Perf History Question for Liszt's Ballade No. 2

[john11inc]

At the Lento Assai (and subsequent, identical passages) I've sometimes heard the RH chords rolled in a very slow and dramatic manner.  Is there some history to this interpretation, or is it a compensation for people with smaller hands only?  I personally like the interpretation choice but would not want to emulate it if it has absolutely no standing.

[prongated]

But...why? I think performance choices should be made not just based on what's right and wrong. There's also such matter as taste - good taste based on shrewd musical judgement.

Incidentally, I can reach the chord, and if voiced properly, I think it's more beautiful when it's not rolled.

[john11inc]

I can also reach the chord.

The notion that performance choices should be made based solely on personal, artistic vision is really cute, but I'm asking more in the context of non-fantasy-land.  If only it were the case. . .

[pianisten1989]

I can also reach the chord.

The notion that performance choices should be made based solely on personal, artistic vision is really cute, but I'm asking more in the context of non-fantasy-land.  If only it were the case. . .

Dude, no need to be rude...

[tsaij]

this might not answer your question exactly, except to offer another opinion-- i'm not intimately familiar with lisztian performance practice, but in terms of non-fantasy-land, i think the text is pretty clear. the first edition (& the critical edition, i think, though i don't have it in front of me at the moment) is consistent with the manuscript which says only the fourth chord is rolled, both times.

[prongated]

The notion that performance choices should be made based solely on personal, artistic vision is really cute, but I'm asking more in the context of non-fantasy-land.  If only it were the case. . .

On the one hand, of course I'm not suggesting that performance choices should be based on personal musical and artistic judgement alone - and incidentally, here I do think what is written in the text should stand, also since Liszt very well knew how to write rolled chords - but on the other, surely these are what signify one's art!

On one level, if it's not at least partly the case, then I'm afraid you've missed the very first thing about romantic music. On another, I would really like to ask, what, if any, is wrong with personal, artistic vision? Or rather, what is with the obsession among certain musicians concerning "historically correct performance practise" (in keyboard music in particular)? While some have been useful and enlightening, some feels truly pedantic; and yeah, sorry, I do find your question here tending towards the pedantic also.

[john11inc]

On the one hand, of course I'm not suggesting that performance choices should be based on personal musical and artistic judgement alone - and incidentally, here I do think what is written in the text should stand, also since Liszt very well knew how to write rolled chords - but on the other, surely these are what signify one's art!

On one level, if it's not at least partly the case, then I'm afraid you've missed the very first thing about romantic music. On another, I would really like to ask, what, if any, is wrong with personal, artistic vision? Or rather, what is with the obsession among certain musicians concerning "historically correct performance practise" (in keyboard music in particular)? While some have been useful and enlightening, some feels truly pedantic; and yeah, sorry, I do find your question here tending towards the pedantic also.

I don't disagree with much you have to say here, now that you've amplified your statement.  However, this is for an exam, not for some recital or standard performance, where it has the potential to matter quite a bit more.  This is a situation where someone might tell me there is a right and wrong, as opposed to a good and bad.  I'm asking what is right.

There is nothing wrong with artistic vision; asking such a question as if I have claimed there was something is putting words in my mouth.  As well, it is an entirely different question than the one regarding historically informed performances.

[prongated]

There is nothing wrong with artistic vision; asking such a question as if I have claimed there was something is putting words in my mouth.  As well, it is an entirely different question than the one regarding historically informed performances.

The subject of this thread begins with, "Perf History Question"...

Anyway, no, I ask those questions not as a direct response to this thread. They're in response to what I personally observe as a phenomena in today's classical music scene. Obviously people's opinions to these questions interest me, hence why I ask them, since we're also on the page of "Perf History Question". But ah, maybe I (or someone else, if not already) will just start another thread for it

[john11inc]

The subject of this thread begins with, "Perf History Question"...

Anyway, no, I ask those questions not as a direct response to this thread. They're in response to what I personally observe as a phenomena in today's classical music scene. Obviously people's opinions to these questions interest me, hence why I ask them, since we're also on the page of "Perf History Question". But ah, maybe I (or someone else, if not already) will just start another thread for it

First, please direct yourself to the addendum in the thread title regarding it pertaining to Liszt's Ballade No. 2.

Second, please direct me to where you answered the question in the title regardless.

[viking]

this might not answer your question exactly, except to offer another opinion-- i'm not intimately familiar with lisztian performance practice, but in terms of non-fantasy-land, i think the text is pretty clear. the first edition (& the critical edition, i think, though i don't have it in front of me at the moment) is consistent with the manuscript which says only the fourth chord is rolled, both times.

Bingo!