Is trill speed limited on an upright?

[1piano4joe]

Hi all,

If repeated notes are faster on a grand than an upright then shouldn't the same be true for a very fast trill?

It seems possible to me to be able to play an adjacent note so incredibly fast executing a trill that the hammer hasn't "reset" on the previous note and that I'm limited by the piano action of the upright.

Does that make sense?

There are two long trills in Bach's invention no. 4 in d minor. I'm using 13 and 31. The quavers (8th notes) are beated at 180 BPM. Just curious but how in the world is this Allegro and not Presto?

I can play H.S. at 200 BPM in either hand but not the trills. Hands together, the 8th notes at 180 are 3 notes per second in one hand against 16th notes in the other which are 6 notes per second. BUT, if the trills are 32nd notes then that is 12 notes per seconds in one hand against 6 16th notes in the other. These 12 notes are not the same key repeated but alternating keys.

There is some kind of problem. I'm not sure what it is. Is it my math? I don't know. I have this piece only worked up to quavers at 84 BPM hands together so far but I have only been working on it a few days. Anyway, I have worked on the trills and found them near impossible to execute even hands separately up to tempo. Maybe my trill technique is not up to snuff?

Are trills supposed to be able to be played even faster than scales are? This is the equivalent of scales at quarter equals 180 BPM and playing 4 sixteenth notes per beat!

Some editions have triplets for the trill and not 16ths and some say let the trills go free.

I think this is doable for me in the 126-160 range which I take to be Allegro. It sounds quite nice already even at only 84.

I'm only an intermediate so maybe those tempos are for advanced players with considerably more chops? I just don't know.

I could use some help, Joe.


 

[j_menz]

The quavers (8th notes) are beated at 180 BPM. 

By whom? Hint: Not Bach. It seems rather fast for my taste.

The trill you are suggesting is going to be possible on an upright without issue.  It's a LH trill, so not easy for most pianist at your level.

My advice - slow it down to where the trill is doable for you. You can speed it up later if you wish. Seems to me 180 is not for "advanced pianists", just speed freaks.

[bobert]

A trill is just a trill - a fast alternation of two pitches.  It doesn't have to be measured.  It doesn't even have to be constant.  It can be completely independent of the tempo.  You could play the same passage at three different tempos and the realization of the trill would or could be exactly the same objective speed in all three.  Some editions do, indeed, layout full trill notation, but this is more a suggestion, an aid to the novice to help get started coordinating the two lines, rather than anything that must be strictly adhered to.

[chopinlover01]

Actually, because the hammers are positioned along the strings horizontally, they don't have gravity assisting them, so speed is somewhat limiting. livingpianovideos on Youtube has a great monologue about it, under the video "Uprights vs Grands". Interesting video, look it up.
For this invention, however, 180 is ridiculously fast. There's no need for that many f***ing notes. You should be fine.

[j_menz]

Actually, because the hammers are positioned along the strings horizontally, they don't have gravity assisting them, so speed is somewhat limiting.

I am aware of the differences between an upright and a grand. The trill in question at the speed suggested is eminently within the capability of any upright I've ever played on, and some of them have possessed actions memorable only for their shortcomings.

[outin]

Some editions have triplets for the trill and not 16ths and some say let the trills go free.

 

IMO in Baroque you can use whatever division and speed is doable for you at the tempo of the piece. The speed of the trill is irrelevant as long as it's musically meaningful.

[iansinclair]

A few comments -- I'll keep this short since I can't type that well these days...

First, unlike later music, Baroque and earlier trills are to be done strictly according to time.  Generally the trill or other ornamental notes are to be twice the finest subdiivision written in the piece; thus if ther are sixteenth notes written, then trills and the like would be thirtyseconds.  There are, of course, exceptions...

Second, be very careful about going too fast in Baroque and earlier music.  There is a very common error in playing it too fast.  Sometimes much too fast.  If you, your instrument, and your performing space combine so that the notes are uneven in tempo, or blur together, you are going too fast.  Slow down!  In some ways, it is sometimes helpful to use the ornaments themselves as a guide.  They must be even and crisp and in time.  If they are not, slow it up until they are, and set the tempo of the whole piece that way.

[indianajo]

I've answered this on instruments but you didn't read it I suppose.
Just because you have a  upright that was a better picture stand than a musical instrument doesn't mean they all are. I can approach or maybe exceed 900 bpm with two hands on my console pianos. One is a 1982 Sohmer 39, the other is a child damaged 1941 Steinway 40.   Uprights from pre-1932 can be as fast but many mechanisms are beginning to come unglued, so there aren't as many good ones anymore.  Look at JoAnne Castle do right hand tremelos on Lawrence Welk reruns if you don't believe. me.  They had a different beater upright every week, it seems. The paint was different every week. 

[1piano4joe]

Hi all,

I read all the responses and have to agree with everyone saying that 180 bpm is too fast. It's just that the Alfred 2 & 3 part inventions has a table of tempos on page 16. The website is stopping me from copying the link. If you want to google it directly, "bach invention tempo czerny gould" should work.

I agree with iansinclair who wrote:

"First, unlike later music, Baroque and earlier trills are to be done strictly according to time.  Generally the trill or other ornamental notes are to be twice the finest subdiivision written in the piece; thus if ther are sixteenth notes written, then trills and the like would be thirtyseconds.  There are, of course, exceptions...

Second, be very careful about going too fast in Baroque and earlier music.  There is a very common error in playing it too fast.  Sometimes much too fast.  If you, your instrument, and your performing space combine so that the notes are uneven in tempo, or blur together, you are going too fast.  Slow down!  In some ways, it is sometimes helpful to use the ornaments themselves as a guide.  They must be even and crisp and in time.  If they are not, slow it up until they are, and set the tempo of the whole piece that way."

For my ears 120-160 bpm sounds best. At 120 bpm H.T. (which I now can handle easily) it seems to drag a little to my ears. At 140 bpm H.T. (which I somehow managed to achieve) it doesn't sound like it's dragging anymore. At 160 bpm (coordinating the "MEASURED" trills gets awkward for me). I think it sounds best at this tempo. It seems to be really zipping along as I feel this one is meant to. Is that still too fast?

I have H.S. up to 240 bpm. I can't believe it. The trills are shaken out of my body. It's mostly wrist rotation. It feels like a tremolo to me. Is this the correct movement? My hand is a blur and so is the sound. I think I'm using finger action coordinated with wrist rotation and it seems this finger movement is more for lifting the finger off the key than depressing it. Does that sound reasonable? There seems to be very little movement of the hand and my trilling fingers stay in contact with the keys during the trill. I think that's what I'm doing but I'm not sure. Also, I give a little pulse on the down beat of the 4 32nd notes to keep track of where I am since the trills go on for several measures. Is this alright?

That's all for now, Joe.