Honest Question: What is and how do you show interpretation?

[gethsemane]

Is it how the piece makes you feel?
Does your personal interpretation involve the main reason why the composer wrote the piece in the first place?

Do you convey intepretaion by:
-dynamics
-graceful hand movements
-face expression
-tempo
-posture (slow, relaxed)(up tempo, dark bass, aggressive, rigid, etc)
-additional body movement (bouncing up and down to bouncy music)

I watched a tutorial on youtube and it basically said when rehearsing or practicing you dont have to repeatly rehearse the emotions the piece makes you feel because it can make you could feel emotionally drained. Is that true? Alot of the points listed above are just observations I have made from watching different videos on the net. If they are correct, and a person played without exhibiting them would you find their rendition...lacking?  Feel free to add or remove from the list as much as you please.

[j_menz]

Interpretation is a combination of what the piece is trying to say, what it says to you, how you feel when playing it, how it makes you feel, how you wish others to feel on hearing it, what you wish to convey through your playing.

You do it by making it sound the way it should were it to do all those things.

[iansinclair]

Interpretation is a combination of what the piece is trying to say, what it says to you, how you feel when playing it, how it makes you feel, how you wish others to feel on hearing it, what you wish to convey through your playing.

You do it by making it sound the way it should were it to do all those things.

and I, for one, don't see how you could possibly rehearse it -- unless the "interpretation" which you were looking for was really acting, and not your own interpretation.  Once you get over the technical hurdles in the piece, then where you are (a dubious phrase...) will start to be evident (or not... I have one Chopin Nocturne which I play, technically, rather well; the thing doesn't speak to me at all for some reason, and it shows).  But it will likely be a little different, day to day.

[dcstudio]

To explain this to my students I use art as an analogy.  Think of a Rembrandt--his paintings were in no way exact--but the soul he put into each face was amazing.  He painted them how HE saw them...  that is interpretation.   The emotion literally jumps off the canvas at you.

In music--sure any pianist can play a sonata--but an "artist" will add those little touches--blending pitches--changing touch and feel through the piece... they bring soul--and it encompases all the technical elements you mentioned--and so much more..

try comparing the same piece played by 2 different concert pianists--there will always be differences--some subtle--and some...not so subtle.   

[j_menz]

and I, for one, don't see how you could possibly rehearse it

Agreed, though you can certainly explore the possibilities and develop your understanding of the piece.

[natalyaturetskii]

I compose quite a lot of music so my idea of interpretation is making a piece of music 'my own', while still sticking true to the composer. So, I don't really rehearse emotions, but when practising, I try to 'immerse' myself in the music and understand it as much as possible (both emotional and technically). Then, when I am performing, I play it the way that I would like it to sound, to represent 'me' almost. But, I always make sure that I am not deviating from what the composer originally intended.

Natalya

P.S. Oh, I was watching a program on the Leeds Piano Competition, and the Jury said that they were looking for a person who played their chosen concerto in a way that had a good interpretation, so was different and original, but still stayed true to the style.