I've recently started working on Chopins G-minor ballade, and have a question regarding the tempo around the first agitated section. In almost all recording I've heard and been able to find on youtube, the pianist speeds up ranging from a minor accelerando to going to something near double or triple speed.

I'm referring to the place starting at measure 44, although most tend to speed up gradually in the prior measures, and then kick it up another notch reaching 44.

Now, I know that m. 40 is marked agitato, yet I somehow don't feel it justifies what is often a doubling of tempo.

Is it fair to say that if Chopin had wanted such radical temporal change, he would have written it? Agitato doesn't even necessarily imply an accelerando, just, well, agitated.

For an example, see this video: Horowitz with notes
The section I'm referring to starts at 2:03.

What is everyones opinion here? Should you do as Horowitz and ignore Chopins manuscript or play the sections in a stricter tempo?

I'm not so sure that Horowitz is ignoring what "Chopin had wanted." Aren't you overlooking that at measure 45 Chopin indicates sempre più mosso - continuously increasing the tempo? It seems to me that Horowitz et al. are doing exactly what Chopin indicates. That steadily increasing tempo continues until the riten. at measure 66.

Regards,

For me, when I feel agitation, I can't stay in the calm tempo that I have been keeping. The music writing also seem to suggest that the degree of agitation isn't the same throughout, but increases as the music progresses.
But if you don't feel the same way, you should play the piece the way you want to play it. Increase in tempo isn't the only way to show agitation, so do whatever you need to do to show the "agitato"

[edit]

haha something I overlooked and failed to mention! BruceD is totally right

First of all, I didn't write that Horowitz ignored what Chopin wanted, but rather that he (along with apparently everyone else) ignored his manuscript, which I still believe to be true, for two reasons: The first being that sempre piu mosso, as you so correctly pointed out, is written at m. 45, one full measure after the shift in tempo. Secondly, I don't believe piu mosso has to indicate an increase in tempo, mosso simply meaning more. I'm more tempted to understand it as broadening the music, doing a crescendo and perhaps even [1] a slight slowing - although I can see that it is possible to interpret it as an accelerando. Also, for clarification, I don't think the calando, smorzando and ritenuto have to mean anything about the tempo of the previous part, since they're at the end of a large section of the architecture.

Still it remains that this indication is a measure after the point where most pianists speed up.

Now, I'm not trying to imply that it is unmusical or wrong to play the ballade the way it is usually played - many pianists so much greater than me do this - I'm rather trying to spark some debate as to whether it is possible and musical to keep a stricter tempo in this section. I'm still not far enough along in my own experiments to make a recording of the section yet, but I do believe it might be possible to play the section starting m. 44 with less pedal and more clarity, bringing the agitation out in that way, yet without the, in my opinion often overdone jumps in tempo.

[1] As Heinrich Neuhaus pointed out in his great book, The Art of Piano Playing, while students often link crescendo and accelerando, slowing down during a crescendo often gives a greater effect, letting the music breathe and broaden.

Mosso means movement. Piu means more, so piu mosso means more movement, or, in other words, faster.

That's true of course. No idea what I was thinking. Mosso though has some connotations to imply something else than simply speeding up. And anyway a measure late.

Like what? It sounds like you're still trying to defend your lengthy post about why sempre piu mosso means something different from what everyone else said it meant.

If you did not write that "that Horowitz ignored what Chopin wanted" what did you write when you wrote : "that he (along with apparently everyone else) ignored his manuscript"? If Horowitz ignored Chopin's manuscript, then does one not conclude that he ignored what Chopin wanted? I do not follow your reasoning, here.


I disagree, mosso does not simply mean "more." Più means "more." I will add to what others have tried to point out : (the following definitions are from the Dolmetsch on-line musical dictionary) :

- mosso (Italian) moved, animated, motion
- più (Italian) more : when used alone as a musical marking, più is understood to imply più mosso
- sempre Italian) always, still, continually, evermore

I can't understand, then, how Chopin's sempre più mosso can mean anything other than continuously increasing the tempo. Nor can I understand your observation that this marking comes "one full measure" after the change in tempo. What is the relevance of that to your argument of keeping a steady tempo throughout this section?

I enjoy a good discussion on musical details as much as the next musical nerd, but I always like to discuss from a point of common understanding of basic terms which doesn't seem to be the case, here.

Regards,

Very well, you've changed your understanding of mosso, which brings us closer to a common agreement as basis for discussion. Now explain what you mean by "a measure late." Why is Chopin's placing of sempre piu mosso in measure 45 a measure late?

It seems pretty evident to me he is advocating that the pianist portray a sense of Agitato starting at measure 40 which becomes even more so with the increase in tempo (sempre piu mosso) at measure 45.

Since the style of writing changes at precisely measure 45, that seems to me a very logical place for the sempre piu mosso to be indicated.

Regards,

In addition to what everyone else has said, including especially about the "piu mosso"......I think you're mistaken in your basic idea of what "agitato" means, at least in this kind of repertoire.

It does generally mean quite fast.

I realize that the word literally means just agitated. But the way the term was used in this style of music, it also meant the other.

There's a similar issue with "leggiero," which was recently discussed here. In this style, it doesn't just mean "light"; it also means quicker than what came before -- maybe not absolutely always, I'm not sure about that -- but in general.

Musical indications sometimes mean more than the literal meaning of the word -- and "agitato" is an example.

agitato(Italian), agitated, with emotion, excited, fast, hurried, restless, anxious

I'm trying to think, in music, of instances where agitato implies something other than a restless speed, or, in other words, of examples where one has a designation of agitato and the music be relatively moderato in tempo.

Regards,

We'd have a hard time finding any such example.

And here's another tough one: How about any such passage at all, whether or not it's marked "agitato"? I mean, any passage of moderate tempo but agitated feeling. And, whether or not we can think of one, what would be the "marking" for such a passage?? I don't really know. I guess it would depend.

The closest passage that comes right to mind is Chopin's E major Prelude, #9. And let's see, what's the indication on that:

"Largo"

Not very helpful, is it.....

I think a good composer for such passages would be my old friend Scriabin. I'm gonna go and look a little.....

Examples (arguably) in Scriabin (harder to find than I thought):

Sonata #2, 1st movement: marked simply Andante

Sonata #3, 1st movement: Drammatico

Prelude, Op. 22 #4: Andantino

BruceD, as with regards to the writing style, it changes in m. 44 and the sempre piu mosso is in m. 45, I'm sure we can agree to this? Either that, or my (Henle) edition places the sempre piu mosso wrongly. Still, the change of writing style is in m. 44. Now, we agree that from sempre piu mosso, one should continously accelerate.

Yet what I don't feel sure about is that one should suddenly change the tempo to something like allegro molto or presto at m. 44 without any indication other than agitato. The part marked agitato requires only a minor accelerando, nothing like the doubling. I'm not familiar enough with the literature to cite specific earlier examples of the use of agitato, but I'm very interested to see if it always indicates a dramatic speeding of the tempo. In any way, this has been a helpful thread for me as I now surely understand the reason for the drastic increases in tempo, even if I don't think they're fully justified. We may also question ourselves - if Chopin wanted to indicate such a thing, would he not have written "Allegro molto" or "Presto" at m. 44?

PS: "If Horowitz ignored Chopin's manuscript, then does one not conclude that he ignored what Chopin wanted?"
Well, then that is ones conclusion, not mine, which is what I wanted to imply from my reply - that strictly speaking of the manuscript, I did feel that, even if ignore is a strong word, there was a departure from the tempo markings here, even if Chopin did in fact want the pianists to play it the way it is usually played.

I was actually wondering the exact same thing... my teacher tells me to increase the tempo gradually but most professional pianists just double the tempo starting at measure 44...

One point to add to the discussion is how fast should the new tempo be once you have arrived. Comparing it to the coda, I would say it should not get faster here than the coda will be. Also, it shouldn't be faster than the arpeggios that come soon after.

Huh? How would he not have ignore what Chopin wanted, but still have ignored the "manuscript"? I don't follow that logic at all.

I don't think there's any relation, either way.
In fact, I wouldn't even really know how to compare the tempos, because the meters are different.


Ditto -- no particular relation necessarily, but (assuming you mean the places I think you do) I would do both of those things at about the same speed.

Still, I realize that many people like to organize such things how you're doing it, in some way -- and IMO in general it's not a bad idea.

The OP is quite right in suggesting that agitato does not infer a faster tempo ... in this case for m40 the "agitato" highlights the contrasting 8th-note pattern (D, F, Eb) within the broad Bb octave ... and then the variation (of C#, Eb, D) within the following broad A octave ... without changing the essential Largo tempo Chopin needed to spike m40-43 with a sharp dose of "rattle-your-cage" chilli ... sheer genius.

Oh come on Mark, agitato has SO much more to do with the general feel than a tempo. A character of a piece should NOT be decided merely on the tempo! Tempo will have so little to do with it if it's not actually good..

I'm puzzled, because I agree with what you're saying.

By not being faster, I meant that the quarter note of the m45 passage should not be faster compared to the quarter note of the coda.

what an 'ínteresting' discussion, ye gods, if a real musician can't make up his or her's own mind on the basis of what the composer left us, ie. a well published piece of music, to be recreated by an artist, not by a civil servant, than what is the fuss all about?

I think I agree, but I'm not sure if what I'm agreeing with is what you meant.

IMO when there are such different opinions, all by people who know something, can there be any one "right" way? So, what it means is, take your pick.

how does one insert all those funnyfaces?

If you click "Reply" on whatever post you're answering (or "Quote"), you'll get a new page that shows a bunch of different icons over the box where you type the reply.
If you click the icon on the left, it gives you a bunch of stupid little images that you can click on.
It will put the image in your post wherever the cursor is.

ok, try 1,

Double the speed?! No way! That will not get you agitato. That will get you agita. (Sorry.) The agitato is all about the unstable harmony and the accents; the way it's written, it will sound agitated at almost any speed. The speeding up should be slight, if at all, and not at all necessary to playing agitato here.

My advice is to listen to Chopin not only here, but at the beginning, where he says Largo and pesante. Some pianists get the pesante (Horowitz does a pretty good job), but play andante, and that limits to some extent what they can do later on in the piece.