Question about chopin scherzo 2

[gn622]

is the section marked "con anima" repeated identically the second and last time?

and what does con anima means? thanks a lot

[mcdiddy1]

I love that piece, I am playing it now. It means more animated so basically faster. You probably should not play it the same way twice. Rubato is Chopin's calling card and it makes a more rewarding musical experience to play it in a way that is subtly different from the first time.

[gn622]

Its actually my favorite piece ever 

what i meant, is the notes exactly the same? or are there some diffrences?

[mcdiddy1]

Actually the con anima section is repeated three times. The first two are identical.The notes are different the last time before it enters the big coda.

[pianoplayjl]

I think con anima literally means 'with animation'. 

[thinkgreenlovepiano]

I've always thought con anima meant "with soul"
Anima= soul in Italian...

 

[mcdiddy1]

the Webster definition CON ANIMA means in a spirited manner —used as a direction in music. Another says with animation so apperently both definitions are right. I think this translates into playing the music a bit quicker.

[jgallag]

I checked my score, just in case, but my gut told me it is never the same. I was right. The first time, in bar 100, the right hand plays a Db-Ab-Db chord, and the Ab remains in the next two bars. In the second instance, bar 233, a Gb is added, putting more emphasis on the b7 in the chord and changing its character, and the third instance the theme is extended going into the coda. If this isn't what you have, you should consider purchasing the Paderewski edition. Harmonically, the forward motion into the following section gains more strength with each repetition of the idea.

@McDiddy: There are no tempo changes in this score anywhere, regardless of what may be performance practice. Make sure that the dotted half remains the same length throughout the piece.

It would be best to go with thinkgreen's answer. It makes the most sense, considering that Jung (or was it Freud?) chose the same word to represent the feminine spirit inside men. Also, to animate is "to bring to life." Therefore, if we consider etymology, it's best to consider anima as spirit or soul rather than faster.

[mcdiddy1]

I checked my score, just in case, but my gut told me it is never the same. I was right. The first time, in bar 100, the right hand plays a Db-Ab-Db chord, and the Ab remains in the next two bars. In the second instance, bar 233, a Gb is added, putting more emphasis on the b7 in the chord and changing its character, and the third instance the theme is extended going into the coda. If this isn't what you have, you should consider purchasing the Paderewski edition. Harmonically, the forward motion into the following section gains more strength with each repetition of the idea.

@McDiddy: There are no tempo changes in this score anywhere, regardless of what may be performance practice. Make sure that the dotted half remains the same length throughout the piece.

It would be best to go with thinkgreen's answer. It makes the most sense, considering that Jung (or was it Freud?) chose the same word to represent the feminine spirit inside men. Also, to animate is "to bring to life." Therefore, if we consider etymology, it's best to consider anima as spirit or soul rather than faster.

I looked at my music and found the changes you were talking about. What is funny is I play through this, play it differently and never realized it was different from the first time. Simply out of ignorance, what makes Paderewski the foremost editor on Chopin? Is if because of the Polish connection?  I have never been a fan of arguing who is the better editor although I have purchased Paderewski in the past .

There are many tempo changes in this piece. There is a poco riten before the animata section, there is an animate marking , calando, smorzando, piu mosso, etc and that is where the performance practice comes from. It also indicates a tempo ( original tempo) which indicates that there was some tempo change through out the piece. Style-wise Chopin's music is normally played with a sense of rubato so the perform should have tempo changes in good taste.

I argue you if you want to bring something to life musically you need to make musical events happen quicker. They opposite dying away or losing life would be morendo which is performed slower. How eles would you translate spirit or soul into music? If it does not translate musically then, I doubt it would be put in the music.

[gn622]

well i guess its better that this section is slightly different each time its repeats, but if the left hand changes its gonna be hell, does it? 

[mcdiddy1]

well i guess its better that this section is slightly different each time its repeats, but if the left hand changes its gonna be hell, does it? 

What do you mean?

[gn622]

well in the con anima section the left hand plays series of 6 notes that to me, are very hard to memorize

so i was wondering if the left hand notes changes the next time the section is repeated?

[pianowolfi]

Con anima= with feeling, with soul.
I don't understand your first question. You have the score and you can look yourself if it's different or not. If you're not able/willing to do that, I honestly can't imagine why you tackle a piece like this.

[gn622]

its definitively a huge challenge for me but its my favorite piece and merely playing it on my spare  time for fun, i can already play the first con anima section but since im a very slow reader i asked if they repeat or not

[gn622]

i tried reading the left hand  notes in the second con anima to compare it with the first, but being the slow reader i am im having HUGE mental pain doing that


i just want to know  if the left hand notes changes in the second repeat, if they do , then i cant wait to start the slow section 

[jgallag]

mcdiddy: I'm sorry that I don't have an answer to your question, but I can get one eventually. I'm at home on break and don't have access to my teacher. I merely forward the advice of a pianist who studied under Adele Marcus, Herbert Stessin, Nelita True, and Thomas Schumacher, and who completed her B.M., M.M., and D.M.A. at Juilliard. I also happen to agree with her musical tastes and very much enjoy her playing. There is no right or wrong answer. However, I firmly state that con anima is not a tempo marking.

gn622: The left hand notes remain the same. Also, there is no slow section. There are simply less notes in it. I believe Artur Rubinstein's recording demonstrates this.

[mcdiddy1]

mcdiddy: I'm sorry that I don't have an answer to your question, but I can get one eventually. I'm at home on break and don't have access to my teacher. I merely forward the advice of a pianist who studied under Adele Marcus, Herbert Stessin, Nelita True, and Thomas Schumacher, and who completed her B.M., M.M., and D.M.A. at Juilliard. I also happen to agree with her musical tastes and very much enjoy her playing. There is no right or wrong answer. However, I firmly state that con anima is not a tempo marking.

gn622: The left hand notes remain the same. Also, there is no slow section. There are simply less notes in it. I believe Artur Rubinstein's recording demonstrates this.

That's a shame because I like to play from the most historical correct editions rather than editors who tend to take liberties in notating the music which is French contradictory to the composer's intent. 

If con anima is not a tempo marking, what is it? How do you play in a spirited manner without changing the tempo at all. I very much doubt Chopin,s intention was to create a scherzo which is supposes to be menacing and full of emotion to be played  with a specific rigid tempo. Of course it is  an expressive mark and deciding to be change the tempo or not is an intperative decision. However historically and stylistically I think the music favors slight modicifications in tempo.

[jgallag]

That's a shame because I like to play from the most historical correct editions rather than editors who tend to take liberties in notating the music which is French contradictory to the composer's intent. 

If con anima is not a tempo marking, what is it? How do you play in a spirited manner without changing the tempo at all. I very much doubt Chopin,s intention was to create a scherzo which is supposes to be menacing and full of emotion to be played  with a specific rigid tempo. Of course it is  an expressive mark and deciding to be change the tempo or not is an intperative decision. However historically and stylistically I think the music favors slight modicifications in tempo.

I'm confused as to why this is such an issue for you. Do you know something about the Paderewski edition that I don't? I apologize that I respect the advice of my professor, but she has proven to me that she knows what she's doing. And would you please post a recording where someone plays faster at the con anima section? There is a poco ritenuto marking two bars before it, but most recordings I know carry over the same tempo from the beginning to the con anima section. And if con anima were a tempo marking, why not write piu mosso? Or accelerando? Chopin's already indicated the piece should be played presto, and he's made it "faster" by putting more attacks per measure. Why would this section need to be even faster? I would argue that "spirit" could have as much to do with dymanics and articulation as it does with tempo, and as a good pianist shouldn't one have more than an increase in tempo at his/her disposal to provoke more excitement and passion in a passage?

[mcdiddy1]

I'm confused as to why this is such an issue for you. Do you know something about the Paderewski edition that I don't? I apologize that I respect the advice of my professor, but she has proven to me that she knows what she's doing. And would you please post a recording where someone plays faster at the con anima section? There is a poco ritenuto marking two bars before it, but most recordings I know carry over the same tempo from the beginning to the con anima section. And if con anima were a tempo marking, why not write piu mosso? Or accelerando? Chopin's already indicated the piece should be played presto, and he's made it "faster" by putting more attacks per measure. Why would this section need to be even faster? I would argue that "spirit" could have as much to do with dymanics and articulation as it does with tempo, and as a good pianist shouldn't one have more than an increase in tempo at his/her disposal to provoke more excitement and passion in a passage?

No issue for me. I am just saying I like to use editions that are better based on historical accuracy rather than word of mouth. I don't claim to know about the Paderewski editions. On that I am igonorant, but for me it is better to know why an edition is better rather than word of mouth. I don't have any loyalty to any edition so I am not bashing anyone who does, just stating an opinion.

On the other point, like you said there is a poco ritendo. Logicially, doesn't that prove the piece is not all in one tempo? All I am saying is there is slight swaying of tempo (rubato) so the tempo may appear to be the same but when you listen to is carefully there are slight accelerating and slowing down of tempo. There is a pui mosso marking in the piece and in my opinion con anima is there instead of pui mosso to encourage the performer to make more expressive choices than simply going faster. Presto is just a general tempo, you can varying degree of a fast tempo. If you heard the piece played at the exact same speed, with no alterations of tempo I think you would find the piece much more hollow sounding.

With the dynamics and articulation comment, I doubt it would be an articulation change because the section is to be placed legato, right? I think you are right about con anima could be indicate a change in dynamic phrasing however i find it hard to classify con anima as a dynamic meaning getting softer, because they would have written morendo.I think you could argue by increasing tempo and dynamics, you create more spirited effect in this case. It is just to me a hard sell to say con anima is a dynamic marking because you have energetic life in a soft passage also. Anyways heres an example of a performance with changes in tempo that is pretty common

[jgallag]

I believe you and I are miscommunicating. I am not talking about rubato, which I believe you are. I'm talking about a marked change in base tempo of a section. I think of tempo and rubato in this way: every piece or section of a piece has a base tempo, which I think of when one says tempo, and rubato encompasses inconsequential fluctuations in that tempo, but not a changing of the base tempo as a piu mosso or meno mosso or new tempo marking would indicate. In regards to markings like the poco ritenuto, I would regard them as "guided rubato." In other words, for the remainder of the section you must make your rubato decisions based on cadences, phrasing, form, and harmonies, but here Chopin has told you what kind of rubato he wants and for how long. Apart from the beginning in Bb minor, where Li and Argerich and everyone else take amazing liberties with tempo, once he reaches the key of Db (before the ritenuto and con anima) his base tempo is relatively consistent, with a slight accelerando into the end of the scherzo.

And I did not say con anima is a dynamic marking; I said you have as much basis calling it a tempo marking as you do a dynamic marking. By the way, I have an a tempo marking above the con anima in parentheses, indicating that in one of the historical editions Chopin had that marking there, which by your logic would mean that con anima is not a tempo marking, since that would be redundant. If Chopin wants you to add a little more soul and spirit (both are valid meanings of anima), to me that means he'd like you to pay even more attention to the phrasing and harmonic changes and this section, and to really listen to the implications of the notes he's written, and play with a little more soul and spirit. It's really hard to describe what that means in terms of tempo, dynamics, and articulation, since it is a subjective term. Composers enjoy doing that. Perhaps another good example is the term dolce: sweet. It's not the same as piano, which often accompanies it, so what is it? It's not a tempo marking, it's not an articulation marking, it's not a dynamic marking either. It's a mood or attitude marking, like con anima. So, con anima does not mean faster in the same way that agitato does not mean faster. If it did, don't you think the term presto agitato would be slightly redundant?

As for recordings, this man was said to be the authoritative interpreter of Chopin:

And if it helps with the Paderewski issue, here is the first paragraph from the editorial comments: "The principal aim of the Editorial Committee has been to establish a text which fully reveals Chopin's thought and corresponds to his intentions as closely as possible. For this reason the present edition has been based primarily on Chopin's autograph manuscripts, copies approved by him and first editions. The Committee has had to take into account the fact that even though a manuscript may have served as a basis for a first edition, it is not always the final version of any particular piece. Chopin frequently changed details of his compositions up to the very last moment. So much is clear not only from contemporary sources, but also from variants between original editions and manuscripts. Such variants, moreover, cannot possibly be considered to be engraver's errors or editorial alterations. The manuscripts will always be the prime source for the textual verification of Chopin's works. But although no effort has been spared, it has not always been possible to discover or study a given manuscript. The Editorial Committee has also consulted recent editions for purposes of comparison."

So while they do not claim to be "authoritative," they claim to have done their homework, at the very least. They also give detailed descriptions of where manuscripts disagreed. Interestingly enough, it says that the poco ritenuto indications were only found in the attested copy of the manuscript in the National Library of Warsaw and the original German edition, but not in Chopin's manuscript or in the original French edition.

[mcdiddy1]

I really appreciate this reply. I think you hit the nail right on the head. Thanks for clearing up what you meant. I agree with about everything you said expecially about tempo. Only issue we disagree with is playing with a little soul and sprit.

Attitude and  Mood markings are more subjective in the degree elements that are changed (dynamics, articulation, phrasing, etc) but that does not mean you cannot define the parts you must change. For example dolce, you may want a slower tempo, slower dynamic, smoother articulation and to go in the other direction would be inappropriate. The problem is  "pay even more attention to the phrasing and harmonic changes and this section, and to really listen to the implications of the notes he's written, and play with a little more soul and spirit." does not really communicate what to do phyically on the piano. Physically on the piano, the keys can either be played quicker or slower, held longer or shorter and the performer can only control these aspects of the key. You can look and listen all you want but you must physically make a decision in order to achieve the effect you want musicially. I don't want to get very technical and scientific but all the moods must come down to the basic elements physically at some point. A mood marking to me is a combination of musically elements, not just a mysterious category that is felt by the performer and the listener. The insturment is minipulated to produce sound that mimics the emotions we people and can easily be decipered by the performer.

For me telling someone to play with more soul and life is very unclear and you have to break it down to what the physical actions on the piano are. If you cannot describe it in a way the performer can execute then the mood marking loses its meaning. What you said before about paying attention to the phrasing and harmonic changes, implication etc is important to understanding the degree of change of tempo and dynamics you must take and when but it is certainly not a mysterious form and can be figured out.

Agitato means excited and getting faster, so presto agitato would not be redundant at all. It would just mean in a fast tempo and having a tempo with elements of slow and parts that speed.

Thanks for the info about Paderewski. Sounds like a great edition and probably will be the edition I choose next time I buy Chopin music

[jgallag]

I agree with you that it is nice to have specifics, but let me use the example to clarify what I mean by the use of mood, on the subject of agitato in this scherzo. The agitato appears at m. 492, but it parallels a section with the same melody and similar figuration at m.m. 310 and 412. First off, when I had my first lesson on this piece, my teacher turned to the agitato and said, "Can you play agitated without speeding up?" Naturally, I could, because I have a great agitato ( ) and have to work more on being lyrical. However, the other sections with this melody are not agitato, they're actually espressivo. I played all three sections in the same tempo, as my teacher asked, and in the espressivo I brought out the soprano and made longer lines while in the agitato I brought out the alto and followed the much shorter phrasing Chopin has indicated. They obviously didn't sound the same, especially since I played the espressivo pp as indicated a few bars before, and the agitato f as indicated a few bars before, but both still had an agitated feel to them. After puzzling over it for a while, my teacher finally caught that I was rushing the triplets in all sections, and while it was fine for the agitato section, it was too uneasy for the espressivo. I didn't change the overall tempo in either section, but I let the triplets in the espressivo expand to their full value and the problem was fixed. So, in the end, I do believe there are specific things you do to change the mood in these places, but you need to think beyond basic tempo markings, dynamics, and articulations that the composer could have easily indicated otherwise. In addition, the changes you make for different moods vary from piece to piece.

In the way that relates to con anima, I would approach it this way: does the music here have soul/spirit? No? Why not? Is there something too robotic about the playing? Does it get a little off-kilter somewhere? Is there something in the music I am/the student is not observing? Are any notes swallowed up? Are any rhythmic values distorted by the rubato? In other words, the marking is not like crescendo, where you can say "Yes, I am getting louder" or piu mosso, where you can say "Yes, I am getting faster." It's like cooking. You taste it, and if it isn't good, you do some sleuthing to figure out what ingredients are too present and what ingredients are missing. Chopin can trust that all interpreters will understand the feeling as the same thing when he writes something like con anima or agitato, and the slight differences in meaning from person to person are what makes listening to multiple interpretations of the same piece an enjoyable experience.

This is, at least, how I interpret mood markings. You know it when you hear it, but you have to tinker with the musical elements a bit to get it to sound just right. And as a response to you, what do you do when you tell a student to play the con anima a little faster and it comes out agitato, or the agitato a little faster and it comes out con anima? I think this would be a lot easier to understand if we could see teaching demonstrations...

Anyways, I think we agree, except that I would trust instinct and intuition until it fails, and then go into technical detail, but that's a difference of learning styles, and I don't think one is better than the other. (Well, I do,  but it's certainly not worth arguing over.) As far as the info on Rubinstein goes, it was in the Grove dictionary. I had to research him and write a short bio for my piano journals this semester. And you might notice that he and I interpret the espressivo differently. I find his too unsettling for my taste, but overall I do enjoy his performance very much.

[gn622]

gn622: The left hand notes remain the same. Also, there is no slow section. There are simply less notes in it. I believe Artur Rubinstein's recording demonstrates this.

thank you so much, this will really help me  a lot 

btw, is the middle section harder or easier than the first?

[mcdiddy1]

I certainly agree with experiment and self-discovery to develop musical interpretation. I think that works for a sophisticated level of student with an extensive musical back ground. I think for a beginner who does not know the what musical elements are involved, however you have to give this student some concrete physical instructions.

As you said, having some musical demonstration showing how the elements can interact with each other would be really useful. All I am saying is to a musical beginner ( at the piano or otherwise) saying to play with more soul is not particularly helpful regardless of their learning style. I agree with you that musical instinct is an important part of interpreting mood but that would entail the performer has a specific sound already in their head which you do but many don't. 

Back to the original question, about the definition of con anima, while it is true it is a mood marking a great deal of the meaning has to do with increasing speed. In interpretation when to do it and how much to do it is part of having an effective rendition of the passage,  there needs to be an element of speed. If someone wanted in a nutshell , what to do when they see con anima, I dont think it helps to say play with soul and experiment with it and see what you come up with unless they bring some musical background and taste. I think the problem with it is "with soul or life" can mean a number of things that are not reflected in the intent.

[jgallag]

thank you so much, this will really help me  a lot 

btw, is the middle section harder or easier than the first?

Harder. My advice is not to bother with the rolled chords at 553. Well, I only roll the left hand chord in 554 throughout, the others I play together. It's enough to create the illusion that they're rolled at the proper tempo. It's a bear of a passage, and if you try and roll them you will probably lose tempo, especially since you're doing this on the side and I assume you have a less-developed technique (my apologies if I'm wrong!). There's really very little that's challenging technically in the scherzo, but the trio has some tricky parts in it. The coda is quite difficult too. Have fun with it. I first worked on this my freshman year, and I could not get it up to tempo, but three years later I'm a senior and it's audition-worthy, so don't get discouraged.

mcdiddy: While I agree that sometimes it is best to simply things for beginners and only help them understand the complexities as they progress, I don't see myself ever assigning this piece to a beginner. There are enough flashy pieces that prodigies can show off with without giving them pieces like the Chopin Scherzos or Ballades.

[gn622]

Harder. My advice is not to bother with the rolled chords at 553. Well, I only roll the left hand chord in 554 throughout, the others I play together. It's enough to create the illusion that they're rolled at the proper tempo. It's a bear of a passage, and if you try and roll them you will probably lose tempo, especially since you're doing this on the side and I assume you have a less-developed technique (my apologies if I'm wrong!). There's really very little that's challenging technically in the scherzo, but the trio has some tricky parts in it. The coda is quite difficult too. Have fun with it. I first worked on this my freshman year, and I could not get it up to tempo, but three years later I'm a senior and it's audition-worthy, so don't get discouraged.

Thank you so much for all the tips and answers you really helped me a lot 

and yes my technique is horrible it took me months to play the con anima section!
i tackling this piece very slowly , and its not my main  piece for now actually

[gn622]

this is interesting, according to this : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Liszt#Liszt.27s_teaching_approach

it seems franz liszt disliked this scherzo  anyone knows more about this?

[mcdiddy1]

First, wikipedia is not the most reliable source because they rely on everyday people to edit their information. Second it said he did not like to hear it played at his masterclassess, not necessarily that he dislike the piece. I doubt he disliked it as he was a very big supporter of Chopin and his music and the piece isn't bad.