leaf through some Mozart

[hardy_practice]

I was checking the dynamics in K330 today (very interesting) and it occurred to me that mf (bar 21) is quite rare in Mozart up to then.  I leafed backwards and couldn't find one, or in variations for piano either.  Anybody want to look through from K330 backwards (urtext of course) and corroborate this?  The eyes often miss things.  Thanks.

p.s. no point pointing out to me that it's caused by my 'stiff arms', I'll take that as a given.

[dima_76557]

Anybody want to look through from K330 backwards (urtext of course) and corroborate this?

If the so-called Urtexts are really faithful to Mozart's manuscripts, then I wouldn't try too hard to find any if I were you. In his manuscripts, Mozart often did not write any indications for dynamics at all. Much of what we have now seems to have been added by editors, sometimes long after the work had been written, presumably to adapt to the increasing availability of the touch-sensitive fortepiano that was not yet available when the works were written. Where dynamics and tempo indications are missing, only good taste can lead.

[hardy_practice]

The whole point of using first editions (on what urtext is partly based) is the supposition, and usual practice, that the composer approved the plates before printing.  Are you saying Artaria just went ahead and printed any old thing?  You have evidence for this?

[dima_76557]

The whole point of using first editions (on what urtext is partly based) is the supposition, and usual practice, that the composer approved the plates before printing.  Are you saying Artaria just went ahead and printed any old thing?  You have evidence for this?

I have no evidence, because I am generally not very interested in it where art is concerned. Logic dictates that a composer like Mozart would never indicate something that could not be done on the instruments he wrote for. I can imagine that Mozart himself randomly added (or approved of adding) something later on, when the touch-sensitive fortepianos became available.

A book like John Irving's "Mozart's Piano Sonatas: Contexts, Sources, Style" could give you some more info on the subject.

[hardy_practice]

I have no evidence, because I am generally not very interested in it where art is concerned. Logic dictates that a composer like Mozart would never indicate something that could not be done on the instruments he wrote for. I can imagine that Mozart himself randomly added (or approved of adding) something later on, when the touch-sensitive fortepianos became available.

A book like John Irving's "Mozart's Piano Sonatas: Contexts, Sources, Style" could give you some more info on the subject.

I really don't know what you're trying to say.  Could you do me a favour and leaf through pre-K330 to see if I missed anything?  If you have Irving's book maybe have a look in there for mf pre-K330?  Thanks.

edit: thanks for the link!  Actually as it turns out he lives not far from me - I'll go to his K271 concert next month.

[dima_76557]

I really don't know what you're trying to say.

It was simply impossible to produce mezzo forte on the pianos Mozart had when he composed his early sonatas. The instrument did not even have an escapement mechanism yet, and you had to be careful not to crack the soundboard or to break the instrument in two. At that time, "f" indications had to be understood and interpreted strictly proverbially. Also, the instruments had a very uneven touch with keys sticking, etc. Mozart writes about this in his letters. Check the manuscripts ISMLP has for all of the sonatas that are of interest to you; nothing in between "p" and "f".

Could you do me a favour and leaf through pre-K330 to see if I missed anything?  If you have Irving's book maybe have a look in there for mf pre-K330?  Thanks.

I have only a Russian edition that says it is "based on the Urtext". That will hardly be credible as evidence. I tend to trust the manuscripts more.

edit: thanks for the link!  Actually as it turns out he lives not far from me - I'll go to his K271 concert next month.

Ask him personally.
I am pretty sure that what I said above I learned from reading his very book.

[hardy_practice]

The piano escapement was invented in 1720's by Christofori so well understood in Mozart's day.   I've played on a piano, with escapement, made before this sonata was published.  I'm also well aware of what an early piano (not to mention clavichord) can do.  I also own a piano without escapement and that handles mf just fine.  And yes, Mozart did play on some real mingers! But If this is his first use of mf in piano writing then yes, I think something must have clicked in his head - I think I can guess what that was.  That's why I want to know!    

[dima_76557]

I've played on a piano, with escapement, made before this sonata was published.  I'm also well aware of what an early piano (not to mention clavichord) can do.

We are clearly talking about different instruments.

First of all, the publishing date and the date of composition were far apart in many cases. I don't think Mozart took the trouble of revising them all to fit the newer instruments; he most probably didn't have the time either.

Second, what was invented was never immediately implemented for all, so most people simply continued playing on the old pianos they had. That was the instrument the early sonatas were written for.

The instrument you were probably allowed to try was VERY expensive to make at that time and was only for a few privileged. Mozart clearly played on another type of instrument, and his early sonatas did not have the new invention in mind. If "mf" had been possible, he would have used it.

P.S.: If in doubt, ask Mr. Irving.

[hardy_practice]

P.S.: If in doubt, ask Mr. Irving.

Well, I'm sitting here in the library staring at his book.  The wonders of wifi!  They were making good pianos in London from the 1760's.  JC Bach gave the first piano concert  here in about 1768.  Try his pieces - the instruments of the day were OK.

[dima_76557]

Well, I'm sitting here in the library staring at his book.

Please read:
Preface page xii, starting from "Some performance issues...". Footnote 8 will refer you to chapter 3.

[hardy_practice]

Please read:
Preface page xii, starting from "Some performance issues...". Footnote 8 will refer you to chapter 3.

Yes, Irving does posit changes in the piano as reasons for the difference in autograph and first edition.  I'm not so sure.  He's freely using cres and decres in all but the first 2 sonatas - there's obviously some subtlety available there.  Anyway, I also got Irvings Understanding Mozart's Piano Sonatas so we'll see what he says there.

edit: read through some of Understanding - he lists the dynamics in K330 but doesn't comment much; certainly not on the mf which I think may be Mozart's first use of it in a solo piano work.  Prove me wrong someone, PLEASE!   

[dima_76557]

edit: read through some of Understanding - he lists the dynamics in K330 but doesn't comment much; certainly not on the mf which I think may be Mozart's first use of it in a solo piano work.  Prove me wrong someone, PLEASE!

Why would anyone have to prove you wrong? What if it really was a tradition for some time because of temporary limitations in the instrument? It is interesting to note that the very first compostion for the fortepiano was 12 Sonate da cimbalo di piano e forte, Op.1 by Lodovico Giustini (1732).
We see the same symptoms there: nothing but "p" and "f".

[thalbergmad]

We see the same symptoms there: nothing but "p" and "f".

I wager his f was not as f as our modern f.

Thal

[dima_76557]

I wager his f was not as f as our modern f.

Of course, Thal. I tried to express that in reply # 5. It was a "proverbial" forte on a VERY fragile instrument. Not much room to work between "p" and "f".

[hardy_practice]

Why would anyone have to prove you wrong?

So I can put my theory to bed! 

[dima_76557]

So I can put my theory to bed! 

As long as one doesn't limit oneself and others in the present, one is free to believe whatever one thinks is "right" about the past. Since we don't have a time machine, any theory (including Irving's) can be nothing more than speculation.

[j_menz]

As long as one doesn't limit oneself and others in the present, one is free to believe whatever one thinks is "right" about the past. Since we don't have a time machine, any theory (including Irving's) can be nothing more than speculation.

Not entirely. Whilst we can't travel to the past, some of the past has managed to travel to us. Any theory must be at least consistent with the evidence that we do have. And some theories are more convincing than others even if both have passed that test.

[dima_76557]

Not entirely. Whilst we can't travel to the past, some of the past has managed to travel to us. Any theory must be at least consistent with the evidence that we do have. And some theories are more convincing than others even if both have passed that test.

Of course. What I really wanted to say was that, just as in any court case, there is physical evidence and there are also laws of logic involved that limit the interpretation of that evidence.

Musicologists simply tend to go too far sometimes in their urge to restore certain conventions. For example, we are supposed to apply the physical technique of the Old Masters, and if we can't do that on our not-so-fragile instruments, we should not play their music on "newer" instruments, but instead choose the older ones. We should actually also cut the tempo of Chopin's etudes in two. What's next? There were no really big concert halls at that time, so you can't play Bach, Mozart, and/or Beethoven in Carnegie Hall?

[j_menz]

Musicologists simply tend to go too far sometimes

Only sometimes? 

Musicologists, like literary analysts, are self appointed guardians of a tradition they do not have the wit or skill to pursue in its own right, and bitterly envious of those who do.

[thesixthsensemusic]

As far as I know, MF (and MP) is not nearly used as often as the non-intermediate dynamic markings at all by any composer.

I browsed through loads of Chopin, Beethoven, Mozart and Schumann, in most cases the Henle Urtext but also some Editio Musica Urtext editions, and learned a small amount of all these pieces, but remember only 1 instance in which MF was used in a work I actually learned: in Schumann's 'Carnaval', right in the opening movement on page 2.