Piano Forum

Topic: Interpretation vs "the score"  (Read 1333 times)

Offline ypana3

  • PS Silver Member
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 8
Interpretation vs "the score"
on: December 30, 2013, 11:30:42 AM
So I've learned the first half of Beethoven's Sonata no. 14 (Moonlight) 3rd movement (yeah I know, overplayed, but I still like it). I've also listened to many pianists on YouTube and the way they play is completely different from mine; very true to the score. I know every pianist is supposed to have a unique sound, but I feel like I'm playing it wrong. I play some piano phrases forte and some other phrases with de/crescendo (where there is none), etc. There's a problem though, because I personally prefer the way I play. The pianists play quick and staccato like almost all throughout, while mine's quick, but airier and legato. I extensively use the pedal also, and I feel it gives the piece a darker, more sinister sound. I also think it allows for differing variations, rather than the ones on YouTube which have pretty much identical variations in regards to articulation, dynamics etc.

So what's your opinion fellow forumers? Do you think it's a good idea not to conform and play what you prefer rather than what the artist (may have) intended? Is there such thing as a right or wrong performance? Or do you think that too much deviance from the score ruins a performance or the integrity? Personally I believe the former but I'm afraid of criticism of how I'm playing it "wrong". That being said, I don't think anybody knows exactly how Beethoven himself wanted the piece played, just like how we hear many "Rachmaninoff plays Rachmaninoff" pieces which sound very different from pretty much any other artist's interpretation.

Sorry for my ramblings, and if I don't make sense, it's because I am very tired and hungry.

Offline kevin69

  • PS Silver Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
Re: Interpretation vs "the score"
Reply #1 on: December 30, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
Who are you playing for?
Yourself, for your own pleasure or some formal setting such as a competition or exam?

Formally, you will probably get judged by how accurately you stick to the score as written.

If you are playing purely for pleasure, then i think you should just play it the way that sounds best to you. I don't think there is a 'right way' to play a piece, but at some point you aren't interpretting a piece any more, you are performing a slightly different piece. In classical music people tend to take that kind of thing quite seriously, but in other traditions (eg jazz, folk, or rock) it isn't seen as important (mostly because the performer is seen as more important than the composer).

Offline onwan

  • PS Silver Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Interpretation vs "the score"
Reply #2 on: December 31, 2013, 12:39:54 AM
1) There is good and bad performance!
Good one-you change dynamics, make phrases, take breath, play right notes (or minimal mistakes). You just put your soul into the piece no matter what.
Bad one-is absolute opposite-play all notes the same, no phrasing, no pauses, no feelings, it is dull and featureless.

2) What the sheet says:
Always you find in the sheets some dynamics marks(cresc, pp, f...), tempo marks (allegro, andante,  accel, rit...), than there are some "style" marks (dolce, stac, legato, grave, vivace...).
The composer had to have some reason why he/she wrote the marks. But also if you play strict by the marks, the interpretation will be cold, with no feelings or phrasing...like it is played by machine (even you keep whole marking as it is written.)

3) your own ideas
everybody has some ideas how the piece could sound.
-I like the legato here, even the composer wrote stac.
-I want it forte instead of piano.
Sometimes you want to play it completly different way than others and than it is written. Than there always will be two groups of people:
a) the first one which like your performence, because it is not usual, you put some new ideas in, find some inventions...and they like it.
b) the second one which don't feel it the same way as you, thay often call it "wrong interpretation" or incomprehension of the piece. Thay are like: "What the hell is he doing? It can't be played that way! It is not in the sheets! He plays it wrong way!"

(The second group is often wrong, they are to old-fashioned, old-schoolers, too strict, intolerant. They don't want to understand your playing-it is easier for them to say that it was bad interpretation. Because it is too difficult for them to try to understand why you play it different way, that you feel the piece other way, that the piece causes different feelings in you, mood...)

It is too difficult to accomplish all of the 3 categories at the same time and not to get mad some people. It is also difficult to find your own position in all the different sources of informations. And I think that the best interpretation should be great synthesis of all of this components. And also you should be prepared to the fact that not everybody will like your style. But I think it is better to be controversial that boring or drab.

PS: This whole stuff is only my opinion. I can't express opinions of others and also don't know them. And have on your mind that music is subjective.
Bach-Prelude and Fugue 2
Mozart-Sonata 545
Schubert-Klavierstucke D946 - 1, 2
Chopin-Etude 10/9, 25/12
Liszt-Un Sospiro
Rachmaninoff-Prelude 23/5, 3/2

Offline iansinclair

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1472
Re: Interpretation vs "the score"
Reply #3 on: December 31, 2013, 02:19:37 AM
Seems to me that Onwan's comments are very well put.

I might, however, add a few of my own. 

The first relates to learning a piece in the first place.  It is just my own opinion, but it seems to me that you should be able to play the piece within pretty close correspondence to what is marked in the score -- by the composer, not by a later editor.  This doesn't mean that you have to play it that way, only that you can do so if you are required to for some reason. 

The second is to watch out for markings in a score added by editors.  These are very very common, particularly in earlier music (some later composers were absolute bears about marking everything; presumably they meant.  Sometimes they are even right).  If the markings are editor's markings, they are just one man's opinion, and no better than yours or mine (assuming that you or I are reasonably informed about the style and performing practices, etc. appropriate to the piece).

The third is to echo Onwan, really: once you can play the piece as written, you then can -- and jolly well should -- put your own interpretation onto it.  There is nothing worse than a lifeless note by note transcription of a score -- I can program that onto a piano roll or a MIDI controller.  You must add your own life and soul to the piece.
Ian

Offline ypana3

  • PS Silver Member
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 8
Re: Interpretation vs "the score"
Reply #4 on: December 31, 2013, 02:32:31 AM
Thanks for your responses, all great answers. I'd tend to agree with you have said, and it makes me a bit more confident going forward with learning. Of course playing everything exact will sound mechanical and boring, and I think adding new ideas, different phrasing, voicing, etc. will be much more fun to play, and hopefully pleasing to a listener.

Offline gregh

  • PS Silver Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
Re: Interpretation vs "the score"
Reply #5 on: January 12, 2014, 08:20:22 PM
I'm coming late, and in the sense of performing when it counts I can't improve on the other replies. But I think interpretation/arranging is kind of an interesting matter because of different approaches in different contexts.

First, you can't think outside the box until you know what's in the box. There tends to be definite stylistic elements in different types of music, and an audience would expect you to follow them. An example is when I was learning a song on trumpet that I'd never actually heard before, like "Polka Dots and Moonbeams", I played it like it was friggin' heavy metal, but when I heard it on the radio (almost didn't recognize it at first) it was light and quick, which is more the style in jazz, or at least that branch of it. I thought theirs sounded better than mine.

But then there's the matter, in jazz, that nobody expects you to play a piece like anyone else does, or to play it the same way twice. It's not just things like instrumentation, pacing, and ornamentation; jazz players will make significant changes to a standard and the audience will call it good. In rock'n'roll they don't play standards, they play covers. But look at, for instance, Apocalyptica, a cello quartet from Finland that plays songs by groups like Metallica (and also their own compositions), and the songs can be rearranged. Then there's their rendition of "In the Hall of the Mountain King", which is extensively changed. It's good. But they're also not playing in orchestra-type venues--their audiences are not made uncomfortable by significant deviations from the original score.

In classical music you're generally expected to stick to the score. If the score is arranged for a different set of instruments, it should still sound like the same song played on different instruments. Otherwise you'd call it "Fantasy on In the Hall of the Mountain King", or something that makes it clear that you're not playing the original score. That scene isn't as loose as jazz or rock. But there's no reason you couldn't play classical music in a jazz culture type of context, like improv over Beethoven's Sonata No. 14, and as long as the audience knows you're going to do that I'm sure it would be fine, but they should be warned because that's not the usual practice.
For more information about this topic, click search below!

Piano Street Magazine:
Take Your Seat! Trifonov Plays Brahms in Berlin

“He has everything and more – tenderness and also the demonic element. I never heard anything like that,” as Martha Argerich once said of Daniil Trifonov. To celebrate the end of the year, the star pianist performs Johannes Brahms’s monumental Piano Concerto No. 2 with the Philharmoniker and Kirill Petrenko on December 31. Piano Street’s members are invited to watch the livestream. Read more
 

Logo light pianostreet.com - the website for classical pianists, piano teachers, students and piano music enthusiasts.

Subscribe for unlimited access

Sign up

Follow us

Piano Street Digicert