Beethoven on the modern piano I am constantly aware that it is a different instrument.  Same thing when playing transcriptions.  All very worthwhile music that sounds great on the modern piano.

One last thing.  The halls now are much larger.  It kind of cancels out the increased resonance of the modern instruments.  Changing pedals sounds unbearably dry to me, so I don't.

I'll quote Landowska again half-jokingly.  You go ahead and play it your way, I'll keep playing it his.   

[counterpoint]

It's a debate about words, not about reality!

What does it mean physically, when you press the damper pedal:

all dampers lift off the strings, so the strings can resonance with the played notes.

So, if the resonances are too much - and on my piano, they are definitely too much - with the silent pressed keys (instead of the damper pedal) you can get a more appropriate resonance.

That's all, folks 

Perhaps someone has a solution for Waldstein Sonata Finale?
I use the pedal as Beethoven has indicated. but the sound is too thick and too disturbed.

[mikey6]

Walter, I feel we usually agree, so I think we are closer that it would appear in our approach to this question.

I come to Op. 31#2 with the advantage of 2 centuries of interpretation and the benefit of having heard this piece, and played it, many more times than Beethoven did.  I come with the disadvantage of having never heard Beethoven play, nor of being in his head.

Between Beethoven and me there are a bunch of black dots on lines and a few signs Beethoven left, like p here and there, largo, allegro, adagio, etc.  and pedal markings, which alas may as well could have been left out.  He also left a few fingerings, which I currently not understand and usually do not follow.

When I said "The pedal marks are Beethoven's.  They shall be observed."  I was half-jokingly quoting Schnabel (I think).  I agree one should be curious and creative, and would add that you should play it the way it sounds right to you.

That said, I find modern students, particularly teenagers, are too quick to dismiss the written instructions on the basis that it can be played another way.  So be it.  Blurry harmonies are historically accurate and stylistically appropriate here.  I think you agree, since you play it with pedal as written.

Those clusters and silent notes are anachronistic.  This is not Ligeti or Normal Dello Joio.

And I take exception that the fortepiano is an inferior instrument.  It just is a different one.  If you don't like them, don't play them.  When I play Beethoven on the modern piano I am constantly aware that it is a different instrument.  Same thing when playing transcriptions.  All very worthwhile music that sounds great on the modern piano.

One last thing.  The halls now are much larger.  It kind of cancels out the increased resonance of the modern instruments.  Changing pedals sounds unbearably dry to me, so I don't.

I'll quote Landowska again half-jokingly.  You go ahead and play it your way, I'll keep playing it his.   

I disagree somewhat but for the life of me, I cannot form my arguement into words so I will eave it at that

[ramseytheii]

I hope I didn't sound like a jerk, my rigtheous rage was not directed at you iumonto!  The premise that anything that is written must be done rather than thought about is all too common, and Alfred Brendel has also railed against those who recorded wrong notes in pieces because they appeared in the first editions. 

But to counter your final statement I leave Landowska's much less quoted, but still powerful comment: "If Rameau were alive today, and he told me to play his music in a certain way, I would say, 'No Monsieur; leave me alone.  Your music is beautiful, and it belongs to us now!'"

Walter Ramsey

Walter, I feel we usually agree, so I think we are closer that it would appear in our approach to this question.

I come to Op. 31#2 with the advantage of 2 centuries of interpretation and the benefit of having heard this piece, and played it, many more times than Beethoven did.  I come with the disadvantage of having never heard Beethoven play, nor of being in his head.

Between Beethoven and me there are a bunch of black dots on lines and a few signs Beethoven left, like p here and there, largo, allegro, adagio, etc.  and pedal markings, which alas may as well could have been left out.  He also left a few fingerings, which I currently not understand and usually do not follow.

When I said "The pedal marks are Beethoven's.  They shall be observed."  I was half-jokingly quoting Schnabel (I think).  I agree one should be curious and creative, and would add that you should play it the way it sounds right to you.

That said, I find modern students, particularly teenagers, are too quick to dismiss the written instructions on the basis that it can be played another way.  So be it.  Blurry harmonies are historically accurate and stylistically appropriate here.  I think you agree, since you play it with pedal as written.

Those clusters and silent notes are anachronistic.  This is not Ligeti or Normal Dello Joio.

And I take exception that the fortepiano is an inferior instrument.  It just is a different one.  If you don't like them, don't play them.  When I play Beethoven on the modern piano I am constantly aware that it is a different instrument.  Same thing when playing transcriptions.  All very worthwhile music that sounds great on the modern piano.

One last thing.  The halls now are much larger.  It kind of cancels out the increased resonance of the modern instruments.  Changing pedals sounds unbearably dry to me, so I don't.

I'll quote Landowska again half-jokingly.  You go ahead and play it your way, I'll keep playing it his.   

[iumonito]

Touche'.  Epatant.

[klm46]

Thanks for your replies, they've been helpful.

Can I please ask at what tempo you would play the Allegro sections at in the Tempest?  Remembering that throughout the piece these sections have to be at the same speed, and each has its own character, what metronome mark would you use (per minim).