A question on rests

[adodd81802]

If a rest comes between two notes but the score indictates that you hold the sustain throughout, should you? Or should you cut off for the rest and come back in until indicated to lift off? An example would be chopin waltz 64 no 2 some parts of the left hand do this.

[dcstudio]

 are you referring to the 1st page?

that means legato--not sustain...

give me more information please. what are you referring to?

the score will never tell you to sustain and rest and the "come back to the sustained note"  you can't pick the decaying sound of a note back up...  

if there is another voice like say in a fugue--one voice or part might have a sustained set of notes--(or tied) notes with a rest between them...but it indicates that the second voice is resting for a different period of time than the first... not that you should "let go" of the tie and return to it.

so NO.

[keypeg]

I grabbed a score at random.   I see pedal indications (Ped. ... *, etc.)

https://imslp.nl/imglnks/usimg/d/d7/IMSLP114892-PMLP02373-FChopin_Waltzes__Op.64_BH9.pdf    
I see examples of what the OP is talking about on p. 2

A couple of things I remember being told:
- That pedal marks in Chopin often are not that accurate; together with this, that pedal is of a musical choice that you make as you understand the music and with that understanding, decide on the musical effects you want

There is also another concept that blew me away, since it implied two aspects to reading and maybe writing music.  1. In one, the notation is written to tell you how the music should sound.  For example, on p. 2 where the LH has a rest on beat 3, mentally I would hear a silence in the LH and so would want to produce that silence (the note in beat 2 is cut off).  Obviously that is an impossibility if you have the sustain pedal down as indicated in the score.  That, in fact, is the OP's dilemma.
But 2.  That a score can be written to indicate the physical motions that the composer envisions: Chopin having been a master pianist who fully understood the instrument, and aiming for an effect.  Thus if you physically play as it is written - for example in the 3rd measure on p. 2 - LH Db - FAb - with the sustain down for the whole measure - then the FAb would last for two beats, and that Chopin would have intended for it to sound that way.  This also allows you to release the hand early to get down to the G.  With the Minute Waltz being a fast piece, that early release is quite welcome.  If this is so, it may even be that Chopin wrote what he felt in his hand.

The first time this came up was while looking at a score where the sustain was indicated but staccato was shown - another impossibility.  But if played with that staccato motion plus sustain, you had a particular auditory effect.

This is all an approximate memory of something from quite a while back, so I'm hoping someone else will weigh in.

dcstudio - does this ring any kind of bells?  Or am I out to lunch, do you think?  

[dcstudio]

ok now I see what your asking...  the pedal is clearly marked -- so it stays down...  but the fingers play the rest--the hand lifts during the rest

the LH is more the focus of the sustained sound...  the RH should be bell like

[adodd81802]

Dcstudio, thanks for your response. Just to be sure, I have added an example.

I'm not one for copying others technique, but if you don't always have a piano teacher to hand, you tend to take to performances of some good pianists to get an idea of how something would sound. Horowitz tends to love taking the pedal off, which very much contrasts Kissin for example

To be honest, I do like the cut, one thing I have learned from playing a lot of Chopin is my legato is terrible. With songs offering the ability to effectively abuse the pedal, I have realised a lot of my music is pretty much staccato with pedal, so I couldn't tell the difference of how to play this piece with or without rest.

Question, why are the rests in there, is it just to make sure the notes aren't too over powering?

[adodd81802]

Also keypeg - thanks for your response. I will play with pedal down, my query stemmed probably from the fact that my piano is not of a great make, and when sustaining and playing a combination of notes it seems to lack clarity, which had me considering removing pedal altogether with the rests

[keypeg]

ok now I see what your asking...  the pedal is clearly marked -- so it stays down...  but the fingers play the rest--the hand lifts during the rest.

Therefore you will end up having the 2nd note sounding like it's a half note, even though it is written as a quarter note followed by a rest.  This was the important thing that I learned which I wrote about, namely that music can be written to show how to play, rather than how it should sound.  In other words, you don't try to reproduce that quarter rest sound.  It is a quirk particular to piano.

[dcstudio]

for the first section that 16th rest is clearly meant to be heard..or not heard..whatever... most students ask about that when they learn this...

it looks like Fred wants it audible but not too percussive..  keep in mind that his sustain pedal then did not sustain like the pedals of today....  it would have decayed away a bit more quickly

but this one is open to interpretation.. 

[nystul]

This is an uninformed opinion of a poor hobby piano player, but it was interesting to think about.  If you listen to waltzes played by ensemble, the rhythm part (oom pah pah) is usually very short and muted.  Or the bass note on count one is sustained but the notes on 2 and 3 are still very short.  It might be out of character to write those as half notes unless there is some specific reason to do so.

I think then with piano, if the short notes are played lightly, pedal can be used and still have the desired character.  If that would be the artistic choice made, then pedal would not necessarily need to be cleared for a rest either.

[keypeg]

it looks like Fred wants it audible but not too percussive..  keep in mind that his sustain pedal then did not sustain like the pedals of today....  it would have decayed away a bit more quickly

That is also interesting.  I think the bottom line is that written music is not like a set of Ikea instructions but more like guidelines.  When I was doing music completely on my own, I thought that scores had to be taken literally and verbatim.  Therefore that score would have confused me as it did the OP, because I would have thought that the listener must hear the 2nd bass note as a quarter note rather than a half note, but then what about the sustain etc.  That's an important thing to know about, even if it is obvious to experienced pianists.

[dcstudio]

I thought that scores had to be taken literally and verbatim.

yep, you feel like if you don't follow every single thing to the letter that you will be punished somehow...lol...  that it won't be right...  

like Fred will rise up from the grave in a horrid violent protest because you didn't hold the pedal long enough...lol    then the world will know you really don't know how to play...

I have thought this through...  many times..


and yes--understanding the instruments of the period is really kind of vital to determining what the composers intentions were.   That's why stuff get's re edited and new markings are added, it's not the piece that has changed--it's the instrument

Mozart had no pedal till later in his career...if ever, I can't remember  
and Bach had no piano...  so whatcha gonna do?    actually Bach was cool with his stuff being played on other instruments as I recall--as long as it was done well...   but none of it was ever intended for piano...  so arguing about it is really pointless.   but they do it anyway...his instrument had no dynamic range... so..  it's not gonna be like he intended if you play it on the piano anyway

[keypeg]

Exactly.

For those of us who started self-taught, I don't think there is a fear factor, but rather, you just assume things are as they appear to be because what else do you have to go on?  That does help is help our fellows later on when we do know a few things.