How do I interpret piano music?

[danhuyle]

I'm at the point where I can learn whatever I want to play. It's making the transition from intermediate to advanced level.

Surprisingly, there some advanced pieces that are very easy memorize. Easy to memorize does not mean easy.

I can beat around the bushes all day long and play easier pieces like Burgmuller Op100, Mozart Sonatas, Czerny studies etc.

Sure I can phrase at intermediate level and then everything falls apart when I step into advanced territory.

[xerula]

The title of your post asks a question that is as broad and fundamental as wondering "how do I play the piano?", or "how do I make music?" This degree of puzzlement merits an essay in response, so I am going to give you one.

First of all, the way you write about, for example, Mozart sonatas, reveals a certain naivety about the interpretational demands of technically simpler repertoire, and about your concept of interpretation itself. I think traveling much deeper into the music you already play is going to be key to your development, whether in tackling "simple" or "advanced" repertoire.

Even concert pianists who play the most demanding romantic pieces by Liszt or Rachmaninoff, regard Mozart sonatas as incredibly challenging and elusive on an interpretational level. In fact, the core virtuosic romantic repertoire is often more approachable, because its sentiments and gestures are worn "on the sleeve", and there is not such an extreme sense of exposure.

But let's back up a bit - what do you think interpretation actually *is*?

"Sure I can phrase at an intermediate level..." you say, as if this means you have mastered the soul and wit of the Mozart sonatas.

Sure you can phrase... but what about building phrases of phrases of phrases, to create a sustained narrative structure that tells a story full of questions, surprises, human characters and emotions? What about the nuanced balancing of the inner voices of chords, or of one voice against another, to paint shades of hope against darkness, joy against vulnerability? And doing this not just with minutely contrasted dynamics, but using subtle shifts of articulation and rubato? And as for rubato, what about judging the micro-temporal adjustments necessary to make cadences dovetail just so? What about capturing the essence of a run or flourish by ascending to scarcely believable peaks of smoothness and evenness and gradations of touch? What about the spiritual quality of the music? What about a million other barely perceptible things that make all the difference?

I have to laugh, really, when you say that playing Mozart sonatas at this "advanced level" you have reached where you can "learn anything you want to play" would be "beating around the bush". (I am not laughing at you, because as a kid I reached the same false conclusions myself.) Might I gently suggest that a serious classical musician would find such statements absurd. After all, some of the most formidable technicians of our age devote years to contemplating Mozart sonatas. And have you listened to the recordings by Brendel, Pires, Uchida? Does your playing of the sonatas yet rank amongst these glories?

Once you have reconsidered all these things, and updated your concepts of technical proficiency to match the demands of expressing a new level of detail, fluency and personality, I don't think you will be asking such generalized questions anymore... instead of "how do I interpret piano music?", it will be "in this specific modulation, could I let the melody linger very slightly, with a gentle diminuendo, to increase a sense of unfulfillable longing?"... or "exactly how should I stagger the loudness and staccatissimo of these chords, to convey a certain dismissive brutality?"... etc. etc.

By all means start tackling more virtuosic pieces. But it sounds like you also need to start tackling K545 again, with a view to communicating something vital.

And I don't mean to encourage this view of a dichotomy between technique and artistry. The idea that interpretation can just be tacked onto a piece at the end of a course of technical training is a mistake that will lead you to dry and fatally uninteresting pianism. Your interpretative ability defines you as a musician, and you should have developed it alongside everything else; or rather, it should have become in some way unified with your technical intentions.

As I wrote recently wrote to another forum member: "Of course, the more advanced you are, the more generally fluent your playing; but even in the simplest piece, the serious pianist will always be able to find something to struggle with to the point of exhaustion."

I am not saying that a great concert pianist would have any particular technical problem with anything in, say, the Anna Magdalena notebook; yet if that pianist were going to seriously perform or record the notebook, be assured that he or she would spend several days peering into every nook and cranny of those pieces, turning them over and over in their minds, seeking, searching for an expressive vision that will capture hearts and minds. This in turn will bring them to some limits of their technical ability - how quietly and absolutely evenly they can give shape to a particular passage, how elegantly and wittily they can turn out of a trill... The interpretative and technical requirements are of the same nature, and, in the end, pianism is a oneness. If you can truly interpret the Mozart sonatas, the door to everything else will be wide open.

[nyiregyhazi]

I'm at the point where I can learn whatever I want to play. It's making the transition from intermediate to advanced level.

Surprisingly, there some advanced pieces that are very easy memorize. Easy to memorize does not mean easy.

I can beat around the bushes all day long and play easier pieces like Burgmuller Op100, Mozart Sonatas, Czerny studies etc.

Sure I can phrase at intermediate level and then everything falls apart when I step into advanced territory.

Controversial maybe, but I'd advise listening to a great pianist playing something very simple. First spend time analysing how he phrases. Then try to emulate it. Bach/Siloti played by Gilels would be an excellent piece to use.

[kellyc]

Hi Dan. Yours is not an uncommon problem, especially among pianists. They become so wrapped up in the technical aspects of there music, that they never learn to learn the music itself. Great music doesn't just happen, no matter how silly movies and such show us it being done. A great piece of music is as well thought out as a brilliant mathematical formula. So the first question to really ask you is, how strong is your theory? How many courses on Harmony, counterpoint, orchestration, etc. have you taken. If you truly don't understand the music, you won't be able to play it the way you would like. To a large extent this is like a great actor saying there lines in a play. It is the same words that anyone else could read, but it comes out oh so differently when they say them. If your answer to the questions on knowledge of theory is that you really haven't delved deeply into it, then go take some courses. It will help.

Kelly

[danhuyle]

Hi Dan. Yours is not an uncommon problem, especially among pianists. They become so wrapped up in the technical aspects of there music, that they never learn to learn the music itself.

Kelly

I used to fall into that trap, especially with rhythm and pedaling. It's either something with playing from memory or focusing on the difficulties of a piece rather than the simplicity.

[phillip21]

......... I am not saying that a great concert pianist would have any particular technical problem with anything in, say, the Anna Magdalena notebook; yet if that pianist were going to seriously perform or record the notebook, be assured that he or she would spend several days peering into every nook and cranny of those pieces, turning them over and over in their minds, seeking, searching for an expressive vision that will capture hearts and minds. This in turn will bring them to some limits of their technical ability - how quietly and absolutely evenly they can give shape to a particular passage, how elegantly and wittily they can turn out of a trill... The interpretative and technical requirements are of the same nature, and, in the end, pianism is a oneness. If you can truly interpret the Mozart sonatas, the door to everything else will be wide open.

Thank you Xerula for that really excellent essay, with which I thoroughly agree.  I have recently returned to preparing some 'simple' sonatinas by Diabelli and Kuhlau for my YouTube channel, and am constantly amazed by the musical challenges of phrasing, tempo changes between movements and sections of movements, articulation etc. etc, that they present

[werq34ac]

Xerula is exactly right. The "easy" pieces get harder and harder as we grow musically. A few years back I though Traumerei was ridiculously simple. Then I heard Horowitz's playing it with utmost mastery of the music, the piano, and the art of expressing oneself. It was pure artistry in that simple little piece. So I took a look at the score and began sight-reading it. After playing through it once, I decided never to perform it unless I was absolutely confident I could play it with a respectable amount of artistry.

And Mozart Sonatas? Far from easy (well.. I haven't played one since i was 11 or so, but from what I hear from others, I'm not to keen on learning one yet). Something about puberty makes Mozart just frustratingly difficult in terms of interpretation. I've heard Mozart is played best when you are either under 10 or over 70.

As for your original question, ask yourself what is interpretation? It's how the performer sees the music and effectively communicates it to the audience.
 There is two parts. First of all, you have to decide how you envision the music. How does the music flow? What sort of character is this passage? What sort of expression do I want to have?
The
 The second part is how you are going to communicate that to the audience. Xerula pretty much hit the main points. You have to decide on your pedaling, articulation, dynamics, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. and utilize them in order for what you envision in your head to actually speak.