I just had the opportunity to hear a piano roll recording of Debussy himself playing his famous "Claire De Lune" (I've included the link below)

It's like no other performance of this song I've ever heard, and I've been terribly interested in it ever since i discovered it the other day. The characteristic "impressionism" and colors are tremendously more apparent in this performance. Particularly noticeable in the "slurred" aspect of the familiar theme at measure 27...(among many other places) It almost doesn't even sound like a piano, as all accounts I've read of his actual playing style seem to corroborate. -We've all heard references to his style as a piano "without hammers".


I know that piano rolls are somewhat controversial in the realms of dynamics and subtleties (He used the Welte-Mignon system on this one, I believe), but being a "real time" mechanism, I would think that the notes, tempos, "rubato" would be cut into the paper as he himself "actually" played the piece. I read that Debussy himself was very pleased with these piano roll recordings. The performance has that "ring of truth" to it...

Just wanted to share this with you all, if anyone out there hasn't heard this yet. This serves as a wonderful insight into the song, and Debussy's playing style in general for anyone learning it.

I think of this song in a completely new way now... what do you all think?




Debussy plays Debussy

I think the recording shows how much playing styles have changed. If someone played this piece this way today, IMO they might be accused of rhythmical inaccuracy and/or tasteless rubato. Even the rolled chords sounded out of place.

I found it interesting but didn't enjoy it at all. I didn't hear anything particularly beautiful in the tone quality.

I wonder if Debussy really wanted the piece to sound this way. He was very precise and detailed in his scores, but I don't think he followed his own score very well especially on the first two pages.

I listened to his recordings of Evening in Granada, Delphic Dancers, Sunken Cathdral and Golliwog's Cakewalk and the recordings sounded more like the way people would play these works today.

Yes, it's definitely an eyebrow raiser! The "rhythmical inaccuracy and tasteless rubato" certainly is somewhat of a shock when compared with the modern interpretations normally heard (ie. generally following the score) -Except he did make this recording himself.. and must have been somewhat pleased with the result.

Several questions arise after hearing this:

Could this be an example of "do as I say, not as I do" when interpreting the score? -As I've read Beethoven to be at times (in the book "The Great Pianists" , by Harold Schonberg). Beethoven was cited as being very strict about the score when teaching students or commenting on others' performances of his work, but some eyewitnesses accounts say that he noticeably varied his tempos artistically in a manner that contrasted to his insistence on following the score in others.

If this was the way he intended it, was the score merely inadequate to account for such an interpretation of impressionistic music (the strange rubato, tempo accelerations etc...)? I mean, how accurately can you quantify the artistic qualities of impressionistic playing styles with a musical score?(Could be that he's just taking artistic liberties in the performance of his own song)

I read a bit more about the Welte-Mignon systems (correct me if I'm wrong), and found it was capable of recording pedaling and pressure of the fingers on the key.

NY Times article on Debussy's Piano roll Recordings

(Note the 7th paragraph down)

If only we could hear recordings of Beethoven, Chopin, or Liszt ("Yeah yeah....") I wonder how much of a shock that would be at times to our modern ears?

This piano roll is definitely food for thought!

I think Debussy could have easily written the score so it would match the way he plays it if he wanted to, and it has little to do with "quantifying the artistic qualities of Impressionistic playing". "Artistic liberties" doesn't mean doing whatever one wants to. This is what LL is often criticized for. My guess is that appropriate/acceptable interpretation meant something quite different 100 years ago.

Or maybe there is something wrong with the piano roll. Or maybe Debussy had a stomach ache when he recorded CDL. The other Debussy recordings don't seem to be anywhere as extreme.

Very True. Though, would this also apply to the composer of the song as well, performing his own work? Back in the dawn of "recording". It seems that Debussy took these piano roll recordings quite seriously, and was pleased with the results. If he was trying to preserve the songs as he played them for posterity, you'd think that he would try to perform it as closely to his most well known interpretation (especially with how popular this song is).

What if we just hypothesize for fun, that the piano roll is not messed up in any way, and accurately depicts the way he intended to play the song, with all the strange timing and such, (At least, at that point in his life, -who knows, maybe he did have a stomachache, lol!), what then?

Aren't those "artistic liberties," like rubato, and the accelerations, "intentional inaccuracies", rolled chords, etc, some of those certain individual qualities that give a musician their own "tone" (or style, so to speak)? -It's well documented that Chopin had a characteristic rubato that contributed to his own unique style. -Enough to the point where he got into that argument with Meyerbeer over the time signature of one of his pieces (Mazurka in C Op 33/3). Meyerbeer claimed it was 2/4, Chopin exclaimed it was 3/4, quite emotionally, and they parted in a bad mood!

I doubt though, that Chopin would have ever deviated far from from what was written (certainly not like what is heard in this piano roll), being the most "Classical" of the romantics, and having a distaste for "artistic liberties" -the wanton embellishments and tempo fluctuations of other pianists of the day.

(Ok, so the Chopin analogy isn't that great as it relates to the deviance from the score we hear in this roll )

But hey, maybe Debussy did play it this way, liberties and all...? (possibly preferring stylistically to play it this way). That impressionistic piano flavor is pretty darn abstract sometimes.

Also, sometimes after songs are composed, some can sort of take a new life as the composer continues to play them throughout his or her life. Changing here and there sometimes with noticeable differences from the way it was originally published. ("a song is never truly finished....etc") Another Possibility?

Fataliac:
Thank you so much for sharing this! *This* is the kind of playing I find exciting and musical! I know it's not popular now, and that is why I generally don't go to concerts. I have heard recordings of pianists early in recording technology who played just like this...the rolled chords, rubato, separation of hands, so I would say that most likely this piano roll was quite accurate. I really appreciated hearing this today :D>

One can only hazard guesses as to what Debussy intended, although his playing undoubtedly reflected the norm of his era. One might also suggest that were Debussy to have lived in more modern times his playing, too, would have changed to reflect that of the current "norm."

The overuse of excessive rubato, broken chords, unsynchronized hands was indeed the "style" of piano playing at the turn of the 20th century but, as has already been suggested, such playing now is considered passé, out-of-date, old fashioned - any term that suggests is not standard performance practice. Indeed, we consider it to be sloppy and tasteless, at best.

Such recordings, historically interesting as the may be, can only be viewed in the context of their time and, I think, should not be used as yardsticks for current performance practice.

Regards,

Are you sure this is legitimate?

A while ago there were postings on youtube of Ravel playing Jeux D'eau. These sort of discussion ensued about "composer's intention", and then it was discovered later that the playing was not Ravel at all, just a piano roll from a contemporary of Ravel.

As for the performance itself, if it actually is Debussy, while I certainly have respect for it, I personally don't like it. I find it is rushed and many beautiful moments are lost. I find the same of his piano roll of "Dr Gradus ad Parnassum", a piece that I find to be a nostalgic witty piece, which he just rushes through like a student exercise. There was a NYT article exploring this same question. Can I declare that the composer is not playing his own piece in the best way? Interesting question.

Well said. Excessive artistic liberties should never be used in poor taste. Debussy, though, was a product of that artistic time period, so was/is his music, and so was the playing style. If the song was written for that style, couldn't it be (just for fun) proposed that it was best suited for playing in that style, as Mozart is, for the "classical" style?

I share Chopin's feelings when he angrily said to Liszt, "Play the music as written, or not at all" (After playing one of Chopin's pieces with a smattering of his usual embellishments)

Liszt replies: "play it yourself!"

...And we all know what happened next

But that's just it. This piano roll is of Debussy himself, playing his own own composition (allegedly -I'll see what I can find about the authenticity of the recording), as Chopin did when challenged by Liszt. Not by an interpreter.

The style of the times it may be, and unpopular now (understandably so), but I think that this piano roll, with his own tempos, rubatos, and lack of synchronicity can really shed some light on the coloring effects he used. Especially with this song, since it is one of the most popular piano pieces ever written, regardless of genre or current state of accepted playing style.

A lot has been gained in modern times with the resurgence of "scientific piano playing strictly as written" as Alfred Brendel, for example does. (And Brendel's performances are some of my favorite of the Beethoven interpretations) But I'd like to agree with Morodiene by suggesting that there may be a certain "artistic edge" or sense of individuality that may have been lost... Especially for those songs written with that style in mind, as they were popularly embraced by the masses back then. I think a lot's to be said about it.

I'm not telling every student of this song to rebel against their piano teacher of course. lol!! (you can't take any artistic liberties, if you're so inclined, without first properly knowing the music as written)

I myself don't care for a few of Debussy's liberties in the recording, but wow, There are many parts in there that have really opened my eyes about what I've always read Debussy's coloring effects to be about (esp. the volume dynamics and some of the LH speed/pedal slurring). Some of which, seem to be amplified simply because of that "passe" style which is no longer accepted.

May I request - before someone else does - that you refrain from referring to a piano composition as a "song"? I'm not sure what your musical background is, but in the discussion of classical music, "song" is reserved - with very few exceptions - to describe vocal works. Songs are sung. Piano pieces, compositions, works - and all the more specific genre names (etudes, preludes, fugues, sonatas, etc.,) are played.

Thank you.

Regards,

Ah, The most pertinent question of all!

So far, I've found two cds available that claim to be "Debussy plays Debussy" piano roll recordings available for sale at the provided links:

"Masters of the Piano Roll - Debussy (cited as played by Debussy)"
-This one clearly has Clair De Lune on the tracklist

BUT, you'll notice in the 'see also' section that there's another cd of the same series "Master of the piano roll - Ravel", in which the track listing includes "Jeux D'eau" which Theowne already addressed...

I found more info on the Debussy rolls at this site:

Debussy Plays Debussy
-and the further link on this site to Amazon.com where that cd can be purchased

In which either the "Suite Bergamasque" or "Clair De Lune" by itself are NOT in the tracklist.

So no, I'm not sure it's legitimate. Help with this appreciated...

You're right, please excuse me.... "piece," "work," or "artistic, chronologically-based tone sequence," or "Movement 3 of the Suite Bergamasque", if you prefer... (Gee, I didn't expect anyone to mince words over the term "song" in this context)

I think we have a more important matter at hand at the moment though, that is, the legitimacy of the recording, as "played by Debussy himself"

I'd like to state for the record that I don't find the use of the term `song' in this context objectionable. If it was good enough for Mendelssohn, it's good enough for me. There are, indeed, more important issues to worry about.

I have a piano roll of my teacher who made rolls for Welte-Mignon and it has a statement on it with her signature that she verifies it as her playing and she gives her approval. The statement:

"This record is an authentic reproduction of my playing.
Cecile de Horvath"

Ken Caswell made a CD for me of this roll and others of her performances so I feel that Debussy must have done something similar. I have a 33/ vinyl record of his playing and can't say that I'm impressed but Debussy in general doesn't impress me except for particular pieces.

View it as an historical treasure and enjoy it as such.

http://www.djupdal.org/karstein/debussy/recordings.shtml doesn't include Clair de lune, nor does any other list that I can find (excluding CD promotional materials and summaries). I'd be surprised if Debussy did record it, because as I understand it he only polished up Suite Bergamasque and had the pieces published because he desperately needed the money. He didn't consider them good works. Even if Clair de lune had become a household classic across Europe by 1912 or 1913, I'm not sure that its popularity would make him want to record it for posterity. Debussy seemed like the kind of guy to record music that he thought was high quality and worth preserving in his own performance, regardless of what other people thought. (Children's Corner = music he liked and would also sell well.) Nevertheless, I'm intrigued and I look forward to listening to the link when I get home from work.

I think the point is regardless of whether or not it is actually Debussy, it is from that time period, in a well-accepted practice of performance for the time. Yes it is out-dated, old-fashioned, and any other hyphenated term you wish to attribute to it, but give me that any day over how music is generally played today (there are those who do play this way, thankfully to those of us who enjoy that). It fully engages my mind and it doens't lure me to sleep. This is also why I like Horowitz so much, because he used these same techniques in his playing.

Again, I know this is not the popular thing to say, but I'm saying for the sake of those who may inwardly like this style of playing but be afraid to think so. You are not alone!

I've heard quite a few recordings by various pianists from around the same time and none were nearly as rhythmically distorted by modern standards as this particular Claire de Lune. Even the other three recordings by Debussy I mentioned earlier were far more reasonable in terms of today's tastes. In the very recently published The Art of French Piano Music, CDL is not listed among the piano rolls recorded by Debussy, although I don't know how accurate the book's list is.

I don't agree Horowitz ever played that way. His earliest recordings(on The Young Horowitz for example) seem very modern for the time. I can't think a single recorded work by Horowitz where the tempi were distorted to the point of being IMO rhythmically incorrect when compared to the score.

Which pianists do you think plays this way today?

When you listen to recordings like
this, of pianists with a direct link
to the 19th century, you hear the
old style of rubato that has been
bred out of the current generation
of concert pianists, and replaced
with the just-play-the-notes, everyone-
sound-the-same brand of playing
that is taught today.

I give Gyro the rare "Amen!" to this comment.


Well, there are several, although none who are famous or you may have heard of. Robert Hill is one, although he specializes in Baroque music and plays mainly harpsichord. His sister-in-law, Marianne Ploger is another. She is a pianist who studied with Nadia Boulanger, but her focus is more in education than in performance. I do not know if she has any recordings that are commercially available but there are some on her website (if you google both of these names you can find their websites and some recordings). Apart from those two, no one I know of today plays like this. I do know that Ploger had taught this style of playing, so I can assume that others like me have learned it. I try to, but I'm not a performer.

I have only listned to Ploger's rcording of Chopin's Etude Op. 25 No.1, but I found nothing remotely extreme in tempo fluctuation or rubato.

When we see the score from the composer, we're only seeing what he or she wanted at that moment in time. Composers are creative creatures and may change their minds from day to day, and since it's their music, they can take liberties with it that is unacceptable for other performers.

Another example of this is Bartok, who is known to be very exacting about people following his score and wrote down detailed dynamics and tempo instructions. I believe he even wrote down a projected time that each piece should last. I listened to some recordings of him playing his Sonatina and he willfully ignored a lot of his own instructions and added liberal rubato all over the place. If I had done that, you betcha people would protest! But since he wrote it, there's nothing we can criticize...

If you want further comparison, here is Rachmaninoff playing a Debussy piece:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvJ35-zZa-I

And Debussy playing the same piece himself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMrdhgWR9Zk&feature=related

I would say since he wrote it we can't criticize him for doing it, but we can criticize the performance for not sounding good.

Of course, it is a musical decision to make. To say that one should always or shouldn't ever fluctuate the tempo is to put oneself in a situation where there would always be exceptions. There's lots of rubato in her playing, rolled chords, and separation of hands. Did you listen to her Revolutionary etude (the last Chopin clip on her home page)? That one has very easily identifiable rubato.

Her Rev. Etude certainly has rubato and hands not together, but I don't think many performers today or even the last 100 years would get far playing the piece this way. To me it just sounds bad, but obviously she doesn't feel this way. If other pianists from the 19th century played this way then the performance is historically interesting. The piano's bass sounds pretty bad also.

Here's an interesting comparison of 7 pianist playing the Butterfly Etude:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whYhO0P5DE0

Although some are extreme interpretations by today's standards, I don't think any are nearly as extreme as Debuusy's CDL(if genuine) or Ploger's Revolutionary Etude.

This definitely seems to be the consistent, list of official piano roll recordings that Debussy made in the 1913 Welte session, that I keep finding. For convenience, I'll list these pieces below:

Roll no. 2733

* Childrens Corner: Doctor Gradus ad Parnassum
* Jimbo's Lullaby
* Serenade for the Doll
* The Snow is Dancing
* The Little Shepherd
* Golliwog's Cake Walk

Roll no. 2734

* D'un cahier d'esquisses

Roll no. 2735

* Estampes: La soirée dans Grenade

Roll no. 2736

* La plus que lente

Roll no. 2738

* Préludes I: Danseuses de Delphes
* La cathédrale engloutie
* La Danse de Puck

Roll no. 2739

* Préludes I: Minstrels
* Le vent dans la plaine

-I didn't list the 4 audio tracks of him playing accompaniment, but those always pop up as well. And I have to agree by saying that This Piano roll recording probably was not made by Debussy himself.



This is definitely part of the underlying point here, though.
And I'm enjoying this conversation very much, btw...

Here, though, are links to some of the other piano roll recordings that are established as being Debussy himself.(as recorded during the Welte session of 1913)

"La Cathedrale Engloutie"

"Le vent dans la plaine"

"Danseuses de Delphes"

"La plus que lente "

"Estampes: La soirée dans Grenade "

"La Danse de Puck "

(I'm tired of the "Golliwogg"..... )

You can probably find all the remaining ones in the "related" box by the poster.

Debussy's timing is much more metrical than we heard in the "Clair" roll. Unfortunately, I've not studied any of these other pieces. How do these compare for those of you who have?

La Cathedrale engloutie : By the beginning of what is the second page in the Durand edition ("peu a peu sortant de la brume"), this interpretation was almost unlistenable, although I stayed with it out of curiosity; every one of the right hand chords is broken on that page.

Similarly the return of the "organ" theme 18 measures from the end, the broken chords sound more like a strummed guitar than the organ tones (I believe) they are supposed to represent.

The composer's original recording notwithstanding, I am much more willing to accept modern approaches to this work. Much of this, I reiterate, must be due to a change in performance practice.

Regards,

@Fataliac:

I've had a chance to listen the recording now. I can't say I like it much, though in view of who I suspect is the performer, I'll cut him some slack. I'm not against "old school", "unabashedly romantic" performances, for example, I really like Paderewski's piano roll recording of Liszt's Hungarian Rhapsody #10. So indulgent but so good! And I mostly like Grieg playing Grieg and Rachmaninoff playing Rachmaninoff.

http://www.rprf.org/Rollography.html

According to the above, the only person ever to record Debussy's Clair de lune on the Welte-Mignon system was Cecile de Horvath. Five pianists recorded it on other types of piano rolls; in alphabetical order: George Copeland, Herbert Fryer, Walter Gieseking, Yolanda Mero, and Olga Samaroff. My guess is that the link starting off this thread is a recording by Walter Gieseking. It sounds like he might have played that way in his youth (sorry if that sounds rude, hehe), and I also notice that the works on the "Masters of the Piano Roll: Debussy plays Debussy" CD that were not (apparently) recorded by Debussy, are listed as recorded by either Gieseking or Rudolph Ganz. So maybe at some stage a mixture of Debussy, Gieseking and Ganz recordings were mistakenly attributed exclusively to Debussy?

Regarding "old school" virtues of interpretation, for me this cuts both ways. As much as I dislike dry, overly objective performances, I'd prefer to hear a deeply musical, slightly understated performance than a highly wilful one. Lenz once complained to Chopin that his performance of the variations in Beethoven's Op.26 sonata didn't have enough contrast/vigor. Chopin's response? "I say it's up to the listener to complete the picture." There are performers who draw the listener in, while others project so much, doing all the work so brashly, that listeners become no more than passive recipients. A couple of months ago I was listening to various Youtube recordings of Brahms's 2nd Piano Concerto. My goodness, what dross, for the most part! Then along came Pollini and Abbado: fresh air, poetry, magic.

While I haven't heard a wide range of Horowitz performances, I agree with pianoloverus's comments, and I've never heard Horowitz sound anything like the gushing indulgences of many historic recordings. Horowitz's 1932 recording of Liszt's Piano Sonata was/is a very modern performance, where romantic spontaneity is perfectly balanced by a clear illumination of the structure of the work. In contrast, a typical "historic" performance would likely have been an episodic mishmash leaving listeners thinking that maybe the sonata didn't hang together properly and was a failed experiment rather than a masterwork.

When Mendelssohn used it in the phrase "Songs Without Words," it was self-consciously figurative. It doesn't mean he used it categorically for any and all non-vocal compositions written by him or anyone else.

Steven

Bruce, if you have 2 minutes 21 seconds to spare, please watch this from beginning to end: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zrvra2-7yxo

In my opinion, Debussy is not representing an organ, more a general sense of majesty, grandeur, awe, of a large, wondrous thing interacting dramatically with a large body of water. And when a large structure emerges from the sea, and when it sinks back again, there's water falling, rippling, sprinkling, not a perfect silkiness. Debussy, you beaut! You've sold me on slightly breaking those chords. I also love the yearning hesitation in the middle of bar 36.

Thanks for these links; I ought to go to bed now but I have to listen to them all now.

The rolling of the chords is a technique pianists of a certain era used on all music. I don't think it has anything to do with water.

Interestingly, the Welte-Mignon gives a number which I suppose is to set the roll at the right speed for the interpretation to be authentic. Mr. Caswell commented that he did not record the Debussy CDL of Mme. de Horvath because he could not get it to sound right. There could be some problem with the speed as he indicated.

One must be a somewhat lenient in judging playing from that period since more liberties were taken than is allowed now.
Frankly, some of the playing today is rather sterile and boring. The notes are correct but the individuality and passion are missing.

Given your dislike of the Debussy piano roll (performed by whomever) your opinion seems consistent. Really, there's nothing to talk about, but I wanted to point out that she performed this on a period instrument (replica).

I almost agree with your first sentence in general, but surely Debussy followed his own path and refused to follow the conventions of his era? That has always been my impression of him based on his written opinions and compositions, and now his recordings. Where are the rolled chords in Danseuses de Delphes, that "pianists of a certain era used on all music"? There are absolutely none in Debussy's recording. In La cathédrale engloutie, where are the rolled chords where the cathedral is above the surface (bars 28-40)? Nowhere; only when the cathedral is rising or sinking are chords broken. I can sometimes over-analyse things, but I honestly don't think I'm doing that here. There are specific things in these recordings that are strengthening my view of Debussy as a meticulous craftsman where very little is unplanned, or the product of tradition or the trends of the time.

@Fataliac: Many thanks; I've just finished listening to all the recordings. Fascinating stuff! With pieces like Le vent dans la pleine and La danse de Puck, while I enjoyed hearing the composer's take on them, I prefer Gieseking's recordings (1953, EMI, very good quality mono). Thanks to a direct comparison, I can hear how Gieseking's more sparing use of the pedal in Le vent dans la pleine succeeds in making the atmosphere more windy and vivid. The wind shifting direction in the grasses and intensifying just doesn't quite work the same when there's too much pedal. I think if Debussy had heard Gieseking play some of these pieces, he might have been impressed and a bit humbled.

Debussy followed his own compositional path...not the same as his own path in terms of playing the piano. "Used on all music" meaning music of all eras or at least starting on music of the Romantic era...not the same as on every composition(it's up to the player judgement when to roll chords) to the same extent or equally throughout a given composition.

If rolling the chords was representing water, then it would mean that when Debussy wasn't representing water he wouldn't roll chords. I think some of the chords in Evening in Grananda were rolled.

I agree with pianoloverus here. Composing and performing are two different things. Some great composers were also great performers, but not always. And simply because Debussy shirked a lot of compositional customs - "parallel 4ths and 5ths? Sacrilege!" - does not mean he also shirked the performance practices of the time. I think the likeness to water is a superimposed observation.

I have a number of Debussy attributed recordings using Welte-Mignon piano. He certainly is documented not only to have used Welte-Mignon, but found the experience agreeable. His great adversery Saint Saens did not [from memory] although I have a Saint Saens recording of Chopin's F minor nocturne and not only is his technique is right up with the great Prokofiev and Rachmaninov, but there is nothing wrong with the recording.

Debussy on the other hand sounds 2nd rate in comparison. He loused up a performance of La Plus De Lente and to my annoyance many performers have tried to mimmick his glaring errors "in the spirit of Debussy". This is taking nothing away from his compositions (some are amongst my all time favourite piano works), but he should have followed Schubert's lead as a performer in my opinion.

The only chords that Debussy breaks in his performance of Soirée dans Grenade are indicated in the score. It is clear from these piano roll recordings that Debussy does not fit remotely into the turn-of-the-century mold of rolling lots of chords (and playing the left hand ahead of the right hand too). One distinct exception shows up in these recordings, and that's the slight rolling of chords in the right hand in La Cathédrale engloutie, but only when the cathedral is rising and falling, not when it is above the surface. I didn't mean to suggest that the rolling chords were directly representing water, more that the rolled chords seem appropriate to the atmosphere, which in this case includes water but one could just as well say "shimmering" or "glistening" or whatever.

Also, just in case anyone resented the clip from Atlantis and thought, "Who the heck is this guy?!", it isn't my aim to try to impose a specific view of the piece, either, I was merely trying to express my strong support of Debussy's interpretations on two main counts: a) They're the product of an immensely original musician and owe barely anything to whatever performance habits/trends were going on at the time; b) To me, there's a completely natural reason for Debussy to roll the chords that he did.


Debussy wrote and spoke very extensively on the interpretation of piano music, including and especially his own. His views are suffused with keen insight, sensitivity, and a desire for his music to sound a certain way (including not only his piano works but also his orchestral music, the relationship between voice and accompaniment in songs, and what his aim was in writing the recitative of his opera the way he did). There are dozens of books filled with Debussy's views, both directly in his own words and related by students, musicians, and friends. Like Chopin, Debussy had thoughts of writing a treatise on piano performance but never completed one. Here's a website to jump into, with a sample of interesting quotes. The website has a good list of references too:

http://www.djupdal.org/karstein/debussy/method/m01.shtml

Debussy, in a letter: "One is often betrayed by so-called pianists! I mean it - I can't tell you the extent to which my piano music has been deformed; so much so that often I have a job to recognize it!"

George Copeland: "When I asked him why so few people were able to play his music, Debussy replied, after some reflection: 'I think it is because they try to impose themselves upon the music. It is necessary to abandon yourself completely, and let the music do as it will with you - to be a vessel through which it passes."

Debussy, in a letter to Sylvain Bonmariage: "So you really think a poem has only one meaning! Aren't you aware that each one of your poems is transformed by each of its readers? And it's the same with every musical score. You only have to listen to experts talking about them. You write poems as you like. We can draw from them the music that we like. And the listener, or reader, finds in them the charm that he likes. Everything is relative."

George Copeland: "The piano [...] was draped with a silk scarf held in place by a heavy cloisonné vase. I asked permission to move the vase, so that I might open the piano cover. 'Absolument non!' he replied with obvious annoyance. 'Do not touch it! I never permit that anyone should open my piano. As it is, everyone plays my music too loud.'"

Maurice Dumesnil: "At the crescendo leading to the climax, marked ff, he stopped at my side: 'Please do not overdo this crescendo. It sounds too dramatic; start more softly and you will reach the same effect without impairing the quality of your tone.'"

Maurice Dumesnil: "Remembering his previous remarks about dramatizing, I tried to keep the middle part [of Clair de lune] moderate. But I guess I still overdid it: 'No,' he said, 'you exaggerate both the crescendo and the rubato. The latter must be done within the entire phrase, never on a single beat.' And the expression had to remain dignified."

Maurice Dumesnil: "Also in Clair de lune it was important that the triplets were strictly in tempo, 'but within a general flexibility'."

Debussy, related by Maurice Dumesnil: "In those first bars I would like the right hand slightly more prominent than the left hand. Octaves sound flat when played with the same tone volume in both hands."

Maurice Dumesnil: "Debussy often thought in terms of orchestration. Concerning the second section of 'Clair de lune', he said, 'The left-hand arpeggios should be fluid, mellow, drowned in pedal, as if played by a harp on a background of strings.' But he did not tolerate any confusion and insisted on the purity of each harmonic pattern."

Debussy, related by Marguerite Long: "'The fifth finger of virtuosi, what a pest it is!' What he meant by that is that too often one hammers the melody without attaching sufficient importance to the whole harmony; harmony that, according to him, should never be sacrificed to the melodic idea."

Thanks! This is just as fascinating as Scriabin playing his 8/12 etude. In both cases I like the free and unique style of playing.
I find the music suitable to be played like this. Less precisely structured and timed makes it a more organic whole.

I don't see how this negates my point at all..,in fact, it reinforces what I said. Whether marked or not, he used rolled chords when he wasn't dealing with water. Yet you claim there's some special significance to the place he rolled chords in Cathedral, because he was trying to represent some watery scenario.


He plays many rolled chords in Golliwogs(most marked, others not). Same for Arabeque No.2. He also plays some LH notes before RH notes in Golliwogs.

If he marked rolled chords, instead of assuming/hoping the pianist would play some of them rolled, I don't see see how this would imply he didn't fit into the mold of rolling chords.




I don't see your point. None of this applies to rolling chords (whether marked or not) or whether he would have played piano in the style of his contemporaries.

I heard Debussy using slightly rolled chords in a piece where they aren't marked, exceptionally to my perception of the recordings I've heard, and I was enthusiastic that this minor exception seems very appropriate to the piece. I perceived somewhat hasty judgements being made in this thread about an extraordinary composer playing his own music, and I stepped in to defend and emphasize what I see as valuable and interesting things about the performances. What I found apt in the cathedral piece happened to involve water. Please let's not focus unduly on water or bring watery or non-watery into discussion of other pieces. If you still don't see my point, or don't think I've made one (or a worthwhile one), then let's just agree to disagree.


Let's put the Arabesque aside, as that isn't listed as a confirmed Debussy recording in any of the sources discussed earlier in this thread (other than CD listings). As to Golliwog's Cake Walk, I've listened carefully while reading the score and I don't see what you mean, unless lack of simultaneity to the tune of <0.05 seconds counts (i.e. nothing at all like the blatant chord rolling and LH anticipations common to that era) -- and those imperfections sound more like slightly flawed technique more than anything else. Would you mind giving a Youtube starting time, and/or a bar number in the score, so I know what to listen for?


Overall in Debussy's piano works, how often does he call for rolled chords? Very rarely, yes? How do some rolled chords in Soirée dans Grenade (which are surely ever-so-Spanish flourishes, not even worth debating) suddenly push Debussy towards the chord-rolling throng? Rolled chords are a very varied expressive device. Their very occasional use <> turn-of-century schmaltzy performance practice.

(Saving space by not re-quoting my carefully considered and thorough disagreement with this assertion)
I didn't find any direct Debussy statements regarding rolling chords, though Maurice Dumesnil speaks strongly against them in his book. But as I hoped would be obvious (sorry for snipping too much of your post though), my point is that Debussy very much followed his own path playing the piano. Just about everyone who ever heard him knew it and commented on it, and one only has to hear and play his compositions to realize that he was doing revolutionary things with tone and color and texture that are inextricably bound with a certain aesthetic and sound that is very much apart from late Romantic performance practice. I don't feel like saying "in my opinion", because the vast majority of musicians over a century seem to concur with me! You said something that seemed pretty outlandish to me, and I explained as best as I could why I disagreed.

I'm not going to try and go through each your points again at this point. Suffice it to say I find nothing in your latest post to convince me that any of the points in my previous posts are invalid.

I have given numerous examples of Debussy's use of rolled chords(both indicated in his scores and not)in many of his works he plays on videos. I think the only piece without rolled chords played that has been discussed is Prelude No 1. Both uses of rolled chords seem to indicate he was not against using this technique of the past (and probably of his teachers).

I disagreed first with your description of the rolled chords in Cathedral as relating to water and I gave logical arguments to explain why your example from Granada only made my point more convincing. You seem to have backed off this water description.

It's bizarre how you claim Debussy didn't like to use rolled chords yet he plays them them in abundance in his performance of Cathedral and every piece except Delphi Dancers.

Exactly, I like this roll interpretation. It's more straightforward, compared to some other more sentimental ones. Not that the others are not valid, just currently it fits.

I never claimed that Debussy "didn't like to use rolled chords"! But if asked to agree or disagree with this spin on my posts, then I'd say Debussy had a preference for not rolling chords in the turn-of-the-century, schmaltzy manner. When he did rolls chords, I'd say that it was in the vast majority of cases an expressive (or sometimes affected stylistic) gesture quite removed from typical performance practice of the time. Also, let me clarify (before anyone claims I said otherwise), I'm not saying that Debussy wasn't at all influenced by what was happening around him. If one were to try to quantify the source of Debussy's chord rolling in terms of personal versus external/traditional influence, I'm sensing a casual 50:50 attitude in some of the posters here. I respectfully disagree and I'd say it's probably a lot more like 98:2!


I can only wonder how we can hear these performances so differently! Youtube has at least nine of Debussy's piano roll recordings. In roll number order, here's a tally of discernable unmarked rolled chords that Debussy plays:

Golliwog's Cakewalk - none (you say he does, I invited you to point out where, you declined)

D'un cahier d'esquisses - none

La soirée dans Grenade - none

La plus que lente - just the 2nd beat of the theme in most appearances, and the four bars near the middle marked Cédez and Cédez encore plus

Danseuses de Delphes - none

La cathédrale engloutie - the RH slightly in the outer sections, none in the central section

La danse de Puck - a LH chord in bar 33 and again in bar 37, otherwise none

Minstrels - none

Le vent dans la plaine - none

Since you have raised the issue of marked chords in Debussy's music by saying "whether marked or not" in an earlier post, let me point out that only two of the above pieces have a significant number of marked broken chords. Both are in affected styles lying outside of Debussy's usual fare: one jazz (Golliwog's Cake Walk) and the other Spanish (or, more specifically, maybe a fusion of Andalusian and Moorish folk influence - La soirée dans Grenade). Neither could sensibly be said to show an affinity for the chord rolling of performance tendencies circa 1900, surely?


Your assumption that I claimed rolling the chords was literally "representing water" is a bit of a distortion of what I was saying, but even if I went along with this, the second part of your sentence does not follow logically from the first part. Water could potentially be one of many, many ideas/sensations/moods/images/etc. that could inspire someone to break chords rather than not.

I think you are right about my incorrect logic mentioned in your last paragraph.

But some other points I would disagree with. For example, there are other Debussy pieces with lots of rolled chords written...Arabesque No.2 is an example. Nor do I think the rolled chords in Cathedral are minimal. BruceD descirbed every chord on second page as rolled.

I listened to D's playing of Le Plus que Lent. It had numerous rolled chords. If many(not all) of them occured on a certain note in the theme, I don't see that as important and the theme is repeated many times. There are also some marked rolled chord at the end of that piece. There were also examples of Debussy playing the LH befor the RH.

Morodine said "I think the likeness to water was a superimposed observation", so she apparently also felt you had given the same significance to the rolled chords that I stated.

Would it surprise you to know that there are just 21 rolled chords in that 6 page piece? And there's only one broken chord in the whole of the last 2 pages. I think it's the abundance of lively triplets, perhaps combined with the rolled chords being played too obtrusively, as they often are, that can give the impression that there are more. (You may have highlighted a useful marker of whether a performance of this piece is a good one. If listeners are left with the impression, "Wow, there are a lot of rolled chords in that piece!" then in my opinion the performer has probably been playing them too brashly.) Anyway, to me, in this Allegretto scherzando piece, these are playful, "hoppy/skippy" broken chords, not the "schmaltzy" broken chords I associate with some early 20th century performances. There are a large number of solid chords, and the two significant, sober buildups of ascending sequences feature no broken chords at all.

Suite Bergamasque has 22 broken chords in total: 6 in the Prélude, 9 in the Menuet, 7 in Clair de lune, and 0 in the Passepied. Their use in every case is judicious and fascinating. For example, in the Prélude, they are all of the "attention, please!" kind, and I found the exercise of figuring out "Why here but not here?" very educational. In the Menuet they are all playful and harp-like. Only in Clair de lune are they the tenderly expressive kind associated with late Romanticism.


There are a lot of them in one particular passage, but I don't find them intrusive. Bars 1-13 are played completely "straight", then a few of the chords in bars 14-15 (starting at 0:59 in the Youtube recording) quiver ever so slightly, then bars 16-21 (1:11-1:40) feature gradually incrasingly rolled chords. From 1:40 to 1:56 (bars 22-27), Debussy straightens up again, and from that point on the chords are nearly all rock solid, with few exceptions (usually the highest note of melodic climaxes).


Yes, Le plus que lente is way more "traditional" in its performance style than the other recordings in the list! My impression is that Debussy is paying homage to salon waltzes, so he deliberately soups up his performance and plays in a salon style. This fits with the implied irony of his "Molto rubato con morbidezza" marking. I also find it interesting that one particular return of the theme is played completely straight (1:20-1:35 in the Youtube link). It's as if Debussy momentarily forgot to be schmaltzy and reverted to his normal playing style. I would prefer (admitting my bias, that I've heard enough chaste and idiomatic playing from Debussy recently that I'd like that to be his "main side"!), to view this as another case of him writing an intentionally stylized piece, in this case the slushy waltzes that were popular in Paris during his time, and performing it as such.


Indeed, point taken. With hindsight, I could and should have expressed myself more clearly.

I want to thank everyone for their input into this thread! I've been finding it most wonderful and informative! Been caught up in the Thanksgiving thing the past few days (Happy Thanksgiving to those who celebrate it, btw) But I've been following along whenever I got a chance.

Also I'd like to say, I'm aware that I misspelled (clair"E" de lune) earlier. oops


Thanks SlatterFan for this:





Since we've sufficiently established that the recording probably isn't Debussy, and can't hear him play it himself , this is great insight on this song! Of particular interest to me as I've recently added it to my rep.

Please check this out everyone. There's a "Debussy/Clair De Lune" reference towards the end that i think is quite humorous in relation to this conversation. Great video overall too!!

"Harry's Music Mashup #5"

Debussy playing the 1st Arabesque has somehow made its way onto my mp3 player. To be disingenuous, I thought I was listening to a "pub pianist". Then it suddenly clicked. He had good technique, flair and intimate musical understanding of his own music. I believe he must have choked with nerves. The performance sounds like one that wants to be over and done with in the fastest possible time.

Unfortunately, I think we've established with reasonable probability that these are the only pieces Debussy himself made rolls of (Aside from the 4 accompaniment audio recordings):





The Arabesque pieces and Clair De Lune aren't listed (hate to say, but i hope and wish they exist somewhere!) Arabesque No. 1 is a great piece, but it was probably played by one of the following players (if a piano roll), as mentioned by SlatterFan:





Seriously, you all ought to check out the great Debussy tribute/parody towards the end of this vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ROzfIZSZWc

It's a great vid, and there are more of these if you like that one... ALL worth checking out!

This may be right. The Aberesque was performed very different to La Plus Que Lente. And I agree both Aberesques are amongst my favourite play/chill out pieces