The point of an etude and musicality

[perprocrastinate]

According to Google: a short composition for a solo instrument; intended as an exercise or to demonstrate technical virtuosity.

Of course, etudes are not purely for technical purposes, the proof being many sets of etudes from various composers contain the most beautiful music ever. (Okay, it's subjective, but can we generally agree on that?)

I was reading on people's thought's on the fingering of Liszt Transcendental Etude No. 4 (Mazeppa), and it turns out that the intended fingering by Liszt is 2-4, which I believe dictates a significant portion of the point of the etude- quoted from Wikipedia: Liszt, as usual, indicates a rather odd fingering: the fast successive thirds in the beginning two sections should be played only with the index and fourth finger, alternating hands every two intervals. This fingering hinders speed, is more difficult than moving from the thumb and third finger for the first interval to the index and fourth for the second interval, and is therefore not used by every performer. However, this fingering is given for specific purposes; it makes the consecutive thirds sound more like a horse by preventing legato and expressive playing and builds strength in the second and fourth fingers.

Many people don't seem to like to use Liszt's fingering, and use 1-3 2-4 instead. In my opinion, the 1-3 2-4 fingering sounds better to me, and therefore has more musicality in my point of view.

So the question is, is it right to waste the technical gains of an etude for musicality, and is it right to waste the musicality of an etude for technical gains?

I've also found another piece that has a similar issue: Chopin Etude Op. 25-10, with the middle notes being held/played. Some people may prefer not to play them because they prefer the piece without them, but then they lose a portion of the purpose of the etude.

[fftransform]

In general, "musicality" is a really pointless word.  Either two things are meant by it: specific types of technique, or interpretative qualities of a performance.  If you refer to the production of specific spectra, e.g. from certain finger techniques or from complex voicing, this is in large part an aspect of technique, just as raw as playing octaves or scales.  If what is meant is, "here, there is rubato," or, "here, there is more variety in timbre," and then ascribing to a performance of a piece or passage the qualifier, "more musical," because of it, you are simply using a word that falsely appears to have some degree of objectivity to what is really a preference in interpretation.  Of course, one can objectively speak of what the conglomerate listening audience's preferences are in interpretations at any given time/for any piece/composer, and one can objectively speak about what the audience means by a "musical" performance, but that is of a lower order.  Your example of the fingering in Mazeppa is a good example of this at work; I'm sure that what you're really getting at is that the alternating fingering facilitates more timbral variety or speed.  "More timbral variety" being "good" is subjective.

Regardless, I don't think that the term "exercise" is appropriate for most pieces that are titled "etudes."  However, trying to describe what every single etude ever written is, in a single sentence, is going to be a failure no matter what you say.  Composers can write any sort of piece they want and then call it an etude.  For instance, Debussy's 10th etude is an etude in "opposing sonorities"; I think that most people would consider sonority an aspect of "musicality," not "technique," and here we again see the blur in distinction between the two.  As another example, what of Dusapin's Etudes?  Or Czerny's?  I think if we try to say, "Chopin's, and Debussy's, and Liszt's, and Czerny's, and Dusapin's, etudes are all meant to do/be X," whatever that 'X' is, the statement is going to be garbage.  Even if you try to say that, "all of Liszt's Etudes are meant to do/be X," you will fail, or inadequately enumerate a differentiation between Liszt's etudes and music in general.

[ahinton]

I’ll desist from quoting fftransform’s above post to save space and because none of the points within it call for argument. It might be fair to contend that, ever since Chopin’s Op. 10, the very notion of a piano étude has generally come to be regarded as – and is often deliberately designed to embrace – both aspects of keyboard pedagogy and music for public concert use and, accordingly, a composer’s decision to have recourse to that designation is often (though not necessarily always) prompted by an intent to explore some specific pianistic and/or compositional device within the piece concerned; this is as true for Alkan’s as it is for Ligeti’s, Godowsky’s, Debussy’s, Dusapin’s or Sorabji’s. One might nevertheless ask what prompted Ferneyhough to title a work Études Transcendentales or indeed yours truly to title one Szymanowski-Etiud, but the latter is intended more as a kind of character study and I’ll leave it to anyone else to decide about the Ferneyhough. "Musicality" is indeed one of those Alice-in-Wonderland words…(!)…

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I think the romantics changed the notion of what is an Etude. Before Chopin for instance, they were mainly exercises, after, mainly musical.

One perhaps would not play etudes by Cramer and Czerny in concert, but would play etudes by Liszt, Thalberg, Alkan & Henselt.

Me old teacher once told me that Etudes do not have to be musical to be of benefit, but it is nicer if they are.

Thal

[ahinton]

I think the romantics changed the notion of what is an Etude. Before Chopin for instance, they were mainly exercises, after, mainly musical.

One perhaps would not play etudes by Cramer and Czerny in concert, but would play etudes by Liszt, Thalberg, Alkan & Henselt.

Me old teacher once told me that Etudes do not have to be musical to be of benefit, but it is nicer if they are.

Much of that broadly accords with what I was trying to say about the matter.

Best,

Alistair

[chopin2015]

It would not make much sense if it was not musical, you can always use given fingering on any notes, but just any notes do not sound right. The fingerings are to make musicality accessible. The main point of fingering is to set yourself up for fluid movements, actually complete sentences instead of just word after word or single scattered words, comma splices and run on sentences. I think it is ok to use your own fingering in some cases, just as long as you are making correct use of it. For example, you can alter fingering because your hands are smaller/bigger, but I think a general guide line is to finish/land on the given finger indication, and start on the given finger indication, just so you have enough "breath" to say what it is meant to say in the music, without having to lift your hands in the middle of a point, for crying out loud!

[ahinton]

It would not make much sense if it was not musical, you can always use given fingering on any notes, but just any notes do not sound right. The fingerings are to make musicality accessible. The main point of fingering is to set yourself up for fluid movements, actually complete sentences instead of just word after word or single scattered words, comma splices and run on sentences. I think it is ok to use your own fingering in some cases, just as long as you are making correct use of it. For example, you can alter fingering because your hands are smaller/bigger, but I think a general guide line is to finish/land on the given finger indication, and start on the given finger indication, just so you have enough "breath" to say what it is meant to say in the music, without having to lift your hands in the middle of a point, for crying out loud!

Whilst there is much with which to agree in what you write, the question of fingering is arguably a rather broader one than you appear to suggest here; much, for example, depends upon whether it was the composer's own or whether it's been added by an editor, for it does not necessarily follow that all piano études were written by pianists - Dusapin and Ligeti, for example, were hardly known as pianists...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Much of that broadly accords with what I was trying to say about the matter.

Well, that don't happen very often.

Thal

[ahinton]

Well, that don't happen very often.

A little more so than you may presume, I suspect...

Best,

Alistair

[chopin2015]

Indeed, I have been lucky in the past. I found books for discussion of Chopin's technique and documents indicating his own fingering suggestions, as well as Ravel, there are a couple of books that include a discussion of technique and fingering. Sometimes an editor will include his own indications and specify how he plays it and how Ravel played it, as an explanation of why one works for some better than the other, very educational. I like the dover books, though.

[emrysmerlin]

When you can't think of a form that matches your composition, you can always call it an etude