How to play tempo rubato correctly and elegantly?

ico

Not easily.

....but seriously folks.... you'll get different answers from different people. Opinions vary.

Some people would say the accompaniment has to keep strict time, while playing the melody flexibly; others (including me) would say that's an oversimplification -- the accompaniment doesn't have to be totally strict and rarely should be. And even once we get past that debate, we've only just begun.
That's when it gets really hard, to say what exactly is correct or elegant.

Best I can say: How a good singer might sing it.

Can you perfectly internalize steady beat, pulse, rhythm, etc.?

Listen to lots of opera, songs, choral music, wind instruments, string instruments, chamber music, etc... Learn and understand how to achieve a good long line, good phrasing, and horizontal movement/momentum in music.

It takes lots of time and experience to fully get it, something I still don't fully get.

And it's definitely not something that can fully be explained in just text.

Welcome to the Forum ico ... only 6 entries to date.

My guess is that the rubato question relates to the playing of Chopin ... especially the Nocturnes.

How to get it right would of course depend on individual passion for Chopin compositions ... for my own part, having over the years played the lot ... my take would suggest that the slowing or speeding up of the tempo would depend on the particular mood of the pianist ... I don’t think I’ve ever successfully matched the Chopin-esque rubato to the breathtaking Nocturnes ... but I keep trying!

Watch out chaps ... the OP is a Brazilian Prosecuting Attorney ... and might put you in the hot-seat with his cross-questioning ... however, he does seem to be a cultured gent with a liking for music, painting, literature and philosophy.

The book Interpreting Mozart by Badura-Skoda has a nice chapter on rubato. Although the examples are by Mozart, you'll get a better understanding of rubato if you have the chance to read it.
I think you must really get into the secrets of a piece (emotionally) before you attempt rubato.

There is no "correct and elegant" rubato. But, in contrast, there is lots of inept, tasteless, and inelegant rubato. So, all you have to do when playing rubato is to avoid the latter, and you'll have what you are looking for.

Not really. I think that there's a lot of range between inept/tasteless and correct/elegant. Rubato or any aspect of piano playing is a continuum. And one person's inept may be another person's elegant, although there will be some unanimity of opinion among knowledable pianists.

To me, you can't give a straight answer to that: it depends too much on the type of music. For example, the ballad portion of solo piano renditions of jazz and popular standards virtually require quite high levels of rubato to be effective. By contrast, visiting those same levels on Romantic Classical piano invariably results in something corny and tasteless. I have heard Chopin, Schumann, Beethoven, Schubert, Liszt, et al, played -- uh, freely -- but typically the expressiveness is on the printed page: it doesn't need "help" in that regard.

You mean you could give a straight answer for a type of music?

Rubato is stolen time, in other words push and pull. A lot of people take time when they see rubato but never make up for it.

That reflects a view that is often stated, but which in the opinion of many is too rigid and pat, and not right.

Paderewski: "We are not so noble. What is taken away cannot always be given back."

That's actually not an exact quote, but my recollection of how it's sometimes paraphrased. I figured I'd try to see if I could find the actual thing, and through the miracle of the web I found it -- and in fact it's just a small part of a long and thoughtful article on rubato that he wrote.

Here's the part that the above thing is paraphrased from:

"....Some people, evidently led by laudable principle of equity, while insisting on the fact of stolen time, pretend that what is stolen ought to be restored. We dully acknowledge the highly moral motives of this theory, but we humbly confess that our ethics do not reach such a high level. The making up of what has been lost is natural in the case of playing with orchestra, where, for the security of the whole, in spite of the fractional alterations of the movement, the metric integrity should be rigorously preserved. With soloists is quite different. The value of notes diminished in one period through accelerando, cannot always be restored in another by ritardando. What is lost is lost. For any lawlessness there is, after a certain term, proscription."

BTW, none of what we're saying really answers the OP. In fact, I think nothing really answers it. The answer is a matter of talent, taste, ear, and learning. But it helps to talk about it.

It takes lots of time and experience to fully get it, something I still don't fully get.

Pollini once said:
Rubato must emerge spontaneously from the music, it can’t be calculated but must be totally free. It’s not even something you can teach: each performer must feel it on the basis of his or her own sensitivity. There’s no magic formula: to assume otherwise would be ridiculous.
That's what I have always thought of rubato.

Personally, rubato means flexibility of time, but not rhythm. The basic pulse should remain, but be slightly distorted - rhythms should still be correct relative to each other.

Most of all, when you make conscious decisions about rubato, you should always be in control. Don't just let your hands meander, how you distort time should always contribute to the musical expression you're trying to achieve.

Yes it cannot "always" be given back. But if we always take take take, it will sound unnatural. I was just saying that it's the definition of "rubato" - stolen time. There's nothing wrong with taking time (I do it all the time, probably badly but whatever), but it's interesting and this is something that a great violinist said to me in a coaching once - when you tell people to be free, the first thing they usually think of is to take time. Most wouldn't think to go forward, which can be free as well.

Something to think about.

Just because something is taken it doesn't mean it has to be given back. So I think the fact that rubato translates as "stolen time" in no way implies anything has to be given back (unless perhaps if those who first used this term specifically said something to this effect).

How on earth do you make it sound good?

Just because something is taken it doesn't mean it has to be given back. So I think the fact that rubato translates as "stolen time" in no way implies anything has to be given back (unless perhaps if those who first used this term specifically said something to this effect).

Are we talking about rit. or rubato? For a non-nauseating rubato it goes both ways - it involves flexibility in the tempo which doesn't only mean taking time.

The only way to make rubato sound good is to play exactly half of the piece faster than average, and the other half slower.

Fortunately that's not as difficult as it sounds.

I disagree. You do it very, very well!


Hopefully that's a joke!

I mean it is, but I hope it was intentional.

Sure it was intended as a joke, but it is also true. As the mathematically inclined will confirm this is the very (not entirely precise i'll admit) definition of "average speed": the speed for which it holds that half of the piece is faster, and half of the piece is slower. So it is mathematically impossible NOT to play a piece exactly like this.
(that's why it's not hard, you can't play any other way no matter how hard you try).

As a more serious comment, i can't help thinking of this fact when I hear that the stolen time must given back, in order to maintain a certain average speed, as I think i've heard Barenboim say in a master class on YT. It is meaningless.

So it's clear i don't feel that the stolen time should necessarily be given back.
Even more than singing, tempo rubato makes me think of reading a book out loud (for children for instance). The text itself imposes how fast you read (a chase will be faster), and in between you have little pauses to punctuate (parts of) phrases that belong together, catch your breath, or accentuate something.

This -and this is key for me- are irregularities in order to make it sound regular. Just because i tak a breath does not mean i should hurry to make up for it (of course there can be other reasons to accelerate). If a robot reads the same text out loud it sounds very awkward/unnatural, because the listener anticipates the pause, and if you don't do them, you steal time, not from the clock but from the listener. Such little pauses don't FEEL like a pause, unless...


...


it is used for some effect. (This would be a rit. for me.)

The same is true for light effects in the paintings of Rembrandt, Vermeer, or even e photo: in order to make a surface seem of a uniform brightness, you cannot paint it with a uniform brightness.

Some other observations i'd like to venture:
-Sometimes you can accentuate or phrase something but just a little hesitation, coming just a little bit after the beat, but not enough to incur a significant delay that should be recouped.
-In lots of places it seems to me that Chopin is writing the rubato in the score: Where you have a melody of a perfectly even rhythm, but all of a sudden he throws in a rest and a dotted note that breaks the pattern. To me that's an invitation to play that one like i feel, and not exactly as written.
-The effect (or rather:feeling) that Chopin apparently sought to achieve is the feeling of freedom of the melody. And never exaggerate.

So that's what i try to do. Even if i'm tempted to accentuate a particularly beautiful chord by holding on to it, i let the melody prevail. Simplicity being the highest goal and all.

But....

Good thing you said "not entirely precise," because it isn't, and sometimes it's not even that close. I'll leave out the full explanation, except to say that it's the same as why "mean" and "median" are often very different.

Exactly! I did not want to go into that either, but it IS what i think of when i hear that stolen time must be given back. For the median that's not necessary.

The full explanation will remain our little secret (and maybe almost all of the forum members).

BTW, I shoulda said, it was a good joke anyway.

well thank you!