Metronome for Pieces that Call for Rubato?

[ryankmfdm]

 So I've recently begun working on Chopin's Waltz in A Minor (Op. posthumous). I know it's one of his more cliché pieces, but it is one of the few I've looked at of his that seem to be within my current skill level.

 At any rate, as I'm sure you all know, the score calls for it to be played rubato. What are your thoughts on practicing such pieces with a metronome? Part of me wants to think it's the sort of "knowing the rules before breaking them" type thing, but I was hoping someone with a little more experience could weigh in on the matter.

[faulty_damper]

The marking in your score is probably an editorial marking as there is no such marking in the piece.  As well, it should not be played with rubato.  Expressivity is done entirely with the right hand while the left hand is kept in strict time.

[nyiregyhazi]

The marking in your score is probably an editorial marking as there is no such marking in the piece.  As well, it should not be played with rubato.  Expressivity is done entirely with the right hand while the left hand is kept in strict time.

? Aside from the fact that what you called expressivity is exactly how Chopin defined rubato ( so I have no idea what you consider rubato to mean, if something different to your definition for expressivity) , what on earth puts you in a position to say that this waltz should not involve rubato? How can a person make such an ignorantly simplistic assertion of fact without bothering to back it up with a shred of reasoning?

A waltz sounds truly awful with three equal left hand beats. You don't have to exaggerate as much as some, but a waltz is simply meaningless unless it has at least a subtle lilt, rather than three square beats in every bar. Metronome practise is destructive to the stylistic lilt if done to excess, although it's okay for an occasional check.

[j_menz]

A waltz sounds truly awful with three equal left hand beats. You don't have to exaggerate as much as some, but a waltz is simply meaningless unless it has at least a subtle lilt, rather than three square beats in every bar. Metronome practise is destructive to the stylistic lilt if done to excess, although it's okay for an occasional check.

Absolutely right.

My only addition would be to suggest that if you do want to use a metronome, set it to click only on the first beat of each bar.

[lazyfingers]

So I've recently begun working on Chopin's Waltz in A Minor (Op. posthumous). I know it's one of his more cliché pieces, but it is one of the few I've looked at of his that seem to be within my current skill level.

 At any rate, as I'm sure you all know, the score calls for it to be played rubato. What are your thoughts on practicing such pieces with a metronome? Part of me wants to think it's the sort of "knowing the rules before breaking them" type thing, but I was hoping someone with a little more experience could weigh in on the matter.

It is played rubato even if it isn't marked in the Urtext. But don't play rubato until you have the piece securely learnt. At this stage you can use the metronome. However, I don't suggest you do so until you have grasped the notes sufficiently. Counting helps.

Once you are more proficient, then work on the lilting waltz rhythm in the LH. If you use the metronome, then just use a slow beat on every beginning of the bar, and not every crochet. After that, you may put in a little rubato. But remember not to get overly sentimental.

The waltz rhythm is much more important than the rubato at this stage.

Good luck.

As for rules about rubato and Chopin, there has always been contention about what Chopin actually meant or how he actually played. One thing we can be certain of though, is that he was famous for it amongst his contemporaries. So, it does exist. How rubato is his rubato is of course another question that seems to cannot be answered definitively.

[lazyfingers]

As well, it should not be played with rubato. 

Sometimes the things you write amaze me.

[lazyfingers]

? Aside from the fact that what you called expressivity is exactly how Chopin defined rubato ( so I have no idea what you consider rubato to mean, if something different to your definition for expressivity) , what on earth puts you in a position to say that this waltz should not involve rubato? How can a person make such an ignorantly simplistic assertion of fact without bothering to back it up with a shred of reasoning?

I think (s)he is referring to the school of thought that Chopin's rubato was strict time in the LH but the RH sways around this unerring beat. I don't think this view is correct.

Lizst reputedly remarked, "Look at these trees, the wind plays in the leaves, stirs up life among them, the tree remains the same, that is Chopinesque rubato"

A waltz sounds truly awful with three equal left hand beats. You don't have to exaggerate as much as some, but a waltz is simply meaningless unless it has at least a subtle lilt, rather than three square beats in every bar.

+1

Did you know that reputedly only 9 of Chopin's surviving manuscripts actually have rubato marked? However, no real Chopin interpreter would contemplate playing without rubato in all of his work.

[lazyfingers]

Sometimes the things you write amaze me.

On second thoughts, please strike out "Sometimes" and substitute "Often".

[nyiregyhazi]

I think (s)he is referring to the school of thought that Chopin's rubato was strict time in the LH but the RH sways around this unerring beat. I don't think this view is correct.

He seemed to be saying don't do rubato, but then saying do something identical to how Chopin actually described rubato (unless he was saying not to play with any expressivity?). I think the thing with that is that it's relative. The lh should be tighter and need not always follow the right, but probably not literally metronomic. Certainly not in a waltz.

[lazyfingers]

He seemed to be saying don't do rubato, but then saying do something identical to how Chopin actually described rubato (unless he was saying not to play with any expressivity?). I think the thing with that is that it's relative. The lh should be tighter and need not always follow the right, but probably not literally metronomic. Certainly not in a waltz.

I agree - the LH cannot be metronomic because it is a waltz. Even though a waltz is not Polish, the Polish character of Chopin's music surely cannot be questioned. And Polish music (especially the dances) is characterised by tempo rubato.

As for the claim for a metronomic beat supposedly stemming from a quote by his pupil Wilhelm von Lenz, that the LH is the Kappelmeister - it must not relent or bend, I find that hard to believe. But these things are now clouded by the fog of time , and relying on 2nd hand quotes possibly taken out of context is fraught with danger.

[faulty_damper]

Chopin's music is analogous to modern pop music (and many other genres.)  You'll notice that pop music does not flex on the rhythm, only the lyrics.  If it were to flex, it would sound terrible, which is why pop music is not flexible in this regard.

As well, the waltz rhythm should be in strict time, all three beats.  What some of you refer to as rubato with the LH is the failure to accent the downbeat, hence the need to flex it.  Failure to accent the downbeat results in the wilt missing.

[lazyfingers]

Chopin's music is analogous to modern pop music (and many other genres.) 

Wow... on what basis do you make this analogy? 

The rest of your argument is based on this false analogy, and hence is a logical fallacy.

If it were to flex, it would sound terrible, which is why pop music is not flexible in this regard.

That is because most current pop music is based on a rigid drum track or the "groove". Chopin's music isn't.

As well, the waltz rhythm should be in strict time, all three beats.

Wow. I am convinced you don't understand the waltz rhythm.

What some of you refer to as rubato with the LH is the failure to accent the downbeat, hence the need to flex it.  Failure to accent the downbeat results in the wilt missing.

Wow....even the Viennese style?

[j_menz]

results in the wilt missing.

 

That aside, your understanding of the Waltz is abysmal.

[nyiregyhazi]

Chopin's music is analogous to modern pop music (and many other genres.)  You'll notice that pop music does not flex on the rhythm, only the lyrics.  If it were to flex, it would sound terrible, which is why pop music is not flexible in this regard.

As well, the waltz rhythm should be in strict time, all three beats.  What some of you refer to as rubato with the LH is the failure to accent the downbeat, hence the need to flex it.  Failure to accent the downbeat results in the wilt missing.

As in your constant references to technique, you need to provide an example of someone who reflects what you feel represents this. Otherwise your argument exists purely in theoretical terms. Who are the pianists who play the Chopin waltzes effectively with equal beats and where can we hear an example?

[faulty_damper]

Wow... on what basis do you make this analogy? 

The rest of your argument is based on this false analogy, and hence is a logical fallacy.
That is because most current pop music is based on a rigid drum track or the "groove". Chopin's music isn't.
Wow. I am convinced you don't understand the waltz rhythm.
Wow....even the Viennese style?

What's funny is that I can say the same to you (and others) about not understanding waltz or even basic musical principles.

Music follows a limited number of rules; the rest is stylistic.  This is why music across all genres and cultures follow the same rules even if they developed independently.  This goes for American folk, jazz, metal, rock, country, gamelan, hip hop, rap, flamenco, tango, Argentine waltz...  all in strict time with strict rhythm.

Chopin's music is no different.  It should be played in strict time with strict rhythm.  Chopin repeatedly emphasized this in his own teachings to his students.  Why?  Because strict adherence to time and rhythm sounds the best!  He detested the rubato of his time because it takes away from the music and places focus on the performer.

[j_menz]

Here, you dropped this...

[lazyfingers]

What's funny is that I can say the same to you (and others) about not understanding waltz or even basic musical principles.

Clearly both of us think we are independently and mutually exclusively correct. But I don't think I am incorrect when I say you are one of only a few who claim that each beat of a Waltz is equal.

Basic musical principles state that Chopinesque tempo rubato actually does exist. The usual argument is in what style and to what extent, but only a few would argue that it does not exist.

Music follows a limited number of rules; the rest is stylistic.  This is why music across all genres and cultures follow the same rules even if they developed independently.  This goes for American folk, jazz, metal, rock, country, gamelan, hip hop, rap, flamenco, tango, Argentine waltz...  all in strict time with strict rhythm.

Wow... limited number of rules? The rest stylistic? Hmmmm....

All in strict time with strict rhythm? Hmmm..... so Tempo Rubato does not actually exist? Hmmmm....

I am beginning to believe that you do not understand rubato at all and what it means. It does not mean the total abandonment of timing and rhythm, as I suspect you incorrectly take me to mean. It merely means to rob one note to pay the other - and generally the overall time taken to play all the bars is observed (more or less).

Chopin's music is no different.  It should be played in strict time with strict rhythm.  Chopin repeatedly emphasized this in his own teachings to his students.  Why?  Because strict adherence to time and rhythm sounds the best!  He detested the rubato of his time because it takes away from the music and places focus on the performer.

Actually he didn't detest the rubato. I would tell students too to use the metronome but of course that is because they are students and usually learning the pieces. Take that out of context and you would believe that I was always for strict time - something as far away from the truth as your false analogy.

So, I am curious which pianist now plays Chopin in strict time? (as are others here) Please show us a youtube link or even a reference.

[faulty_damper]

Clearly both of us think we are independently and mutually exclusively correct. But I don't think I am incorrect when I say you are one of only a few who claim that each beat of a Waltz is equal.

Basic musical principles state that Chopinesque tempo rubato actually does exist. The usual argument is in what style and to what extent, but only a few who argue that it does not exist.
Wow... limited number of rules? The rest stylistic? Hmmmm....

All in strict time with strict rhythm? Hmmm..... so Tempo Rubato does not actually exist? Hmmmm....

I am beginning to believe that you do not understand rubato at all and what it means. It does not the total abandonment of timing and rhythm. It merely means to rob one note to pay the other - and generally the overall time taken to play all the bars is observed (more or less).

Actually he didn't detest the rubato. I would tell students too to use the metronome but of course that is because they are students and usually learning the pieces. Take that out of context and you would believe that I was always for strict time - something as far away from the truth as your false analogy.

So, I am curious which pianist now plays Chopin in strict time? (as are others here) Please show us a youtube link or even a reference.

Do not take what I say out of context and try to distort it like some other people here.

The only instances in which you have pure rubato is in vocal-only music such as unaccompanied folk music.  It's sometimes referred to as long meter.  But in melody with accompaniment, only the melody is subject to expressive push and pull while the accompaniment is held in strict time and rhythm.  What you and others suggest would never work in the case of jazz, for example, for the very obvious reason that it would sound bad.  It also sounds bad with Chopin but most people don't know it because they've been so accustomed to hearing Chopin played badly that they don't know any different and think Chopin played badly is good.   

[lazyfingers]

Do not take what I say out of context and try to distort it like some other people here.

I don't believe I have. And I let the other readers judge that. Obviously, you are pretty much on your own there.

The only instances in which you have pure rubato is in vocal-only music such as unaccompanied folk music.  It's sometimes referred to as long meter.  But in melody with accompaniment, only the melody is subject to expressive push and pull while the accompaniment is held in strict time and rhythm. 

So, say you. Apparently not Berlioz.

What you and others suggest would never work in the case of jazz, for example, for the very obvious reason that it would sound bad. 

But we are not talking jazz are we?

It also sounds bad with Chopin but most people don't know it because they've been so accustomed to hearing Chopin played badly that they don't know any different and think Chopin played badly is good. 

So, the undiscovered (except by you) truth at last!

Maybe you don't like Chopin played with rubato. However, it doesn't sweep away the incontrovertible fact that tempo rubato has been discussed, argued over, commented on by countless since Chopin first played in public in Paris. Something that would not have happened if this unique aspect of his style were not immediately evident from the outset.

I would ask again who you think are great Chopin interpreters who play in strict time? Please show us the evidence rather than making endless unsubstantiated claims.

[dima_76557]

@ faulty_damper

Formally, a waltz is written in 3/4, but it should have a slightly lilting feel to it. It is not swung, but it is not played in strictly straight time either, otherwise it will not be recognized as a waltz stylistically. If in doubt, simply ask any good dance instructor what the stylistic differences are among the more popular dances in 3/4. They are quite significant to the trained ear.

[faulty_damper]

I don't believe I have. And I let the other readers judge that. Obviously, you are pretty much on your own there.
So, say you. Apparently not Berlioz.
But we are not talking jazz are we?
So, the undiscovered (except by you) truth at last!

Maybe you don't like Chopin played with rubato. However, it doesn't sweep away the incontrovertible fact that tempo rubato has been discussed, argued over, commented on by countless since Chopin first played in public in Paris. Something that would not have happened if this unique aspect of his style were not immediately evident from the outset.

I would ask again who you think are great Chopin interpreters who play in strict time? Please show us the evidence rather than making endless unsubstantiated claims.

Your ignorance is showing as well as your naivete but you don't have the experience to know it.  You make the assumption that Chopin is different from jazz (and dozens of other genres) when it is not. It's the same with only stylistic differences.  The lyrics/melody is flexible while the accompaniment is adhered to strict time and rhythm.

Do not be afraid to step out of the darkness and experience exactly what I referred to.  Listen to the styles I mentioned and hear for yourself the direct comparisons that can be made.  Only then will your ignorance be abolished.  But as it is now, we have too many champions of ignorance.

[faulty_damper]

@ faulty_damper

Formally, a waltz is written in 3/4, but it should have a slightly lilting feel to it. It is not swung, but it is not played in strictly straight time either, otherwise it will not be recognized as a waltz stylistically. If in doubt, simply ask any good dance instructor what the stylistic differences are among the more popular dances in 3/4. They are quite significant to the trained ear.

I've danced Argentine waltz.  Good performance of Argentine waltz are in strict 3/4 time.  We can step on the 1, 2, or 3, as well as the subdivisions.  However, there was once a live performance of waltz (and tango) where the musician played with excessive rubato.  As a result, it was almost undanceable.  We could not step in time because the tempo was too erratic and the downbeat could not be reliably predicted.  This lack of prediction eventually made dancing to it obnoxiously annoying.  We were all glad he stopped playing and recorded music was played instead.

[lazyfingers]

Your ignorance is showing as well as your naivete but you don't have the experience to know it.  You make the assumption that Chopin is different from jazz (and dozens of other genres) when it is not. It's the same with only stylistic differences.  The lyrics/melody is flexible while the accompaniment is adhered to strict time and rhythm.

Please spare me... contrametric rubato has been known since before Mozart. It wouldn't have made anyone remark if that form was all Chopin did since just about everybody used it then.

In the early days, Chopin mostly subscribed to the contrametric form. In the 19th century, the agogic rubato made its prominence. There is lots of evidence that both forms were used by Chopin, as Mendelssohn and Berlioz remarked. The latter even claimed that Chopin push rhythmic independence too far!

Do not be afraid to step out of the darkness and experience exactly what I referred to.  Listen to the styles I mentioned and hear for yourself the direct comparisons that can be made.  Only then will your ignorance be abolished.  But as it is now, we have too many champions of ignorance.

You are beginning to sound far too fundamentally religious to me. And yet, you cannot show evidence of a famous Chopin interpreter playing in strict time! (Oh I forgot... everybody plays/enjoys "bad" Chopin except for you of course).

[dima_76557]

I've danced Argentine waltz.  Good performance of Argentine waltz are in strict 3/4 time.  We can step on the 1, 2, or 3, as well as the subdivisions.

The Argentine (tango) waltz is in a world of its own and is not an indicator of how a, let's say, Viennese waltz should be performed.

However, there was once a live performance of waltz (and tango) where the musician played with excessive rubato.  

Anything "excessive" is to be avoided in any style of playing. I think most would agree with that.

P.S.: As far as I know, Chopin's waltzes were never designed for dancing.

[faulty_damper]

The Argentine (tango) waltz is in a world of its own and is not an indicator of how a, let's say, Viennese waltz should be performed.

P.S.: As far as I know, Chopin's waltzes were never designed for dancing.

Argentine music is the melding of numerous cultures including European and African.  It's not a world of its own in any respect.  As for Viennese waltz, no one would dance to it if the beat were unpredictable.  And just because Chopin never intended his waltzes to be danced to does not mean it should be free of rhythmic and temporal pulses. The same for his mazurkas.

Again, the waltz wilt is the result of a strong-weak-weak pulse, not a weak-weak-weak pulse that many pianists play.  In order to achieve the wilt, each beat is in strict time but the downbeat is louder than the weak beats, and the 2nd weak beat is even weaker than the first.  This is how the impression of the wilt is performed.

[j_menz]

As for Viennese waltz, no one would dance to it if the beat were unpredictable. 

Firstly, it's a lilt, not a wilt as you persist in calling it.

A lilt is not in any way irregular or unpredictable. It is merely one example, among many, where what is written is not exactly what is played. Go off an listen to any Viennese band or orchestra playing a Strauss waltz. Perfectly predictable, but the three beats in a bar are not of equal duration. They are consistent throughout, but not equal as written.  The Viennese lilt is one of the more extreme, but other waltz conventions employ a similar effect to a lesser extent. And it is perfectly danceable.

[dima_76557]

Argentine music is the melding of numerous cultures including European and African.  It's not a world of its own in any respect.

I was talking about the Argentine (Tango) Waltz, not about Argentine music in general. The ONLY thing this type of waltz has in common with other types of waltzes is that it is written in 3/4, but that is a matter of graphics only.

[faulty_damper]

Firstly, it's a lilt, not a wilt as you persist in calling it.

A lilt is not in any way irregular or unpredictable. It is merely one example, among many, where what is written is not exactly what is played. Go off an listen to any Viennese band or orchestra playing a Strauss waltz. Perfectly predictable, but the three beats in a bar are not of equal duration. They are consistent throughout, but not equal as written.  The Viennese lilt is one of the more extreme, but other waltz conventions employ a similar effect to a lesser extent. And it is perfectly danceable.

Thanks for the correction.

Strauss wrote those waltzes that way as a farce.  It sounds terrible performed that way but was the fashion of the times, like bell bottom pants of the 6o's and skinny jeans of the 2000's-2010s.   

If by rubato, you mean the gradual accelerandis, I do not consider this rubato.

[faulty_damper]

I was talking about the Argentine (Tango) Waltz, not about Argentine music in general. The ONLY thing this type of waltz has in common with other types of waltzes is that it is written in 3/4, but that is a matter of graphics only.

The Argentine waltz is European of origin adapted with the instruments available at the time and influenced by the popular music of the time.  Almost all Argentine music is of foreign import from around the world.

[dima_76557]

The Argentine waltz is European of origin adapted with the instruments available at the time and influenced by the popular music of the time.  Almost all Argentine music is of foreign import from around the world.

This is all beside the point.

A Google search can help reveal the finer points. Just an example:
How different is tango vals from Viennese waltz (from post # 3 on)

[faulty_damper]

This is all beside the point.

A Google search can help reveal the finer points. Just an example:
How different is tango vals from Viennese waltz (from post # 3 on)

I post on that forum, btw.

Anyway, post #3 is just another way of saying that style is different but the form is the same.

[dima_76557]

Anyway, post #3 is just another way of saying that style is different but the form is the same.

What that poster writes is just one element of the many differences.

The waltz was the first West-European dance where the partners were allowed to both see and touch each other and the prudish community of that time had great difficulty accepting it even as far as 1825 (in the Oxford English Dictionary of that time the dance is called "riotous and indecent"). Composers were therefore required to keep both form and content "politically correct" and "decent", according to the puritan societal norms.

One can therefore not compare it with the liberating, erotic and seductive variant the Argentines made of this dance because those opposite spirits do simply not allow for similar means of expression. In the Argetine variant, you are also no longer bound to simply ONE-two-three, ONE-two-three. Apart from the 3/4 in which it is written, both form and content are unique mainly because of unexpected syncopations and such.

[faulty_damper]

That still doesn't address the topic of rubato.

[pianoman53]

That still doesn't address the topic of rubato.

And you haven't addressed anyone who plays Chopin in strict tempo.

[dima_76557]

That still doesn't address the topic of rubato.

Addressing rubato is/was not my intention (discussions about good taste rarely lead to anything constructive and/or useful). I mainly reacted to some generalisations you made about the waltz as such.

As to the topic: I use the metronome only to test my technical skills under certain forced, unnatural circumstances. Musical elements like Rubato depend on good taste and musical/cultural sophistication, and cannot be solved with the help of a metronome.

[ryankmfdm]