I have to confess, I've never actually heard Don Giovanni. Now what I think is that first impressions is the ones that REALLY count. I've noticed it on myself many times, particularly with tempi of Bach's music, that once I get attached to a tempo, it's really hard to open my mind up for a new interpretation. Therefore, I think, when choosing which interpretation should we listen first is an important choice. With that said, I think it is at least as important of a skill to be able to stray away from what a person's used to and be open to new ideas. So what I really wanted to say is that since I haven't actually heard any of Don Giovanni before, I had very little bias when listening to your demonstrations, and as you yourself said in the video, it indeed sounded very natural! The tempo sounded very close to just right, like my favorite bachian or classical choices of tempo, if you get my meaning. Quite a great video. Once I've thought you've fallen to the "other side of the horse" as we say it over here, that is you've become biased and sticking to the other side of the argument "just because" with really no research/heavily biased interpretation of the research, but now I'm really beginning to think you're onto something, Great job, looking forward to future content.
thank you very much for this deep feedback, it is really great to read other people's experience. You are right: getting used to a performance is an emotional thing. It needs time to take a distance again. In an hour, the first interview with Lorenz will go online. And over the coming months, I plan to implement several 'assignments' that will guide people through this process themselves. Just have to figure out how practically we could do this !
The same can be said about the time period of the instrument (mid 20the Century Piano vs 1830 Pianoforte vs Viennese Fortepiano circa Mozart, or Revival Harpsichord (Pleyel ala Landowska or Serien Neupert "Bach Registration") vs Original Ruckers Harpsichord vs Italian Harpsichord vs late 18the Century French Harpsichord prototypes, or Baroque Flute vs Boehm Flute, Natural Horns and Natural Trumpets vs 19th century valve horn and trumpets vs 20th century trumpets and "Bach Trumpets" (High pitched Trumpet/Cornet Hybrids to play the clarino parts in Baroque music).
This makes me love classical music again. My friend in band, (i only played trombone 2 years, I haven't played since) introduced me to mozart. I used to listen to it at night, while laying in bed and everyone else was asleep. I would create my own symphonies in my mind. I went to college, got married, and distracted with surviving, and just fell into pop music. When youtube opened up the world to international music, I began to listen to Asian music, and then music from all over the world, and once in a while, classical music, and now here I am again, back to mozart. Thank you.
Υοur research and interpretation made this gem sound so strange yet beautiful to my ears, like hearing it for the first time! Good job, regards from Greece
Great! The ouverture is really spooky at this speed, as it should be, really aticipating the finale (same music) with the ghost of the Commendatore lurking and flames of hell approaching...
@@geiryvindeskeland7208 I don't blindly believe in Wim Winters but I find what he says makes sense. I don't know about the performances you mention bin this video also his ouverture lasts about 6 minutes, not the whole video because he also talks.
You play very musically - I really like your playing. That's rare amongst musicians - particularly classical, who normally play like machines these days. Before WWII, individuality and phrasing were acceptable, and expected in classical interpretation - no more unfortunately.
AuthenticSound Virtuosity is really wasted on some musicians. I would rather listen to an error strewn performance that move me than a technically perfect performance that left me cold inside.
Not that I am that old, however all my teachers pre-dated WWII, so my teaching style encourages individuality. Unfortunately the exam system here in Toronto does not favour that.
From the point of view of playing piano, I find this very encouraging because I can't play very fast, and I've always gotten a lot out of Bach, Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven anyway, noticing a lot more of the details at a more moderate tempo. Slowing things down would also make certain passages with fast scales and arpeggios manageable that I otherwise just would have to give up on. I also notice that as I gain proficiency on a piece, the difference in speed is not great between what I consider too slow and what I consider to be just about right. I must admit, though, that I often find passages played faster still to be more exciting, but of course within reason. I find your ideas very encouraging.
Fascinating, as usual, Mr. Winters! I found this video just before the 3rd production of Don Giovanni I’ve attended. My request to such an esteemed academic and connoisseur as yourself, would be for a listener’s guide to Mozart’s score, which would delve into Mozart’s unique ability to create dramatic effects to suit the libretto. I imagine your insights would make the experience even more rewarding. Thank you for all your interesting content!
So... what little evidence do we have about the tempi in Don Giovanni? Luckily we have one of the few opera playbills that states both the starting and finishing time of the show, for the Prague premiere in 1788 specifically. It says very clearly 'Der Anfang ist um 7 Uhr - Das Ende um halb 10 Uhr.' I.e. the opera begins at 7 and finishes at 9:30... thus is only 2hrs30mins long. This is also backed up by the Leipzig 1788 playbill which reads 'Der Anfang ist präcise halb 6 Uhr - Das Ende um 8 Uhr' - again 5:30-8 is 2hrs30mins. This alone should disprove the double-beat theory in Mozart (unless you propose that they read watches differently too?), but how does that relate to the Tomaschek metronome markings? I did some complex maths to see what I could find out... (3secs added for each fermata, and 5secs between each movement to account for discontinuity/time-wasted - only for non-attacca) * Overture (30 bars of Alla-Breve at 92 quarter-note=78)+(262 bars of C at 132 half-note+3=241)+5 = 324secs 1. Notte e giorno faticar… Ah, soccorso! (175.5 bars of C at 104 half-note+3=206)+(17 bars of Alla-Breve at 60 quarter-note=68)+5 = 279secs 2. Ma qual mai s'offre... Fuggi, crudele, fuggi (44 bars of C at 80 half-note=66)+(3.5 bars at 80 quarter-note=11)+(14.5 bars at 52 quarter-note+3=70)+(62.5 of Alla-Breve at 100 half-note=75)+(2 bars at 80 quarter-note=6)+(3 bars at 63 quarter note+3=14)+(7.5 bars at 100 half-note+3=12)+(6.5 bars at 60 half-note=13)+(55 bars at 100 half-note=66)+5 = 338secs 3. Ah! chi mi dice mai (108 bars of C at 84 half-note+3)+5 = 162secs 4. Madamina! (84 bars of C at 152 quarter-note+12=145)+(88 bars of 3/4 at 96 quarter-note+3=168)+5 = 318secs 5. Giovinette che fate all' amore (86.5 bars of 6/8 at 126 dotted-quarter-note)+5 = 87secs 6. La ci darem la mano (48 bars of 2/4 at 88 eighth-note+3=134)+(33 bars of 6/8 at 92 dotted-quarter-note=43)+5 = 182secs 7. Ah, fuggi il traditor (45 bars of 3/4 at 112 quarter-note)+5 = 77secs 8. Non ti fidar, o misera (88 bars of Alla-Breve at 96 quarter-note)+5 = 225secs 9. Don Ottavio, son morta! (23 bars of C at 92 half-note=30)+(8.5 bars at 52 quarter-note=39)+(5.5 bars at 58 quarter-note=23)+(2 bars at 92 half note=3)+(14 bars at 58 quarter-note=58)+(16 bars at 92 half-note=21)+5 = 179secs 10. Or sai chi l'onore (70 bars of Alla-Breve at 69 half-note+6) = 128secs 11. Finch' han dal vino (160 bars of 2/4 at 116 half-note)+5 = 88secs 12. Batti, batti (60.5 bars of 2/4 at 88 eighth-note+3=168)+(39.5 bars of 6/8 at 92 dotted-quarter-note=52)+5 = 225secs 13. Presto, presto! (91 bars of C at 100 half-note=109)+(47 bars of 3/4 at 84 quarter-note=101)+(75 bars of 2/4 at 120 quarter-note=75)+(33 bars of 3/4 at 96 quarter note=62)+(19 bars of Alla-Breve at 52 quarter-note=88)+(87 bars of 6/8 at 126 dotted-quarter-note=83)+(46 bars of 2/4 at 80 quarter-note=69)+(61 bars of 3/4 at 96 quarter-note=114)+(30 bars of C at 116 half note+3=34)+(34 bars at 84 quarter-note+3=100)+(89 bars at 88 half-note=121)+[31 bars at 120 half-note*=31]+5 = 987secs 14. Eh via buffone (75 bars of 3/4 at 72 dotted-half-note)+5 = 68secs 15. Ah, taci ingiusto core (84 bars of 6/8 at 104 eighth-note)+5 = 296secs 16. Deh, vieni alla finestra (44 bars of 6/8 at 80 dotted-quarter-note)+5 = 71secs 17. Metà di voi qua vadano (84 bars of Alla-Breve at 60 half-note)+5 = 173secs 18. Vedrai, carino, se sei buonino (104 bars of 3/8 at 116 eighth-note+12)+5 = 178secs 19. Sola, sola in buio loco (130 bars of Alla-Breve at 58 half-note+3=272)+(146 bars at 112 half-note=156)+5 = 433secs 20. Ah, pietà, signori miei! (106 bars of C at 112 half-note)+5 = 119secs** 21. Il mio tesoro intanto (101 bars of Alla-Breve at 96 quarter-note+3)[(Di rider tinirai e.t.c. at 69 quarter-note***)]+5 = 261secs 22. O statua gentilissima (108 bars of C at 160 quarter-note)+5 = 167secs 23. Crudele! Ah no, mio bene... Non mi dir, bell' idol mio (2.5 bars of C at 138 half-note+3=5)+(12.5 bars at 69 eighth-note=89)+(47 bars of 2/4 at 88 eighth-note+6=134)+(52 bars of C at 138 quarter-note=90)+5 = 323secs 24. Gia la mensa e preparata (46 bars of C at 100 half-note=55)+(70 bars of 6/8 at 80 dotted-quarter-note+6=111)+(44 bars of 3/4 at 152 quarter-note+3=55)+(38 bars of Alla-Breve at 152 quarter-note+3=63)+(178 bars of 3/4 at 72 dotted-half-note+3=151)+(53 bars of Alla-Breve at 112 half-note=57)+(87 bars at 50 half-note=209)+[32 bars at 82 half-note*=47]+(49 bars at 96 half-note+3=64)+(108 bars of 3/4 at 60 dotted-half-note+3=111)+(43 bars of Alla-Breve at 60 quarter-note+3=175)+(116 at 69 whole-note+3=104)+5 = 1,207secs Preliminary Total = 6,895secs Secco Recitatives (with timings taken from René Jacobs & Freiburg-Baroque recording as this gives a varied and comprehensive view of the work, taken in accurate speech-rhythm - cuttin, of course, the scenes from the Vienna version of the opera): +31+60+51+60+60+60+4+43+60+60+15+60+50+43+60+25+30+60+53+60+20+36+60+60+5+60+60+20+60+16+60+60+7+37+60+60+1+60+60+60+60+17+60+20 = 1,964 (Total = 8,858secs) + 5% time added overall to account for potential rits, breaths, general pauses, extra gaps, and dragging/fluctuation of tempo. Total Length = 9,301secs / 2hrs35mins1sec. The overture was not finished at the dress run so was probably not accounted for in the timings. Therefore -5mins24secs… Final Length = 2hrs29mins37secs, which rounds up to 2hrs30mins exactly as the original playbill states. Therefore, I believe (when read literally), we actually have a thoroughly reliable and historically accurate insight into Mozart's tempi here. Let's not tarnish a good source with misapplied theories and instead appreciate the information it actually gives us. Many of the tempi above are actually slower than even non-HIP performances tend to take them today so your notion that double-beat would be less than half speed is also incorrect in this case. I'm not suggesting that double-beat theory doesn't exist at all, but it is certainly not applicable to the music of Mozart. *Tomaschek does not account for the ‘più stretto’ here, so the difference in tempi given by Gielen has been added to approximate (half-note: 132-100=32) **incorrect title given (‘Ah per pietà’) in the Fink article ***these sections are treated as recitative and taken from the above recording (as the tempo is similar to 69bpm)
thanks for sharing. Just sing it 30% faster than Tomascheck and you're good on your way of proving... why are my single-beating friends so afraid of playing / singing...
30% is over a quarter faster than the indicated tempi. As an experienced musician, I'm sure you know that even a couple of clicks either way on the metronome is enough to be noticeable, and 10% alone would be enough to ruin a piece in the ears of someone who heard Mozart himself conduct it. None of this opera is unplayable or unsingable at Tomaschek's indicated speeds... far from it, and that is enough for me. Your proposal that his speeds should be halved goes completely against all of the reliable evidence that we have on this opera. If we're talking about singing, perhaps try to comfortably sing through 'La ci darem' at semiquaver=88bpm, Il mio tesoro at semiquaver=160. It just isn't possible without chopping up phrases to awkwardly breathe everywhere. I actually don't even think 2:06 is too difficult for a native Italian speaker anyway as they have much quicker tongues than most English or German speakers as it's the way their language works. There similar examples of patter-song like that in later Italian opera, and I don't think it's fair to pick one of the most difficult passages in the whole opera to illustrate a generalised point. Yes, slowing the tempo makes the coloratura easier, but let's not pretend that Mozart's singers weren't proficient enough to manage this. Also Fink implies that the music is being ruined by the performers' lack of capability at faster tempi, which suggests to me that they weren't able to keep up with the orchestra at these speeds anyway, like you demonstrate. You'd have to be a pretty amateur singer not to be able to keep up with the indicated speed, never mind a double-beat one. When Mozart told Leopold that the Presto of the Haffner Symphony should be marked and played 'as fast as possible', do you again believe that his performers weren't technically able to play quavers faster than say crotchet=120. I don't find that convincing at all.
yes, but a few clicks would not outrage mr Finck stating that current musicians were destroying Mozart's music. WAY faster is more than just a few numbers.
Yes, you are probably right, but as I said in the last comment fast enough to destroy Mozart's music surely means almost too fast to physically perform... which also suggests that Tomaschek's markings should be taken literally. You haven't refuted the evidence that I've pointed to here. I don't think it's just a coincidence that Tomaschek's markings correspond EXACTLY to the original length of the opera (with only a 23 second margin in my calculations). Even I was surprised at how accurate they are. Also, nothing that Mr Finck says implies that ALL of the opera was played too fast. For all we know he may have been talking about the serenity of the slow movements being ruined by excess speed (and admittedly, we have the same problem in opera houses today). It is not fair to assume that he only means the fastest parts of the work for the sake of argument.
Also, I'd like to point out that the digitally manipulated extract here is not at Tomaschek's tempo at all. He marks 'Mille torbidi pensieri' as half-note=112, and this is closer to 145bpm... you've already made it 30% faster before increasing by another 30% which misrepresents the tempi completely. I've heard plenty of recordings that take it even faster than the correct thirty percent and cope perfectly fine, and even most non-HIP recordings actually take that section faster than Tomaschek tells us to.
I know I am late to the party and this maybe a stupid question anyhow, but considering how people back than wrote letters about their daily life to their friends and family about as regularly as we take pictures of our food, there have to be accounts of people who attended the performance and mentioned how much time they spent at the opera ... couldn't that help to narrow in on the actual tempo the performance was given in? I believe DG is about 3 hours today? How long would it have been back then? Anyhow, thanks for this very interesting video and I have to say I would love to hear the arias be sung in that tempo (and I image that, e.g., queen of the night would have been less of a machine gun and more of a mortar then, right?)
Why? Certainly longer than today, but that was also the goal, operas were the meeting places for people, they were 'Abendfullende Werke'. What about some Wagner operas...?
Listening to period performances and DVDs/Productions of this opera, really interesting thoughts on tempi. The HIP groups seem to air on the side of fast but thankfully not too fast. In Mozart/Daponte and even his La Finta Giardiniera (a different librettist) there's a lot of humour, innuendo, puns, and other jokes that frankly would be lost at break neck speed. Even in Figaro where Figaro is so excited to be with his new wife and staying in the house between his master and mistress's bedchambers, Susanna reminds him of each of their ulterior motives to has the man and women at their respective beck and call with "Ding Ding, Don Don." As my friend's Romanian language GPS says "Limitat la viteza!" watch your speed (to some of these performances). I really like the sound and playing of your clavichord, such a great instrument.
I'm just a musical peasant, having played guitar for over 40 years. I play mostly by ear, so obsessing over time signatures seems curious to me. Of course Mozart may have had a tempo in mind, but that doesn't take into consideration simple things like quality of the musicians, instruments, temperament of the patron, and other earthly factors. I also know from vast experience that performances are always fast, event if by a beat or two. While this discussion, like so many on time signature is interesting, it isn't going to give you an answer. The most you can hope for is a marginally acceptable discourse that is self perpetuating. What I would focus on, and I think you touch on it periodically in these videos is how the musical tastes of the audience/patron influences the music thematically. And, as someone already stated, tastes of the audience changed within a lifetime---just as it does now. What was all the rage in 1798 was passé in 1803.
Reminds me of Furtwängler's Mozart a little (who ironically of course couldn't have cared less about metronome markings "as text" - historical or otherwise). Thank you so very much for sharing your efforts!
Thanks for sharing this, I'll have to look for that recording then. Well, they did not care of course of any historical context, perhaps but tradition, which, on its turn, does not have to say anything about a performance more two centuries before, but sometimes, one sees a glimpse of such long tailed tradition in older performances. Here's a video where I discuss such possible echo's in Ramin's Bach : ua-cam.com/video/EIgAmWLMjUA/v-deo.html
I completely agree with your assessment there. Whilst listening to you describing, very politely, the ways in which some performances push the tempi beyond the intelligibility of structure, a statement by Hans Keller came to mind: "Tempo in itself is nothing: tempo is a function of structure and hence, in performance, a function of phrasing." Maybe culture will warm up to the subjectivity entailed in such conceptions again. EDIT Completely forgot to mention either Furtwängler or tradition. Maybe just this: I find it oddly sweet that posterity has kind of agreed to label the Wagnerian school of conducting or the romantics in general as some sort of "pompous sweeteners" of pre-classical and classical music, specifically because of their measured and "slow" tempi. Of course anyone can insert their favorite example of a gargantuan apparatus simply attempting to sound lush, but reading what artists like Wagner (as a conductor) or Furtwängler had to say about the first principles of their music making: they were absolutely obsessed with the creation of structural legibility. (hyperbole)Odd to frame some of the idiosyncrasies of historically informed performances as a kind of counter-revolution to the influence of a man who died 135 years ago, but stranger things have happened.(/hyperbole)
thank you. you've made me want to hear all of mozart in this way. i'm re-working the string quartets and symphonies and the magic flute in my head as i think about this. it's pretty musical. mostly, what i've heard of mozart sounded like he was this silly show-off. most realistically, if people don't get what you're trying to do, rogers and hart wrote 'my funny valentine' as a totally up-beat flapper song, and someone told them to just slow it down. they did, and it became a great song instead of a novelty piece.
One week ago or so I found your videos on UA-cam by chance. I am very impressed by your work - especially because I am also tortured by rushed and overhasty tempi of so many of todays musicians. So, for example, I also cannot understand why Schubert, whose Sonatas are full of contemplative calmness (but which are played much much to fast today), could be such an enthusiastic admirer of Beethoven, if Beethovens music is really that fast and furious as it is usually performed today. But, certainly, your theory is, at least for the moment, still that: a theory. You bring in your videos, as far a I have seen, very interesting arguments for it. However, to be honest, I have a problem with the, so to say, main-argument of this clip concerning Don Giovanni: If I understand you well, Fink asked Tomaschek in 1839 to give him MM indications concerning a performance of 1791. That means a performance which took place 48 (!) years before. I think it's rather impossible to remember the tempi of an opera I heard nearly half a century ago. Even if this refers only to the Introduction. So I am very sceptic about calling Tomaschek a reliable witness. Surely, this is only argument among many others. And be sure that I hope, that your research will discover even more good arguments for your theory than you have already shown, because I think it's not only very plausible, but it has the power to chance our view towards the treasures of classical music fundamentally and in a way which is most remarkable. Thank you and best regards!
Point is not whether Tomachek's tempi were those of Mozart, point is that for Finck, these mms were taken as proof for how much too fast (so much faster than the crazy Tomachek tempi) people played Mozart's music. See also perhaps the new version of this video: ua-cam.com/video/bvHyQUkXDvM/v-deo.html
Great! That is what it is all about: reflection and sharing that. Will be great to ready your reflections in the future, we'll be having regular videos on that topic over the coming months
This is extraordinary. Thank you so much for all of this work and for sharing it with all of is. This is impacting a Handel and Mendelssohn trio recital I will be doing.
AuthentucSound!!! ¿What part of the master piece of Mozart are you playing from the 11:10 minute to 12:33? Extremly Beautiful, so so incredible, please tell me what part of what piece is... ¿is a don giovanni piano version?
It indeed is the opening of Don Giovanni, but than with the tomaschek MM metrically understood (as probably is no doubt any more they should). Great you like this, I'll be doing a project with singers and my new pianoforte in the coming years with it.
Dear colleague, my sincere congrats for your sensitive and emotional playing. I'm sorry, I did not get this: the MM signature 92 for the Andante. First you say 'we take it for quarter notes' and then '...or we take it for the eight notes...'. You understand that makes a big difference. So, was the Tomascheck MM for quarters or for eights? Thank you. By the way I can figure how it may sound with an orchestra and... YES... A horrifying Deus ex machina' appears!
Wow, that's so different from what I'm used to that I couldn't even tell you were still playing the overture!! (granted, I'm also not used to hearing it on keyboard...) But I dig it
from what i gather the orchestra had zero time to practice. Sections of the opera were incomplete days before the premiere. Mozart rewrote the wood wind section so that it would not sound so badly out of tune. And of the performance, it was all sight read. Orchestra were part time amateurs. The actors improvised their lines. A truly authentic production would by todays standards be completely chaos. And it was done in 2 hours 30 minutes. I guess they skipped a lot of it.
I think the key here is to have an open mind regardless of music and tempi and not to get caught up in "what should" or "according to this recording" etc. etc. You do a make a strong case here and I really really approve greatly. More freedom to music in general is what music and interpretation needs today. Not Robots Stuck To A Metronome, or being fascistic in just following the notes and not being able to add notes, appoggiaturas, etc or colors to the music. As if this here recording or interpretation is the final word. No. Music is a search for each and everyone of us. Cherish it, because we will all perish regardless. And to throw a boot at message below. First impression is never last(to citate AXE commercial).
I really like the slower tempi. The music is more dramatic and allows the harmonies and counterpoint to be better appreciated. However, two concerns re the slower speeds come to my mind: 1. If all the tempi are halved, how long must the opera last? 2. If the tempi are halved, can the singers sustain their notes well enough and perform the phrases in one breath? Another question then comes to mind - 3. Are there different uses of metronome markings with respect to whether the time signature is Common Time (4/4) or Cut Common Time (2/2) or Simple Duple Time (2/4)? Different rules for compound times? Do the halved metronome speeds only apply in certain time signatures?
great to read your thoughts here, Tracey! First off, it is not halved compared to what we hear today. if double beat would be "0" and single beat "10", most performance situate between 2 and 8. So in either case of reconstruction, the 0's and 1's would be even more present than the 9's and 10's. Yes, it is for all MM, so an easy start is to consider that approach for all of Beethoven's, Czerny's, Moscheles', Hummel's, ... tempi. take opus 299 of Czerny with his MM and try it in double beat, you'll be surprised and learn directly why he was so popular as a teacher!
I must admit that I often hedge my bets by using completely different tempi for repeats, say in the little preludes, when I find both beautiful in their own way - usually starting allegro, repeating andante - 2nd section first time andante and then the repeat ending the piece on a more upbeat speed. Well, it works as a kind of incipient Sonata form 😊 No historical precedent, but why not?
Gould was a genius, no matter what he did, fast, slow, ... if often seemed as if he had two brains. His 1981 goldberg is the one disc I'd take to an island. His 1955 version is in the top 10 list.
I prefer the metrical reading of classical pieces, but the performance you give for Tomaschek's speed I measure at 144, not 112. I still think 112 read non-metrically is too fast, but it's more manageable that it seems here, if I measured correctly.
Thank you for your videos Wim. Today I just had my first piano recital, I was very nervous while playing and made quite a few mistakes which I dont usually make. Do you have the same problem? If so, how do you overcome this stage fright? Thank you!
Dear Henry, you must think I did forget about your question! I apologize for being so late with addressing your concern, which is something many more people struggle with. I must say that your message inspired me to make extensive notes taken from my own experience, and since the topic is so wide, I'll be constructing an online course from it, not the coming time, but this year still. If you would like to Skype with me about your experience, I'm happy to do that as a thank you for the idea. Don't hesitate to ask, you can reach me anytime on wwintersATtelenet.be. Best wishes! Wim
I always preferred the overture to be played slower. Celibidach was the only one I found who did it slow enough, but he only did the overture, from what I can tell. What is sad, is all the historically informed performances of it, are like they are trying to get it over with. Gardiner and Jacobs' sound way too fast, even compared to their contemporaries. Levine's 1990 had the best cast for his, but his is still a touch too fast and it's also unavailable (darn you Metropolitan Opera, I keep requesting it) . Karajan's has been my definitive CD release, but it's also a touch fast, but much slower than most. It's so nice to hear all the intricacies of the piece when it's slowed down. I'd be interested to hear more pieces taken to task and tempo from you. I for one, always try to find out what the composer's intention was. Stravinsky liked Bernstein's recording of the Rite of Spring. Ravel said Bolero should be 17 minutes long, so I often lean toward performances that are that long. Does that make me a musical snob, or narrow minded? Perhaps, but I like getting as close to what is intended as possible.
This way of playing seems to make sense, but I have just a few "reservations" 1. How did almost everyone forget that a beat was back and forth on the metronome and switch to each half-swing being a beat? You'd think at least half of the performers today would have been taught this if it was the standard a couple hundred years ago. Put more simply, how was this "transition" made across all of classical music? 2. Certain tied notes or long notes in piano music can't really be sustained for as long as written. 3. How would an adagio be played? They seem fairly slow as it is, making one twice as slow could be very boring! Or are they also indicated to be too fast?
interesting questions. 2 is not a problem at all: certainly the early instruments just have a shorter tone, it is all suggestion of the voice anyway, and long notes occur in all tempi, 3 is something that is sometimes really hard, but e.g. in the adagio of kv 284, it is clear that the metrical way is the only way to perform that piece, I'll talk about it in the practising hours next sunday, and 1 is an intruiging question. There was a generation long almost no interest at all for the metronome, and although even metrical and non metrical (modern) use of the metronome has existed (see eg Henrico Stewen's study of Reger - Straube - it is a fascinating study-) there is research to be done on this field, and my guess is that once we change our perspective to read the 19th c. sources the answers will be there. And do not forget the people in the 19th c. were not interested in playing according to older tradition (partly that is the storyline of these Tomaschek videos). So the pupils of pupils of Chopin/Liszt, play on those recordings how they played ca 1900, it is not -by far not I think- a reflection of how they played before 1850. Just thinking out loud here !
I revisited this post today and had a thought. I found an average orchestral performance of the overture on another channel and ran it opposite your playing at the slower tempo. While it presents no particular problems on the face, something did come up as I examined my comparisons. Your tempo is a good 25% slower perhaps?... Well, Don Giovanni is three hours long excluding intermissions. An extra 25% added makes it 3 3/4 hours long. That's like the Ring Cycle. Do you really think that the slower tempo and its effects on the entire opera's performance time (given contemporary expectations for opera goers) conflict logically at that speed?
Operas often had a very long durations, with the ballets etc. Leopold reports from Wolfgang's Mitridate opera that it had a huge success, was repeated more than 20 times, although it lasted more than 6 hours. So the ring might be an end point of a tradition more than we believe today?
I love Don Giovanni! I think the tempo you present works very well. Especially when you consider it in light of the rest of the opera and I can feel this pacing working throughout the opera. Sorry to be missing so much lately but I haven't been well and have had to spend time in other places. Is it just me or are the strings and soundboard on your clavichord opening up? It sounds more open than it did last year.
The power at the beginning surprised me as well I must say, the sound gets bad on times when the mic for speaking has to remain on, but other than that, I don't know why the instrument sounded so free. Sometimes it is the weather, it opens when it is cold outside, freezing is the best.
Who knows how accurate Thomaschek's metronome was? Or good his memory was or a performance he heard 40 years ago? Or if the Czech orchestra with a different conductor five years after the premiere was accurately replicating Mozart's tempos?
Hi John, in fact that does not matter. What matters is that a) these are Tomaschek's tempi that b) are aproved by the fact Finck published them and c) that, though in single beat they are so unhumanly fast, were served by Finck as to proof that Mozart -at least in his taste- was destroyed in that time by playing his music way too fast. Way too fast is not adding 10%, it's adding more, which, to those Thomasheck MM, simply is not an option. That's the whole point of the video.
I'm not sure I've performed the whole opera, but I've certainly performed the Overture to Don Giovanni a number of times and know the rest of the opera quite well, as I taught an Intro to Opera course for years. 134 to the quarter is fine to me, but I hear you doing a lot of ritardandi. I'm not looking at a score right now, but I don't remember them being there, and I think if the overture is played more nearly straight in this tempo, it will work fine, but to me, with all those ritardandi, it dies.
Thanks Ian, it does. Still we're thinking of building a live sounding studio in the barn next doors. For reasons of silence and production time. If you're interested, I made a few videos, also with a legendary sound engineer : ua-cam.com/video/3FRpB1s_Sho/v-deo.html
Dear Wim, Do you know the EMI Klemperer [London] recording of the Don [complete]? I think you might appreciate it. It is very close to your reading. I love the Don [the only opera I can easily listen to for pleasure on so many levels], and I suspect that you would also love it in Klemperer's uncompromising reading. Best wishes from George
@@AuthenticSound Dear Wim, May I suggest the Warner 4 CD issue of the Don which has a fascinating hour long survey of part of the rehearsals as the 4th. disc. A unique insight into the massively detailed approach as to tempo and expression from Klemperer himself, and and the importance of the shortest notes, which are not a sort fog, but essential. That was in 1966, and so your efforts have a president, though not widely known these days. Best wishes from George.
@@AuthenticSound Dear Wim, I listened to the whole of the Klemperer recording today. It would be a huge work to do - to relate the reading to the known Tomachek metronome marks, but it might be instructive. Klemperer was notable late in his career for very steady tempi, and yet the music does not sit on its hands when he is leading. He finds the value in every note within the phrase and makes resilient rhythms that remain clear and forward moving. He is never REALLY slow as such. Earlier in his career, he was rather fast on occasion, though more often than not unfashionably slower than normal. His recordings of the Pastoral Symphony really do observe the peasant dance with a definitely "pesante" feel of steady distinct beats rather than the Viennese metropolitan "one in a bar" style favoured by almost every other conductor! I could go on, but suffice to say that I have found your videos in accord with absolute sense regarding the speed of playing of the classics - not the least, your one about "Fate knocking at the door," in Beethoven. Obviously the knocks are portentous rather than rushing! Best wishes from George
Having been ill for a few days I have spent time comparing the Fink/Tomaschek tempi with a (fairly) modern recording .. one made in 1989 by Nicholas Harnoncourt which is on UA-cam. The results are very interesting. There are, of course, differences of tempo but it is fairly equally balanced between who is faster. In 21 examples Tomaschek's speed is higher than Harnoncourt's but in 18 examples the opposite is true. Some of Harnoncourt's Allegros are MUCH faster than Tomaschek e.g. Ah Fuggi and Finche Han Vino from Act 1 and Ah! Signor from Act 2. Tomaschek often has higher tempo markings for Andantes and Allegrettos. In 13 cases Harnoncourt's tempi match Tomaschek precisely. No-where do I find T's Metronome markings to be 'unplayable' or even unreasonable although one (famous) number is very different. Deh Vieni (Allegretto with mandolin accompaniment) is usually performed as if it were a steady Andante with an eighth note at around mm = 100 or even slower. Tomaschek's tempo of dotted quarter note = 74, although surprising to us since we are used to the much slower tempo, actually makes sense of Mozart's tempo description and puts the music into the tempo range of Allegretto Minuets etc. Obviously Tomaschek does not represent some 'Gospel Truth', and probably even Mozart's own tempi would have varied a fair bit, but there seems to be no reason to dismiss Tomaschek's tempi as wrong or in need of radical re-calculation. Adding a huge 30% to T's tempi is inevitably going to make them seem ridiculous. Also it is extremely unlikely that he meant that EVERY part of the opera was being performed too quickly, his intention was surely to correct particular problems while giving general guidance for the whole. Thanks for your interesting posts
Interesting you've done some experiments! Now, the point of the previous video was, that tempi of Mozart around 1840 were way higher than this, leading to impossible decisions. It's in that context that the old metrical reading of MM again becomes relevant, as in many other places I believe. here is the previous video that you might want to check out: ua-cam.com/video/06Tx6-v_KEg/v-deo.html&index=4&list=PLackZ_5a6IWVP1Nb_Zxr-RfFHX62Nz9iQ, thanks for your thoughts anyway, much appreciated!
if we consider mozart as the maradona of music, then we could compare the speed maradona played footbal and the speed mozart played music, but we must consider footbal is a sport and music is an art
Common sense? Allegro means fast, no snail-paced... As violinist who has played this overture, I would have to say that it is not possible to play at these slow speeds musically. Also, bear in mind that there were no chin or shoulder rests in 1787, without which is very difficult to play vibrato. Can you imagine playing such lengthy notes without vibrato... It would sound gruesome... even on a strad! Theory aside, if someone says allegro, it means fast and 132 crotchets in a minute fits just right. Another factor is this... Don Giovanni usually lasts 3 hours... can you imagine going to an opera lasting 6 hours?! Don giovanni, a cenar teco, m'invitasti, e son venuto... The poor bass, il commadatore, will run out of breath at the above tempi!
Understand your concern, but it's important not to mix too many elements. First: if those notes are possible or not, is something that with different playing techniques could be solved. On keyboard it works, so sure on an instrument with a longer tone. Secondly, it is not doubling the lenght, we today don't reach those numbers or don't want to. Keep in mind Tomscheck's numbers were considered to be "slow" in 1840... so you must speed up considerably compared to those even, to come close to what our colleagues played these works in (only that element must ring a bell). Thirdly: allegro does not mean fast... check czerny: he gives 12 different connotations on Allegro. A notation / time signature like this starts from its tempo ordinario, which is -no discussion here- is 60 for the quarter note. This video might give you some perspectives: ua-cam.com/video/2yd7LWi4wus/v-deo.html
This "authentic" sound would bore all Prague aristocracy and bourgeoisie from Mozart's time into a profound and tranquil sleep... OF COURSE this opera doesn't last 6 hours, AND IT IS AN OPERA, otherwise NOT a keyboard composition! AND even in the keyboard , following THAT theory thing, would meant to be playing for fucking 6 hours NON-STOP; OF COURSE it is NOT the case. I suggest listening to René Jacobs and Freibruger's orchestra interpretation and performance: NOW THAT'S EMOTION and VERY advanced technique. Tomascheck MUST have been JUST wrong, and just passed his bad interpretation to Fink. I cannot understand HOW in a matter of less than 20 years the "same" music would be played ridiculously faster by those uninformed contemporary musicians. And the fact that they give very fast tempo means NOT much, because to think what people thought before as to reconstruct exactly what they thought nowadays is impossible, we will never really know, though we could try to reconstruct ancient sounds ... At least that is the most probable possibility, because everyone was playing different than them ...
@mortonbay chestnut _"Allegro means fast"_ This is not true. In Italian, _allegro_ means lively, joyful, cheerful. It has nothing to do with speed but with temperament.
As someone who is not even remotely familiar with operas of Mozart let alone opera in General... this all sounds completely natural like this for the first hearing... It seems like it would be too childish and playful...
some older ones the andante comes close, but other than that, I don't think so. You've probably heard this recording already: ua-cam.com/video/ZA7xqzu3osE/v-deo.html
These observations are carefully studied thus give the Public interested on this kind of Musical-Investigation, a clear and accurate historic lesson on how Music was played in the days of the Great Masters......with regards the first Recording of Don Giovanni, I have reservations about the "true-speed " of that recording, as we must take in consideration the Electricity Voltage of that Period and the Mechanical R.P.M of the Recorder and the Player's capabilities, the Tempo sounds much too "Fast therefore a bit un-realistic",.....very difficult and awkward to make a fair "judgement based on the sound reproduction of those first Music making Machines........
Hi Oscar, that is the great thing about metronome numbers, they are what they are. Here's a recent 1838 source on how to use the metronome, it's weird that so few people take time to use google search... read para 40 +: books.google.de/books?id=AJtNdn3eKEwC&pg=PA9&dq=mouvement+metronome&hl=de&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjAh9-w7d3bAhUL3qQKHV0ECgI4MhDoAQhuMAk#v=onepage&q=mouvement%20metronome&f=false
Thank you Wim for your recommendation on the book La Musique sans Maitre, it appears to me to be an invaluable Tool containing lots of information about several aspects of Music making including the chapters about applying Tempo,......I have downloaded the on-line PDF version from a Toronto University source,....there is only small inconvenient on the subject, the Book's versions are only available in French (the original version") or German, unfortunately I do not speak fluently any of these two Languages, and there is not an Option on Google for having the PDF text translated unto English, later on perhaps, I'll search for a method of having PDF Text translated unto English,......in the mean thanks again for the thought and please do not stop making good Music and your tutoring Videos,...best wishes Oscar.
We plan in the near future to bring a selection of sources in e-book or print and translate into English -thought that's a really challenging project, I believe it's necessary, since many of those sources are in German or French
We do not have original tempi from Bach, we do have Quantz, French 18th c. sources, and, also important, the Czerny Bach MM. I made a video on Beethoven and Bach, it might interest you: ua-cam.com/users/edit?o=U&video_id=fAx1Rkn6HUE
I have the feeling, that we can reconstruct the tempo of Bach very precise. There is a book "Bach und die drei Temporätsel", written by the swiss piano teacher Rolf Möser. He writes on the tempo order of the "Wohltemperiertes Clavier", which gives us many hints to do that.
Hi Martin, it basically is no secret at all. One starts from the normal tempo ordinario (mésure ordinaire), which is 60/80 for a 4/4 bar structure with notation in fastest 16th and harmonic changed not faster than half notes, and there is all you need to know: notation gets more densed: it slows down, more open, it speeds up (until the old alla breve, where you have 1 harm. change per bar and eight notes as f. note value). I'm talking a lot on that during the live masterclasses , every two sunday evenings, I also read the chat than!
Very interesting! I can't read music... but I'm a complete fan of Mozart, I always wandered why all of his operas sound so different tempo wise. Did Mozart or other musicians didn't write the tempo in their compositions? I have don Giovanni directed by Riccardo Muti, and compared to other directors is for me at least the best performance . The timing feels perfect!
HI Daniel, no Mozart has not, later generations like Czerny and Moscheles added MM which if read correctly, make perfectly sense. The notation however, if understood correctly - which is not so hard- gives strong indications as well.
AuthenticSound thank you so much for the reply! Is MM the tempo? Sorry, I'm no expert in music terminology! So Mozart for example never wrote the tempo on any of his compositions? Was there any way to know, or is just a guess of how are meant to be played?
We know the tempi because of a lot of treatises from the time and earlier, and also the MN (Metronome numbers, sorry for the typo of MM) of C. And M. who were close to key composers like Beethoven and his tradition. Here's a playlist of videos I made on the world of Tempi :) ua-cam.com/play/PLackZ_5a6IWVP1Nb_Zxr-RfFHX62Nz9iQ.html Another one, more in detail with Lorenz Gadient ua-cam.com/play/PLackZ_5a6IWU1zXuo_Qx-YrCCtaJcBiPO.html
Absolutely the best way for Don Giovanni- far more dramatic opening. It has always baffled me why musicians rush through pieces at breakneck speed. It might show off their skill as players but also often shows a deplorable lack of feeling for the music. Perhaps I just opt for slow because that is the best my stiff fingers can do!,
Probably. Some studies have shown that music in different tempi and genres can actually alter our heart rate (and blood pressure) so slower is possibly good for our health. What is not to like about that? On the subject of heart beats, there are two for every pulse beat as the major one circulates blood around the body and the minor one the lungs. Like the metronome?
I think You've got a point. Before I get to know your theory I was just wondering how musicians on those times could play that fast on those slow response keyboard instruments. Also, I wondered if nowadays speed wouldnt be considered vulgar or untasty mostly if we consider that life a couple of centuries ago had another pace and aristocrátic environments wouldnt consider rush as a virtue.
How do we know if Tomaschek remembered that correctly at the age of 65, having it heard almost 50 years back in his past when he was just 17 years old? Furthermore, for Don Giovanni we cannot tell if Tomaschek’s metronome indications were actually much slower than what was played in 1839 because G.W.Fink speaks about tempi in general, not Don Giovanni specifically. I also doubt that he has tried Tomaschek’s metronome indications himself at the piano to see if they made more sense to him. Secondly, the Ouverture is clearly marked Andante alla breve, whereas in your tempo you are actually feeling the quaver (eighth note) as a ground beat. This is clearly against the character of this music, in my humble opinion.
the point is not whether Mozart played in these tempi but that Finck published them by which he approved the speeds and said that musicians played even way faster than these already extreme tempi
The point is, you think this is another example that can prove your approach re metronome indications. I assume you have your information from this article in “ Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung (19 juni 1839)” «Ueber das Bedürfniss, Mozart's Hauptwerke unserer Zeit so metronomisirt zu liefern wie der Meister selbst sie ausführen liess.», where Fink (or Finck) just in general says that some of his contemporaries played too fast in general, not specifically Mozart’s Don Giovanni. By printing the metronome as indicated by Tomaschek in this article (and later in an edition), he wanted to make sure that this won’t happen to Don Giovanni. I don’t think you can deduct from that, that at Fink’s time, Don Giovanni was played even faster than Tomaschek’s metronome indications and that therefore these indications are meant in one complete swing of the pendulum so they should actually be played at half the speed, which is the point you want to prove with this example. @@AuthenticSound
yes, of course it is interesting information by someone really close to Mozart, but basically the information of Tomascheck of course is interesting because it were his tempi.
well, it is hard for me to believe that Tomascheck should have remembered the exact tempi from 50 years in his past. I even assume that he couldn't indicate the exact metronome tempo of a piece played to him live without using a metronome to doublecheck. That means, the 17 year old boy would have had to sit there with a metronome and write down the Tempi of every piece in the whole opera! Do you believe that? I am convinced his metronome indications are just a very vague memory from the past.I don't think he is a reliable source to define Mozart's tempi in Don Giobanni at all, sorry. p.s. What makes it even more doubtful is the fact that Tomascheck wasn't even a musician when he heard Don Giovanni in Prague, he was a University student,@@AuthenticSound
I believe they started the performances earlier, and they didn't have competition from radio or TV, let alone the Internet. However, I don't believe there would be much of an audience today for a 6-hour performance, which might be a good reason to consider a compromise tempo for practical reasons.
All my life I have been very upset and disturbed by the overture to Don Giovanni and also that of Figaro, too fast, and nothing could help me, although I did try to learn to "listen fast," and after many bars I could marvel even at the supersedes they were going, at the structure, power, and glory of Mozart. I am seventy seven now, and, having heard three or four of your videos, I feel like I am glimpsing the promised land. Will I enter it? Get to hear an actual performance? Vincent Shaw Flack
Great to read, Vincent, you express a kind of natural feel that is rare. The promised land... I can tell you, once you experience the excitement, contrast and... peace and relaxation of it, there is no way back, we still are in a post 19th century industrial revolution today, even, I would say certainly in our Early Music Movement. Here are some playlists that talk on the matter : ua-cam.com/play/PLackZ_5a6IWU1zXuo_Qx-YrCCtaJcBiPO.html and ua-cam.com/play/PLackZ_5a6IWVP1Nb_Zxr-RfFHX62Nz9iQ.html
I came across an interesting example of how hearing familiar pieces played more slowly can be revealing. It's the introductory chorus to Bach's popular cantata BWV 140 "Wachet Auf". Listed to any recording on UA-cam then listen to Karl Richter's version: ua-cam.com/video/ldRUt5tU9A0/v-deo.html Then hang around for the duet that follows. If Bach wrote opera?
Our scientific minds long for a "per minute" notation. I.e. ♩= 120 to us should mean 120 quarter notes per minute--very scientific, but no one marked their tempi that way. They say "MM". But what is the definition of MM? It only means "set your metronome to 120". Then what? As the robots in old sci-fi used to say, "insufficient data. Does not compute". Obviously different composers and editors used this device in two different ways back then.
I have to confess, I've never actually heard Don Giovanni. Now what I think is that first impressions is the ones that REALLY count. I've noticed it on myself many times, particularly with tempi of Bach's music, that once I get attached to a tempo, it's really hard to open my mind up for a new interpretation. Therefore, I think, when choosing which interpretation should we listen first is an important choice. With that said, I think it is at least as important of a skill to be able to stray away from what a person's used to and be open to new ideas. So what I really wanted to say is that since I haven't actually heard any of Don Giovanni before, I had very little bias when listening to your demonstrations, and as you yourself said in the video, it indeed sounded very natural! The tempo sounded very close to just right, like my favorite bachian or classical choices of tempo, if you get my meaning. Quite a great video. Once I've thought you've fallen to the "other side of the horse" as we say it over here, that is you've become biased and sticking to the other side of the argument "just because" with really no research/heavily biased interpretation of the research, but now I'm really beginning to think you're onto something, Great job, looking forward to future content.
thank you very much for this deep feedback, it is really great to read other people's experience. You are right: getting used to a performance is an emotional thing. It needs time to take a distance again. In an hour, the first interview with Lorenz will go online. And over the coming months, I plan to implement several 'assignments' that will guide people through this process themselves. Just have to figure out how practically we could do this !
What vocal score are you using for this video?
The same can be said about the time period of the instrument (mid 20the Century Piano vs 1830 Pianoforte vs Viennese Fortepiano circa Mozart, or Revival Harpsichord (Pleyel ala Landowska or Serien Neupert "Bach Registration") vs Original Ruckers Harpsichord vs Italian Harpsichord vs late 18the Century French Harpsichord prototypes, or Baroque Flute vs Boehm Flute, Natural Horns and Natural Trumpets vs 19th century valve horn and trumpets vs 20th century trumpets and "Bach Trumpets" (High pitched Trumpet/Cornet Hybrids to play the clarino parts in Baroque music).
This makes me love classical music again. My friend in band, (i only played trombone 2 years, I haven't played since) introduced me to mozart. I used to listen to it at night, while laying in bed and everyone else was asleep. I would create my own symphonies in my mind. I went to college, got married, and distracted with surviving, and just fell into pop music. When youtube opened up the world to international music, I began to listen to Asian music, and then music from all over the world, and once in a while, classical music, and now here I am again, back to mozart. Thank you.
Great to read, thanks for sharing!
Υοur research and interpretation made this gem sound so strange yet beautiful to my ears, like hearing it for the first time! Good job, regards from Greece
I'd love to hear Don Giovanni in whole beat now, because that was gorgeous. It's like a whole new piece!
super video papa! 😉
xxx
_what?_
The introduction of the overture sounds really terrifying! That should be the way to play it, nowadays. It is so logical
The overture sounded so amazing with your interpretation!!
I love this kind of video where you breakdown your process and explain both in theory and practice.
Great! The ouverture is really spooky at this speed, as it should be, really aticipating the finale (same music) with the ghost of the Commendatore lurking and flames of hell approaching...
@@geiryvindeskeland7208 I don't blindly believe in Wim Winters but I find what he says makes sense. I don't know about the performances you mention bin this video also his ouverture lasts about 6 minutes, not the whole video because he also talks.
You play very musically - I really like your playing. That's rare amongst musicians - particularly classical, who normally play like machines these days. Before WWII, individuality and phrasing were acceptable, and expected in classical interpretation - no more unfortunately.
So great to read your lovely words, Patrick, thank you so much, and great to have you here!
AuthenticSound Virtuosity is really wasted on some musicians.
I would rather listen to an error strewn performance that move me than a technically perfect performance that left me cold inside.
Not that I am that old, however all my teachers pre-dated WWII, so my teaching style encourages individuality. Unfortunately the exam system here in Toronto does not favour that.
From the point of view of playing piano, I find this very encouraging because I can't play very fast, and I've always gotten a lot out of Bach, Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven anyway, noticing a lot more of the details at a more moderate tempo. Slowing things down would also make certain passages with fast scales and arpeggios manageable that I otherwise just would have to give up on.
I also notice that as I gain proficiency on a piece, the difference in speed is not great between what I consider too slow and what I consider to be just about right.
I must admit, though, that I often find passages played faster still to be more exciting, but of course within reason. I find your ideas very encouraging.
Fascinating, as usual, Mr. Winters! I found this video just before the 3rd production of Don Giovanni I’ve attended. My request to such an esteemed academic and connoisseur as yourself, would be for a listener’s guide to Mozart’s score, which would delve into Mozart’s unique ability to create dramatic effects to suit the libretto. I imagine your insights would make the experience even more rewarding. Thank you for all your interesting content!
*Great video Maestro!*
Very interesting video. Congratulations for your forte-piano playing!
So... what little evidence do we have about the tempi in Don Giovanni? Luckily we have one of the few opera playbills that states both the starting and finishing time of the show, for the Prague premiere in 1788 specifically. It says very clearly 'Der Anfang ist um 7 Uhr - Das Ende um halb 10 Uhr.' I.e. the opera begins at 7 and finishes at 9:30... thus is only 2hrs30mins long. This is also backed up by the Leipzig 1788 playbill which reads 'Der Anfang ist präcise halb 6 Uhr - Das Ende um 8 Uhr' - again 5:30-8 is 2hrs30mins. This alone should disprove the double-beat theory in Mozart (unless you propose that they read watches differently too?), but how does that relate to the Tomaschek metronome markings? I did some complex maths to see what I could find out...
(3secs added for each fermata, and 5secs between each movement to account for discontinuity/time-wasted - only for non-attacca)
* Overture (30 bars of Alla-Breve at 92 quarter-note=78)+(262 bars of C at 132 half-note+3=241)+5 = 324secs
1. Notte e giorno faticar… Ah, soccorso! (175.5 bars of C at 104 half-note+3=206)+(17 bars of Alla-Breve at 60 quarter-note=68)+5 = 279secs
2. Ma qual mai s'offre... Fuggi, crudele, fuggi (44 bars of C at 80 half-note=66)+(3.5 bars at 80 quarter-note=11)+(14.5 bars at 52 quarter-note+3=70)+(62.5 of Alla-Breve at 100 half-note=75)+(2 bars at 80 quarter-note=6)+(3 bars at 63 quarter note+3=14)+(7.5 bars at 100 half-note+3=12)+(6.5 bars at 60 half-note=13)+(55 bars at 100 half-note=66)+5 = 338secs
3. Ah! chi mi dice mai (108 bars of C at 84 half-note+3)+5 = 162secs
4. Madamina! (84 bars of C at 152 quarter-note+12=145)+(88 bars of 3/4 at 96 quarter-note+3=168)+5 = 318secs
5. Giovinette che fate all' amore (86.5 bars of 6/8 at 126 dotted-quarter-note)+5 = 87secs
6. La ci darem la mano (48 bars of 2/4 at 88 eighth-note+3=134)+(33 bars of 6/8 at 92 dotted-quarter-note=43)+5 = 182secs
7. Ah, fuggi il traditor (45 bars of 3/4 at 112 quarter-note)+5 = 77secs
8. Non ti fidar, o misera (88 bars of Alla-Breve at 96 quarter-note)+5 = 225secs
9. Don Ottavio, son morta! (23 bars of C at 92 half-note=30)+(8.5 bars at 52 quarter-note=39)+(5.5 bars at 58 quarter-note=23)+(2 bars at 92 half note=3)+(14 bars at 58 quarter-note=58)+(16 bars at 92 half-note=21)+5 = 179secs
10. Or sai chi l'onore (70 bars of Alla-Breve at 69 half-note+6) = 128secs
11. Finch' han dal vino (160 bars of 2/4 at 116 half-note)+5 = 88secs
12. Batti, batti (60.5 bars of 2/4 at 88 eighth-note+3=168)+(39.5 bars of 6/8 at 92 dotted-quarter-note=52)+5 = 225secs
13. Presto, presto! (91 bars of C at 100 half-note=109)+(47 bars of 3/4 at 84 quarter-note=101)+(75 bars of 2/4 at 120 quarter-note=75)+(33 bars of 3/4 at 96 quarter note=62)+(19 bars of Alla-Breve at 52 quarter-note=88)+(87 bars of 6/8 at 126 dotted-quarter-note=83)+(46 bars of 2/4 at 80 quarter-note=69)+(61 bars of 3/4 at 96 quarter-note=114)+(30 bars of C at 116 half note+3=34)+(34 bars at 84 quarter-note+3=100)+(89 bars at 88 half-note=121)+[31 bars at 120 half-note*=31]+5 = 987secs
14. Eh via buffone (75 bars of 3/4 at 72 dotted-half-note)+5 = 68secs
15. Ah, taci ingiusto core (84 bars of 6/8 at 104 eighth-note)+5 = 296secs
16. Deh, vieni alla finestra (44 bars of 6/8 at 80 dotted-quarter-note)+5 = 71secs
17. Metà di voi qua vadano (84 bars of Alla-Breve at 60 half-note)+5 = 173secs
18. Vedrai, carino, se sei buonino (104 bars of 3/8 at 116 eighth-note+12)+5 = 178secs
19. Sola, sola in buio loco (130 bars of Alla-Breve at 58 half-note+3=272)+(146 bars at 112 half-note=156)+5 = 433secs
20. Ah, pietà, signori miei! (106 bars of C at 112 half-note)+5 = 119secs**
21. Il mio tesoro intanto (101 bars of Alla-Breve at 96 quarter-note+3)[(Di rider tinirai e.t.c. at 69 quarter-note***)]+5 = 261secs
22. O statua gentilissima (108 bars of C at 160 quarter-note)+5 = 167secs
23. Crudele! Ah no, mio bene... Non mi dir, bell' idol mio (2.5 bars of C at 138 half-note+3=5)+(12.5 bars at 69 eighth-note=89)+(47 bars of 2/4 at 88 eighth-note+6=134)+(52 bars of C at 138 quarter-note=90)+5 = 323secs
24. Gia la mensa e preparata (46 bars of C at 100 half-note=55)+(70 bars of 6/8 at 80 dotted-quarter-note+6=111)+(44 bars of 3/4 at 152 quarter-note+3=55)+(38 bars of Alla-Breve at 152 quarter-note+3=63)+(178 bars of 3/4 at 72 dotted-half-note+3=151)+(53 bars of Alla-Breve at 112 half-note=57)+(87 bars at 50 half-note=209)+[32 bars at 82 half-note*=47]+(49 bars at 96 half-note+3=64)+(108 bars of 3/4 at 60 dotted-half-note+3=111)+(43 bars of Alla-Breve at 60 quarter-note+3=175)+(116 at 69 whole-note+3=104)+5 = 1,207secs
Preliminary Total = 6,895secs
Secco Recitatives (with timings taken from René Jacobs & Freiburg-Baroque recording as this gives a varied and comprehensive view of the work, taken in accurate speech-rhythm - cuttin, of course, the scenes from the Vienna version of the opera): +31+60+51+60+60+60+4+43+60+60+15+60+50+43+60+25+30+60+53+60+20+36+60+60+5+60+60+20+60+16+60+60+7+37+60+60+1+60+60+60+60+17+60+20 = 1,964 (Total = 8,858secs)
+ 5% time added overall to account for potential rits, breaths, general pauses, extra gaps, and dragging/fluctuation of tempo.
Total Length = 9,301secs / 2hrs35mins1sec. The overture was not finished at the dress run so was probably not accounted for in the timings. Therefore -5mins24secs…
Final Length = 2hrs29mins37secs, which rounds up to 2hrs30mins exactly as the original playbill states.
Therefore, I believe (when read literally), we actually have a thoroughly reliable and historically accurate insight into Mozart's tempi here. Let's not tarnish a good source with misapplied theories and instead appreciate the information it actually gives us. Many of the tempi above are actually slower than even non-HIP performances tend to take them today so your notion that double-beat would be less than half speed is also incorrect in this case. I'm not suggesting that double-beat theory doesn't exist at all, but it is certainly not applicable to the music of Mozart.
*Tomaschek does not account for the ‘più stretto’ here, so the difference in tempi given by Gielen has been added to approximate (half-note: 132-100=32)
**incorrect title given (‘Ah per pietà’) in the Fink article
***these sections are treated as recitative and taken from the above recording (as the tempo is similar to 69bpm)
thanks for sharing. Just sing it 30% faster than Tomascheck and you're good on your way of proving... why are my single-beating friends so afraid of playing / singing...
30% is over a quarter faster than the indicated tempi. As an experienced musician, I'm sure you know that even a couple of clicks either way on the metronome is enough to be noticeable, and 10% alone would be enough to ruin a piece in the ears of someone who heard Mozart himself conduct it. None of this opera is unplayable or unsingable at Tomaschek's indicated speeds... far from it, and that is enough for me. Your proposal that his speeds should be halved goes completely against all of the reliable evidence that we have on this opera.
If we're talking about singing, perhaps try to comfortably sing through 'La ci darem' at semiquaver=88bpm, Il mio tesoro at semiquaver=160. It just isn't possible without chopping up phrases to awkwardly breathe everywhere. I actually don't even think 2:06 is too difficult for a native Italian speaker anyway as they have much quicker tongues than most English or German speakers as it's the way their language works. There similar examples of patter-song like that in later Italian opera, and I don't think it's fair to pick one of the most difficult passages in the whole opera to illustrate a generalised point. Yes, slowing the tempo makes the coloratura easier, but let's not pretend that Mozart's singers weren't proficient enough to manage this.
Also Fink implies that the music is being ruined by the performers' lack of capability at faster tempi, which suggests to me that they weren't able to keep up with the orchestra at these speeds anyway, like you demonstrate. You'd have to be a pretty amateur singer not to be able to keep up with the indicated speed, never mind a double-beat one. When Mozart told Leopold that the Presto of the Haffner Symphony should be marked and played 'as fast as possible', do you again believe that his performers weren't technically able to play quavers faster than say crotchet=120. I don't find that convincing at all.
yes, but a few clicks would not outrage mr Finck stating that current musicians were destroying Mozart's music. WAY faster is more than just a few numbers.
Yes, you are probably right, but as I said in the last comment fast enough to destroy Mozart's music surely means almost too fast to physically perform... which also suggests that Tomaschek's markings should be taken literally. You haven't refuted the evidence that I've pointed to here. I don't think it's just a coincidence that Tomaschek's markings correspond EXACTLY to the original length of the opera (with only a 23 second margin in my calculations). Even I was surprised at how accurate they are. Also, nothing that Mr Finck says implies that ALL of the opera was played too fast. For all we know he may have been talking about the serenity of the slow movements being ruined by excess speed (and admittedly, we have the same problem in opera houses today). It is not fair to assume that he only means the fastest parts of the work for the sake of argument.
Also, I'd like to point out that the digitally manipulated extract here is not at Tomaschek's tempo at all. He marks 'Mille torbidi pensieri' as half-note=112, and this is closer to 145bpm... you've already made it 30% faster before increasing by another 30% which misrepresents the tempi completely. I've heard plenty of recordings that take it even faster than the correct thirty percent and cope perfectly fine, and even most non-HIP recordings actually take that section faster than Tomaschek tells us to.
I know I am late to the party and this maybe a stupid question anyhow, but considering how people back than wrote letters about their daily life to their friends and family about as regularly as we take pictures of our food, there have to be accounts of people who attended the performance and mentioned how much time they spent at the opera ... couldn't that help to narrow in on the actual tempo the performance was given in? I believe DG is about 3 hours today? How long would it have been back then? Anyhow, thanks for this very interesting video and I have to say I would love to hear the arias be sung in that tempo (and I image that, e.g., queen of the night would have been less of a machine gun and more of a mortar then, right?)
Performing the entire opera in tempi like these would've taken an entire day...
Why? Certainly longer than today, but that was also the goal, operas were the meeting places for people, they were 'Abendfullende Werke'. What about some Wagner operas...?
@@AuthenticSound Which Wagner takes 8 hours to perform, like Don Giovanni would with these slow tempi?
was not your point!
thank you. great videos!
sounds beautiful Wim! I would love to hear the complete overture on the clavichord!
Hopefully, soon with an orchestra too ;-)
Love it! I have seen this opera three times. ❤️
Loved and subbed!
Welcome!
wow ! your channel is amazing !
Listening to period performances and DVDs/Productions of this opera, really interesting thoughts on tempi. The HIP groups seem to air on the side of fast but thankfully not too fast. In Mozart/Daponte and even his La Finta Giardiniera (a different librettist) there's a lot of humour, innuendo, puns, and other jokes that frankly would be lost at break neck speed. Even in Figaro where Figaro is so excited to be with his new wife and staying in the house between his master and mistress's bedchambers, Susanna reminds him of each of their ulterior motives to has the man and women at their respective beck and call with "Ding Ding, Don Don." As my friend's Romanian language GPS says "Limitat la viteza!" watch your speed (to some of these performances). I really like the sound and playing of your clavichord, such a great instrument.
Thank you Daniel, great to read your thoughts here
I'm just a musical peasant, having played guitar for over 40 years. I play mostly by ear, so obsessing over time signatures seems curious to me. Of course Mozart may have had a tempo in mind, but that doesn't take into consideration simple things like quality of the musicians, instruments, temperament of the patron, and other earthly factors. I also know from vast experience that performances are always fast, event if by a beat or two. While this discussion, like so many on time signature is interesting, it isn't going to give you an answer. The most you can hope for is a marginally acceptable discourse that is self perpetuating. What I would focus on, and I think you touch on it periodically in these videos is how the musical tastes of the audience/patron influences the music thematically. And, as someone already stated, tastes of the audience changed within a lifetime---just as it does now. What was all the rage in 1798 was passé in 1803.
Very interesting video, thank you!
Reminds me of Furtwängler's Mozart a little (who ironically of course couldn't have cared less about metronome markings "as text" - historical or otherwise). Thank you so very much for sharing your efforts!
Thanks for sharing this, I'll have to look for that recording then. Well, they did not care of course of any historical context, perhaps but tradition, which, on its turn, does not have to say anything about a performance more two centuries before, but sometimes, one sees a glimpse of such long tailed tradition in older performances. Here's a video where I discuss such possible echo's in Ramin's Bach : ua-cam.com/video/EIgAmWLMjUA/v-deo.html
I completely agree with your assessment there. Whilst listening to you describing, very politely, the ways in which some performances push the tempi beyond the intelligibility of structure, a statement by Hans Keller came to mind: "Tempo in itself is nothing: tempo is a function of structure and hence, in performance, a function of phrasing." Maybe culture will warm up to the subjectivity entailed in such conceptions again.
EDIT
Completely forgot to mention either Furtwängler or tradition.
Maybe just this: I find it oddly sweet that posterity has kind of agreed to label the Wagnerian school of conducting or the romantics in general as some sort of "pompous sweeteners" of pre-classical and classical music, specifically because of their measured and "slow" tempi. Of course anyone can insert their favorite example of a gargantuan apparatus simply attempting to sound lush, but reading what artists like Wagner (as a conductor) or Furtwängler had to say about the first principles of their music making: they were absolutely obsessed with the creation of structural legibility. (hyperbole)Odd to frame some of the idiosyncrasies of historically informed performances as a kind of counter-revolution to the influence of a man who died 135 years ago, but stranger things have happened.(/hyperbole)
thank you. you've made me want to hear all of mozart in this way. i'm re-working the string quartets and symphonies and the magic flute in my head as i think about this. it's pretty musical. mostly, what i've heard of mozart sounded like he was this silly show-off. most realistically, if people don't get what you're trying to do, rogers and hart wrote 'my funny valentine' as a totally up-beat flapper song, and someone told them to just slow it down. they did, and it became a great song instead of a novelty piece.
Great ro read Mike!
Is there a recorded performance of Don Giovanni that comes closest to how you would like it played or just one you prefer?
One week ago or so I found your videos on UA-cam by chance. I am very impressed by your work - especially because I am also tortured by rushed and overhasty tempi of so many of todays musicians. So, for example, I also cannot understand why Schubert, whose Sonatas are full of contemplative calmness (but which are played much much to fast today), could be such an enthusiastic admirer of Beethoven, if Beethovens music is really that fast and furious as it is usually performed today. But, certainly, your theory is, at least for the moment, still that: a theory. You bring in your videos, as far a I have seen, very interesting arguments for it. However, to be honest, I have a problem with the, so to say, main-argument of this clip concerning Don Giovanni: If I understand you well, Fink asked Tomaschek in 1839 to give him MM indications concerning a performance of 1791. That means a performance which took place 48 (!) years before. I think it's rather impossible to remember the tempi of an opera I heard nearly half a century ago. Even if this refers only to the Introduction. So I am very sceptic about calling Tomaschek a reliable witness. Surely, this is only argument among many others. And be sure that I hope, that your research will discover even more good arguments for your theory than you have already shown, because I think it's not only very plausible, but it has the power to chance our view towards the treasures of classical music fundamentally and in a way which is most remarkable. Thank you and best regards!
Point is not whether Tomachek's tempi were those of Mozart, point is that for Finck, these mms were taken as proof for how much too fast (so much faster than the crazy Tomachek tempi) people played Mozart's music. See also perhaps the new version of this video: ua-cam.com/video/bvHyQUkXDvM/v-deo.html
Very interesting! This gives me material to think about.
Great! That is what it is all about: reflection and sharing that. Will be great to ready your reflections in the future, we'll be having regular videos on that topic over the coming months
wonderful insight!
Thanks, Jure!
This is extraordinary. Thank you so much for all of this work and for sharing it with all of is. This is impacting a Handel and Mendelssohn trio recital I will be doing.
AuthentucSound!!! ¿What part of the master piece of Mozart are you playing from the 11:10 minute to 12:33? Extremly Beautiful, so so incredible, please tell me what part of what piece is... ¿is a don giovanni piano version?
It indeed is the opening of Don Giovanni, but than with the tomaschek MM metrically understood (as probably is no doubt any more they should). Great you like this, I'll be doing a project with singers and my new pianoforte in the coming years with it.
It makes so much more sense! Thanks
Dear colleague, my sincere congrats for your sensitive and emotional playing. I'm sorry, I did not get this: the MM signature 92 for the Andante. First you say 'we take it for quarter notes' and then '...or we take it for the eight notes...'. You understand that makes a big difference. So, was the Tomascheck MM for quarters or for eights? Thank you. By the way I can figure how it may sound with an orchestra and... YES... A horrifying Deus ex machina' appears!
Hi Gianluca, you might find some answers already in this video: ua-cam.com/video/2yd7LWi4wus/v-deo.html
Wow, that's so different from what I'm used to that I couldn't even tell you were still playing the overture!! (granted, I'm also not used to hearing it on keyboard...) But I dig it
A lot still to be discovered, John! Fascinating, right?
Do you have a video playing this song? I would love to hear it.
yes, it is on the channel!
I’ve never heard all the articulations in the overture until now 😮 Such a shame we’ve missed all those notes for over a hundred years!
from what i gather the orchestra had zero time to practice. Sections of the opera were incomplete days before the premiere. Mozart rewrote the wood wind section so that it would not sound so badly out of tune. And of the performance, it was all sight read. Orchestra were part time amateurs. The actors improvised their lines.
A truly authentic production would by todays standards be completely chaos. And it was done in 2 hours 30 minutes. I guess they skipped a lot of it.
Wow. Where did you find that information? Please I will love to read the source thank you
Wonderful.
I think the key here is to have an open mind regardless of music and tempi and not to get caught up in "what should" or "according to this recording" etc. etc. You do a make a strong case here and I really really approve greatly. More freedom to music in general is what music and interpretation needs today. Not Robots Stuck To A Metronome, or being fascistic in just following the notes and not being able to add notes, appoggiaturas, etc or colors to the music. As if this here recording or interpretation is the final word. No. Music is a search for each and everyone of us. Cherish it, because we will all perish regardless. And to throw a boot at message below. First impression is never last(to citate AXE commercial).
Sounds much more natural in your interpretation. Incredible how things may change according to trends!
yeah, and let us not forget, it is more than 2 centuries ago!
I've heard and seen Don Giovanni several times. This sounds good to me!
Thanks Rosa!
I really like the slower tempi. The music is more dramatic and allows the harmonies and counterpoint to be better appreciated. However, two concerns re the slower speeds come to my mind: 1. If all the tempi are halved, how long must the opera last? 2. If the tempi are halved, can the singers sustain their notes well enough and perform the phrases in one breath? Another question then comes to mind - 3. Are there different uses of metronome markings with respect to whether the time signature is Common Time (4/4) or Cut Common Time (2/2) or Simple Duple Time (2/4)? Different rules for compound times? Do the halved metronome speeds only apply in certain time signatures?
great to read your thoughts here, Tracey! First off, it is not halved compared to what we hear today. if double beat would be "0" and single beat "10", most performance situate between 2 and 8. So in either case of reconstruction, the 0's and 1's would be even more present than the 9's and 10's. Yes, it is for all MM, so an easy start is to consider that approach for all of Beethoven's, Czerny's, Moscheles', Hummel's, ... tempi. take opus 299 of Czerny with his MM and try it in double beat, you'll be surprised and learn directly why he was so popular as a teacher!
Where can I find Tomaschek MM numbers??
I am waiting for the book in english. How is the translation process going? I will buy it as soon as it comes out.
It's a slow process, we're working on it
So, Don Giovanni was meant to be a suspenseful opera and not meant to be played as a farcical piece the way we are used to hearing it?
I believe so
I must admit that I often hedge my bets by using completely different tempi for repeats, say in the little preludes, when I find both beautiful in their own way - usually starting allegro, repeating andante - 2nd section first time andante and then the repeat ending the piece on a more upbeat speed. Well, it works as a kind of incipient Sonata form 😊 No historical precedent, but why not?
I would like to know what you think of Glenn Gould and his Bach Interpretations.
Great thank you.
Gould was a genius, no matter what he did, fast, slow, ... if often seemed as if he had two brains. His 1981 goldberg is the one disc I'd take to an island. His 1955 version is in the top 10 list.
but how about his organ playing - re Art of the Fugue recording in Toronto?
I prefer the metrical reading of classical pieces, but the performance you give for Tomaschek's speed I measure at 144, not 112. I still think 112 read non-metrically is too fast, but it's more manageable that it seems here, if I measured correctly.
Thank you for your videos Wim. Today I just had my first piano recital, I was very nervous while playing and made quite a few mistakes which I dont usually make. Do you have the same problem? If so, how do you overcome this stage fright? Thank you!
I will make a video for you on this topic, promised.
Thank you so much!
Dear Henry, you must think I did forget about your question! I apologize for being so late with addressing your concern, which is something many more people struggle with. I must say that your message inspired me to make extensive notes taken from my own experience, and since the topic is so wide, I'll be constructing an online course from it, not the coming time, but this year still. If you would like to Skype with me about your experience, I'm happy to do that as a thank you for the idea. Don't hesitate to ask, you can reach me anytime on wwintersATtelenet.be. Best wishes! Wim
I always preferred the overture to be played slower. Celibidach was the only one I found who did it slow enough, but he only did the overture, from what I can tell. What is sad, is all the historically informed performances of it, are like they are trying to get it over with. Gardiner and Jacobs' sound way too fast, even compared to their contemporaries. Levine's 1990 had the best cast for his, but his is still a touch too fast and it's also unavailable (darn you Metropolitan Opera, I keep requesting it) . Karajan's has been my definitive CD release, but it's also a touch fast, but much slower than most. It's so nice to hear all the intricacies of the piece when it's slowed down. I'd be interested to hear more pieces taken to task and tempo from you. I for one, always try to find out what the composer's intention was. Stravinsky liked Bernstein's recording of the Rite of Spring. Ravel said Bolero should be 17 minutes long, so I often lean toward performances that are that long. Does that make me a musical snob, or narrow minded? Perhaps, but I like getting as close to what is intended as possible.
Great feedback, thanks ! And I will share more of this.
Can you share Tomaschek's document which gives the MM for the opera?
Would you spend some time on the Goldberg Variations?
This way of playing seems to make sense, but I have just a few "reservations"
1. How did almost everyone forget that a beat was back and forth on the metronome and switch to each half-swing being a beat? You'd think at least half of the performers today would have been taught this if it was the standard a couple hundred years ago. Put more simply, how was this "transition" made across all of classical music?
2. Certain tied notes or long notes in piano music can't really be sustained for as long as written.
3. How would an adagio be played? They seem fairly slow as it is, making one twice as slow could be very boring! Or are they also indicated to be too fast?
interesting questions. 2 is not a problem at all: certainly the early instruments just have a shorter tone, it is all suggestion of the voice anyway, and long notes occur in all tempi, 3 is something that is sometimes really hard, but e.g. in the adagio of kv 284, it is clear that the metrical way is the only way to perform that piece, I'll talk about it in the practising hours next sunday, and 1 is an intruiging question. There was a generation long almost no interest at all for the metronome, and although even metrical and non metrical (modern) use of the metronome has existed (see eg Henrico Stewen's study of Reger - Straube - it is a fascinating study-) there is research to be done on this field, and my guess is that once we change our perspective to read the 19th c. sources the answers will be there. And do not forget the people in the 19th c. were not interested in playing according to older tradition (partly that is the storyline of these Tomaschek videos). So the pupils of pupils of Chopin/Liszt, play on those recordings how they played ca 1900, it is not -by far not I think- a reflection of how they played before 1850. Just thinking out loud here !
What is the publisher of the score because this is very interesting
It is a 'normal' piano reduction no special edition
The Thumbnail is great😂😂
it's actually fun to make those :-)
What an interesting chanel : congrats !
Thanks and great to have you here!
Really good episode ! Love it !
Good to hear that from you, Michael, the thumbnail was really way out of my comfort zone...
I revisited this post today and had a thought. I found an average orchestral performance of the overture on another channel and ran it opposite your playing at the slower tempo. While it presents no particular problems on the face, something did come up as I examined my comparisons. Your tempo is a good 25% slower perhaps?... Well, Don Giovanni is three hours long excluding intermissions. An extra 25% added makes it 3 3/4 hours long. That's like the Ring Cycle. Do you really think that the slower tempo and its effects on the entire opera's performance time (given contemporary expectations for opera goers) conflict logically at that speed?
Operas often had a very long durations, with the ballets etc. Leopold reports from Wolfgang's Mitridate opera that it had a huge success, was repeated more than 20 times, although it lasted more than 6 hours. So the ring might be an end point of a tradition more than we believe today?
I love Don Giovanni! I think the tempo you present works very well. Especially when you consider it in light of the rest of the opera and I can feel this pacing working throughout the opera.
Sorry to be missing so much lately but I haven't been well and have had to spend time in other places.
Is it just me or are the strings and soundboard on your clavichord opening up? It sounds more open than it did last year.
The power at the beginning surprised me as well I must say, the sound gets bad on times when the mic for speaking has to remain on, but other than that, I don't know why the instrument sounded so free. Sometimes it is the weather, it opens when it is cold outside, freezing is the best.
Who knows how accurate Thomaschek's metronome was? Or good his memory was or a performance he heard 40 years ago? Or if the Czech orchestra with a different conductor five years after the premiere was accurately replicating Mozart's tempos?
Hi John, in fact that does not matter. What matters is that a) these are Tomaschek's tempi that b) are aproved by the fact Finck published them and c) that, though in single beat they are so unhumanly fast, were served by Finck as to proof that Mozart -at least in his taste- was destroyed in that time by playing his music way too fast. Way too fast is not adding 10%, it's adding more, which, to those Thomasheck MM, simply is not an option. That's the whole point of the video.
I'm not sure I've performed the whole opera, but I've certainly performed the Overture to Don Giovanni a number of times and know the rest of the opera quite well, as I taught an Intro to Opera course for years. 134 to the quarter is fine to me, but I hear you doing a lot of ritardandi. I'm not looking at a score right now, but I don't remember them being there, and I think if the overture is played more nearly straight in this tempo, it will work fine, but to me, with all those ritardandi, it dies.
Thanks subtitle Indonesia
I LOVE this.!
Great to read Robert
That room sounds great: good acoustics.
Thanks Ian, it does. Still we're thinking of building a live sounding studio in the barn next doors. For reasons of silence and production time. If you're interested, I made a few videos, also with a legendary sound engineer : ua-cam.com/video/3FRpB1s_Sho/v-deo.html
I would love to hear your organ in that space.
Incredible profound video congratulations you are brilliant thank you. You always make my in tempo.
We came to the same conclusion although by different means. I support your conclusion.
Thanks, recording of the ouverture will be on tomorrow
Notice how people play Liszt's Don Juan-fantasy. Those sixteenth notes are played in Thomasceck's tempo.
Dear Wim,
Do you know the EMI Klemperer [London] recording of the Don [complete]?
I think you might appreciate it. It is very close to your reading. I love the Don [the only opera I can easily listen to for pleasure on so many levels], and I suspect that you would also love it in Klemperer's uncompromising reading.
Best wishes from George
thanks for suggesting, I did not know!
@@AuthenticSound Dear Wim,
May I suggest the Warner 4 CD issue of the Don which has a fascinating hour long survey of part of the rehearsals as the 4th. disc. A unique insight into the massively detailed approach as to tempo and expression from Klemperer himself, and and the importance of the shortest notes, which are not a sort fog, but essential.
That was in 1966, and so your efforts have a president, though not widely known these days.
Best wishes from George.
@@AuthenticSound
Dear Wim,
I listened to the whole of the Klemperer recording today. It would be a huge work to do - to relate the reading to the known Tomachek metronome marks, but it might be instructive. Klemperer was notable late in his career for very steady tempi, and yet the music does not sit on its hands when he is leading. He finds the value in every note within the phrase and makes resilient rhythms that remain clear and forward moving. He is never REALLY slow as such.
Earlier in his career, he was rather fast on occasion, though more often than not unfashionably slower than normal. His recordings of the Pastoral Symphony really do observe the peasant dance with a definitely "pesante" feel of steady distinct beats rather than the Viennese metropolitan "one in a bar" style favoured by almost every other conductor!
I could go on, but suffice to say that I have found your videos in accord with absolute sense regarding the speed of playing of the classics - not the least, your one about "Fate knocking at the door," in Beethoven. Obviously the knocks are portentous rather than rushing!
Best wishes from George
Having been ill for a few days I have spent time comparing the Fink/Tomaschek tempi with a (fairly) modern recording .. one made in 1989 by Nicholas Harnoncourt which is on UA-cam. The results are very interesting. There are, of course, differences of tempo but it is fairly equally balanced between who is faster. In 21 examples Tomaschek's speed is higher than Harnoncourt's but in 18 examples the opposite is true. Some of Harnoncourt's Allegros are MUCH faster than Tomaschek e.g. Ah Fuggi and Finche Han Vino from Act 1 and Ah! Signor from Act 2. Tomaschek often has higher tempo markings for Andantes and Allegrettos. In 13 cases Harnoncourt's tempi match Tomaschek precisely. No-where do I find T's Metronome markings to be 'unplayable' or even unreasonable although one (famous) number is very different. Deh Vieni (Allegretto with mandolin accompaniment) is usually performed as if it were a steady Andante with an eighth note at around mm = 100 or even slower. Tomaschek's tempo of dotted quarter note = 74, although surprising to us since we are used to the much slower tempo, actually makes sense of Mozart's tempo description and puts the music into the tempo range of Allegretto Minuets etc.
Obviously Tomaschek does not represent some 'Gospel Truth', and probably even Mozart's own tempi would have varied a fair bit, but there seems to be no reason to dismiss Tomaschek's tempi as wrong or in need of radical re-calculation.
Adding a huge 30% to T's tempi is inevitably going to make them seem ridiculous. Also it is extremely unlikely that he meant that EVERY part of the opera was being performed too quickly, his intention was surely to correct particular problems while giving general guidance for the whole.
Thanks for your interesting posts
Interesting you've done some experiments! Now, the point of the previous video was, that tempi of Mozart around 1840 were way higher than this, leading to impossible decisions. It's in that context that the old metrical reading of MM again becomes relevant, as in many other places I believe. here is the previous video that you might want to check out: ua-cam.com/video/06Tx6-v_KEg/v-deo.html&index=4&list=PLackZ_5a6IWVP1Nb_Zxr-RfFHX62Nz9iQ, thanks for your thoughts anyway, much appreciated!
if we consider mozart as the maradona of music, then we could compare the speed maradona played footbal and the speed mozart played music, but we must consider footbal is a sport and music is an art
Wow.
i would have loved to meet mozart in person
Shocking? The only shock is that I spent all my seventy one years listening to no-Mozart!
Vincent Flack and we're here to change that :-)
Common sense? Allegro means fast, no snail-paced... As violinist who has played this overture, I would have to say that it is not possible to play at these slow speeds musically. Also, bear in mind that there were no chin or shoulder rests in 1787, without which is very difficult to play vibrato. Can you imagine playing such lengthy notes without vibrato... It would sound gruesome... even on a strad! Theory aside, if someone says allegro, it means fast and 132 crotchets in a minute fits just right.
Another factor is this... Don Giovanni usually lasts 3 hours... can you imagine going to an opera lasting 6 hours?! Don giovanni, a cenar teco, m'invitasti, e son venuto... The poor bass, il commadatore, will run out of breath at the above tempi!
Understand your concern, but it's important not to mix too many elements. First: if those notes are possible or not, is something that with different playing techniques could be solved. On keyboard it works, so sure on an instrument with a longer tone. Secondly, it is not doubling the lenght, we today don't reach those numbers or don't want to. Keep in mind Tomscheck's numbers were considered to be "slow" in 1840... so you must speed up considerably compared to those even, to come close to what our colleagues played these works in (only that element must ring a bell). Thirdly: allegro does not mean fast... check czerny: he gives 12 different connotations on Allegro. A notation / time signature like this starts from its tempo ordinario, which is -no discussion here- is 60 for the quarter note. This video might give you some perspectives: ua-cam.com/video/2yd7LWi4wus/v-deo.html
This "authentic" sound would bore all Prague aristocracy and bourgeoisie from Mozart's time into a profound and tranquil sleep... OF COURSE this opera doesn't last 6 hours, AND IT IS AN OPERA, otherwise NOT a keyboard composition! AND even in the keyboard , following THAT theory thing, would meant to be playing for fucking 6 hours NON-STOP; OF COURSE it is NOT the case.
I suggest listening to René Jacobs and Freibruger's orchestra interpretation and performance: NOW THAT'S EMOTION and VERY advanced technique. Tomascheck MUST have been JUST wrong, and just passed his bad interpretation to Fink. I cannot understand HOW in a matter of less than 20 years the "same" music would be played ridiculously faster by those uninformed contemporary musicians. And the fact that they give very fast tempo means NOT much, because to think what people thought before as to reconstruct exactly what they thought nowadays is impossible, we will never really know, though we could try to reconstruct ancient sounds ... At least that is the most probable possibility, because everyone was playing different than them ...
But people should try to listen and analyse NOT theory, BUT HOW they practised and performed and the timespan of the performances.
@mortonbay chestnut
_"Allegro means fast"_
This is not true. In Italian, _allegro_ means lively, joyful, cheerful. It has nothing to do with speed but with temperament.
As someone who is not even remotely familiar with operas of Mozart let alone opera in General... this all sounds completely natural like this for the first hearing... It seems like it would be too childish and playful...
are there any modern recordings that come close to this interpretation?
some older ones the andante comes close, but other than that, I don't think so. You've probably heard this recording already:
ua-cam.com/video/ZA7xqzu3osE/v-deo.html
AuthenticSound didn’t hear it yet, your playing is wonderful!
Other than that, good ol Celibidache is the closest I could find.
Wow it’s really fast!
thanks for watching!
These observations are carefully studied thus give the Public interested on this kind of Musical-Investigation, a clear and accurate historic lesson on how Music was played in the days of the Great Masters......with regards the first Recording of Don Giovanni, I have reservations about the "true-speed " of that recording, as we must take in consideration the Electricity Voltage of that Period and the Mechanical R.P.M of the Recorder and the Player's capabilities, the Tempo sounds much too "Fast therefore a bit un-realistic",.....very difficult and awkward to make a fair "judgement based on the sound reproduction of those first Music making Machines........
Hi Oscar, that is the great thing about metronome numbers, they are what they are. Here's a recent 1838 source on how to use the metronome, it's weird that so few people take time to use google search... read para 40 +: books.google.de/books?id=AJtNdn3eKEwC&pg=PA9&dq=mouvement+metronome&hl=de&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjAh9-w7d3bAhUL3qQKHV0ECgI4MhDoAQhuMAk#v=onepage&q=mouvement%20metronome&f=false
Thank you Wim for your recommendation on the book La Musique sans Maitre, it appears to me to be an invaluable Tool containing lots of information about several aspects of Music making including the chapters about applying Tempo,......I have downloaded the on-line PDF version from a Toronto University source,....there is only small inconvenient on the subject, the Book's versions are only available in French (the original version") or German, unfortunately I do not speak fluently any of these two Languages, and there is not an Option on Google for having the PDF text translated unto English, later on perhaps, I'll search for a method of having PDF Text translated unto English,......in the mean thanks again for the thought and please do not stop making good Music and your tutoring Videos,...best wishes Oscar.
We plan in the near future to bring a selection of sources in e-book or print and translate into English -thought that's a really challenging project, I believe it's necessary, since many of those sources are in German or French
I would like to hear a video on Bachs tempi in vocal choral phantasiasn etc.
We do not have original tempi from Bach, we do have Quantz, French 18th c. sources, and, also important, the Czerny Bach MM. I made a video on Beethoven and Bach, it might interest you: ua-cam.com/users/edit?o=U&video_id=fAx1Rkn6HUE
I have the feeling, that we can reconstruct the tempo of Bach very precise. There is a book "Bach und die drei Temporätsel", written by the swiss piano teacher Rolf Möser. He writes on the tempo order of the "Wohltemperiertes Clavier", which gives us many hints to do that.
Hi Martin, it basically is no secret at all. One starts from the normal tempo ordinario (mésure ordinaire), which is 60/80 for a 4/4 bar structure with notation in fastest 16th and harmonic changed not faster than half notes, and there is all you need to know: notation gets more densed: it slows down, more open, it speeds up (until the old alla breve, where you have 1 harm. change per bar and eight notes as f. note value). I'm talking a lot on that during the live masterclasses , every two sunday evenings, I also read the chat than!
looks like real candles
How long would the opera last? 4 cd's?!
Hmm, what's the importance of that...?
Very interesting! I can't read music... but I'm a complete fan of Mozart, I always wandered why all of his operas sound so different tempo wise. Did Mozart or other musicians didn't write the tempo in their compositions?
I have don Giovanni directed by Riccardo Muti, and compared to other directors is for me at least the best performance . The timing feels perfect!
HI Daniel, no Mozart has not, later generations like Czerny and Moscheles added MM which if read correctly, make perfectly sense. The notation however, if understood correctly - which is not so hard- gives strong indications as well.
AuthenticSound thank you so much for the reply! Is MM the tempo? Sorry, I'm no expert in music terminology!
So Mozart for example never wrote the tempo on any of his compositions? Was there any way to know, or is just a guess of how are meant to be played?
We know the tempi because of a lot of treatises from the time and earlier, and also the MN (Metronome numbers, sorry for the typo of MM) of C. And M. who were close to key composers like Beethoven and his tradition. Here's a playlist of videos I made on the world of Tempi :) ua-cam.com/play/PLackZ_5a6IWVP1Nb_Zxr-RfFHX62Nz9iQ.html
Another one, more in detail with Lorenz Gadient ua-cam.com/play/PLackZ_5a6IWU1zXuo_Qx-YrCCtaJcBiPO.html
AuthenticSound brilliant! Thank you so much for the explanation!!
The Ouverture sounds more like some Enio Morriconne music for a western movie. Amazing!
thanks!
Lol that thumbnail it looks as if u be headed Mozart and you are holding his head
It sounds good to me. I don't remember Don Giovanni oeuverture.
Absolutely the best way for Don Giovanni- far more dramatic opening. It has always baffled me why musicians rush through pieces at breakneck speed. It might show off their skill as players but also often shows a deplorable lack of feeling for the music. Perhaps I just opt for slow because that is the best my stiff fingers can do!,
I believe it is because your heart beats still in a natural human-like way and relates to those tempo-ordinario/giusto speeds.
Probably. Some studies have shown that music in different tempi and genres can actually alter our heart rate (and blood pressure) so slower is possibly good for our health. What is not to like about that? On the subject of heart beats, there are two for every pulse beat as the major one circulates blood around the body and the minor one the lungs. Like the metronome?
I think You've got a point.
Before I get to know your theory I was just wondering how musicians on those times could play that fast on those slow response keyboard instruments.
Also, I wondered if nowadays speed wouldnt be considered vulgar or untasty mostly if we consider that life a couple of centuries ago had another pace and aristocrátic environments wouldnt consider rush as a virtue.
Playing begins at 5:35.
How do we know if Tomaschek remembered that correctly at the age of 65, having it heard almost 50 years back in his past when he was just 17 years old? Furthermore, for Don Giovanni we cannot tell if Tomaschek’s metronome indications were actually much slower than what was played in 1839 because G.W.Fink speaks about tempi in general, not Don Giovanni specifically. I also doubt that he has tried Tomaschek’s metronome indications himself at the piano to see if they made more sense to him.
Secondly, the Ouverture is clearly marked Andante alla breve, whereas in your tempo you are actually feeling the quaver (eighth note) as a ground beat. This is clearly against the character of this music, in my humble opinion.
the point is not whether Mozart played in these tempi but that Finck published them by which he approved the speeds and said that musicians played even way faster than these already extreme tempi
The point is, you think this is another example that can prove your approach re metronome indications.
I assume you have your information from this article in “ Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung (19 juni 1839)”
«Ueber das Bedürfniss, Mozart's Hauptwerke unserer Zeit so metronomisirt zu liefern wie der Meister selbst sie ausführen liess.», where Fink (or Finck) just in general says that some of his contemporaries played too fast in general, not specifically Mozart’s Don Giovanni. By printing the metronome as indicated by Tomaschek in this article (and later in an edition), he wanted to make sure that this won’t happen to Don Giovanni.
I don’t think you can deduct from that, that at Fink’s time, Don Giovanni was played even faster than Tomaschek’s metronome indications and that therefore these indications are meant in one complete swing of the pendulum so they should actually be played at half the speed, which is the point you want to prove with this example.
@@AuthenticSound
yes, of course it is interesting information by someone really close to Mozart, but basically the information of Tomascheck of course is interesting because it were his tempi.
well, it is hard for me to believe that Tomascheck should have remembered the exact tempi from 50 years in his past. I even assume that he couldn't indicate the exact metronome tempo of a piece played to him live without using a metronome to doublecheck. That means, the 17 year old boy would have had to sit there with a metronome and write down the Tempi of every piece in the whole opera! Do you believe that? I am convinced his metronome indications are just a very vague memory from the past.I don't think he is a reliable source to define Mozart's tempi in Don Giobanni at all, sorry.
p.s. What makes it even more doubtful is the fact that Tomascheck wasn't even a musician when he heard Don Giovanni in Prague, he was a University student,@@AuthenticSound
So according to your theory Don Giovanni lasts 6 hours instead of 3 hours??
Hows that possible?
Wagner's operas lasted days.
I believe they started the performances earlier, and they didn't have competition from radio or TV, let alone the Internet. However, I don't believe there would be much of an audience today for a 6-hour performance, which might be a good reason to consider a compromise tempo for practical reasons.
you are right-everything is played too fast
All my life I have been very upset and disturbed by the overture to Don Giovanni and also that of Figaro, too fast, and nothing could help me, although I did try to learn to "listen fast," and after many bars I could marvel even at the supersedes they were going, at the structure, power, and glory of Mozart. I am seventy seven now, and, having heard three or four of your videos, I feel like I am glimpsing the promised land. Will I enter it? Get to hear an actual performance? Vincent Shaw Flack
Great to read, Vincent, you express a kind of natural feel that is rare. The promised land... I can tell you, once you experience the excitement, contrast and... peace and relaxation of it, there is no way back, we still are in a post 19th century industrial revolution today, even, I would say certainly in our Early Music Movement. Here are some playlists that talk on the matter : ua-cam.com/play/PLackZ_5a6IWU1zXuo_Qx-YrCCtaJcBiPO.html and ua-cam.com/play/PLackZ_5a6IWVP1Nb_Zxr-RfFHX62Nz9iQ.html
Karajan made the overture to Don Giovanni sounds like Mahler !
he is, basically on instinct, many parts of his DG are really fast
Seductively erotic…is my impression of this tempo….which makes sense given the theme and the century…bravo Winter..
I came across an interesting example of how hearing familiar pieces played more slowly can be revealing. It's the introductory chorus to Bach's popular cantata BWV 140 "Wachet Auf".
Listed to any recording on UA-cam then listen to Karl Richter's version:
ua-cam.com/video/ldRUt5tU9A0/v-deo.html
Then hang around for the duet that follows. If Bach wrote opera?
Our scientific minds long for a "per minute" notation. I.e. ♩= 120 to us should mean 120 quarter notes per minute--very scientific, but no one marked their tempi that way. They say "MM". But what is the definition of MM? It only means "set your metronome to 120". Then what? As the robots in old sci-fi used to say, "insufficient data. Does not compute". Obviously different composers and editors used this device in two different ways back then.
MM means Maelzel Metronome I think.
they had to play fast back then, didn't want the people to get restless
wuerde lieber sie in deutsch hoeren... wie ist es mit den d. scarlatti sonaten?vielleicht geben sie beispiele gespielt im historischen tempo...