I have always noticed how, for example, playing certain popular Bach pieces "a bit more slowly than usual" makes them sound so much more round and genius. I suppose this is because, if say the counterpoint in a polyphonic piece moves to fast, your brain cannot aesthetically grasp all the affective logic behind the individual interactions in the melodies. It's like watching a movie you like, but sped up by 20%. You kind of get the jist of what is going on, but all the beauty and details get lost in the unadjusted pace, so grasping them becomes a daunting task, since brain processing takes time. So I set myself the rule: If I'm playing Bach or am listening to a rendition and feel like I am not grasping all the affects that are trying to be conveyed, if all gets lost in a rushed and mushy mess, it's probably too fast. Something similar with romantic pieces, say by Tárrega. You really have to dig in deeper and find the right accentuation and try to explore what your inner aesthetical judge tells you, if you want to find out, where in the piece to "take time" and where to "put it back" at a later point. The baroque concept of rubato on lutes comes close to this, I would say.
On point, I always play bach and scarlatti way slower than most. Oddly enough, this speed-disease does not apply to composers like buxtehude or pergolesi which most of the times is played in a more moderate tempo. I think it comes down to bach and scarlatti often being played by virtuoses and then some get impressed and think "wow, I wanna play like that" and then just play it quick. It actually saddens me, it feel like some just play it fast to get it over with as soon as possible. Just as you wrote, the brain is not able to process the music in these insane tempos.
Totally. My very first guitar teacher insisted I had to play classical pieces first, his first lesson was always to "take my time" on the notes i felt needed extra accentuation, to prolongue the end of some phrases to get a more dramatical effect... Later on I went to school and up to this point there's nothing I despise more than the generalized idea that you have to play "to the grid", on a steady strict tempo... For me, all music pop, rock, jazz, barroque... Whatever you call it, has to have some flowing, breathing tempo 😮 it's music!
Also, in many instances, one CANNOT hear the actual articulation of the notes due to the faster speed. Music is NOT A RACE... to see who can finish first.
I think it's vital to the understanding of playing a classical piece to work it through at different tempo's. I always play through everything slowly to hear the music accurately before playing it to any kind of speed.
This is a frequently recurring question: do we attempt to play it as it was performed in those days, or do we interpret it in the current context? Should baroque be played on ancient instruments? Etc. ... . I think it doesn't matter. But giving the freedom to the player to do what he feels is better attracts me more. If we are expected to play as Sor or Giuliani we should get a romantic guitar, which was smaller and therefore easier to play fast. So it's logical that we approach the music now a bit differently with a modern guitar.
I made an interesting experience. I wrote a classical guitar piece that was too hard for me to play at first. I decided to make a midi version, slow it down and learn to play along. I finally was able to play it in time at the tempo I thought it would fit. I kept on practicing without the midi. After a year or so I stumbled on that midi version again and before deleting it, I once more listened to it. It sounded sterile and boring as expected. I had to do some hard work on the tempo track to make it sound more natural. This tempo track now looks like a roller coaster but it really sound consistent. It's interesting to hear and feel a constant musical pulse while at the same time knowing it's not constant at all.
Yeah, the whole to-the-grid (machine-strict steady tempo) produces sterile music. To this day i cannot play to - the ggrid to get sheet music of my compositions, i just cannot play like a robot, i rather go grab sibelius or even Guitar Pro, and it is literally changing speed each measure, or setting accelerandos/ralentandos on the software for it to SOUND like I hear it in my mind. 😮 I dont know why it is so hard for people to understand it. Same with tuning I personally have composed or enjoy playing some pieces on A/Ab=425Hz i just like it some pieces... Supposedly Handel composed on A= 422.5 😮... Just like tempo, sometimes tuning your guitar up or down will give you a different" tonal texture" that just makes it 👌
Regarding the issue of the speed of the Andantino tempo marking up until the 1820's, Mo Fernandez 's intuition about Giuliani considering Andantino to be slower than Andante (just like Mozart and Rossini) is likely to be correct. As a matter of fact, J. N. Hummel - who was both Mozart's student as well as a Giuliani's friend (Giuliani played/collaborated with Hummel in several occasions) - reports this in his piano method: "Many authors assign a quicker degree of movement to the Andantino, than to the Andante; but this is incorrect, for it is evident that Andantino is the diminutive of the original word Andante, and therefore that it implies a less degree of movement than it."
@@alcguitar well, after the beginning of the 19th century some non-native Italian speakers started to use Andantino as tempo indication which was faster than Andante, a habit which slowly influenced the music world, and eventually got accepted as the standard in the 20th century. As a native Italian speaker, I always found odd whenever Andantino was referred to as faster than Andante by some of my foreign friends; however, after some years I realized that also this view is now part of a musical tradition which, whether one can agree or not, is worth acknowledging. I personally tend to stick to a slower type of Andantino for 19th century music; whenever I go for 20th century repertoire I look for historical recordings of the composers where they either supervise or conduct their works featuring the Andantino and Andante markings (e.g. Villa-Lobos), to understand how they conceived this tempo.
Yes, Andantino is a diminutive, and thus logically would seem to connote a tempo somewhat slower than Andante. But diminutives such as “-ino” and “-etto” suggest a diminution of something, and it would be a mistake to always equate “less than” with “slower than.” It all depends on “less than what?” If the tempo is slow, like Largo, then Larghetto is less slow, not slower. Allegro is a faster tempo, so Allegretto is slightly less fast. So for me, the question becomes “What is Andante?” If you think of it as being the mid-point of tempi, the meaning of Andantino becomes ambiguous.
"Wrong tempo". We literally have "recordings" or Gershwin playing many of his tunes (I put quotations because they require a player piano to replay rather than a record player but functionally it's the same if not mechanically) and so we absolutely KNOW that virtually EVERYONE plays his works at the "wrong" tempo... because at this point pretty much everyone has agreed that they sound better that way. It's downright jarring for most people to hear a well known piece like say Rhapsody in Blue when it's played *by the man himself* at "the right" speed. Because it sounds like someone accidentally hit the "1.25x Speed" button here on youtube. It's *that* much faster.
(1) Take the score, imagine that you are student of composition, an try to reconstruct it. When you have studied harmony, counterpoint, fugue, form and can compose at the table without a guitar at hand, you discover what tempo, nuance, phrasing are. When you see a river flowing it seems that there is one speed or tempo. When approaching the river, you see turbulences, points where water stagnates. That is the same when reconstructing the score in the internal mind and that is also how the composer hears his music. It fluctuates. (2) Hugo Riemann write several treaties on rhythm and phrasing. If style is different in history, the rules are the same. What is the beat for the ear ? Not necessarily that of the fingers. The ear can calculate only from 60 to 120, so if the beat shows 140 in 4/4, the true perceived beat is 70 or 2/2. The bar being one consideration even more important is the "metre", that is the basic unit of a motive, usually 2 bars and the bar in case of a composed bar (12/8 for example). Both the "metre" an half of it are not units of beat. So for instance the 1st movement of Beethoven's Eroica cannot be be beaten in 1 though it is supposed that the bar is at 60. It must be beaten in 3 and we have to struggle for understanding what that 60 stands for. (3) When listening to Segovia it is amazing that he takes his time. He stretches a lot. Rightly so when following Riemann's rules. Great singers do that too. Do not ask Domingo to sing at the tempo of Pavarotti. Listen to the lutenist Thomas Dunford. He understands that well.
I think that version at 53bpm was correct. the phrases have time to resolve in your brain. 12:55 More stately and Musical and it's more enjoyable to listen too as well. This speeding things up is Musicians getting bored or showing off, mostly boredom from doing it over and over.
Love it, thank you. I have a recording of Erik Sate’s music played really quite slowly; to my mind it makes a huge and wonderfully emotional and listenable difference.
Very interesting and useful considerations from maestro Fernandez. I would like to add a very subjective but to my thinking truthful assertion that generally speaking the music from previous times was originally played slower than we do today because all the aspects of their life were slower than our contemporary life.
@@rabokarabekian409 I didn't say "serene" I just said the rhythm of life itself was slower in those times, for example they didn't have motor cars, trains, planes etc
If you are sensitive to it, the music itself will tell you the best tempo. Often this is quite different from the way most people play a piece. If this is the case, you have discovered a hidden beauty in the music.
Interesting theory about Sor's Op. 29 no. 18 but I'm not sure I agree. If you look at the sheet music of the Moonlight sonata you notice that the 16th notes in the melody are really close to the left hand arpeggio notes on the stave. That might confuse players because when 2 notes are really close (like an A and a B) one usually gets shifted a bit to the right for reading clarity although they should be played at the same time. Therefore Czerny might have felt the need to clarify. Now there are some pieces that use a combination of triplets in one voice and dotted 8th notes in another where the 16th note should indeed be played at the same time as the last triplet note but in that case the 16th note is notated right above the last triplet note. Strictly speaking this is incorrect notation because triplet notes and 16th notes should never line up (except for the first note obviously) while the correct notation would be to use triplets for both voices but one voice using a triplet consisting of a quarter and an 8th note.
@@isaacbeen2087 I think it was just a convention of the period. But if you use modern notation software (like Musescore) you cannot line up triplets in one voice and 16th notes in another. The only way to do that is to use triplets for both voices.
I moved from music to biology in performance… hearing the maestro helps in my reach on vision in movement… the factors on time are things to consider… in his case and what I hope to envision are intermediate steps (unperceived) by the listener but vital to performance… how the performer’s body tags the scene… maybe… I need to see the maestro’s performance 🎉
Add to this information the fact that they did not play or tune their instruments to a 440 .and it makes a huge difference, we are not hearing the way the music was originally composed with all of the nuances .so we are losing the accurate interpretation of the peace
My classic guitar 1976 is tuned around 423 Hz. She likes it, i like it. It makes her sing. The notes hold on longer, resonates better. I like to Play slow and enjoy the music.
No sólo cuestiones de técnica y fraseo, también lo inexorable: el contexto. La práctica, sintaxis musical y lenguaje como idiosincrasia es una idea interesante. La discusión de tempo y figuración muy buena.
Interesting.....but I found that all the pieces that were played more quickly really unsettling to listen to......I'm rather more accepting of the Player's interpretation or input.....
Supposedly classical music was written with A=432 instead of the current A=440 hertz, and musical instruments were tuned at that frequency too...? It seems to be a debatable subject, and I'm not sure what to think anymore. Certainly any type of music can be decreased or increased in tempo, which can dramatically alter the emotional content of the songs.............?
There was no standard pitch until 1859 when the French government passed a law(!) setting it to A=435 Hz and an international standard wasn't really estalished until the mid 20th century. --- A=432 is known as Verdi tuning since Giuseppe Verdi briefly supported it. Despite many claims it does not have any particular historical presedent or significance. It's not actually a bad choice though so if you and any other musicians you play with prefer it, go for it! ("Verdi tuning" is an ambigious term btw since it's also used as an alternative name for Saveur pitch with A=430.54.) --- Documented and stipulated chamber pitches from the 17th to early 20th century varies at least from A=381 to A=c. 525 but we don't have that much data and the actual range may well have been much wider. --- We do have four dated pitchforks from Paris from the late 18th and early 19th century. They are tuned in A=390 (1795), A=423 (1810), A=432 (1822) and A=449 (1855). Sor, Aguado, Carulli and Carcassi were active in that city at the beginning of the 19th C. so it's reasonable to assume they tuned their guitars somewhere in the 420-430 range but we can't be sure. --- It seems Italian, Austrian and German pitch tended to be higher than French. A pitchfork that belonged to Beethoven is at A=455.4 and La Scala in Milan operated with A=449 at some time during the 19th C. So guitarists like Giuliani and Legnani may well have tuned their instruments even higher than the modern 440.
Yes, and we have also no idea how classical music has to be phrased. Sor was the leading ballet composer of his time and his music has all the flow and sublime rythmtreatments, that we know from Beethoven and nearly never of guitarists. German maestro Lawall is a complete composer and conductor besides a guitarist who knows that different styles have (like languages) different grammars. This link leads to all great classical Sonatas (4 Molitor, 3 Diabelli, 4 Sor, Giuliani and 4 by Beethoven). On youtube-coolguitarschool he demonstratrs in detail how to achieve this. ua-cam.com/video/8BsD0CECmPI/v-deo.html
Modern players have not only tuned their instruments a lot higher, they have also accelerated their tempos,... something which I dislike. Thank you for this excellent video.
I am fully aware that the Goldberg Variations were not played as fast during Bach's lifetime as they were by Glenn Gould in his legendary 1955 recording, but to be honest, I don't care at all! Perhaps this would even not have been technically possible on the instruments of that time. The pianist Alfred Brendel however once said that the term “authenticity” should be removed from the musicological dictionary because nobody knows exactly what it means. For me, the only thing that matters is what sounds right to me.
Tonebase, if you're going to produce videos for an audience of musicians, please bear in mind that for them, having background music is like having someone else talking at the same time as the presenter. It divides the attention and makes it difficult to process what the guy is saying.
@@エルフェンリート-l3i And how do we know that? There were not tape recorders at that time and the interpretation of verbal descriptions is time dependent, just as the written music itself.
Regardless of what the notation is, the tempo of performance of the music have to make sense. It should sound pleasant. Dance music has to be played at correct tempo, otherwise you can imagine what it will be like when it is too fast or too slow. It will be ridiculous 😂😂
IMO...Bach's Prelude, from his first Cello Suite, is always played too fast. Classical guitarists are the biggest culprit, along with many cello players.
There are two things you never trust a boomer with. 1. Classical interpretation and 2. Politics. Look at the downfall of music since they came to age. All this free thought do what you want interpretation of music. Now you have to question everything you've ever learned on how to read rhythm and tempo because of boomers when before it was pretty damn straight forward.
Tonebase Guitar, why do you annoying me with music while speaking? I know, you are not the only one, but it’s very disturbing. Music is a kind of language, so listening to two languages at the same time, that’s not easy!
Amazing yet disappointing. A few handful of characters in their ingenuity holding us accountable to such complicated analysis. Art need not be expressed in the hands of the performer for others to play as intended. If so we are very good book keepers. Did Sor intended for his work to be diluted in this way…did he intend when writing his work for it to be analyzed in such a manner? Impressive and anointed but no. 13:23
11:12 First of all it's Louis not Luis, second this is not what he said and as such you shouldn't be using quotation marks. He uses the word "he" not "he or she".
@Stephen Bell You do know that the parentheses actually indicates that it's NOT part of the quote? So how is that dishonest? Really of all the things to be upset about you this attempt to be inclusive is what gets you? Let me guess...you think this is another case of "woke nonsense"?
Oh man.... musicians can read and play multiple voices at the same time but they seem to be struggling to listen to a gentleman speak with a backing track. Give me a break and stop the whining! 🙄
Why so concerned about speed? Play at your normal capabilities. Who cares about feel? Paco de lucia flamenco guitar super speed playing is normal for him. To others, it is a struggle.
Cause pieces need to be played fast/slow in order to sound the way they are supposed to sound. Even though i don't always 100% agree with the exact speed. One example would be clair de lune wich sounds better played slower than intended in my opinion, but the original is already rather slow. So if you would playnit let's say twice the speed it just wouldn't the same. But those things are a matter of taste.
Andre Segovia played variations very fast in his very early days, maybe his youthful fingers were nimble strong. But check to his later advance age playing, you notice he played much slower, that apply for other pieces in his repertoire. Slow or fast, his fans always enjoyed his playing, me too.@@dregga7638
When you play music, don't talk, and when you talk, don't play music. When you do both at the same time, you devalue both. The music becomes annoying accompaniment, and the talk is near incomprehensible argle-bargle. I think I would like to watch this video with good editing. I think I would like to hear this man talk. But as it is I can't. And that's a dislike. Go home and do it again.
Dear Jesper, thank you for this concise & overdue comment : absolutely spot on, you really made your point perfectly clear, (refreshingly : without being "p.c."...). Couldn't agree more.
So what is the purpose of this talk? He talks around the bush without meaningful content, disturbed by background noise. Sorry, these are thirteen minutes of waisted time.
I had a similar feeling. May be I am deaf, but I hardly noticed any differences , when he played a piece two times. Background music made me understanding much harder.
If this is meant to be a taster to persuade the listener to subscribe to the tonebase service ... ? well, tonebase, please don't waste your viewers' time by having extremely regular adverts, many of which cannot be chased away after x - seconds. I lost count how many there were. Secondly, don't insult your listeners' intelligence. The only people who are going to be interested in something like this are guitar students (of a wide variety of levels). Therefore, playing guitar music, quite loudly, underneath the presenter's speech, is massively distracting. For me more than many, no doubt. Moreover, the presenter, while being a highly respected figure in the business, is quite softly spoken. Even over good speakers, its not a good balance. Next, while it is fine to refer to and recommend original editions, to do so without mentioning the inherent problems that can arise is rather poor. For example, famously, the first edition of Op9 has notes missing - in the Theme! Also, while you don't expressly say so, the implication I took away was that you thought that hand written copy of Op 9 was by the composer ... which it is not. It is not his handwriting. Aside from the fact that few students are going to have ready access to ms versions of any kind (other than the same place you got that one from), they are even more likely to be prone to error - copyists error! - and of course un-noted alterations to e.g. tempo etc which a modern, urtext edition should deal with. So, I suggest, for the great majority to today's students, to first consult a reputable modern urtext edition is the better move, backing that up with analysis and appreciation of the old editions. In short, were one of my students to ask whether I recommend this video to them - the answer is no.
Modern classical guitar is straight-up awful. Quick-slow-quick-slow-quick-slow. It's close to unlistenable. No idea what to do? Go quick then slow. A part is too hard for you? Go quick then slow and pretend that you thought it through. Most pieces and most classical guitarists sound the same. It's why I turned my back on it.
I have always noticed how, for example, playing certain popular Bach pieces "a bit more slowly than usual" makes them sound so much more round and genius. I suppose this is because, if say the counterpoint in a polyphonic piece moves to fast, your brain cannot aesthetically grasp all the affective logic behind the individual interactions in the melodies. It's like watching a movie you like, but sped up by 20%. You kind of get the jist of what is going on, but all the beauty and details get lost in the unadjusted pace, so grasping them becomes a daunting task, since brain processing takes time. So I set myself the rule: If I'm playing Bach or am listening to a rendition and feel like I am not grasping all the affects that are trying to be conveyed, if all gets lost in a rushed and mushy mess, it's probably too fast.
Something similar with romantic pieces, say by Tárrega. You really have to dig in deeper and find the right accentuation and try to explore what your inner aesthetical judge tells you, if you want to find out, where in the piece to "take time" and where to "put it back" at a later point. The baroque concept of rubato on lutes comes close to this, I would say.
I agree. Most players are more concerned in showing off how fast they can play than to express all the details that you mentioned.
On point, I always play bach and scarlatti way slower than most. Oddly enough, this speed-disease does not apply to composers like buxtehude or pergolesi which most of the times is played in a more moderate tempo. I think it comes down to bach and scarlatti often being played by virtuoses and then some get impressed and think "wow, I wanna play like that" and then just play it quick. It actually saddens me, it feel like some just play it fast to get it over with as soon as possible. Just as you wrote, the brain is not able to process the music in these insane tempos.
Totally. My very first guitar teacher insisted I had to play classical pieces first, his first lesson was always to "take my time" on the notes i felt needed extra accentuation, to prolongue the end of some phrases to get a more dramatical effect...
Later on I went to school and up to this point there's nothing I despise more than the generalized idea that you have to play "to the grid", on a steady strict tempo... For me, all music pop, rock, jazz, barroque... Whatever you call it, has to have some flowing, breathing tempo 😮 it's music!
Also, in many instances, one CANNOT hear the actual articulation of the notes due to the faster speed. Music is NOT A RACE... to see who can finish first.
I think it's vital to the understanding of playing a classical piece to work it through at different tempo's. I always play through everything slowly to hear the music accurately before playing it to any kind of speed.
This is a frequently recurring question: do we attempt to play it as it was performed in those days, or do we interpret it in the current context? Should baroque be played on ancient instruments? Etc. ... . I think it doesn't matter. But giving the freedom to the player to do what he feels is better attracts me more. If we are expected to play as Sor or Giuliani we should get a romantic guitar, which was smaller and therefore easier to play fast. So it's logical that we approach the music now a bit differently with a modern guitar.
Thank you. I would listen to maestro Fernandez for hours everyday. *THANK YOU SO MUCH* for the work you do and share.
I bought Eduardo's Fernando Sor album in the 1990's because I was stunned on how fast and articulate his playing was.
I made an interesting experience. I wrote a classical guitar piece that was too hard for me to play at first. I decided to make a midi version, slow it down and learn to play along. I finally was able to play it in time at the tempo I thought it would fit. I kept on practicing without the midi. After a year or so I stumbled on that midi version again and before deleting it, I once more listened to it. It sounded sterile and boring as expected. I had to do some hard work on the tempo track to make it sound more natural. This tempo track now looks like a
roller coaster but it really sound consistent. It's interesting to hear and feel a constant musical pulse while at the same time knowing it's not constant at all.
Yeah, the whole to-the-grid (machine-strict steady tempo) produces sterile music. To this day i cannot play to - the ggrid to get sheet music of my compositions, i just cannot play like a robot, i rather go grab sibelius or even Guitar Pro, and it is literally changing speed each measure, or setting accelerandos/ralentandos on the software for it to SOUND like I hear it in my mind. 😮
I dont know why it is so hard for people to understand it.
Same with tuning I personally have composed or enjoy playing some pieces on A/Ab=425Hz i just like it some pieces... Supposedly Handel composed on A= 422.5 😮... Just like tempo, sometimes tuning your guitar up or down will give you a different" tonal texture" that just makes it 👌
Regarding the issue of the speed of the Andantino tempo marking up until the 1820's, Mo Fernandez 's intuition about Giuliani considering Andantino to be slower than Andante (just like Mozart and Rossini) is likely to be correct. As a matter of fact, J. N. Hummel - who was both Mozart's student as well as a Giuliani's friend (Giuliani played/collaborated with Hummel in several occasions) - reports this in his piano method: "Many authors assign a quicker degree of movement to the Andantino, than to the Andante; but this is incorrect, for it is evident that Andantino is the diminutive of the original word Andante, and therefore that it implies a less degree of movement than it."
Odd that this is a thing. People should really learn the basics of language.
@@alcguitar well, after the beginning of the 19th century some non-native Italian speakers started to use Andantino as tempo indication which was faster than Andante, a habit which slowly influenced the music world, and eventually got accepted as the standard in the 20th century. As a native Italian speaker, I always found odd whenever Andantino was referred to as faster than Andante by some of my foreign friends; however, after some years I realized that also this view is now part of a musical tradition which, whether one can agree or not, is worth acknowledging. I personally tend to stick to a slower type of Andantino for 19th century music; whenever I go for 20th century repertoire I look for historical recordings of the composers where they either supervise or conduct their works featuring the Andantino and Andante markings (e.g. Villa-Lobos), to understand how they conceived this tempo.
@@francescoteopini6290 I know the reasoning, but this should be known by people who have studied music.
Correct!
Yes, Andantino is a diminutive, and thus logically would seem to connote a tempo somewhat slower than Andante. But diminutives such as “-ino” and “-etto” suggest a diminution of something, and it would be a mistake to always equate “less than” with “slower than.” It all depends on “less than what?” If the tempo is slow, like Largo, then Larghetto is less slow, not slower. Allegro is a faster tempo, so Allegretto is slightly less fast. So for me, the question becomes “What is Andante?” If you think of it as being the mid-point of tempi, the meaning of Andantino becomes ambiguous.
Also the size and resonance of the room in which we are playing. For example the music of Bruckner. 🥀☘️🌻
"Wrong tempo". We literally have "recordings" or Gershwin playing many of his tunes (I put quotations because they require a player piano to replay rather than a record player but functionally it's the same if not mechanically) and so we absolutely KNOW that virtually EVERYONE plays his works at the "wrong" tempo... because at this point pretty much everyone has agreed that they sound better that way.
It's downright jarring for most people to hear a well known piece like say Rhapsody in Blue when it's played *by the man himself* at "the right" speed. Because it sounds like someone accidentally hit the "1.25x Speed" button here on youtube. It's *that* much faster.
5:47well, you just cleared up the reason I’ve always struggled reading Renaissance pieces. lol thanks for that!
(1) Take the score, imagine that you are student of composition, an try to reconstruct it. When you have studied harmony, counterpoint, fugue, form and can compose at the table without a guitar at hand, you discover what tempo, nuance, phrasing are. When you see a river flowing it seems that there is one speed or tempo. When approaching the river, you see turbulences, points where water stagnates. That is the same when reconstructing the score in the internal mind and that is also how the composer hears his music. It fluctuates.
(2) Hugo Riemann write several treaties on rhythm and phrasing. If style is different in history, the rules are the same. What is the beat for the ear ? Not necessarily that of the fingers. The ear can calculate only from 60 to 120, so if the beat shows 140 in 4/4, the true perceived beat is 70 or 2/2. The bar being one consideration even more important is the "metre", that is the basic unit of a motive, usually 2 bars and the bar in case of a composed bar (12/8 for example). Both the "metre" an half of it are not units of beat. So for instance the 1st movement of Beethoven's Eroica cannot be be beaten in 1 though it is supposed that the bar is at 60. It must be beaten in 3 and we have to struggle for understanding what that 60 stands for.
(3) When listening to Segovia it is amazing that he takes his time. He stretches a lot. Rightly so when following Riemann's rules. Great singers do that too. Do not ask Domingo to sing at the tempo of Pavarotti. Listen to the lutenist Thomas Dunford. He understands that well.
I think that version at 53bpm was correct. the phrases have time to resolve in your brain. 12:55 More stately and Musical and it's more enjoyable to listen too as well.
This speeding things up is Musicians getting bored or showing off, mostly boredom from doing it over and over.
Love it, thank you. I have a recording of Erik Sate’s music played really quite slowly; to my mind it makes a huge and wonderfully emotional and listenable difference.
play everything faster.... sure.... i am not surprised.
what i learned from this video is: without tone we are nothing
Very interesting and useful considerations from maestro Fernandez. I would like to add a very subjective but to my thinking truthful assertion that generally speaking the music from previous times was originally played slower than we do today because all the aspects of their life were slower than our contemporary life.
Mozart's life, too?
in what way were Beethoven's or Bach's lives serene?
What objective evidence are your statements based upon?
@@rabokarabekian409 I didn't say "serene" I just said the rhythm of life itself was slower in those times, for example they didn't have motor cars, trains, planes etc
If you are sensitive to it, the music itself will tell you the best tempo. Often this is quite different from the way most people play a piece. If this is the case, you have discovered a hidden beauty in the music.
Interesting theory about Sor's Op. 29 no. 18 but I'm not sure I agree. If you look at the sheet music of the Moonlight sonata you notice that the 16th notes in the melody are really close to the left hand arpeggio notes on the stave. That might confuse players because when 2 notes are really close (like an A and a B) one usually gets shifted a bit to the right for reading clarity although they should be played at the same time. Therefore Czerny might have felt the need to clarify.
Now there are some pieces that use a combination of triplets in one voice and dotted 8th notes in another where the 16th note should indeed be played at the same time as the last triplet note but in that case the 16th note is notated right above the last triplet note. Strictly speaking this is incorrect notation because triplet notes and 16th notes should never line up (except for the first note obviously) while the correct notation would be to use triplets for both voices but one voice using a triplet consisting of a quarter and an 8th note.
It's a shorthand notation though, right? I've never seen an example of the "correct" notation that you're describing in music of that period.
@@isaacbeen2087 I think it was just a convention of the period. But if you use modern notation software (like Musescore) you cannot line up triplets in one voice and 16th notes in another. The only way to do that is to use triplets for both voices.
@@0rganopleno Indeed. As I said, a convention of the period. Of course it doesn't add up, it's not meant to, it's merely convenient.
@@0rganopleno And that would of course be a flaw in the notation software! though I suspect Dorico or Lilypond could manage it.
I moved from music to biology in performance… hearing the maestro helps in my reach on vision in movement… the factors on time are things to consider… in his case and what I hope to envision are intermediate steps (unperceived) by the listener but vital to performance… how the performer’s body tags the scene… maybe… I need to see the maestro’s performance 🎉
Great content here, i love tonebase guitar videos! Keep it up!
Very interesting video. Nice to see Eduardo looking well, his cd was the first one I ever bought. It still sounds good.
Add to this information the fact that they did not play or tune their instruments to a 440 .and it makes a huge difference, we are not hearing the way the music was originally composed with all of the nuances .so we are losing the accurate interpretation of the peace
My classic guitar 1976 is tuned around 423 Hz. She likes it, i like it. It makes her sing. The notes hold on longer, resonates better. I like to Play slow and enjoy the music.
@@gilbert6023 I agree
No sólo cuestiones de técnica y fraseo, también lo inexorable: el contexto. La práctica, sintaxis musical y lenguaje como idiosincrasia es una idea interesante. La discusión de tempo y figuración muy buena.
compare beethoven ninth peformances,solti vs bernstein,lennie races,,solti w CSO builds,, a bit slower like a mountain.. which that work certainly is
Thank you. This I say is one of the greatest videos I ve listened to.
thank you sir for this very, very, interseting analysis!
Thank you for your wisdom maestro.
Excellent lecture, maestro.
Excellent contribution
Wim Winters think we are.
Very didactical and instructive. Thank you!
Interesting.....but I found that
all the pieces that were played
more quickly really unsettling to
listen to......I'm rather more accepting of the Player's interpretation or input.....
Gracias Eduardo y tonebase!💘🌻
people's time is running faster these days, the interpretation tempo too.
Supposedly classical music was written with A=432 instead of the current A=440 hertz, and musical instruments were tuned at that frequency too...? It seems to be a debatable subject, and I'm not sure what to think anymore. Certainly any type of music can be decreased or increased in tempo, which can dramatically alter the emotional content of the songs.............?
There was no standard pitch until 1859 when the French government passed a law(!) setting it to A=435 Hz and an international standard wasn't really estalished until the mid 20th century.
---
A=432 is known as Verdi tuning since Giuseppe Verdi briefly supported it. Despite many claims it does not have any particular historical presedent or significance. It's not actually a bad choice though so if you and any other musicians you play with prefer it, go for it! ("Verdi tuning" is an ambigious term btw since it's also used as an alternative name for Saveur pitch with A=430.54.)
---
Documented and stipulated chamber pitches from the 17th to early 20th century varies at least from A=381 to A=c. 525 but we don't have that much data and the actual range may well have been much wider.
---
We do have four dated pitchforks from Paris from the late 18th and early 19th century. They are tuned in A=390 (1795), A=423 (1810), A=432 (1822) and A=449 (1855). Sor, Aguado, Carulli and Carcassi were active in that city at the beginning of the 19th C. so it's reasonable to assume they tuned their guitars somewhere in the 420-430 range but we can't be sure.
---
It seems Italian, Austrian and German pitch tended to be higher than French. A pitchfork that belonged to Beethoven is at A=455.4 and La Scala in Milan operated with A=449 at some time during the 19th C. So guitarists like Giuliani and Legnani may well have tuned their instruments even higher than the modern 440.
Very interesting analysis and all perfectly true. Gracias.
Yes, and we have also no idea how classical music has to be phrased. Sor was the leading ballet composer of his time and his music has all the flow and sublime rythmtreatments, that we know from Beethoven and nearly never of guitarists. German maestro Lawall is a complete composer and conductor besides a guitarist who knows that different styles have (like languages) different grammars. This link leads to all great classical Sonatas (4 Molitor, 3 Diabelli, 4 Sor, Giuliani and 4 by Beethoven). On youtube-coolguitarschool he demonstratrs in detail how to achieve this. ua-cam.com/video/8BsD0CECmPI/v-deo.html
Excellent
Thanks! Great explanation!
Sorry for the off topic, but is this a cedar top guitar?
Its a concrete top
Yes it’s a cedar top
Modern players have not only tuned their instruments a lot higher, they have also accelerated their tempos,... something which I dislike. Thank you for this excellent video.
I am fully aware that the Goldberg Variations were not played as fast during Bach's lifetime as they were by Glenn Gould in his legendary 1955 recording, but to be honest, I don't care at all! Perhaps this would even not have been technically possible on the instruments of that time. The pianist Alfred Brendel however once said that the term “authenticity” should be removed from the musicological dictionary because nobody knows exactly what it means. For me, the only thing that matters is what sounds right to me.
Qué nombre tiene la obra que suena al inicio?
Tonebase, if you're going to produce videos for an audience of musicians, please bear in mind that for them, having background music is like having someone else talking at the same time as the presenter.
It divides the attention and makes it difficult to process what the guy is saying.
Tempo can completely change the feel and the way a piece is played...
'Tempo completely changes the feel and the way a piece is played...'
There, fixed it for you 😉
@@hazenclough4212 lol...✌️❤️💪
tough to watch/listen to with that soundtrack throughout, I hope you will consider losing the soundtrack while your subjects are talking. take care
Agree
Agree!
I couldn’t make it past 3 minutes.
💯
Agree!
One of the greatest living guitarist
So, sometimes I wonder if the composer would recognize what they’re hearing when I play their songs.
Great advice! Stick less to the paper and think more of what the composer would have liked or disliked in the presentation.
@@エルフェンリート-l3i And how do we know that? There were not tape recorders at that time and the interpretation of verbal descriptions is time dependent, just as the written music itself.
Maybe we play Andante too fast, because we walk faster nowadays. But we do not think faster. So it's all too fast.
Play it slower with swing!
Regardless of what the notation is, the tempo of performance of the music have to make sense. It should sound pleasant. Dance music has to be played at correct tempo, otherwise you can imagine what it will be like when it is too fast or too slow. It will be ridiculous 😂😂
1:00 what in absolute HELL was that SHOT!?! HA!! Ugh……Wolfgangus would probably want them all SHOT! HA!!!
IMO...Bach's Prelude, from his first Cello Suite, is always played too fast. Classical guitarists are the biggest culprit, along with many cello players.
Anyone know the piece at 3:10?
Giuliani Op 148 no 7, La Melanconia.
There are two things you never trust a boomer with. 1. Classical interpretation and 2. Politics. Look at the downfall of music since they came to age. All this free thought do what you want interpretation of music. Now you have to question everything you've ever learned on how to read rhythm and tempo because of boomers when before it was pretty damn straight forward.
TRUMP 2024!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@@josephcambron7060 BIDEN 2024 NEWSOM 2028 -2036
🗣🤡
Ironically the music spoiled the music information 🤦♂️🤦♂️
They play fur elise too fast and canon too slow
Tonebase Guitar, why do you annoying me with music while speaking? I know, you are not the only one, but it’s very disturbing. Music is a kind of language, so listening to two languages at the same time, that’s not easy!
Amazing yet disappointing. A few handful of characters in their ingenuity holding us accountable to such complicated analysis. Art need not be expressed in the hands of the performer for others to play as intended. If so we are very good book keepers. Did Sor intended for his work to be diluted in this way…did he intend when writing his work for it to be analyzed in such a manner? Impressive and anointed but no. 13:23
11:12 First of all it's Louis not Luis, second this is not what he said and as such you shouldn't be using quotation marks. He uses the word "he" not "he or she".
Really dude? You're upset that he put (he or she) in parenthesis?
Can you explain why that would upset you?
@Stephen Bell You do know that the parentheses actually indicates that it's NOT part of the quote? So how is that dishonest?
Really of all the things to be upset about you this attempt to be inclusive is what gets you?
Let me guess...you think this is another case of "woke nonsense"?
If being translated from German, it’s likely the original was the gender neutral “man.” And considering originally his name was Ludwig.......
He was actually baptized as Ludewig, modern day is Ludwig. They all mean Louie.
Andante con moto..... 😳🥴
Oh man.... musicians can read and play multiple voices at the same time but they seem to be struggling to listen to a gentleman speak with a backing track. Give me a break and stop the whining! 🙄
Why so concerned about speed? Play at your normal capabilities. Who cares about feel? Paco de lucia flamenco guitar super speed playing is normal for him. To others, it is a struggle.
Cause pieces need to be played fast/slow in order to sound the way they are supposed to sound. Even though i don't always 100% agree with the exact speed. One example would be clair de lune wich sounds better played slower than intended in my opinion, but the original is already rather slow. So if you would playnit let's say twice the speed it just wouldn't the same. But those things are a matter of taste.
Andre Segovia played variations very fast in his very early days, maybe his youthful fingers were nimble strong. But check to his later advance age playing, you notice he played much slower, that apply for other pieces in his repertoire. Slow or fast, his fans always enjoyed his playing, me too.@@dregga7638
STOP playing music over speech!!!+ Please!!!
Why?...
When you play music, don't talk, and when you talk, don't play music. When you do both at the same time, you devalue both. The music becomes annoying accompaniment, and the talk is near incomprehensible argle-bargle. I think I would like to watch this video with good editing. I think I would like to hear this man talk. But as it is I can't. And that's a dislike. Go home and do it again.
Dear Jesper,
thank you for this concise & overdue comment :
absolutely spot on, you really made your point perfectly clear,
(refreshingly : without being "p.c."...).
Couldn't agree more.
So what is the purpose of this talk? He talks around the bush without meaningful content, disturbed by background noise. Sorry, these are thirteen minutes of waisted time.
I had a similar feeling. May be I am deaf, but I hardly noticed any differences , when he played a piece two times. Background music made me understanding much harder.
Totally pointless watching this with the background music on… really annoying
Terrible video..."background"music is almost as loud as the speaking!
Who cares?
If this is meant to be a taster to persuade the listener to subscribe to the tonebase service ... ? well, tonebase, please don't waste your viewers' time by having extremely regular adverts, many of which cannot be chased away after x - seconds. I lost count how many there were. Secondly, don't insult your listeners' intelligence. The only people who are going to be interested in something like this are guitar students (of a wide variety of levels). Therefore, playing guitar music, quite loudly, underneath the presenter's speech, is massively distracting. For me more than many, no doubt. Moreover, the presenter, while being a highly respected figure in the business, is quite softly spoken. Even over good speakers, its not a good balance. Next, while it is fine to refer to and recommend original editions, to do so without mentioning the inherent problems that can arise is rather poor. For example, famously, the first edition of Op9 has notes missing - in the Theme! Also, while you don't expressly say so, the implication I took away was that you thought that hand written copy of Op 9 was by the composer ... which it is not. It is not his handwriting. Aside from the fact that few students are going to have ready access to ms versions of any kind (other than the same place you got that one from), they are even more likely to be prone to error - copyists error! - and of course un-noted alterations to e.g. tempo etc which a modern, urtext edition should deal with. So, I suggest, for the great majority to today's students, to first consult a reputable modern urtext edition is the better move, backing that up with analysis and appreciation of the old editions. In short, were one of my students to ask whether I recommend this video to them - the answer is no.
Modern classical guitar is straight-up awful. Quick-slow-quick-slow-quick-slow. It's close to unlistenable. No idea what to do? Go quick then slow. A part is too hard for you? Go quick then slow and pretend that you thought it through. Most pieces and most classical guitarists sound the same. It's why I turned my back on it.