|
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
79 members (AaronSF, apianostudent, beeboss, brdwyguy, benkeys, Abdulrohmanoman, accordeur, 19 invisible),
2,241
guests, and
447
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 560
500 Post Club Member
|
OP
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 560 |
I've always puzzled why Rubinstein, in all his performances of the Chopin Concerto No 2 insists on expunging the closing tutti (almost typed titti, careful of that ) of the 1st movement. Did he just not like it, did he think it was vacuous, did he just want to get the mov. over with as soon as possible so he could get into the glorious 2nd mov., did he think it interfered with the flow of the line? What could his reason have been? Did he ever give a reason--none I can find. Then I was listening to a 2005 videotape of Ruth Slenczynska's live performance in Tokyo and she has a different take on how to close the mov. Start at 4:24 and then listen carefully at 4:35. Never heard a pianist do this but...well, why not, I suppose. Interesting Ending to Chopin's 1st Mov.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277 |
I've heard a few older performances of Chopin's concertos where not just the closing tutti, but also the orchestral exposition was cut or almost expunged.
I always thought it was because of the pianist's ego (he didn't want to hang around listening to Chopin-without-piano; and anyway everyone knows Chopin knew nothing about orchestral writing - why, Balakirev re-orchestrated the Chopin concertos and showed us how the orchestra should be employed...), and the fact that the conductor felt duty-bound to bow to the soloist's wishes. These days of course, no conductor would stand for this.
It wasn't that long ago when Gerald Moore wrote in Am I Too Loud? how a diva wanted him to cut out the brilliant postlude to a Wolf song, because it would divert the audience's attention from her (presumably) transcendental top notes to the accompanist's virtuosity. (He refused, and was sacked.....).
If music be the food of love, play on!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 560
500 Post Club Member
|
OP
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 560 |
I've heard a few older performances of Chopin's concertos where not just the closing tutti, but also the orchestral exposition was cut or almost expunged.
I always thought it was because of the pianist's ego (he didn't want to hang around listening to Chopin-without-piano; and anyway everyone knows Chopin knew nothing about orchestral writing - why, Balakirev re-orchestrated the Chopin concertos and showed us how the orchestra should be employed...), and the fact that the conductor felt duty-bound to bow to the soloist's wishes. These days of course, no conductor would stand for this.
It wasn't that long ago when Gerald Moore wrote in Am I Too Loud? how a diva wanted him to cut out the brilliant postlude to a Wolf song, because it would divert the audience's attention from her (presumably) transcendental top notes to the accompanist's virtuosity. (He refused, and was sacked.....). Well, good for Moore for standing up for his principles. Far as Rubinstein goes, I'm not sure what exactly he accomplishes by insisting that last tutti be cut, though I know he does it on the Wallenstein recording, the Ormandy recording, and the video with Previn on YouTube. It's not a big deal, I realize. I always seem to hone in on these trivial details (trivial unless you really love that part like I do) I heard Graffman play the No 1 back in the late 60's at the Music Center and he cut the opening tutti. Far as these rearrangements go the only one I stand with is the arrangement (Who was it, Godowsky or Rosenthal, one of those old timers) made with a string quartet. It comes off nicely and in the absence of a regular orchestra saves the day.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277 |
It's not a big deal, I realize. I always seem to hone in on these trivial details (trivial unless you really love that part like I do) I heard Graffman play the No 1 back in the late 60's at the Music Center and he cut the opening tutti. It's a big deal to me. I'd never countenance any tutti of a Beethoven or Mozart concerto (or even a Balakirev concerto) being cut. Why should Chopin suffer this indignity? It is just pandering to the pianist's vanity - he wants to make everyone know that he is the star, no matter what the damage done to the structure of the work. And it is damaging to the work as a whole. At least, Balakirev's re-orchestration (actually, more a re-arrangement: he reassigned some of the piano passages to various orchestral instruments) of the concertos kept the proportions intact, even if the result sounds like a Russianized version of Chopin. Krystian Zimerman, by lavishing care and bringing out various instrumental details in the orchestral playing (in his performances and recordings with his own Polish Festival Orchetsra), showed how well attuned Chopin's orchestration was to these pieces: the orchestra is no mere sideshow to the soloist's brilliance.
If music be the food of love, play on!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,169
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,169 |
This reminds me of the time I heard Barenboim play both Brahms concerti with the Chicago Symphony. (This was in the 80's, before he was the director... I think he might have been conducting too.)
I was amazed at the end of the first concerto when he played chords throughout the final tutti, even though there's nothing written there in the piano score.
-J
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277 |
This reminds me of the time I heard Barenboim play both Brahms concerti with the Chicago Symphony. (This was in the 80's, before he was the director... I think he might have been conducting too.)
I was amazed at the end of the first concerto when he played chords throughout the final tutti, even though there's nothing written there in the piano score.
-J I believe both Mozart and Beethoven played along in the orchestral tuttis when they performed their concertos (and a few modern pianists have also done so in Mozart concertos, in the name of 'authenticity'), but I don't know if this was still the practice in Brahms's time.....
If music be the food of love, play on!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 560
500 Post Club Member
|
OP
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 560 |
This reminds me of the time I heard Barenboim play both Brahms concerti with the Chicago Symphony. (This was in the 80's, before he was the director... I think he might have been conducting too.)
I was amazed at the end of the first concerto when he played chords throughout the final tutti, even though there's nothing written there in the piano score.
-J Sometimes leaving the pianist out at the end of the concerto makes absolutely no sense to me and I ponder why they did. Mendelssohn, Brahms, Chopin, even Listz for heaven's sake. His PC #1 e-flat. The last two chords he leaves for the orchestra. Why?????? Why not just let the pianist finish with them. Some pianists on YT faithfully observe this. Cliburn not only finishes with the orchestra in the Liszt but puts a kettledrum roll in there to boot. Sounds good, I have to admit.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,340
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,340 |
Why alter what has been written down? Write your own stuff and do as you like, I would say.
Longtemps, je me suis couché de bonne heure, but not anymore!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,565
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,565 |
If tutti means 'all' or 'together', is it unreasonable for a pianist to join the party if they want to? I don't really know how this works, but maybe the composer considered this when writing the score. If everyone is playing together, the pianist isn't really taking anything away by playing except for the perception that he is playing out of turn. Looking at Gulda's performances of Mozart's piano concerti where he is also conductor, I notice him playing along a lot and it makes sense from a directing point of view. It also just looks like he's really into the music and I think it adds something to the overall performance. EDIT: Sorry, wikipedia was just lazy research on my part. My dictionary clearly shows that while tutti may mean 'all' in Italian, it's musical definition is: In a concerto, the ensemble as distinct from the soloist(s); a passage for the ensemble So if it's written as tutti and the soloist is playing then it's just a decision to depart from the score. I think this is ok in most cases but that's just me.
Last edited by Pathbreaker; 10/12/13 06:54 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,405
Posts3,349,434
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|