Is playing the base note and the melody note not together acceptable?

[pytheamateur]

This is Ilya Itin playing Chopin's Nocturne in D Flat Major, Op.27, No.2.

I hear that on more than 10 occasions, his base note would sound a fraction of a second later than the melody note in the right hand, especially on the first beat (e.g. bars 5, 7, 8, 13
, 14, 22, 26, 29, 31, 34, 49, 51, 60, 66, 70).

Can you hear this or is it just my ear?  I wonder whether it is some kind of aural illusion in that it takes longer for the base note to reach the ears?

It's the first time I've heard this and I find it quite irritating.  If it's not acceptable practice then this is quite sloppy playing coming from a winner of the Leeds Piano Competition.

[alessandro]

Hi pytheamateur, hi everybody,

You've noticed this very well ; "bass-note after melody-note".   This is more specific than the title of this topic, but for me the answer is two times yes.   Playing the melody-note after the bass note is of course very mainstream, it's part of the rubato, of the singing.  But, indeed, the bass-note before the melody is I think kind of new in piano-world (some people still consider it not done).   I don't think you can find this approach more than five years ago.   Jean-Marc Luisada for example, a Chopin connoisseur, only started doing this "bass-note before melody-note"-thing about two years ago, after exploring Chopin for more than 20 years.   And of course, too much of it is irritating, but that applies for both ways.  
No, for me it is more than acceptable, and not easy to do it beautifully without making it sound weird.  
I may be very liberal ; but I like a lot the freedom taken in interpreting music (like for instance what Bozhanov often does with Chopin), what I'm looking for after all is beauty.

Very kind greetings.

[mike_lang]

This may take some convincing for me (i.e., multiple hearings).  If I had to guess, the purpose of this effect is to give the melody a sense of leading, that is, to further define its role as soloist, but the trouble with having an asynchronous attack on the piano is the nature of the attack itself: an orchestra can be slightly late or behind in such a passage as this, but the effect would not be so pronounced.  For this reason, I'm prone to hear this more as an affectation than as a legitimate interpretative device.

Mike

[nyiregyhazi]

But, indeed, the bass-note before the melody is I think kind of new in piano-world (some people still consider it not done).   I don't think you can find this approach more than five years ago. 

Are you kidding? This is age-old. A very ignorant school of pseudo-intellectuals succeeded in virtually banning it for many years (despite Mozart and Chopin's explicit description of this as being good practise). Fortunately, it's now starting to return.

[pytheamateur]

Are you kidding? This is age-old. A very ignorant school of pseudo-intellectuals succeeded in virtually banning it for many years (despite Mozart and Chopin's explicit description of this as being good practise). Fortunately, it's now starting to return.

I think what Alessandro actually meant is that it is "bass-note AFTER the melody" that is new in the piano world, as he acknowledged that melody after the bass-note is mainstream.

So, are you advocating "bass-note AFTER the melody" or "bass-note BEFORE the melody"?

[nyiregyhazi]

I think what Alessandro actually meant is that it is "bass-note AFTER the melody" that is new in the piano world, as he acknowledged that melody after the bass-note is mainstream.

So, are you advocating "bass-note AFTER the melody" or "bass-note BEFORE the melody"?

Ah, that could make sense. While less common though, this is nothing "new" either. Generally, whatever note you wish to give extra prominence to comes last- which can also include inner voices and bass notes. Pianists had been using these techniques for many years. Also, neither Chopin's nor Mozart's descriptions includes any rule about having to come before or after. They just mention displacement between a steady left and free right hand.

[rc]

Yes I've read Mozart and Chopin's descriptions of rubato as well and it can be an interesting way to change the expression in a melody.  Try playing around with it in a slow cantabile movement.  I found playing the melody note ahead of the beat adds a sense of urgency, impatience, eagerness.  Playing it behind the beat can prolong a dissonance, savory sweetness, or sadness.

It can be easy to play it as an affectation but when I get comfortable it feels natural and gives a vitality to the melody.  (must admit, I got lazy after experimenting with this and reverted to the comfortable practice of strict rhythm)

One of my favorite musicians is Tom Waits and I find him to be a good example of rhythmic expressivity.  In his new album is a song 'Pay Me', a wistful song where he's incredibly free with the rhythm.  A contrast would be 'Hell Broke Luce', an anti-war song imitating a military march, and he uses more strict rhythm.  Both sound right.

The Ilya Itin video isn't like anything I've experimented with...  I could see it being the melody anticipating the beat, with a rit at the cadence, but it often winds up sounding like the accompaniment is following the melody.  I think the simplest explaination is how pytheamateur put it, a bass-after effect.  I don't mind it though, it gives an emphasis to the beginning of the next phrase and the overall effect is still very smooth.  I wonder what Ilya Itin's intentions are...

[bbush]

Thanks, pythe, for starting this thread and pointing out a VERY interesting option for romantic interpretation (I can't see it working for classical pieces) and for sharing Ilya Itin's fine version of one of my favorite Nocturnes!

Bruce

[scottmcc]

I direct the readers of this thread to Beethoven op 31 no 1, first mvt.  Clearly the Ludwig van very specifically wrote for the bass note to be played after the melody, and he did so to create an effect.  This has often been said to be a joke though, or a parody of an unskilled player who can't seem to coordinate the hands.