beethoven apassionata

[ponecorleone]

has anyone played or heard beethovens apassionate op 57, how hard is it to learn compared to chopin etudes 10#1 and 10 # 4

[TheHammer]

Well I have, and I think the first and most important difference to the etudes is, that the appassionata is much longer!(20+) You will need even more endurance than for the etudes. Then you have the interpretation point, in my opinion it is very difficult to deliver a convincing performance of the 1. and 2. mov. It is hard to hold it all together, so you must be quite grown up musically, that is.
Technically, the sonata has some more challenges, but if you are at the level of chopin 10/4 you could give it a try (that's just my opinion, so you could try it nevertheless). Very demanding technically is the third movement- very fast runs, arpeggios (omg when I think of the presto at the end... without words), but that's also true for the first (add to this all the loud and fast chords in the end of both movements - a true feast of angry banging!). Anyway you see, some difficulties appear here...

Well, on the other hand, you could just sight read the hard passages at the end of the outer movements, and see if you can play them (if thats your intention actually, cause you just wanted to know how hard it is).
Best luck

[dinosaurtales]

The apassionata has some interesting technical bits to be sure.  The first movement had more "elements" that had to be smoothed out, such as the finger-switching in the opening theme in both hands.  the repeated bass notes that have to be even in rhythm and dynamics, yet maintain a driving pulse - tricky, the "walking" octaves in the main melody (if you have small hands like I do - this stuff was tough for me), adn all the darned trills!  my god!  they are everywhere, and in all the different configurations - some with rhythmic endings, some without, some 4-5 finger trills = egad!  I don't think there was one "easy" measure in the first movement - just tons of fussy stuff.  That said, it's a blast to play when you finally get it all!

The last section of the second movement wasn't nearly as technical, but once the sixteenths start they don't stop!  so Speed is the trick here.  they all have to be even sixteenths - yup even the jumps! - so learn to love your metronome.  There was a period there when I was convinced I'd never get that thing up to speed - too many blips - too many "out of sync" spots where both hands are doing sixteenths together - but one day it just popped.  It's also a total blast to play once you get it down.  all in all, theApassionata is one of my all-time favorite pieces.

[chopinguy]

The Appasionata Sonata is truly one of the scariest pieces I have EVER heard... lol.
try turning the volume way up and listening to it.  the pianos are piano, and the fortissimos are FORTISSIMO!!!

my teacher just told me to start learning it (1st mvmt), and i was wondering if it's possible to learn it and give a really convincing performance of it by about 1.5 - 2 months from now?  What are some of the really difficult aspects of appasionata in the opinions of people who've learned it already?

thanks

chopinguy

[lostinidlewonder]

Generally I find the 1st movement the harder of the three. The last movement is always played way too fast in my opinion. You naturally feel it should be fast and the fingers edge you on to, but i reckon we can't disregard Beethovens marking of "ma non troppo" so we have to hold back a little.

In the last movement, I guess the most difficult part of that was bar64 in the LH. Playing the (FAb) and Eb octaves. That requires real strength. Also I find that if you start the 3rd movement too fast, to make the Presto section in the end sound any faster is way too hard. So finding the correct speed to start off with could come from identifying your presto speed. I like to use a little more unorthdoxed fingering when playing the RH in bar 20: 1243432 | 14321231. I haven't seen anyone else use that, they usually do 1235321 | 24 etc. But for me i find that the former fingering holds everything in a grasp of the hand.

For the first movement i found bars51 tough. To bring out the upper voice is not natural and demands control. Practice to death bars 228-234. This has to send shivers down anyones spine, so it has to be played really well. I really like Richter's recordings of the Appassionata. Any sections in particular?

[TheHammer]

OK, so now that we are all together here we could discuss the following problem as well.

In the third movement, we have a repeat sign at bar 118, the section which is supposed repeated goes till the presto. My Henle edition at this spot also states: 'Here the autograph says also: "la seconda parte due volte"(=the second part two times)
No problem you think? Well, for me it just seems plain wrong to repeat this part!
Reason: In this second part we get to know some new ideas, especially starting at bar 142. It`s like a huge and steadily increasing flood of notes, but instead of a real climax it suddenly aborts after the ascending arpeggio (around bar 178). It's repeated, but the "flood" is over. There is no climax, on the contrary, we now get to this very intimidate piano passage (192-211), nearly the only rest place in the entire movement. When I play it, I feel like this is the last time I can really "hold it back" before the end. (Of course we have other piano passages in the movement, but only here the steady sixteenth note runs cease.) Maybe my view on the movement is too superficial (?), but even if you don`t see pure fury in it (which I don`t neither), I think I have a point when I say that especially the mentioned passage should stay unique, and not be repeated.
Any thoughts?

[lostinidlewonder]

In this second part we get to know some new ideas, especially starting at bar 142. It`s like a huge and steadily increasing flood of notes, but instead of a real climax it suddenly aborts after the ascending arpeggio (around bar 178). It's repeated, but the "flood" is over. There is no climax, on the contrary, we now get to this very intimidate piano passage (192-211), nearly the only rest place in the entire movement.

I would think from bar 142 you wouldn't aim to steadily increase. Instead it is trying to set up a contrast between two intensities of the melody. As you see, he plays the RH melody with one note to start, then contrasts it with octaves. The octaves reinforce the melody and naturally echoes what you play at a louder intensity. So from bar 142-157 highlight this relationship, controlling to a softer sound when the RH plays single notes and then supporting an increase of suond when octaves play. This to me is the basis for interpration here.

Bars 158-167 should sound more legato so that when 168 appears the double tailed rests beethoven writes is highlighted and the sound is more detached, another contrast. As you approach 176 you should really broaden what you are playing, slow down a little, but think about broader sounds more than tempo slowing down.

Then when finally you reach bar 176 you hold the sustain down the entire time and the upward arpeggios are given full length making the whole piano vibrate. This sound almost echoes through the room when you release the entire sound for the whole bar rests. The two ff arpeggio sounds are then contrasted with softer p, dinimishing, this which should allow listeners to percieve each note a little clearer, not as one whole body of sound as the first two ff ones.

The slow down is so important as you see entire bars played with just one note from 200. This highlights yet again another contrast when you move back to the original theme. The contrast between a huge slow down then back to a brisker tempo makes what you play sound much more exciting, even when it is played at pp. If there is no slow down then it is so hard to make this return encouraged.

Beethoven always highlights contrasts in sounds throughout his music. I guess that is why he was such a good writer for piano because he utilised what it could do. You have to ensure you always search for what part contrasts one another in Beethoven's music.

When I peform this piece I never do the repeat, also I don't do the repeat in the First movement of the Pathetique when it returns to the second page. I have also heard the same done in other peformances/recordings. I don't think it is absoluetly necessary to do the repeat back to Bar 118 even though the autograph says it. I personally never liked it also. I vaguely remember my teacher saying to me that in examinations you do all the repeats but in pefromances you dont have to. So I guess it's up to your own prefference.

[TheHammer]

Actually, I completely agree to your interpretation! I think I just abbreviated my thoughts  on this passage a little bit.

Now nice to hear that someone shares my opinion on the repeat. I also have heard several recordings, some repeating, some not. It just upsets me that I am not of the same opinion as Beethoven was. It remains somewhat odd to me to do exactly the opposite of what the composer intended.