Chopin Op. 25, no. 2

[chopinisque]

After a quick search, I could barely find any information on this song here.  I'm thinking of starting this piece, being one of the easiest etudes.  It is still quite a ways from my level.  So, I'd thought I'd ask...

1.  Is this piece as easy as it looks?

2.  What other difficulties does it have in store other than the contrasting timing in the RH thirds and LH thirds?

3.  Are there any hard parts or points of interest to look out for?

4.  In the Henle Urtext, the fingering is 2, 131 243 131 245, etc.  But in the version at music-scores.com, it is (first note's fingering omitted) 132 132 132 145, etc.  In sheet music archive's version, it's 2 (tie here) and then the rest conforms with the Urtext.  Which was Chopin's original...

5.  Is there any interesting trivia or history related to the piece?

Thanks.

[will]

1. Maybe.  For me, to play at a the marked minim=112, no it is not easy. For me, to play slightly slower yes it is quite easy.

2. Playing it at a ridiculously fast speed. Making the whole piece interesting when the figuration is monotonous.

4. Not sure what Chopin's original fingerings were. I used a hybrid of the two fingering you refer to. I almost always used the thumb at the start of each triplet group. I found this physically and especially mentally convenient.  The fingering I used for the first bars was 132 143 132 145.

[ujos3]

I am playing this etude currently and I do not find it so easy to play at speed with the "whispering" character , dynamics and smoothness of the piece. It was described as a child sleep by someone, and it is said that Chopin described it as "the soul of a loved woman".

The phrasing in descending scales is also interesting. Listen to professional performances: they usually group notes somewhat in groups of six. It sounds beautiful.

My teacher gave me the fingering 132 132 132 145 132 132 132 154 243 212 353 124 343 231 243 231 , etc. It works for me.

Javier

[rhapsody in orange]

Here's a thread on the same etude..
https://pianoforum.net/smf/index.php/topic,6251.0.html
I'm currently working on this etude as well and would be glad to know what you people think about this etude =)

[chopinisque]

That's interesting... the fingering 132 causes that the two of you use causes the thumb to stay in place while the second and third fingers run over and around it.  It makes it easier to play the 54 at the end of the second bar.  More like a fingering for smaller hands, because, at speed, bigger hands might have to squeeze...  However, the 131 causes the thumb to move, evening out the exercise between the three fingers, eliminates cross fingers for big hands but make the strecth-contraction at the end of bar 2 (254) a bit more akward (probably much more pronouced at high speed).  Which to use...

I think this etude is great.  Its beauty isn't as obvious as the others.  It's much more subtle.  The perpetual motion feel of the piece is strangely hypnotic, like a spinning song or fast dance of some sort, and it sounds much harder than it is on paper.  Also,  I interpret the LH thrids as if it were a waltz, with very accented strong beats (2 per bar).  As for the accenting of the RH to sound like 4/4 (as discussed in the other thread), I don't think there should be any accent in the RH because it might spoil the  hypnotic feel, although that's probably just me.   

[steinwayguy]

If you really want to master this etude, it is extremely difficult. This is probably the most underestimated Chopin etude in my opinion. Obviously the first difficulty to overcome is the rhythm, play in groups of 6 with duples off of the left hand, not like triplets. Endurance presents a problem, for this you must use your fingers as little as possible and rotate your arm to as many notes as you can. Then you must be extremely quiet and extremely legato- very little to no pedal). Then recognize the harmonies and phrasing. If you have done all of this, you will most likely play this etude very well.

[chopinisque]

Obviously the first difficulty to overcome is the rhythm, play in groups of 6 with duples off of the left hand, not like triplets.

Could you explain this more explicitely?  How do you not play the LH like triplets when they are triplets?

Thanks.

[chopinisque]

Further question:  Do I play this with flat fingers or curved fingers?

I've tried doing a bit of analisis with my hopelessly meager theory abilities (grade 5) because I'm told it helps.  So, here's the analisis without the harmony (I'll do that later).  Please correct me if I'm wrong or miss out anything.  Thanks.

Page 1 is the same as page 2 and most of page 4.  I've also noted the large amounts of f minor scales and arpeggios in the piece.

The song's most prominent theme is c-d flat-b.  It appears twice in each bar of the two question-answer phrases that keep recurring.

Those two bars are connected to the next phrase (bar 4-7) by a linking bar.  The second phrase consists of a descending recurring motif that goes: note, chromatic upper auxilary, note followed by an echapee.  Then there's an arpeggio going up and down before returning to the question-answer theme.  After that, we have arpeggios and scales rising and falling before ending with a motif of auxilary thirds.

The special part in page 3 is another series of auxilary notes, scales and something I don't remember (echapees ad cambiatas).

I know I sound terrible but everyone seems to say it helps in memorization and identifying a strategy...

[ujos3]

Further question: Do I play this with flat fingers or curved fingers?

I have a recent story about that.

I have had a teacher in another country for some months who told me to play this etude mostly with flat fingers, "because it is the style of the piece" but in a practical way, without dogmatisms (if I wanted to play it at some moments with curved fingers it was ok).

Now I am back to my country (Spain) and yesterday I showed the piece to my usual teacher here. He has a very good Russian teacher and plays regularly with curved fingers.

First, he placed some comments about minimising the left hand movements to make it easier, because I used to miss some notes.

Then he told me that it was no good to "mix" movements. I have to decide between playing generally with curved fingers or with flat fingers. But not both, because:

1) This piece demands homogeneity, fluent way of playing, relax. May be it can only be achieved by a unified style.

2) If I acquire a fluid, homogeneus style, other pieces should be easier to learn, because the general aproach to the keyboard is already learned - that is , I would not  need specific solutions,  I would just play mostly all the time at the "usual" style position (flat or curved)-.

Of  course, I have no choice . I will learn to play it with curved fingers because it is the best way my teacher can teach me. The "practical" approach (specific solutions for every difficult moment) does not impress him at all.

But I would like to get some advice about this interesting question.
(Please suppose some common sense in my actual teacher).

Thanks.

[anda]

1) This piece demands homogeneity, fluent way of playing, relax. May be it can only be achieved by a unified style.

control yourself with your ears, not your eyes. very true, "this piece demands homogeneity, fluent way of playing, relax", but as for how to achieve it, you should find yourself the way that best suites you. also,  try suggesting you teacher listening to you without watching you - he might be able to help you more this way.

2) If I acquire a fluid, homogeneus style, other pieces should be easier to learn, because the general aproach to the keyboard is already learned - that is , I would not  need specific solutions,  I would just play mostly all the time at the "usual" style position (flat or curved)-.

yeah right  i wish it was so easy... you always need specific solutions! i've recently had a somewhat similar discution with another piano teacher who said "the correct wrist position is..." - there is no "correct" wrist position, or finger position, or body position! it all varies from pianist to pianist, and especially from work to work.

(Please suppose some common sense in my actual teacher).

i have had teacher like this one. i learned all i could learn from each of them and moved on. and i am very grateful to all of them for everything i learned from them.

best luck

[ujos3]

control yourself with your ears, not your eyes.

Yes , this teacher always talks about tone, sound and all that. But he had time ago a tendinitis problem, and his new Russian teacher corrected him and has convinced him to play in a concrete way. Now he is a "new converse" to this russian school regime and he is willing me to play in that style.

However, I am having no problems in playing this etude with curved fingers, because "the notes" were already learned. It is taking some practice but no more. And may be all the notes sound similar one to each other, may be it is better now. I don't know.

i wish it was so easy... you always need specific solutions! i've recently had a somewhat similar discution with another piano teacher who said "the correct wrist position is..." - there is no "correct" wrist position, or finger position, or body position! it all varies from pianist to pianist, and especially from work to work.

I know we always need specific solutions. He was talking in general. But i still have some doubts. My other teacher was more "practical" and direct I think. But was he better in the long run?. (Anyway, he was more in my way of thinking than the actual teacher...).

Thanks, anda, for your reply

[chopinisque]

I think I've figured out why I should use 131 243 instead of 132 132.  Because the latter requires you to play with your thumb under your palm which, according to Chang's book, is a no-no for playing fast.  And if this song doesn't require speed, I don't see what does.  Am I right?  Confirmation.  Yes no?  Do I have to go and write a paper on it or something? LOL

[ujos3]

I think I've figured out why I should use 131 243 instead of 132 132.  Because the latter requires you to play with your thumb under your palm which, according to Chang's book, is a no-no for playing fast.

Of course, if you think Chang's book is the "Bible for the Practising Pianist", you are right avoiding thumb under everywhere. But Chang is only one teacher (and quite dogmatic in too many things in my opinion). Ask some other teachers or students, you will see big differences in opinions.

In this etude with the fingering 132 132 the thumb rests very near of the key, in a sense it does not "pass" under. It remains under. I think the fingering is more for small hands like mine (I reach just a ninth).

My last teacher was more of the thumb under school, I think. He even recommended me to try some thumb under exercises (32-34) from Hanon. But mostly because he thought I had rigidness problems with my thumbs (a very typical problem in many piano students: the thumb is somewhat rigid while other fingers are playing).

Anyway, he allowed me to play with thumb over the last arpeggio of this etude, so he was not a fanatic believer on thumb under.