Metronome Markings?

[davidjosepha]

I often see metronome markings on pieces, but they don't seem to make sense. Usually, it seems, they are much faster than what I think the piece should be played at, but sometimes, they are much slower. Only rarely do I find a metronome marking that aligns well with what I think sounds good for the piece. On top of that, recordings of professional pianists playing many of these pieces reveal that they also disagree with the marked tempos, and not just by 5 bpm...often 20 or more beats per minute different from the marked tempo.

Are these tempo markings given by the composers or the editors? If given by the composers, why do people ignore them so much? I understand pianists, especially professionals, take quite a bit of liberty with composer markings, but with tempo, it seems even more pronounced than with dynamics and other such things.

Lastly, it seems in many cases the tempo markings provide a breakneck speed that I would have difficulty playing at...should I feel guilty, in a sense, about not playing it that speed? I mean, obviously when someone says they can play a difficult piece, the assumption is that they aren't playing it half tempo or something like that. But would you consider a piece learnt if you played it at 90% of the marked tempo if that is a tempo you like, and aren't just playing it that speed because you can't play it faster (although you might not be able to)? Confusing question, so here's an example. A piece is marked at 108bpm. You can only play it at 100, but you like that tempo, and even if you could play it at 108, you'd still choose 100. Would you consider that deceptive to claim to be able to play that piece since you can't play it in the way the composer intended, if indeed he wrote the tempo marking?

I guess in the end, it doesn't really matter, but I'm curious what people think about this.

[j_menz]

I've often felt that they were the product of a random number generator.  I generally use a combination of my own good sense and the sensis fidei as revealed in the recordings.

[davidjosepha]

I've often felt that they were the product of a random number generator.  I generally use a combination of my own good sense and the sensis fidei as revealed in the recordings.

Well, glad to know I'm not the only one who feels this way. So are they almost definitely added by the publisher then?

[j_menz]

So are they almost definitely added by the publisher then?

Some of them probably are, but some are by the composer.  Beethoven was initially a fan and added them himself, but subsequently grew less fond of them (and revised his marks down significantly).

Some of those by composers were probably done at the request of the publisher, and I suspect they just gave a number to shut them up.

[werq34ac]

In the case of the Chopin etudes, those are definitely Chopin's markings. However, the speed that Chopin asks is sometimes pretty dang fast. I've heard that perhaps Chopin's metronome was a tad slow. I've also heard that the pianos of back then sounded better and were easier to play at that speed.

However, I wouldn't just ignore the marking. Although the metronome marking is not set in stone, it's worth checking out to see if there's real value behind the speed. For instance, you may think Op. 10/4 sounds fine at 80, but really 88 would be quite impressive (assuming they didn't just play mechanically).

I personally think that while you don't necessarily need to perform at the speed indicated, I think it's probably a good idea to be able to play at that speed just so you have the option of doing so.

[outin]

I am often puzzled by the metronome markings of the Scarlatti pieces I play. They seem too fast. Not too fast to play but the piece sounds a lot better when played slower. Most recordings are slower. Am I right, that this is because what sounds good on harpsichord needs to be adjusted on piano?

[j_menz]

I am often puzzled by the metronome markings of the Scarlatti pieces I play. They seem too fast. Not too fast to play but the piece sounds a lot better when played slower. Most recordings are slower. Am I right, that this is because what sounds good on harpsichord needs to be adjusted on piano?

Since Scarlatti died before the invention of the metronome, the markings you have are by someone else and can be even more safely ignored.

[outin]

Since Scarlatti died before the invention of the metronome, the markings you have are by someone else and can be even more safely ignored.

I assume they are by Kirkpatrick. He did extensive study on how the sonatas should be performed on the harpsichord, so even if they are not original, I don't think they are just random numbers either.

[davidjosepha]

The other thing I've found is that even if it doesn't sound good for me to play a piece up to the marked tempo, that doesn't mean it wouldn't sound good for a professional to do it. Sometimes, I might be able to play it up to tempo, but it's more difficult for me and, as a result, sounds more frantic than it should. Then I think, "Well, I guess it doesn't sound good at that speed." But for a pro, they can play it that speed and still make it sound comfortable, and in that case, it might be a good tempo. Not always, but sometimes.

[outin]

The other thing I've found is that even if it doesn't sound good for me to play a piece up to the marked tempo, that doesn't mean it wouldn't sound good for a professional to do it.

True, but the professionals also seem to play these Scarlatti sonatas much slower...

[davidjosepha]

True, but the professionals also seem to play these Scarlatti sonatas much slower...

My comment wasn't in response to yours, it's just something I thought of when reading back through this topic

[49410enrique]

i tend to shoot for a 'feel' vs a standardized number/metronome click mark. usually they will line up but sometimes i just interpret the piece below or above the normal tempo mark (though i still strive to give it a character according to the tempo indication, as such i think it should normally ready 'pace' vs tempo. unless the composer specifically indicates a metronome indication (many modern pieces will).  

double check vs an urtext. listen to historical/old recordings and new ones as tastes can change and even what indications are interpreted as (metronome marking wise) can vary over long courses of time (i.e decades apart).  

i'd genrally at least make sure you're in the same ball park as the modern convention i.e. if it's a 4/4 deal, within oh  8-12 clicks depending on the style of the work and how the beat is generally organized, i.e texture, runs, etc.

[outin]

My comment wasn't in response to yours, it's just something I thought of when reading back through this topic

Ok, and you are very much right. If I tried to play things at the tempo real pianists do it would sound really bad. Playing it slowly can at least sound nice to someone who doesn't know better

[werq34ac]

Ok, and you are very much right. If I tried to play things at the tempo real pianists do it would sound really bad. Playing it slowly can at least sound nice to someone who doesn't know better

Someone who doesn't know better if you play it slowly probably can't know much better if you play it fast. Faster you play, the easier it is to hide your mistakes to an inexperienced listener. You play slowly and the listener has time to hear every blemish and flaw.

[counterpoint]

Music is not about who can play fastest.

Piano competitions are. Sometimes.

[werq34ac]

Music is not about who can play fastest.

Piano competitions are. Sometimes.

Somewhat irrelevant to the topic. No one mentioned you should play as fast as you can. Just that you should probably be able to.

[counterpoint]

Somewhat irrelevant to the topic. No one mentioned you should play as fast as you can.

Many metronome markings are demanding for playing faster than anyone can play.

This was the beginning of the discussion:

I often see metronome markings on pieces, but they don't seem to make sense.

[werq34ac]

Many metronome markings are demanding for playing faster than anyone can play.

This was the beginning of the discussion:

I was under the impression you were talking about playing faster to the point of being ridiculous and unmusical, not as fast as metronome markings indicate (although admittedly, some metronome markings are ridiculous). However, your point was based on playing faster than other people rather than playing fast because the music indicates it be fast.



As for the original post, Even if they don't make sense, try to play it in a way that it does make sense. Change the phrasing or try playing without any rubato (or add some in). Experiment with it. I'm not saying take that speed, but just understand that it's never harmful to consider ALL of your choices.

[counterpoint]

Why are metronome markings always too fast and never too slow...? 

[j_menz]

Why are metronome markings always too fast and never too slow...? 

I think a number of them in fact are too slow, but that would be a minority.

Also, people don't get the same complex about playing faster than they're "supposed" to.

[johnmar78]

my two cents,,,

I have heard people playing at full tempo speed, but it was technically perfect but no soul. Just remember, with advaced players, their aural ability is much betetr then we do. Thereofre, playing fast perhaps = slow-control for them. Other factors I have seemed, was peopel trying to play fast to 1) impress peopel that they "can " do it. 2) self experimenting.

After all, I have to think MUSICALITY comes first before anything else.......If you can play fast with inclusive of musicality you must be vey talented. Otherwise, working on interpretation is just as hard as tempo speed trials.  Cheers

[danhuyle]

my two cents,,,

I have heard people playing at full tempo speed, but it was technically perfect but no soul. Just remember, with advaced players, their aural ability is much betetr then we do. Thereofre, playing fast perhaps = slow-control for them. Other factors I have seemed, was peopel trying to play fast to 1) impress peopel that they "can " do it. 2) self experimenting.

After all, I have to think MUSICALITY comes first before anything else.......If you can play fast with inclusive of musicality you must be vey talented. Otherwise, working on interpretation is just as hard as tempo speed trials.  Cheers

+1 

If you can play with a good interpretation at a speed you can control, that's way more important than playing fast to impress.

I myself do get "thrown off" by metronome markings. Scriabin's Sonata no2 2nd movement is 96 per half note. Although I have played the first 8 bars at that speed, there's no need for it. I play at full tempo just to know that I can play the metronome marking.

[werq34ac]

Why are metronome markings always too fast and never too slow...? 

  learn some musical history. Pianos were lighter back then.

Your original post had to do with speed competitions. In a speed competition, playing at indicated metronome speeds would probably land someone in last place. You are talking about playing much faster than metronome markings, and that is most certainly an unnecessary point to make about this topic. 

And I'm sticking to my original answer to the post that while you don't have to take the metronome marking listed, you should at least consider it. You might be surprised to see what you learn about the piece.