Beethoven Appassionata 1st mov. Video

[nick]

nick

[birba]

I'm assuming you posted this  in order to hear reactions to your playing and interpretation, right?
I'm also assuming you're an amateur, right?  A very talented and gifted one, but certainly not ready for the professional stage.  The main fault I find in this performance is a steady unity of tempo.  I think, in general, it's a little slow, but I've heard it played at your tempo by wonderful musicians who really brought out the "appassionato" element of the piece.  You are going to be surprised when you go over it with a metronome, in bits and pieces, how much you slow down, speed up, skip rests, etc. (e.g.  The desending scale in meas. 47 and again in the reprise has to be at the EXACT tempo of the following episode.)  the whole movement will take on another character when you really feel the constant pulse throughout.

[nick]

I'm assuming you posted this  in order to hear reactions to your playing and interpretation, right?
I'm also assuming you're an amateur, right?  A very talented and gifted one, but certainly not ready for the professional stage.  The main fault I find in this performance is a steady unity of tempo.  I think, in general, it's a little slow, but I've heard it played at your tempo by wonderful musicians who really brought out the "appassionato" element of the piece.  You are going to be surprised when you go over it with a metronome, in bits and pieces, how much you slow down, speed up, skip rests, etc. (e.g.  The desending scale in meas. 47 and again in the reprise has to be at the EXACT tempo of the following episode.)  the whole movement will take on another character when you really feel the constant pulse throughout.

Yes and yes.

I have played it both ways, a steady tempo and this one without. I like this one better. Thanks for the comments.

nick

[quantum]

You've got the notes down, which deserves compliment in of itself.  Now I think you need to give a bit more appassionato to the piece.  I would have liked to hear more in dynamic contrasts.  There are a lot of ff and pp in this piece.  You are being a bit gentle with the storm, I'd like to be knocked off my feet by it.  I also think you need a bit more rhythmic decisiveness, especially with dotted figures.  The tempo you have chosen is not problematic, but rather you need you bring out the character of the piece within the tempo. 

[nick]

You've got the notes down, which deserves compliment in of itself.  Now I think you need to give a bit more appassionato to the piece.  I would have liked to hear more in dynamic contrasts.  There are a lot of ff and pp in this piece.  You are being a bit gentle with the storm, I'd like to be knocked off my feet by it.  I also think you need a bit more rhythmic decisiveness, especially with dotted figures.  The tempo you have chosen is not problematic, but rather you need you bring out the character of the piece within the tempo. 

Thanks for the comments.

The contrast was difficult for me as I even used the soft pedal for the softest parts, but possibly was not loud enough on ff's. I agree also that i could have put more appassionato into it, but was just pleased to play it with reasonable energy and gusto, and feel good playing it. I post the pieces to have a record of the pieces I love playing. I never play the piece the same way twice, so I do play it differently often.


Nick

[nick]

I gave the subject of tempo some thought, and come up with this: measure 36-37 i think, to me, should be slower than the vigorous measures 51 or the preceding theme. Otherwise, it feels like a march on measure 36 forward. It begs for a lyrical slowing down. Probably just me, but I have a hard time playing that at the same tempo, even though the urtext does not show any change in tempo between the parts. I have heard pianists play it both ways and enjoy them, I prefer the change in tempo there. I have also only heard one pianist play it with the pedaling indicated in the urtext edition, which to me is really not nearly as beautiful as pedaling throughout.

Nick

[prongated]

Nicely played. I liked some of your intentions throughout the piece (and I appreciate you trying to play it differently every time), but there are some that I think simply shouldn't be. For instance, that accentuation of certain LH notes in the 2nd subject of the exposition (in A-flat major). That section is marked pp and dolce, and the way you played it is the exact opposite! (I think you can have a bit more scope for agitation in the development, but nonetheless don't bring out, let alone accent, those LH chords!) After that, no accents in the descending scale that follows.

And as has been mentioned, you need to tighten up your rhythm. The first 2 lines catch a lot of people out - barely anyone gets it right the first time! Remember that the small note is essentially dotted - it's a semiquaver (or sixteenth note), but you played it like a quaver (or eight note) every time! Also note that the last note of the phrase is only a crotchet (or quarter note) - doesn't have to be precisely that if you like, but don't hold onto it too long either!

The first ritard starts in bar 12, not sooner. Also, make sure the rests aren't too short. It's better to make the rests too long than too short - it gives the music more room to breathe and grow.

I assume you know that the coda is piu allegro? Anyway, yes, as has also been mentioned, follow the dynamic markings more closely. For example, after the chords in the coda, the melody starts out piano. It'll give you more scope for a dramatic build up too.

Otherwise, very nice really! It's far from an easy piece to play...

[nick]

Nicely played. I liked some of your intentions throughout the piece (and I appreciate you trying to play it differently every time), but there are some that I think simply shouldn't be. For instance, that accentuation of certain LH notes in the 2nd subject of the exposition (in A-flat major). That section is marked pp and dolce, and the way you played it is the exact opposite! (I think you can have a bit more scope for agitation in the development, but nonetheless don't bring out, let alone accent, those LH chords!) After that, no accents in the descending scale that follows.

And as has been mentioned, you need to tighten up your rhythm. The first 2 lines catch a lot of people out - barely anyone gets it right the first time! Remember that the small note is essentially dotted - it's a semiquaver (or sixteenth note), but you played it like a quaver (or eight note) every time! Also note that the last note of the phrase is only a crotchet (or quarter note) - doesn't have to be precisely that if you like, but don't hold onto it too long either!

The first ritard starts in bar 12, not sooner. Also, make sure the rests aren't too short. It's better to make the rests too long than too short - it gives the music more room to breathe and grow.

I assume you know that the coda is piu allegro? Anyway, yes, as has also been mentioned, follow the dynamic markings more closely. For example, after the chords in the coda, the melody starts out piano. It'll give you more scope for a dramatic build up too.

Otherwise, very nice really! It's far from an easy piece to play...

Thanks for the lengthy response Prongated.
I agree with your point about the sixteenth note not being short enough at times in my playing, especially in the 2nd subject of the exposition (in A-flat major). But in that same section I don't get what you are saying about me accenting the left hand certain notes. I do know I played with more volume in melody r.h. than was written. Guess it just felt correct personally.
The coda being pie allegro? I did play it much faster than the tempo of the piece in general, so felt that was fine.

Do you know there is no pedal marking until measure 124? Who plays it with that marking? Not many that I found. So it may be your opinion it is ok to ignore certain markings and not others, which is fine with me as you can see by my playing . To me, even though there is no retard right before the exposition in A flat, it really begs of one. So if the composer just forgot to put pedal markings, than maybe a retard was forgoten as well, I don't know. Certain markings are more important to me than others. I am no scholar when it comes to interpretation and following a score to the "t". I do want correct note values and notes particularly, but sometimes dynamics I feel a bit differently, and since I play for pleasure, ...

Nick

[prongated]

Thanks for the lengthy response Prongated.

Welcome

But in that same section I don't get what you are saying about me accenting the left hand certain notes. I do know I played with more volume in melody r.h. than was written. Guess it just felt correct personally.

You also played with more volume in the LH, and for me, the problem is with the way you played it - it sounds as though some are intentionally accented, and as result, it sounds coarse. If you intend it to be bold and thick, make the sound "mesh" more (so, instead of articulating each note, don't bring out top/bottom note - let them all have the same sound/voicing so that it's more atmospheric). That way, it'll sound bold, brave, dignified, and more elegant - closer to the "dolce" instruction I believe.

The coda being pie allegro? I did play it much faster than the tempo of the piece in general, so felt that was fine.

Cool. Just checking ^^

Do you know there is no pedal marking until measure 124? Who plays it with that marking? Not many that I found. So it may be your opinion it is ok to ignore certain markings and not others, which is fine with me as you can see by my playing .

Well...gee, I have to say I'm very uncomfortable with that you know...I think that pedal marking in Beethoven is different to the other markings that Beethoven did in his music - it's just that, where he wrote it down, he really wanted it there. I mean, if you think about it, no-one in that century or previously, except Chopin, ever came close to writing down exactly the sort of pedalling the composer's after. But, if you like...

To me, even though there is no retard right before the exposition in A flat, it really begs of one.

...OK. Then for that first ritard (that's how it's spelled by the way, not "retard" ), you may want to try experimenting a little bit...it's just that, to me, you're losing the sense of surprise that came after the ritard. Make it more gradual - don't start at a slower speed straight away. As such, you may want to consider if playing those bass notes (Db Db Db C) slower than the rest of the passage is really getting the effect you want.

...but, just my opinion of course. Take it for what it's worth as always!

[nick]

 I mean, if you think about it, no-one in that century or previously, except Chopin, ever came close to writing down exactly the sort of pedalling the composer's after. But, if you like...

On this, can you direct me to a link as I am most interested in this information. I couldn't find it when I looked some time ago. thanks!

Other comments we can just agree to disagree, with the exception of the "pp" in the exposition, although I wasn't trying to make it particularly loud, just not pp.
Thanks again!

Nick

[prongated]

On this, can you direct me to a link as I am most interested in this information. I couldn't find it when I looked some time ago. thanks!

Link? What link? Just look through the works of Beethoven, Schumann, Brahms, Haydn, Mozart, Liszt...and compare with how much pedal marking Chopin put in his music. Chopin pretty much tried to indicate how one should pedal in his work - it showed some interesting pedalling in certain works, although many just don't work.

If you really have to read it from a book, then maybe you can try Jim Samson's books on Chopin's works.

[nick]

Link? What link? Just look through the works of Beethoven, Schumann, Brahms, Haydn, Mozart, Liszt...and compare with how much pedal marking Chopin put in his music. Chopin pretty much tried to indicate how one should pedal in his work - it showed some interesting pedalling in certain works, although many just don't work.

If you really have to read it from a book, then maybe you can try Jim Samson's books on Chopin's works.

Just wondering where you got the info that Beethoven may not have put in pedal markings even though he wanted them. No particular media, just any place. I tried finding it and cannot. I will look in jim samsons book as you suggest, but if he does not reference Beethoven, no help.

maurice