While not being fully convinced yet, I have to admit that slower interpretations sometimes conjure up far more power than quicker one's. So I appreciate your work!
I stopped playing piano because these pieces were beyond me...I play guitar now..Rock and roll is within my grasp...now I realize Beethoven/Bach/Chopin are also! THANKS!
I am from Czech republic. Beethoven refused to perform the piano sonata in F minor, Op. 57, in Hradec nad Moravicí. He quarreled with the prince Lichnovsky and smashed his bust. After the incident Beethoven left the Hradec castle.
@@thomashughes4859 The next I refuse to perform the Apassionata Sonata, I must find and smash a bust of Prince Lichnovsky, too. Beethoven sure knew who to make a lasting impression.
3 роки тому+3
Well, in Ludwig's defense, Lichnovsky asked him to play for some French military officials who were staying on his residence. Beethoven, who on his younger years saw the french revolutionaries as a breath of fresh air in the stagnant Absolutist Europe, had changed his mind by the time Napoleon proclamed himself emperor, even destroying his dedicatory to Bonaparte on his 3rd Symphony. Furthermore, this was after Bonaparte had waged war with the Austrian empire and ocupated the (bombarded) city of Vienna for several months.
I grew up listening to the Artur Rubenstein recording, thinking it was the best interpretation. But I really loved the Gould version on first hearing, and was able to dig more into the moment of it at the slower tempo, getting more out of it. The idea that a slower tempo is "scandalous" is probably more for clickbait than anything. It is a comfort to hear your interpretation here, and as always it is beautifully played.
Here's where my thoughts are going right now: Why are so many "experts" around here so fussed about Tempo? When I go to Bach fan communities, all I see is in-depth breakdowns of harmony and counterpoint. Did Beethoven fans forget that that's what's at the core of Classical Music? Why aren't we talking about the composition? Don't ask me though, I'm like Socrates, I know nothing, but I enjoy the learning.
@@williamspringer737 I wouldn't hold my breath on converting the die-hard speed lovers though... I oppose conversions of all kinds actually. Some people may be insensitive to harmony, and that's fine. We just have to learn mutual respect, and agree to disagree.
Thank you for all your diligent research and hours of practicing. These weekly premieres are very enlightening, and I’m really looking forward to this one!
This is the best version I have ever heard. It's so dramatic. One can feel all the dramatic details of this masterpiece. Great work, you're the best. ❤
Yes, I must admit that I too was “scandalized”--at least at first. Having listened so many times to my recordings of Gieseking, Kempff, Serkin, and others, it just seemed too “slow” at first. Yet after about 5 minutes I could not stop listening. I heard things that I never knew were there, and was carried through the whole performance with a sense of awe. My feeling at the end of other performances had always been “Is that all?” Something seemed to have been taken away rather than given--“rubato,” you might say. It had all flown by too fast. But not so here. Thank you so much for this Wim!
I’m listening for the first time right now and the “tempo shock” is definitely very strong in this one, but like you said, once you get past that, everything falls into place and it makes a lot more sense. For example, the loud, interjecting, syncopated chords in the first movement now actually sound dramatic but also tasteful, not just brutally loud and completely out of place. So many runs and, in general, notes moving in stepwise motion have been un-blurred and clarified, melodies have time to sing and not be rushed over, calm sections sound sweeter and provide a nice contrast to the minor parts, many awkward spots now actually work thanks to having more breathing room… I could go on, but you get the point. And most importantly, the whole mood of the piece becomes stark and tragic, sorrowful and serious, rather than the angry and violent style that it’s played in today. “Is that all??” is a question I commonly asked myself when listening to Beethoven, and now Mr. Winters has answered my question.
I really love your historically-informed performances meant to honour the composer and his intentions; they are distinctly lacking in personal vanity and instead are about what the composer wanted us to hear. Your meticulous and exhaustive research shows itself in every performance of yours and they are all _extremely_ stirring, honest and expressive. opening them up to a possibility most of us have never known. We wait with bated breath for every one of your performances to premiere, so that we can hear one of our favourite pieces in a way we've never heard before, and revisit an era we long and yearn to know better. This performance is no different and just as how awesome we imagined it to be. Thank you for making our day.
Lacking in personal vanity? Haha a guy that is a youtuber and uploads hundreds of videos provoking other pianists and going against the rest of humanity and experts even when showed evidence. How is that lack of vanity? That is the definition of vanity.
Interesting how some of the effects are so dramatic on this fortepiano at this tempo due to the growly tone of the bass (e.g. at the 1:50 mark or so) . On a modern piano I don't think this would be so effective at this tempo since the tonal variance between bass and treble is not so pronounced and the slightly "harpsichord"-ish tone of the fortepiano is no more. (harpsichord-ish is the wrong word - I mean the tonal quality due to the lesser tension on the strings etc.) . Regardless of one's thoughts about historic tempo, it is interesting to hear music played on instruments like those that the particular piece was composed for.
It sounds like you are learning and practising at a very slow tempo the piece, at this speed the esence and the direction of the piece goes away for me. It gets boring and tiresome. Even a trill sounds weird. I can't imagine this interpretation being the original. Its nice for apreciating the harmonies but overall, if I attended a 1 hour concerto, all pieces at that speed... unbearable!
I can't see how it is possible to feel the allegro in any of these without falling asleep essentially. I don't know how any of the royals that Beethoven would have performed for could have sat through them. Also, Beethoven was a virtuoso. If this truly was the intended tempo, then I MYSELF a 3 year pianist could play it, which makes no sense to me. Only a couple of his were expressly meant for amateurs.
sonatas back then were not concert pieces. They were precisely student material. After Liszt invented piano recital, a generation of pianists who were not composers themselves were in constant material to play, even if oldies. So they take this old Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven music and speed it up to show off their mechanical dexterity and since then it's been this competition of who rushes faster. In my understanding the music simply feels right like this, feels natural. I don't know how to explain but between believing in concert timings for the age and metronome marks I'll go with the latter. I know I'm entering crackpottery territory here, but between music that feels right at the MM given and the timings, it leads me to believe clocks were broken, not metronomes. There may be also cultural differences in play, like the British favoring faster music for instance, and this influencing JC Bach and Mendelssohn for instance... Wagner complained about Mendelssohn's Beethoven take and Beethoven himself seemed to be well aware of the British fondness of fast tempos, for he jokingly remarked to the British conductor George Smart about the 9th taking only 45 minutes! Berlioz also notes that the first time the 5th was presented in England the musicians themselves felt it was a joke. At a high tempo, even such a tragic work can sound like a joke indeed...
I remember reading somewhere that after the first performance of one of Beethoven's symphonies, a critic remarked "Now Herr Beethoven is ready for the mad-house!" I wonder why he thought that?
I have seen several of these videos and it has given me something to think about re tempos but THIS video convinced me that I do not agree with your view. This sounds almost funereal. WAAAAY TOOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOOW. It's impossible for me to believe that this is a suitable tempo for Op 57.
I've come to realise, taking everything into consideration that the half tempo theory is correct. However, I believe these metronome markings are meant for non pro pianists as a minimum tempo. In my opinion Beethoven and other professionals of the time would then have upped the tempo a little. To my ears, about 20%. Not only will the pieces then be more flowing, but the composer will sound brilliant in comparison to the average pianist, keeping him a step ahead of any competition! @AuthenticSound Am I along the right lines do you think?
15% is what you will notice of differences sometimes between MM marks. Certainly for this sonata, which also Czerny gave different MMs for. In a way, a metronome mark tells at the minimum something about the musical projection of the musician/composer in which it was given. What happened later in their minds... we'll never know, so in a way our journey towards their thinking can only start there. And when one 'understands' their system, of course, there are before and afternoons and evenings to vary tempo feeling!
When Clara Schumann performed Beethoven's "Appassionata" in Vienna when she was 18 years old, she caused a sensation. Audiences were thrilled. She was named Royal Imperial Chamber Virtuosa by the Kaiser. Restaurants started selling a "torte à la Wieck". The Austrian writer Grillparzer wrote a poem entitled, "Clara Schumann and Beethoven", where he said that Clara "found the key to Beethoven which had long been sunk deep in the sea". What caused such a sensation? It was surely the impact of the sonata, the terror of a terrifying piece that leaves one's hair standing, played masterfully by a great artist. Many works in Beethoven's "heroic" period are about struggle and victory- a journey from darkness to light, but the appassionata is a journey from dark to darker, a descent to hell, a headlong race into definite destruction. We don't finish in major- Beethoven gives us a glimpse of it only to destroy it completely with F minor in the last movement. In the hands of a true artist, this work should devastate you. Not with its speed (which is really not that fast), but with its shattering emotion and its powerful narrative. And in all honesty, this performance is an offense to the word "appassionata" and to Beethoven's genius. When I listen to it, I feel no passion, no terror, no emotion, no devastation. I hear no narrative. Incidentally, this piece contains the same "knocking" or "fate" motive of the fifth symphony, and the tempi of both pieces are similar: allegro con brio for the symphony (half note = 108 by Beethoven), allegro assai for the sonata (dotted quarter estimated around 120 by contemporary artists).
Much has been said and written about Glenn Gould's eccentric style of performance. In 1995, the great music critic Tim Page composed an article entitled "Glenn Gould in Retrospect" for Fi Magazine, in which he remarked: "Whether one 'liked' everything Gould did was ultimately a matter of small importance. He was simply THERE, impossible to ignore--even though, paradoxically, he spent so much time carefully hidden from the public eye. [...] But Gould was not one of those modernists who are compelled to deliberately break all the rules (therefore remaining forever and inextricably bound to them, if only through reaction). Rather, he was smart enough to adapt the rules to suit his purposes--either that, or to simply ignore the zeitgeist altogether." Who knows whether Gould himself realized that, by "adapting" the modern rules in this way, he may have ended up returning to the rules of the composer's own time?
Do you believe that this whole-beat interpretation affects all composers or just Beethoven? All his pieces, or just the fastest ones that you've cherrypicked and not the others which would obviously be unacceptably slow at half speed? At what point in history do you believe all musicians collectively forgot your counterintuitive interpretation of metronome markings, for which there is no direct evidence?
Well put. Thinking on the other sonatas, the richer (textually thicker, more complex harmonies) parts are better played slower (opening bars of Les Adieux for example) as they convey the heavier emotions and really because it's difficult to hear what's going on if you bash through it. But then for great portions of Appasionata, musically there's not too much going on and slowing down doesn't help you to absorb the intent as you lose sight of the flow and journey of passages. You can hear angst in a single chord, but not really passion or fury in a half speed rendition.
@@vito-lattarulo I think it's more that we have such short attention spans now that it's impossible to not get irritated listening to something that is being played at half the speed we're used to.
I think you might be missing the point of his argument. From my understanding, what he was saying that tempo markings do not make sense with our current standards. In fact, tempo was always a personal thing and is not a matter of fact. I think that by saying the performer’s tempo is wrong is in fact, criticising one person’s opinion, even though his opinion might seem odd. To me, his performance being slower does show the melody much more clearly. Also, period instruments could not have played at the speed that current performers are playing, just like how Bach’s pieces played in recent times would have been much faster than in the 18th century, just because during the 18th century the organs were mechanical and could not have played at speeds that current organists were playing at.
My comment has attracted some attention so I will respond to a few points in the replies: 1. I often see the argument "this music was written before trains, airplanes, TV, etc., when the pace of life was slower, so it makes sense that it was actually played slower than the modern listener expects." It's a cute idea, but I don't believe the average tempo of life is seriously correlated with the average tempo of music. There are plenty of cultures in unindustrialized parts of the world that make lightning-fast music. (Winters also thinks whole beat applies to Chopin, etc., who lived well into the age of factories and railroads.) 2. I also see sentiments like "at this slow speed I can finally hear the distinct notes and I have more time to appreciate the harmonies, so it's probably correct." If you enjoy Winter's tempi and they help you appreciate the composer's writing, then by all means listen to them. But by this logic, all music should be played as slow as possible so that we have maximum time to intellectualize it. What I mean is that composers do not necessarily intend for their audience to hear every note distinctly or consciously perceive exactly how a chord is arpeggiated -- as Scott says, *texture* is an important part of music too, and sometimes rapid flurries of notes are critical to the texture. For an example see the (presto!) coda of the above piece, or Chopin's Revolutionary Etude. His laughable half-speed rendition completely annihilates the characters of the pieces. 3. I was wrong to accuse him of cherrypicking; at the time of writing it looked like he was mostly covering fast pieces like the Appassionata and Hammerklavier and carefully avoiding slow works where whole-beat would sound nonsensical. But by now it looks like he's sunken so far deep into his theory that he's not embarrassed to post something like Op. 10 No. 3. Every movement sounds silly, but his 'Largo e mesto' is all the evidence anyone needs to see that whole-beat is *not* what Beethoven/Czerny intended. For some people the allure of feeling like you're in on a great secret is too irresistible. Peace
Just listening to this for the first time. It is clear, the pauses create suspense. This is great. Picture the “court” in the old days. There was no other form of diversion. The folk sat around with their after dinner drinks for polite conversation. This music just was. It fits this tempo. Too much is lost with speed. I ascribe to WBMT. People now are used to tv or movies flying by so fast. Is this speed necessary. Too often the emotion is run over by a fast flurry of frenzied notes which blur together. Life has become too fast, frenzied, . Thanks for you standing in the hurricane.
That was Czerny's interpretation. Especially regarding the tempo used. We're men of the 21st century and 200+ years removed from a time without electricity, internet, and "want/get on demand". As you do more research, you'll find that even in 1860, Saint Saenz said that we played Mozart WAY TOO FAST! With respect, that't why you don't understand it. :D
@@manuel-et4he They definitely did their best! Remember, they didn't have the benefit of the internet, linking and corroborating the evidence across continents in a way that would be just too expensive in their time. They had to rely too much on educated guesses.
@@manuel-et4he I'm sure they get it but won't do it because people at your historical development level won't pay for it. Keep reading and researching and you'll find it.
Wim not only plays with eminent knowledge, but with real passion! Because true passion is never hectic, but intimate, intense. There is the poetic topos "rasende Leidenschaft" in German. This topos is negatively documented and mostly connoted with insanity. Let us get away from the madness and into the realm of the holy muses, because there you know passion!
I was always sceptical of mainstream performance of this sonata - especially the main Thema, written in 12-8, and combination of crotchet and semiquaver. In most of performances, you cannot hear the semiquaver: it could be heard as quaver, even at the bars like 35th. But in your performance, we can understand exact rhythm. And I think it made this sonata much more passionate piece!
So excited for this Wim! I have played this myself at whole beat and it is amazing! Can't wait to hear the coda of the 3rd movement, which literally every mainstream pianist butchers completely.
Have you seen Perahias performance on UA-cam? He seems to be in total control the whole time, while making the coda sound like a raging fire, I listen in awe each time. But I don't think you can count him as a mainstream pianist anyways :)
Valentina did wonderfully with this as did you. People may say, "wow Tchaikovsky's cherubs was superb" or "Hans Zimmer's Aurora is incredible". Anything by Vivaldi. Chopin is so romantic. Lovers music, really. Mussorgsky and Rossini. Schumann and Rachmaninoff, heck even Franzl Lang. It doesn't matter who you are and what you bring to the table, it will be a weak offering when Beethoven brings his gift of supreme genius. Beethoven is the most fun inventive and creative music my ears have been gifted to FEEL. Hats off to you sir.
Carl Czerny, who was a pupil of Beethoven (he premiered, for example, the Piano Concerto No. 5), devoted chapters 2 and 3 to the fourth volume of his Vollständige theoretisch-practische Pianoforte-Schule Op. 500 to the performance of Beethoven's works. He writes (among other things): Beethoven's Werke sind für gute, wohl ausgebildete Pianisten geschrieben, das heisst, für solche, welche alles, was zur mechanischen Fertigkeit und zum gewöhnlichen guten vortrag gehört, sich bereits durch das Einstudieren vielen andern guten Tonwerke völlig angeeignet haben. His Piano School also contains metronomic tempo marking for Beethoven works. In addition, a little later he published his own edition of Beethoven's sonatas, which contains other metronomic marking that less differ from the Piano School, which is proof that he thought about the tempos and was always looking for their ideal form. In the case of the Apassionata, we can choose between 108 and 120 for the quarter note with a dot (1st movement), 108 or 112 for the eighth note (2nd movement), and 132 or 144 for the quarter note (finale). He writes about the metronome in Volume 3 of the Piano School, Chapter VII (ks15.imslp.org/files/imglnks/usimg/5/5c/IMSLP317671-PMLP513421-czerny_pschule3.pdf). He writes, among other things, that the marked tempo corresponds to the AUDIBLE ticking of the metronome and that for a waltz whose WHOLE bar (half note with a dot) has the figure 88, one bar lasts ONLY ONE metronome beat, which is the only correct tempo (this can be verified by the choreography of the waltz). He not mention any WHOLE BEAT INTERPRETATION and to understand his metronomic markings according to this theory is to play twice as slow!
I have a new respect for Beethoven, and for their society in general, for being so into this kind of music. Way more daring than a lot of traditionalist wannabes of today.
Miguelisaurus animations what do you mean it is not about how boring it is? If something is boring it is not MUSIC. Why would I listen if it’s boring? Music should bring us to a higher spiritual level. Not BORE us.
Eternal Maria Callas Jesus Christ While I really don’t like this guy because of the way he deals with skepticism, you’re being horribly close minded. If you think all music is supposed to be spiritual and all hoighty toighty then you’re seriously missing out
You have reached with your performance the true meaning of the word Appassionata, that is: deep emotions and tension between the mysterious introverted slow parts and the burst of sounds and dynamic dramatic expressions. All this - just by careful following Beethoven's instructions, that is: his true intentions. Bravissimo! Thanks also for the almost poetic info. section, which revealed the choosing of the hard way of expression, non-conforming, not following the main stream. This surely connects you with Glenn Gould, even though your approach comes from entirely different angle. I'm concern about the kittens, but at least they have a good 'parents', 'sisters' and 'uncle-Sibo'. As for their mother - I hope she'll come back. Cats do disappear sometimes even for a long time, and many times they return home. Thanks for this amazing upload.
This makes sense. Even physical abilities of those eras were different. Nutrition was different, leisure time was not as prevalent as you had to spend a considerable amount of time finding a way to feed yourself. All of those circumstances contributed to how much time a pianist could spend practicing, therefore, to me, it makes sense that composers actually played pieces that were slower and more technically feasible for them and orchestral players. The way the music was written was inherently open to interpretation which led to a steady, but unnoticed, increase in tempo as musicians technical and physical abilities advanced. Think of this as a tale that has been passed on through generations with every generation contributing and changing the story ever so slightly, but not enough that the change is unnoticeable to the generations making the change.
Whatever your thoughts about WBT, there is no doubting the power and originality of this performance. I felt like I was seeing layers of varnish being stripped off a Rembrandt.
Absolutely breathtaking! Ferdinad Ries, a compostion studant of Bvtn's tells us that when he went for his lesson one day, Beethoven was playing a theme each time casting it in a new light and quickly he began to realize "I know frm experience, that on such occasions Beethoven is in the most powerful thores of creation." Beethoven after realizing Ries was here, he proposed a walk in the beautiful morning, Ries accepted and willingly gave up his lesson that morning. Ries noticed too that when there was beautiful music on an oboe to be heard and he could not but help draw Beethoven's attention to it, he noticed that signs of deafness were evident that Beethoven was trying to act like he heard it. Then Ries "felt a profound sadness" for mentioning it. Beethoven hummend on to himself. When they came back Beethoven said, "Now I shall play something for you! And as Ries tells us "with irresistible fire and force," played the Appasionata MVT I which was what he had been working on the whole time. The 2nd mvt for me is like raining lavender. If one is ever to feel anxious, let him breathe on the beats of each chord in through his nose and out from his mouth if he cannot play it for himself. The third mvt for me is as a composer who trys to sound remotely similar to Btvn, yet fails as far as genius go's lol is the frustration when writers block happens. But take Btvn for an example it took about a year to compose this sonata. Don't compare yourself to Mozart. He could have written a sonata not of this specific kind but of his own genius in a morning. Just Sit back ad enjoy the process of creating, go out into nature spend sometime thinking about the flowers and before you know it you will be playing it finished on your return. Why do I say all of this? Because for me, you have illuminated these veiws perfectly. Well done sir. Wunderbar! And have you ever considered doing videos purely also on the history of the peice as well? But forgive me, what more can I ask? You have conveyd this sonata wonderfully. One of my favorites! Thank you.❤
Beautiful rendition! Thank you so much for your research, for the passion to defend your position in this highly overrated rapid virtuoso era... When someone comments is boring because of the slow tempo, I just wonder if they're really able to listen to the intricate harmony and the whole structure as architecture of time...Ok, maybe some want just the circus...not the beauty.
virtuosos don't listen to anything. Nobody goes to concert to listen to music, just to watch the juggler sweating while hurling all those notes as fast as they come...
Lots of experts out here in commentland. Well, Quantz and subsequently Dr. Young - the last man to know everything - suggested that with 1/8th notes as the fastest structural value. Mvt. III for example: Allo ma non tropo should have an approx. tempo of 60 measures per minute. Since we have some - a few not too many I guess - 16th notes, the reigns get pulled way back even to about half. Crotch also has several hundred species of musical examples that he had pnedulum inches for, and those allegros averaged about 5 notes per second, never exceeding 7. This last movement is about 4.6 nps. It is consistent with the 1800 - 1812 tempi experts of the time gave. The first mvt. is "sufficiently allegro" ... assai does not mean very in Italian, and it never did. If the English translation were correct, we should say, "A 'good' allegro" - right there! The 16th notes go by at 5.4 notes per second. Again, "feel" how you want, but if allegro assai is "pushing" a "good allegro", the what's left for presto and even prestissimo. in 1801 when this composition was written, you couldn't get more than about 7 nps repeating. That was about the max. Again, Quantz liked 80 to the half for allegros when the fastest note value was an 1/8. That's 5.33 nps. These tempi are not only acceptable, utilising half beat would render them unplayable on a period instrument, sorry ... :(
Vito Lattarulo Thanks, but why did Beet not use di molto then? We could agree that the word implies different connotations. I always have interpreted assez and assai as “sufficiently”, coming as they are from an earlier “ad satis”. It is similar to the Spanish bastante, which I try to not use it as “very”, as it’s used today, but try to preserve its meaning of “sufficient“.
Vito Lattarulo I understand what you say, but using one word over another implies a criterion, albeit pedestrian. Still, to me it sounds allegro; the 12/8 is not meant to be rushed. I tried Schnabel’s (120) and Czerny’s indications at single beat, and I imagine a lively dance. I cannot even imagine what a vivace or prestissimo would be... I know that it may sound like I’m speaking about taste, but am I? With the videos I’ve watched from Wim, I’ve come to perceive notation differently and in a more efficient way. If everything was meant to be so, so fast, why bother with so many subdivisions (even graphical: lines dividing measures)?
We must remember that a 12/8 means 12 beats per measure with a super-layer(?) of 4. So the combination of the layer of how many pulses you feel, creates the general sensation. When in this allegro assai come the 8ths, and specially the 16ths, you get more the sensation of the 12 pulses, which are rather animating, and you ‘get’ why the tempo indication. I don’t even address the MM because it’s already there. :p
Vito Lattarulo You’re right, this is not important in face of every day life nowadays, but... are you sure that just by there being trills, we should slow it even more? I refer to the general feeling of the 12 beats per measure, trills or 16th notes notwithstanding. Also, we are not determining tempo, just interpreting the MM in score. And at a single beat reading, this music is just afflicting and constricting, not allegro. Just some ideas to entertain... Let’s continue learning and living :) and thanks for the Bach, I’ve listened to a bit of it and liked Schiff’s take here on UA-cam.
Hi Vito, I no longer see your comments here, but thank you for the introduction to the FB page and the literature; I will look into it for sure! And also for mentioning Leopardi; I'll read his poems. About the music: all this matter is about objectivizing the subjective. Beethoven, when using tempo terms and a notation tradition, was also trying to do that. The topic of harmony is indeed interesting, because if this music were to be played at single beat, the harmony is quite trepidant and elusive as to be obnoxious; so I sense that this Whole Beat performance is right. And for me, that is the key: sensing. I value intution in this subject because: 1. Beethoven was famous and his music enjoyed by many. I have seen how many people these days don't get Beethoven's or whoever classical composer's music. 2. I "grew" up with Ashkenazy's performance of Les Adieux and Apassio, and the favorites. But deep inside, I felt something was wrong. People next to me did not like the music. They do not find it enjoyable. I even sensed how listening to those performances made me feel flustered. 3. When using the metronome, I have always searched for the dammed middle beat between the ticks! I think you surely have also done that, and multiple other people! It's like a necessity, if I may! So, after knowing the informaiton on heartbeat, harmonies, enjoyability, and all the evidence for the WB practice, and the evidence against SB, including Beet's symphonies' MM; and Beet's use of the word Allegro and not Vivace or prestissimo, I find it natural to go with a sensible degree of intuition. Nice to speak with you, and congratulations on your career, which I'm finding about!
I heard Rudolf Serkin play this in person in 1971 -- spellbinding, but a little too fast. I honestly don't know how fast Beethoven intended it to be played, but I find Claudio Arrau's interpretation the most pleasing to the ear. I never played it quite so fast as that, and I will stick to my own tempo.
Vou estudar sua interpretação compasso por compasso. O piano de Beethoven era diferente do que existe hoje. Certamente ele compôs algo totalmente diferente do que estamos acostumados a ouvir. Eu estou refinando a minha execução da Appassionata. Seu vídeo veio na hora certa. Parabéns!!!! Bravo!!! Que ousadia e coragem. Chega de interpretações enlatadas.
Wim, I like your historical tempi investigations, but even at slower speeds you sometimes play too metronically, play slowly but with more freedom. It looks a bit like a deconstruction, although very interesting. Pogorelic has been playing slowly for a long time - does he also read out these tempos like you do it in your theory, or does he simply feel it?
Whether the Whole Beat hypothesis is true or not I don't know. But I'll tell you this: This is a great practice exercise. Playing this slow is much harder than it sounds! It also allows you to hear everything better, instead of just picking up a normal performance and setting the playing speed to 0.5% So thank you for your work sir!
In case anyone is interested in contrast, Valentina Lisitsa has just put out a video of this sonata which seems to just about follow Czerny's metronome marks in single beat as far as I can tell (given the tempo flexibility inherent in the style). Probably not to everyone's taste given its breakneck speeds, attainable only by virtuosi and far beyond what the vast majority of pianists could reasonably achieve with musical results and without injury , but a very interesting comparison to make with Mr. Winters' recording. What would really be interesting, but will likely never happen, would be to hear Lisitsa play this sonata on a pianoforte such as Mr. Winters' beautiful instrument - after some time to get used to the pianoforte and preferably without breaking it through over-enthusiasm :-)
@@AuthenticSound I believe you. It would be interesting, however, to see just how far a pianoforte like the Fritz could be "pushed" by a pianistic virtuoso speed demon to determine what the limits are of the instrument. Of course this would only be meaningful if the pianist had sufficient practice time to get used to it, the Fritz (or any early piano) being such a different animal from a modern Steinway. I have some difficulty adjusting just between a digital and an acoustic, or an acoustic and a grand :-)
@@dorette-hi4j I had not heard of Ronald Brautigam before but just listened to it on You tube. Fantastic ! I was so impressed that I ordered the complete Beethoven Sonatas CD set with him from Amazon. I may get his Beethoven CD-s as well . Thank you so much for pointing out this artist to me ! I
Then you have a very limited attention span. Me and my 10 year old brother listened to the entire thing. He loved it. Are you telling me that a 10 year old has a wider attention span than yourself?
You've figured out The Authentic Sound approach: slowing everything down. Everything, and bolstering that aesthetic with historic liner notes. It's an approach or a gimmick, depending on if you're clapping wildly or rolling your eyes at the result. You decide. My mind's made up. Have a great weekend, wherever you're having it. 😀
Is it really likely that Beethoven conceived this piece to be almost an hour long? All metronome markings aside this just doesn't fit the description "allegro" (first movement), isn't that the most important thing? Every interpretation is valid, but this is really unbelievably slow to the point of the piece not being recognisable. I think it's a really bold statement to call any interpretation the "correct" one, so what is the reasoning behind this apart from liking the Glenn gould recording.
This recording follows Czerny's metronome numbers of the piece read in a metrical way. Czerny was a longtime friend of Beethoven and also his best piano student, according to Beethoven himself.
@@teodorlontos3294 It's at half the tempo indicated by Czerny. What's also important to remember is that in 18th century the current obsession with loyalty to the score didn't exist, and every pianist had free reign to edit a piece as they wished. To me it's simply inconceivable that this tempo is accurate to what Beethoven wanted. I don't want to say it's incorrect or wrong or misleading or anything like that, but making the statement that any interpretation is "correct" over others is extremely risky and frankly arrogant. None of us were there when this was composed and no one can say which version is correct. My main point of contention remains that at no point do any of the outer movements sound "allegro" And the final Presto lacks all impact as it's played at a tempo barely above Andante. Relying on metronome markings makes no sense since its very very unlikely that Beethoven conceived his tempos in terms of numbers rather than moods and impressions. It's enough to analyse the harmony to see that he clearly doesn't want the same harmony to sound for 20 seconds without moving forwards. In the first movement the pulse is so driven and agitated and this effect is completely lost when the tempo is too slow.
@@shanefee7304 As someone else notes in these comments.... "Allegro" means very brisk. It always did. If Beethoven wanted it this slow then he would have written alternating notes as semi quavers rather than as trills. I think Czerny's metronome markings reflect Czerny and not Beethoven. I can also imagine any composer taking an axe to their forte piano as soon as they upgraded and obtained a pianoforte.
@@shanefee7304 Your problem is to assume that your idea of allegro was their idea of allegro. How do you know? If you your vision of allegro is what they have taught you all your life, then of course you will say it does not sound like your version of allegro. It's like asking a sloth what allegro would sound like and then telling it "You're wrong!"
@@oscarmoreno7774 I actually think it's all much simpler than people are making it, there's so much academic nonsense going on that people are ignoring common sense. If you take a Beethoven violin sonata for example, if the adagio is to be played at 1 beat a minute in order to sound even slower than an incredibly slow allegro, obviously the violin bow is not long enough to hold a note for two bars.. which it is required to do? I think it's a lot more important to feel this stuff than analyse it. Of course everyone's idea of "fast" is slightly different, but these tempos are at a snail's pace slow, no one could ever call this "allegro" let alone "presto" which means as fast as possible?
I was listening to the piano roll recording of one of Liszt's students and logically thinking, we can hear fast thrills, arpeggios and everything. I know that Liszt was born like 50 years apart from beethoven, but he was one great interpreter of him and was known for it. It was a legend that nobody could play the fugue at tempo in the hammer klavier sonata, and Liszt was one of the firsts to do it. Fast thrills for example, also exist at the violin and classical guitar, wich are really old instruments. It makes sense for them to exist in the piano as well. Just look at the klavichord. It was some sort of guitar itself, it just worked with keys that would elevate a pick that plucked a string. I don't know, a lot has changed throughout the years, but there's one thing hasn't changed at all, wich was the human body. Beeing at the edge of we can do hasn't changed that much, and therefore, Beethoven and Chopin compositions must've been as hard as they're today to have the kind of comments that they had, as long as they're played in a fast tempo, lets say. Fast isn't relaitive. It is absolute. It means that it is the higher speed a human can play, as long as we have a human playng ofc (wich we do). If people can play fast now, why couldn't they in the past? They could, and they did it in order to be the most "virtuoso" or just to push the boundaries of what the human body could do.
Where is it written the fugue of the Hammerklavier wasn't playable? ANd we know that piano rolls often are sped up, that's just a fact. As we know that the pupils of Liszt themselves wrote that Liszt wouldn't be able to to what they did around the 1920's.... facts are simply facts...
@@AuthenticSound ok, so how about Francis Planté recordings? He heard Chopin play, he has the fluctuations in tempo like other older pianists, but he's not far from today's interpretations. I'm sure you know him so I won't bother explaining
@@AuthenticSound i only heard a few minutes but I really enjoyed your Schubert's fantasy in four hands, I appreciate your work, man! I don't like how standardized performaces have become and I sure see the value in your ideas.
Realizing how much of our expectations and taste have been forged over years and years of "mainstream" (for lack of a better word) interpretations and instruments (I had never listened to a fortepiano before, shame on me!) is a fascinating experience. Can't be more grateful to the author of this channel for giving me the opportunity to expand my horizons and dive into a rather different world! Would you care to recommend books/recordings I could refer to in order to learn more about the kind of musical research you carry on? (Pointers to online resources are also very welcome, of course.) Apart from the great music, let me congratulate you on the excellent video editing: lighting and sound quality are excellent. P.S.: just to be clear, I love and admire lots of musicians and interpreters. I am not suggesting that there's a "good" way and a "bad" way of making music. I do appreciate the effort of those who chose the unbeaten path. Kudos to them!
Es interesante .... sin embargo solamente adoptaria estos tempos hisotricos para estudio. En el proceso de aprendizaje es factible poder estudiar a este tempo, pero a la hora de tocarlo en un concierto raramente creo que alguna persona quiera escuchar esto asi... Y mucho menos pagar por verlo! (que es lo mas complicado!) . Entiendo que tenga muchos detractores el canal de Authehtic Sound... sin embargo veo muy provechoso y valioso sus estudios y analisis Musicales . Mis respetos por este canal y sobre todo por el tiempo invertido en hacer estos videos!. Saludos desde Argentina!
Edit - How open-minded of you to block my comments or whatever you did to prevent me from replying. I showed your video to my pupils, we're talking about 10 years old children, and they instantly told me that you lacked work. Even children recognise how lame this is. Original comment - Taking Gould as a reference on this piece is a self-inflicted joke upon yourself. Gould plays almost every Beethoven piece two times faster than everybody else. He tried something else with his appassionata, and it didn't work. Not because people were close-minded, if you think of the time they first heard Gould playing Bach without the pedal, that time, they were struck by the clarity and the precision of the playing. No, his appassionata was a scandal because it simply doesn't work. As much as I love Gould, his Mozart doesn't work, his appassionata doesn't work. He was never made to play everything, and he knew it. You seem to be the only one oblivious to that fact. Not every Gould scandal was sparked for the same reasons. You're deforming and popularising the story to backup your point. You keep repeating that you hold Gould as a genius, yet you believe that you know better than him. That's pretty delusional, thinking you're smarter than Gould. Many classical recordings today are also way too slow, just as many are way too fast. It's not about going slower or faster, it's about making sense of the music. Any good musician knows that you can use the tempo you desire, it's not a state secret. As long as it's for the heart of the music, and not because of some arbitrary intellectual reason, it can work. The way you appeal to people's emotions in your description is shallow and demagogic. Anyone can say generic stuff like "the beauty of music is what makes our hearts communicate with our souls". It's hollow and meaningless, a ploy used by people who are trying to pass on intellectual endeavours as heartfelt ones. Your historical references are melting into one another, you're jumping between periods of time, composers and interprets without any meaningful point. As for the core of it all, your interpretation doesn't work. It sounds like a beginner practising their scales. Funny you're using Czerny as a basis for your reasoning, because your pieces sound exactly like a Czerny exercise. It's awfully bland and it oozes of that mainstream, rigid, short-sighted way to teach music which a lot of people suffer from with bitter teachers. Saying some mellow words and throwing vague historical references to save appearances isn't enough. The work you've put into this is mediocre at best, you need to work more on yourself, and accept that you're not Glenn Gould sheltered in his genius bubble. You're trapping yourself in a bubble of mediocrity. Justifying the use of a tempo through an intellectual process is a very rigid way to view tempo, even if you're trying to make it sound as if you're freeing yourself from the norms, it's just the same, with a slower tempo. The right tempo comes from working on the piece, something you so obviously lack. I'm pretty sure you're aware of all of that on some level, but you keep going for it because you're afraid trying to play actual music won't sell as much as taking dramatic stands.
I'm afraid you missed the entire point - what we do is try to understand the original meaning of the metronome marks (tempo indications) composers like Beethoven left. The current view is unattainable. What musicians do with that information, is up to them. The point with GG is that when musicians leave the desire to technically shine on stage behind, they instinctively come very close to the whole beat interpretation of these authentic tempi. And btw, one can think today that tempo choice is the individual's privelegde, but that doesn't mean Beethoven and co did feel the same about it. They didn't. That's not an opinion, that's a fact.
I finally got to listen to this, and I have a question. When you were practicing the first movement, have you tried using the pedal to see how it sounds ? I know you are opposed cause its not on the score, but you didnt even tried to see how it sounds ?
The pedal is like a drug; once you've begun using it is very difficult to stop. It all depends on what you are using the pedal for. Many piano students regrettably use the pedal to make a "fake legato". The pedal was an effect in Beethoven's time and should not be in constant use but rather during specific passages, those that Beethoven indicated in his score.
I think ultimately Mr. Winter makes a logical and factual argument. It is hard to dispute him. Either you play this piece twice as fast as intenfed by the modern reading of the metronome. Or at this speed. To play it at 1.5, 1.7 times as fast makes no logical sense. Classical musicians are just embarrassed to admit that as time went on people just started playing faster to show off. To play this price at this tempo is not an inferior firm of playing. It doesn't take away from the piece in fact adds many details to the masterpiece. Unfortunately since our childhood we are used to fast tempi playing so it sounds weird to us in the beginning. You also have to realize that people those times had much longer attention spansx they could listen to these pieces for 50 minutes it was a gift for them to sit at the piano and listen to a pianist.
The Appassionata is not an ancient piece of music which anyone has the right to guess how it should be played. The Appassionata is a two century old piece, who has been brought to us, not only through the stave but by well known transmission lines from the era of Beethoven until now. No pianist and no Beethoven transmission line has ever played the Appassionata so slow - with the said exception of Glenn Gould. The doctrine of Sola Scriptura may be interesting or not in theology, but its application in classical music is much more limited. There is no Romanticism through the eyes of John Calvin. Sorry Sir.
the kind of tradition you describe never existed, especially not before 1950 but still not today - what students play at their 50th still like their teachers? Even in the era of recording technology interpretations are not kept similar
@@AuthenticSound Of course it existed. Beethoven's transmission lines through Czerny - Liszt or Leschetizky are well documented, let alone the variety of teachers who had heard Beethoven and his associates performing, in Vienna and elsewhere. You think for instance that Ignaz Mosheles, the friend and collaborator of Beethoven didn't know the right tempo for the Sonata? The great Anton Rubinstein (whom Liszt described as "Van II.") the friend of Moscheles, didn't know how to perform that Sonata and couldn't teach his students in the Moscow conservatoire? There have obviously been differences of expression and mentality, but no one has suggested a tempo as slow as yours and claimed to be the authentic.
Extraordinary, like a symphony for the keyboard. The historically correct tempo gives us a revelation into Beethoven mind. It's as if he composed for orchestra on the piano.
Well, that was the slowest presto I've ever heard. I don't dislike it. In fact, I frequently slow down music so I can better analyze it....you just saved me the trouble. I like to hear the intricacies and complexities of the harmonies. There are layers you miss when the piece goes by so fast.
I dont want to hurt your feelings but i am a composer and know many composers in person. Most of them are not interested in being played "correct" by someone thinking what is correct and telling others how not to play them. They contribute to something divine beyond human mind which should bring enjoyment, and deepness to the musicians and to the audience. If you think in terms of correct, wrong you are far from understanding what authenticity in music means. Let people express themselves freely. Do not use old masters to fuel your Ego plz. There is no such thing as a correct interpretation. Every composer knows it. I heard some composers saying, wow that guy girl played my music in a much better way, then i ever imagined, my music was ment differently but his, or her play is much better than what i intended... So be free, let free plz.
This channel is about recalling how these pieces might have been interpreted by the masters themselves. Czerny and several others were in fact interested in "preserving", for example, Beethoven's wishes that his music be played a certain way. As you begin to see more content here, you will begin to notice that it isn't even the artists' interpretations here; it's about the composers. I compose as well, and I probably put a MM number on there, including an Italian word or two, and a certain time and key signature because I would prefer that they played the piece as I had written it. If you write your music to allow any/everyone else forever to play it as they see fit, that's great. That's not quite what we do here. :D
Ok dude, first of all, what does the fact that you are a composer, that you know other colleagues and the fact that you don't mind how your music gets played have to do with what a composer who lived 200 years ago might or might not have wanted in his works? You are assuming that Beethoven's expectations on the performance of his music are the same as yours just because you both happened to be composers? now that's a compelling argument, I am fully sold! Second, we are not preventing anybody from playing the way he or she wants. We live in a free world and everyone can choose and being responsible of his own interpretation. So you should tell us in what way we are limiting people's freedom. Third, I can point to you what the real problem is with what we do on this channel and why this activates the crocodile brain of so many people here into defensive mode. The problem is that we are playing the music of the composers of the past according to the metronome numbers that they left, which were meant as precise speed indications of how they would have played their own music. And the implementation of these MM, results in a slower performance that makes this music sound completely different from what teachers and musicians claim today to be the authentic way. Also they teach what they believe the composers wanted, but yet I don't see anybody complaining about a limitation of freedom. And why does what we do here get rejected so often as a threaten to the music world? Well that's simple, most musicians are not ready to continue to play the way we do today, with the awareness that they are not playing according to what these composers had in mind. Because that is the real use of composers's music as an "ego booster", not ours. It would be interesting to know from you, what is about "fueling our ego" in trying to play according to the composers's intentions. We are just bringing to the world the historical tempo reconstruction of this music, based on the metronome numbers they left. Does it bother people? Yes Is it our problem? No Alberto
@@AuthenticSound Then lets get real dude. You pretend to understand how Beethoven, Bach etc. would like his music be played. But you just simply PRETEND to understand. Then you read stuff, think and come up with a (subjective) conclussion and feel like a genius. (a bit like Bach and Beethoven) Quite ridiculus, because unfortunately Bach can not speak for himself anymore to tell you the truth. Which is very practical isnt it? You understand and interpret the music as only YOU see it and try then make up a academic fact in bringing up some sudo science. Allways met guys like you, i call classical music police department. Perhaps you should have look for an officer job so you can do your pedantic thing and telling people what is right, what is wrong. By the way, even from an academic perspective you tell nothing correct here. But however. It does not bother me, i tried to be kind and telling you the truth to prevent you from wasting your (and others) time in a ego game of bullshitting your self and others and instead of it practicing more, so you can play like the artists you criticize one day. Oh dear, you even do not understand what the principle behind the metronome is, and what rhythm is... clinging yourself onto numbers of timing and numbers.... Ask yourself why the metronome is a pendulum, why you cannot breath with ticks... You do not see the forest through the trees. But yes, this IS YOUR PROBLEM, not that of the musicians you tell your stuff. With my compassionate regards. If you would be less on war with teachers and musicians instead you would be more humble and define your way more as a subjective view instead of scientific fact, THEN you would be a win for the music. No one likes pedantic preachers. Creative subjective views and interpretations of music are welcome.
@@AuthenticSound By the way, you know what "Appassionata" means? Why do you think Beethoven gave this title to this Sonata? Think about it before clinging onto numbers of a metronome. Does your play sound like Appassionata? Does your play (because of a stupid metronome number somewhere) fit into the whole of Beethovens works, including his Symphonies? There you go my friend, why you are on the wrong path. I would not write all this, if i would not sense your huge love for music deep inside you beyond all this brainf..k. Find your love inside you for this music again.... End the war. BE APPASSIONATA!
No offense, but this is a immature question in many ways. First off, it doesnt really matter. Also, your intereptation changes with the tempo you choose. So if he invents an interpretation for a specific tempo he chose, he practicing this exact interpretation, an not one for a faster tempo. He is a competent pianist, of course he could excplicity practice the piece for a faster tempo, but why would he spend the time? Pianist who choose tempi or ways of playing, which are different from the mainstream may hear this question many times. The answer of the pianist himself would often even be, that he cant. Because it's the smartest answer to such an immature question, otherwise he would be put in a position to prove it. And they know that it doesnt matter, if they can. And I dont know if your playing piano yourself, but I guess if you did, you should know that when you can play a piece so secure and robust, its really no problem speeding it up step for step (until you eventually nearly reach the tempo of some popular performers, but to what price?)
Don’t even bother. Mr Winters is playing according to what he studies and believes is the authentic way to play. Why would he need to prove himself to anyone? In the case that he can’t (Which is unlikely) it doesn’t affect his goal.
Very interesting. Beautifully played. Wonderful instrument, works great for this tempo. Maybe, a slightly excessive resonance at low frequencies, probably due to the position of the instrument/microphone near the corner of the room, I suspect the instrument could sound even clearer. I understand your studio is not meant just for recording though! Thank you for this rendition of this piece...
WOW! JUST WOW! this interpretation is incredible. I felt the meaning of every single note and most of all, I felt the deep meaning every single rest! It's incredible how you made the left hand playing and incredible meaningful role along with the right hand melody. Perhaps I was particularly receptive today, but I was in tears during the whole second movement. Thanks for everything you are doing here Wim. Deeply appreciated :'-)
Are you going to be doing Beethoven's late piano sonatas, as well (Nos. 30, 31 and 32)? Can you tease us with a potential date? Waiting with baited breath for this one.
People are just brainwashed with INSTANT gratication. Too occupied with speed to digest the beauty of going slow. With WBT, every piece and every note has a chance to breathe and a chance to express itself withou speed destroying all nuances...
I'm just gonna sit here and wait until Monday! Lol can't wait!! Will be interesting to hear all the things I've never noticed before! And this is one I won't even attempt myself so yes, very much looking forward to this!
The "experts" are those who have taken over the way in which knowledge should be imparted, without really being experts or the pinnacle of knowledge, research or the arts. What's more, many times they coin the title without being good artists or scientists like those they criticize. They have always been the bullies who prevent the advancement of civilizations by blocking paradigms when they can no longer support knowledge and need to be modernized with new discoveries. By the way love the interpretations of Gould and Horowitz, no show but their interpretations reach the public in the biggest way.
With the many anecdotes of Glenn Gould you use in your descriptions, I wonder if you are aware of the "Glenn Gould Reader"? (edited by Tim Page, to clarify the book I'm talking about) I bought a copy at a book store on a whim many years ago, and, as someone interested in Gould, I found it a very insightful read. Much of the writings are in Gould's own "Gould character", but they still let you get in his head a little bit.
2-3 weeks ago I started learning this with the "whole beat" approach thanks to your channel. I didn't have Czerny's markings (until now) so I used the Hammerklavier marking as a clue; but this is even slower! Congratulations on your tremendous work.
I'm also pleased to notice that Beethoven repeatedly reaches the bottom note of the keyboard . . . not shrinking from the lowest note during his, perhaps, lowest point.
Ah, something interesting: My original math conversion (÷2) was obviously flawed, equating HK's half note with AP's _dotted_ half note. If we do it correctly in the most technical sense, we must convert the HK half note into a dotted one first, and then ÷2 since HK's time signature is /4 while AP's is /8. To be honest I don't know if this is correct, but . . . Adding a dot to a half note is adding .5 to its value; Adding .5 the value to 138 is 207; 207÷2=103.5 That is _awfully_ close to 108. AP is "Allegro assai," assai meaning "very" . . . Maybe "Allegro" would be q.=~103.5 while "Allegro assai" is q.=108? 🙂 Precise math does seem to evoke the Apollonian culture of the era!
wim winters is not interested in having a respectful debate over these tempos. any ideas contrary to his are labelled as not rooted in 'fact', is 'wrong', and then immediately banned. if you're not willing to engage in a respectful debate over this then i think you're grossly misrepresenting the musical lineage of piano technique
All the time he'd waste debating, would be less time to practice. He's a busy, full time performer now. In life, there are the talkers, and there are the do-ers. Guess what he chose to be.
@@surgeeo1406 this isn't a red pill/blue pill situation. It's not like listening to this interpretation all of a sudden explains Beethoven and everything in music makes sense now and we've been fed a lie this whole time. There are so many unanswered questions to just blindly accept this theory (which I will elaborate at a later date) and one of them is how do you explain the MASSIVE leap in technical ability over the course of 10 years? How do you go from Beethoven, Hummel, and Clementi at these supposed tempos (which are technically speaking the most difficult of their day) to Liszt, Alkan, and Debussy which are lightyears further in technical demands? In my understanding of piano technique and development, it took decades for keyboard technique to get to Liszt's level and beyond, so how did we get there if we are to believe these are the supposed "true" speeds Beethoven intended his music to be played at?
As the most loyal Beethoven's follower and lover, I recognize this efford for achieve such an historical reconstruction, but I didn't like It. The sound of the fortepiano is sweet and expresive, but not the speed.
Please know that this tempo is almost certainly NOT the historical tempo. This is based on a fringe theory which doesn't hold up to historical scrutiny. You are well justified in preferring Beethoven's intended, fiery tempo!
I actually noticed that Chopin quoted the finale in his coda. Now I realize that the G-minor Ballade is full of covert references to the Appassionata. I believe the last of the ballades may also borrow from the Appassionata at its route, being in F minor from start to finish.
I have enjoyed your recording. You instrument collection is astonishing. Have you any interest in an old Broadwood piano. I believe Beethoven had one. The Roderts Pianos in Oxford just made an assessment of one which could be free to a restorer. I am a sucker for old pianos and homeless dogs.
No. This is not a historical reconstruction. The interpret is a delusional egomaniac who thinks he's a genius because he plays everything at half the correct tempo.
Playing an instrument has always had an obvious element of "showing off" your agility and dexterity. I'm not saying that's right, but that's just how it is. It's always been the case, it's insane that you suggest that this is a "modern tendency". Go listen to drummers in Africa or Indonesia or the Amazon. God, even 4years old when they start learning, all they want to do is to play "fast". Now, you're trying to convince us that a "Presto" for Beethoven, the fastest that he wanted his pieces to be played, is this slow motion performance? He never wrote anything at 20 notes per second on the piano? That is just impossible to believe. A man that had the ability to use music language as he pleased, and expressed all kind of thoughts and feelings simply didn't write anything to be played as fast as possible? He just refused to use one entire dimension of the sound? He refused to show off his skills on the piano where he spent his life playing? No way you even believe this yourself.
Even though the premise is interesting, one would expect (as Czerny attests) quite a lot of freedom and rubato (and accelerando!), especially at a slow, more fantasia like tempo. Interesting...
I just listened to Richter and was rather disappointed. He missed a lot of notes in the Presto and did not bring out the accents well which made the passage rather bland, imo
I'm glad i've found this channel, your interpretations change the point of view of musical history, and how different were the sound perceptions in the past. Can you make a Hystorical Tempo reconstruction of Bach's Brandemburg concerts?. Keep on the great work! EDIT: I've already found a video of my question in your channel, you are amazing for sharing these materials!
McCluhan famously said “the medium is the message.” What is the medium: a recording? No. The piano? Some may say so, but musicians throughout the ages would gainsay that. The medium the composer left us is the pure composition, best represented by notes on page; the score. A musician (capitol P) Performs the music from that score. It is a moment in time-an interpretation. Music, like dance, has two aspects: composition and performance (I believe that’s one reason they marry so beautifully-whether in ballet, opera, theater, modern dance, whatever). Recording it-a completely different art-is capturing a moment of time; but it has nothing to do with the interpretation of a gone or long gone composer. So to the question of what is the “correct” interpretation of a composition penned 50, 100, 200, 300 years ago... We can probably agree a chimpanzee in front of a piano would not qualify-reading music and being able to play the instrument is a necessary pre-requisite. Should the composer’s tempi guidance be followed? Probably. Can we be certain that what it meant then is what means today? I’m inclined to allow a degree-just a degree-of flexibility in deference to the performer’s musicianship (who then sinks or swims accordingly); I’m suspicious of rubato applied more than sparingly unless explicitly called for but don’t believe or like music to be played metronomically. Does that sound like a contradiction? It isn’t, it’s performed music that is *live* and not mechanical. Listen to Horowitz, for example. Bursting with life. I am NOT a fan of Gould. He is technically meticulous-but to my ear, devoid of life. Rubinstein, overflowing with life; a surfeit of life. Perhaps too much. That, for the listener, becomes a matter of taste-and choice. And that’s another very important point: as we all know the same composition can be played by the same musician on the same instrument different ways; by different musicians on the same instrument; same musician different instrument; different ways; different instruments-different TYPES of instruments... In every case, different listening experience. Most of them within the scope of the composer’s intent. All of them, in my opinion, valid. Are all of them good? Who knows. Only the listener can decide-it is Art. It is magic. It is wonder. We get to transport genius through the centuries-how wicked brilliant is that?! So as I started: the medium is the message: the medium is an abstract communication, an ordered sequence of notes representing pitches of approximate duration and volume struck, plucked, blown or voiced at relative volumes-alone or in concert with other like representations. (my specialisation was computer/electronic music-does it show? 🙂). The only important question is do you like THIS performance; you can like as many as you like! By the way, despite the metronome, the performance by our host I would call “live”-and I enjoyed it.
Beethoven marked this movement"allegro assai."[Italian, very fast] A directive to perform the indicated passage of a composition at a very fast tempo;this cannot be reconciled with the chosen tempo of Wim
I just listened to Arrau's performance of this movement, which is about twice Wim's tempo. The funny thing is that speeding it up does not make it any more Allegro (cheerful, merry, happy), but if anything imparts more of a sense of foreboding. I don't find the whole beat tempo really cheerful either--not in the simple sense anyway. I find it expectant, anticipatory, but also hopeful and not foreboding of doom. Yet neither is it a happy peasant dance or something. If that is your interpretation of the tempo indication, then neither performance speed fulfills it. Clearly Beethoven means something different by "Allegro" here. Perhaps it has to do with personal philosophy and experience. When we are young, "cheerful" may mean a carefree sense of pleasure or joy. As we grow older and have experienced more, joy more often comes mixed with anticipation and some foreboding. That is my experience at least. Rarely are our youthful dreams fulfilled so easily as we may have anticipated. Perhaps it is a social idealist who finds the world cannot be changed so easily as he thought, or a musician who discovers his hearing loss is worsening and now irreversible. But any way you take it, whole beat or half, this is not your ordinary Allegro.
This is my favourite sonata of Beethoven. At first glance even though it seemed a little off from the customary, it exiceted me and made me think more. I saw that there are some hidden beauties that I couldn't see before.
While not being fully convinced yet, I have to admit that slower interpretations sometimes conjure up far more power than quicker one's. So I appreciate your work!
I stopped playing piano because these pieces were beyond me...I play guitar now..Rock and roll is within my grasp...now I realize Beethoven/Bach/Chopin are also! THANKS!
You're not alone!
This is an important implication that unshackles music!
:) I was waiting this recording for along time. Well played, well done!
Thanks again!
I am from Czech republic. Beethoven refused to perform the piano sonata in F minor, Op. 57, in Hradec nad Moravicí. He quarreled with the prince Lichnovsky and smashed his bust. After the incident Beethoven left the Hradec castle.
Thank you for the historic back ground information.
@@Renshen1957 Indeed. I guess Beethoven didn't cower to folks. Nice. I like this guy!
@@thomashughes4859 The next I refuse to perform the Apassionata Sonata, I must find and smash a bust of Prince Lichnovsky, too. Beethoven sure knew who to make a lasting impression.
Well, in Ludwig's defense, Lichnovsky asked him to play for some French military officials who were staying on his residence. Beethoven, who on his younger years saw the french revolutionaries as a breath of fresh air in the stagnant Absolutist Europe, had changed his mind by the time Napoleon proclamed himself emperor, even destroying his dedicatory to Bonaparte on his 3rd Symphony. Furthermore, this was after Bonaparte had waged war with the Austrian empire and ocupated the (bombarded) city of Vienna for several months.
Zajímavé, děkuji za informaci
I grew up listening to the Artur Rubenstein recording, thinking it was the best interpretation. But I really loved the Gould version on first hearing, and was able to dig more into the moment of it at the slower tempo, getting more out of it. The idea that a slower tempo is "scandalous" is probably more for clickbait than anything. It is a comfort to hear your interpretation here, and as always it is beautifully played.
Here's where my thoughts are going right now: Why are so many "experts" around here so fussed about Tempo? When I go to Bach fan communities, all I see is in-depth breakdowns of harmony and counterpoint. Did Beethoven fans forget that that's what's at the core of Classical Music? Why aren't we talking about the composition?
Don't ask me though, I'm like Socrates, I know nothing, but I enjoy the learning.
@@williamspringer737 Welcome! I'm not new here, and what you said is precisely why I said what I said.
@@williamspringer737 I wouldn't hold my breath on converting the die-hard speed lovers though... I oppose conversions of all kinds actually. Some people may be insensitive to harmony, and that's fine. We just have to learn mutual respect, and agree to disagree.
@@williamspringer737 Since this is the only recording in this tempo and it is not convincing for everybody, it is normal that the people can disagree.
@@annapetrova2890 speak for yourself. It sounds very convincing to me and I used to enjoy Claudio Arrau's take...
Thank you for all your diligent research and hours of practicing. These weekly premieres are very enlightening, and I’m really looking forward to this one!
I really enjoy this version, it is more detailed and it makes more dramatical and emotional
thank you
This is the best version I have ever heard. It's so dramatic. One can feel all the dramatic details of this masterpiece. Great work, you're the best. ❤
Wow, thank you!
Yes, I must admit that I too was “scandalized”--at least at first. Having listened so many times to my recordings of Gieseking, Kempff, Serkin, and others, it just seemed too “slow” at first. Yet after about 5 minutes I could not stop listening. I heard things that I never knew were there, and was carried through the whole performance with a sense of awe.
My feeling at the end of other performances had always been “Is that all?” Something seemed to have been taken away rather than given--“rubato,” you might say. It had all flown by too fast. But not so here.
Thank you so much for this Wim!
Thanks for sharing Larry!
Exactly!
I’m listening for the first time right now and the “tempo shock” is definitely very strong in this one, but like you said, once you get past that, everything falls into place and it makes a lot more sense. For example, the loud, interjecting, syncopated chords in the first movement now actually sound dramatic but also tasteful, not just brutally loud and completely out of place. So many runs and, in general, notes moving in stepwise motion have been un-blurred and clarified, melodies have time to sing and not be rushed over, calm sections sound sweeter and provide a nice contrast to the minor parts, many awkward spots now actually work thanks to having more breathing room… I could go on, but you get the point.
And most importantly, the whole mood of the piece becomes stark and tragic, sorrowful and serious, rather than the angry and violent style that it’s played in today.
“Is that all??” is a question I commonly asked myself when listening to Beethoven, and now Mr. Winters has answered my question.
I really love your historically-informed performances meant to honour the composer and his intentions; they are distinctly lacking in personal vanity and instead are about what the composer wanted us to hear. Your meticulous and exhaustive research shows itself in every performance of yours and they are all _extremely_ stirring, honest and expressive. opening them up to a possibility most of us have never known. We wait with bated breath for every one of your performances to premiere, so that we can hear one of our favourite pieces in a way we've never heard before, and revisit an era we long and yearn to know better. This performance is no different and just as how awesome we imagined it to be. Thank you for making our day.
Thank you so much Rohan
I couldn't agree more ! Well said Rohan Puranick
Lacking in personal vanity? Haha a guy that is a youtuber and uploads hundreds of videos provoking other pianists and going against the rest of humanity and experts even when showed evidence. How is that lack of vanity? That is the definition of vanity.
Interesting how some of the effects are so dramatic on this fortepiano at this tempo due to the growly tone of the bass (e.g. at the 1:50 mark or so) . On a modern piano I don't think this would be so effective at this tempo since the tonal variance between bass and treble is not so pronounced and the slightly "harpsichord"-ish tone of the fortepiano is no more. (harpsichord-ish is the wrong word - I mean the tonal quality due to the lesser tension on the strings etc.) . Regardless of one's thoughts about historic tempo, it is interesting to hear music played on instruments like those that the particular piece was composed for.
Suddenly all the broken chord passages get a meaning and become important. This is so beautiful!
It sounds like you are learning and practising at a very slow tempo the piece, at this speed the esence and the direction of the piece goes away for me. It gets boring and tiresome. Even a trill sounds weird. I can't imagine this interpretation being the original. Its nice for apreciating the harmonies but overall, if I attended a 1 hour concerto, all pieces at that speed... unbearable!
I can't see how it is possible to feel the allegro in any of these without falling asleep essentially. I don't know how any of the royals that Beethoven would have performed for could have sat through them. Also, Beethoven was a virtuoso. If this truly was the intended tempo, then I MYSELF a 3 year pianist could play it, which makes no sense to me. Only a couple of his were expressly meant for amateurs.
sonatas back then were not concert pieces. They were precisely student material. After Liszt invented piano recital, a generation of pianists who were not composers themselves were in constant material to play, even if oldies. So they take this old Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven music and speed it up to show off their mechanical dexterity and since then it's been this competition of who rushes faster.
In my understanding the music simply feels right like this, feels natural. I don't know how to explain but between believing in concert timings for the age and metronome marks I'll go with the latter. I know I'm entering crackpottery territory here, but between music that feels right at the MM given and the timings, it leads me to believe clocks were broken, not metronomes. There may be also cultural differences in play, like the British favoring faster music for instance, and this influencing JC Bach and Mendelssohn for instance... Wagner complained about Mendelssohn's Beethoven take and Beethoven himself seemed to be well aware of the British fondness of fast tempos, for he jokingly remarked to the British conductor George Smart about the 9th taking only 45 minutes! Berlioz also notes that the first time the 5th was presented in England the musicians themselves felt it was a joke. At a high tempo, even such a tragic work can sound like a joke indeed...
Welcome to the world of Wim!
I remember reading somewhere that after the first performance of one of Beethoven's symphonies, a critic remarked "Now Herr Beethoven is ready for the mad-house!" I wonder why he thought that?
@@pentirah5282 arent they all ready ? Are we not ready ourselves to the madhouse with the music we listen today ?
I have seen several of these videos and it has given me something to think about re tempos but THIS video convinced me that I do not agree with your view. This sounds almost funereal. WAAAAY TOOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOOW. It's impossible for me to believe that this is a suitable tempo for Op 57.
Imagine applying Whole Beat to dance music. That's really enough.
One of my favourite piano sonatas by Beethoven, I am so excited!
Those aren't historically informed lighting fixtures. Next time, candelabras with wax candles.
YOU aren't historically informed 😛
Like the connection to the internet you're using? Nice. 😂😂😂
I've come to realise, taking everything into consideration that the half tempo theory is correct. However, I believe these metronome markings are meant for non pro pianists as a minimum tempo. In my opinion Beethoven and other professionals of the time would then have upped the tempo a little. To my ears, about 20%. Not only will the pieces then be more flowing, but the composer will sound brilliant in comparison to the average pianist, keeping him a step ahead of any competition! @AuthenticSound Am I along the right lines do you think?
15% is what you will notice of differences sometimes between MM marks. Certainly for this sonata, which also Czerny gave different MMs for. In a way, a metronome mark tells at the minimum something about the musical projection of the musician/composer in which it was given. What happened later in their minds... we'll never know, so in a way our journey towards their thinking can only start there. And when one 'understands' their system, of course, there are before and afternoons and evenings to vary tempo feeling!
When Clara Schumann performed Beethoven's "Appassionata" in Vienna when she was 18 years old, she caused a sensation. Audiences were thrilled. She was named Royal Imperial Chamber Virtuosa by the Kaiser. Restaurants started selling a "torte à la Wieck". The Austrian writer Grillparzer wrote a poem entitled, "Clara Schumann and Beethoven", where he said that Clara "found the key to Beethoven which had long been sunk deep in the sea". What caused such a sensation? It was surely the impact of the sonata, the terror of a terrifying piece that leaves one's hair standing, played masterfully by a great artist. Many works in Beethoven's "heroic" period are about struggle and victory- a journey from darkness to light, but the appassionata is a journey from dark to darker, a descent to hell, a headlong race into definite destruction. We don't finish in major- Beethoven gives us a glimpse of it only to destroy it completely with F minor in the last movement. In the hands of a true artist, this work should devastate you. Not with its speed (which is really not that fast), but with its shattering emotion and its powerful narrative. And in all honesty, this performance is an offense to the word "appassionata" and to Beethoven's genius. When I listen to it, I feel no passion, no terror, no emotion, no devastation. I hear no narrative. Incidentally, this piece contains the same "knocking" or "fate" motive of the fifth symphony, and the tempi of both pieces are similar: allegro con brio for the symphony (half note = 108 by Beethoven), allegro assai for the sonata (dotted quarter estimated around 120 by contemporary artists).
Much has been said and written about Glenn Gould's eccentric style of performance. In 1995, the great music critic Tim Page composed an article entitled "Glenn Gould in Retrospect" for Fi Magazine, in which he remarked: "Whether one 'liked' everything Gould did was ultimately a matter of small importance. He was simply THERE, impossible to ignore--even though, paradoxically, he spent so much time carefully hidden from the public eye. [...] But Gould was not one of those modernists who are compelled to deliberately break all the rules (therefore remaining forever and inextricably bound to them, if only through reaction). Rather, he was smart enough to adapt the rules to suit his purposes--either that, or to simply ignore the zeitgeist altogether." Who knows whether Gould himself realized that, by "adapting" the modern rules in this way, he may have ended up returning to the rules of the composer's own time?
That's funny, since Gould said he played it slowly because he hated the piece. You're looking too deep into it.
Do you believe that this whole-beat interpretation affects all composers or just Beethoven? All his pieces, or just the fastest ones that you've cherrypicked and not the others which would obviously be unacceptably slow at half speed? At what point in history do you believe all musicians collectively forgot your counterintuitive interpretation of metronome markings, for which there is no direct evidence?
Well put. Thinking on the other sonatas, the richer (textually thicker, more complex harmonies) parts are better played slower (opening bars of Les Adieux for example) as they convey the heavier emotions and really because it's difficult to hear what's going on if you bash through it. But then for great portions of Appasionata, musically there's not too much going on and slowing down doesn't help you to absorb the intent as you lose sight of the flow and journey of passages. You can hear angst in a single chord, but not really passion or fury in a half speed rendition.
@@vito-lattarulo I think it's more that we have such short attention spans now that it's impossible to not get irritated listening to something that is being played at half the speed we're used to.
I think you might be missing the point of his argument. From my understanding, what he was saying that tempo markings do not make sense with our current standards. In fact, tempo was always a personal thing and is not a matter of fact. I think that by saying the performer’s tempo is wrong is in fact, criticising one person’s opinion, even though his opinion might seem odd. To me, his performance being slower does show the melody much more clearly.
Also, period instruments could not have played at the speed that current performers are playing, just like how Bach’s pieces played in recent times would have been much faster than in the 18th century, just because during the 18th century the organs were mechanical and could not have played at speeds that current organists were playing at.
You realize that he has recorded all of the Beethoven sonatas in whole beat. right? Every single one of them
My comment has attracted some attention so I will respond to a few points in the replies:
1. I often see the argument "this music was written before trains, airplanes, TV, etc., when the pace of life was slower, so it makes sense that it was actually played slower than the modern listener expects." It's a cute idea, but I don't believe the average tempo of life is seriously correlated with the average tempo of music. There are plenty of cultures in unindustrialized parts of the world that make lightning-fast music. (Winters also thinks whole beat applies to Chopin, etc., who lived well into the age of factories and railroads.)
2. I also see sentiments like "at this slow speed I can finally hear the distinct notes and I have more time to appreciate the harmonies, so it's probably correct." If you enjoy Winter's tempi and they help you appreciate the composer's writing, then by all means listen to them. But by this logic, all music should be played as slow as possible so that we have maximum time to intellectualize it. What I mean is that composers do not necessarily intend for their audience to hear every note distinctly or consciously perceive exactly how a chord is arpeggiated -- as Scott says, *texture* is an important part of music too, and sometimes rapid flurries of notes are critical to the texture. For an example see the (presto!) coda of the above piece, or Chopin's Revolutionary Etude. His laughable half-speed rendition completely annihilates the characters of the pieces.
3. I was wrong to accuse him of cherrypicking; at the time of writing it looked like he was mostly covering fast pieces like the Appassionata and Hammerklavier and carefully avoiding slow works where whole-beat would sound nonsensical. But by now it looks like he's sunken so far deep into his theory that he's not embarrassed to post something like Op. 10 No. 3. Every movement sounds silly, but his 'Largo e mesto' is all the evidence anyone needs to see that whole-beat is *not* what Beethoven/Czerny intended.
For some people the allure of feeling like you're in on a great secret is too irresistible. Peace
Just listening to this for the first time. It is clear, the pauses create suspense. This is great. Picture the “court” in the old days. There was no other form of diversion. The folk sat around with their after dinner drinks for polite conversation. This music just was. It fits this tempo. Too much is lost with speed. I ascribe to WBMT. People now are used to tv or movies flying by so fast. Is this speed necessary. Too often the emotion is run over by a fast flurry of frenzied notes which blur together. Life has become too fast, frenzied, . Thanks for you standing in the hurricane.
thank you for being here!
With all the respect, I don´t understand your interpretation.
That was Czerny's interpretation. Especially regarding the tempo used. We're men of the 21st century and 200+ years removed from a time without electricity, internet, and "want/get on demand". As you do more research, you'll find that even in 1860, Saint Saenz said that we played Mozart WAY TOO FAST! With respect, that't why you don't understand it. :D
@@thomashughes4859 So Barenboim, Brendel, Arrau, Kempff doesn't understand how to play Beethoven?
@@manuel-et4he They definitely did their best! Remember, they didn't have the benefit of the internet, linking and corroborating the evidence across continents in a way that would be just too expensive in their time. They had to rely too much on educated guesses.
@@surgeeo1406 Arrau's teacher was a pupil of Liszt. And Liszt studied with Czerny who was the pupil of Beethoven.
@@manuel-et4he I'm sure they get it but won't do it because people at your historical development level won't pay for it. Keep reading and researching and you'll find it.
Wim not only plays with eminent knowledge, but with real passion! Because true passion is never hectic, but intimate, intense. There is the poetic topos "rasende Leidenschaft" in German. This topos is negatively documented and mostly connoted with insanity. Let us get away from the madness and into the realm of the holy muses, because there you know passion!
Nope
22:32 Isso não sai da minha mente. Tempo perfeito! Exato! Meditativo como sempre sonhei! Obrigado! BRAVÍSSIMO 👏👏👏👏
I was always sceptical of mainstream performance of this sonata - especially the main Thema, written in 12-8, and combination of crotchet and semiquaver. In most of performances, you cannot hear the semiquaver: it could be heard as quaver, even at the bars like 35th. But in your performance, we can understand exact rhythm. And I think it made this sonata much more passionate piece!
Beethoven in the tempo you play him become so spiritual. And it is so wonderful.
Man, I'm not saying its "wrong", but this feels like swimming through molasses to me
ahahahahahahahahahaha
🤣🤣🤣👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
@@cuneyterkanol What are you laughing at, Champ?
@@thomashughes4859 I can laugh whatever I want and it's not your business.
So excited for this Wim! I have played this myself at whole beat and it is amazing! Can't wait to hear the coda of the 3rd movement, which literally every mainstream pianist butchers completely.
Have you seen Perahias performance on UA-cam? He seems to be in total control the whole time, while making the coda sound like a raging fire, I listen in awe each time. But I don't think you can count him as a mainstream pianist anyways :)
@@thingiezz Nope. I might check it out thanks.
Valentina did wonderfully with this as did you. People may say, "wow Tchaikovsky's cherubs was superb" or "Hans Zimmer's Aurora is incredible". Anything by Vivaldi. Chopin is so romantic. Lovers music, really. Mussorgsky and Rossini. Schumann and Rachmaninoff, heck even Franzl Lang. It doesn't matter who you are and what you bring to the table, it will be a weak offering when Beethoven brings his gift of supreme genius. Beethoven is the most fun inventive and creative music my ears have been gifted to FEEL. Hats off to you sir.
Carl Czerny, who was a pupil of Beethoven (he premiered, for example, the Piano Concerto No. 5), devoted chapters 2 and 3 to the fourth volume of his Vollständige theoretisch-practische Pianoforte-Schule Op. 500 to the performance of Beethoven's works. He writes (among other things): Beethoven's Werke sind für gute, wohl ausgebildete Pianisten geschrieben, das heisst, für solche, welche alles, was zur mechanischen Fertigkeit und zum gewöhnlichen guten vortrag gehört, sich bereits durch das Einstudieren vielen andern guten Tonwerke völlig angeeignet haben. His Piano School also contains metronomic tempo marking for Beethoven works. In addition, a little later he published his own edition of Beethoven's sonatas, which contains other metronomic marking that less differ from the Piano School, which is proof that he thought about the tempos and was always looking for their ideal form. In the case of the Apassionata, we can choose between 108 and 120 for the quarter note with a dot (1st movement), 108 or 112 for the eighth note (2nd movement), and 132 or 144 for the quarter note (finale). He writes about the metronome in Volume 3 of the Piano School, Chapter VII (ks15.imslp.org/files/imglnks/usimg/5/5c/IMSLP317671-PMLP513421-czerny_pschule3.pdf). He writes, among other things, that the marked tempo corresponds to the AUDIBLE ticking of the metronome and that for a waltz whose WHOLE bar (half note with a dot) has the figure 88, one bar lasts ONLY ONE metronome beat, which is the only correct tempo (this can be verified by the choreography of the waltz). He not mention any WHOLE BEAT INTERPRETATION and to understand his metronomic markings according to this theory is to play twice as slow!
I have a new respect for Beethoven, and for their society in general, for being so into this kind of music. Way more daring than a lot of traditionalist wannabes of today.
I love Emil Gilels interpretation. Far greater than this.
He played very well, he's only show us the real tempo, doesn't matter how boring it is
@@vito-lattarulo according to what he explain in the other video
Miguelisaurus animations what do you mean it is not about how boring it is? If something is boring it is not MUSIC. Why would I listen if it’s boring? Music should bring us to a higher spiritual level. Not BORE us.
@@eternalmariacallas2283 Well, you're right, but one same thing isn't boring for everyone (but yes, for me this is boring)
Eternal Maria Callas Jesus Christ While I really don’t like this guy because of the way he deals with skepticism, you’re being horribly close minded. If you think all music is supposed to be spiritual and all hoighty toighty then you’re seriously missing out
You have reached with your performance the true meaning of the word Appassionata, that is: deep emotions and tension between the mysterious introverted slow parts and the burst of sounds and dynamic dramatic expressions. All this - just by careful following Beethoven's instructions, that is: his true intentions. Bravissimo! Thanks also for the almost poetic info. section, which revealed the choosing of the hard way of expression, non-conforming, not following the main stream. This surely connects you with Glenn Gould, even though your approach comes from entirely different angle. I'm concern about the kittens, but at least they have a good 'parents', 'sisters' and 'uncle-Sibo'. As for their mother - I hope she'll come back. Cats do disappear sometimes even for a long time, and many times they return home. Thanks for this amazing upload.
thank you
I don't know why but I kinda had a feeling it would be this piece 🤔
Thanks Wim and Alberto for the hard work you show us !
This makes sense. Even physical abilities of those eras were different. Nutrition was different, leisure time was not as prevalent as you had to spend a considerable amount of time finding a way to feed yourself. All of those circumstances contributed to how much time a pianist could spend practicing, therefore, to me, it makes sense that composers actually played pieces that were slower and more technically feasible for them and orchestral players. The way the music was written was inherently open to interpretation which led to a steady, but unnoticed, increase in tempo as musicians technical and physical abilities advanced. Think of this as a tale that has been passed on through generations with every generation contributing and changing the story ever so slightly, but not enough that the change is unnoticeable to the generations making the change.
I can finally hear the exact motifs beethoven composed. I also love the interpretation
Just glad you can hear again, Van
Whatever your thoughts about WBT, there is no doubting the power and originality of this performance. I felt like I was seeing layers of varnish being stripped off a Rembrandt.
thank you
I really enjoy this performance. This work makes more sense with the historical reconstruction. Thanks for your efforts Wim!
Please do Beethoven Sonata 32! I’m desperately eager to hear your interpretation of it :)
Alberto is about to record the last part of it tonight! Opus 101 will come Monday
Absolutely breathtaking! Ferdinad Ries, a compostion studant of Bvtn's tells us that when he went for his lesson one day, Beethoven was playing a theme each time casting it in a new light and quickly he began to realize "I know frm experience, that on such occasions Beethoven is in the most powerful thores of creation." Beethoven after realizing Ries was here, he proposed a walk in the beautiful morning, Ries accepted and willingly gave up his lesson that morning. Ries noticed too that when there was beautiful music on an oboe to be heard and he could not but help draw Beethoven's attention to it, he noticed that signs of deafness were evident that Beethoven was trying to act like he heard it. Then Ries "felt a profound sadness" for mentioning it. Beethoven hummend on to himself. When they came back Beethoven said, "Now I shall play something for you! And as Ries tells us "with irresistible fire and force," played the Appasionata MVT I which was what he had been working on the whole time.
The 2nd mvt for me is like raining lavender. If one is ever to feel anxious, let him breathe on the beats of each chord in through his nose and out from his mouth if he cannot play it for himself.
The third mvt for me is as a composer who trys to sound remotely similar to Btvn, yet fails as far as genius go's lol is the frustration when writers block happens. But take Btvn for an example it took about a year to compose this sonata. Don't compare yourself to Mozart. He could have written a sonata not of this specific kind but of his own genius in a morning. Just Sit back ad enjoy the process of creating, go out into nature spend sometime thinking about the flowers and before you know it you will be playing it finished on your return.
Why do I say all of this? Because for me, you have illuminated these veiws perfectly. Well done sir. Wunderbar!
And have you ever considered doing videos purely also on the history of the peice as well? But forgive me, what more can I ask? You have conveyd this sonata wonderfully. One of my favorites! Thank you.❤
Beautiful rendition! Thank you so much for your research, for the passion to defend your position in this highly overrated rapid virtuoso era... When someone comments is boring because of the slow tempo, I just wonder if they're really able to listen to the intricate harmony and the whole structure as architecture of time...Ok, maybe some want just the circus...not the beauty.
Thank you so much Gerardo, it makes my day hearing voices like yours!
virtuosos don't listen to anything. Nobody goes to concert to listen to music, just to watch the juggler sweating while hurling all those notes as fast as they come...
I can't decide which tempo I prefer. At this tempo, you can hear everything, but I like the faster speed too. Thank you for sharing.
Thanks for listening!
Lots of experts out here in commentland. Well, Quantz and subsequently Dr. Young - the last man to know everything - suggested that with 1/8th notes as the fastest structural value. Mvt. III for example: Allo ma non tropo should have an approx. tempo of 60 measures per minute. Since we have some - a few not too many I guess - 16th notes, the reigns get pulled way back even to about half. Crotch also has several hundred species of musical examples that he had pnedulum inches for, and those allegros averaged about 5 notes per second, never exceeding 7. This last movement is about 4.6 nps. It is consistent with the 1800 - 1812 tempi experts of the time gave.
The first mvt. is "sufficiently allegro" ... assai does not mean very in Italian, and it never did. If the English translation were correct, we should say, "A 'good' allegro" - right there! The 16th notes go by at 5.4 notes per second. Again, "feel" how you want, but if allegro assai is "pushing" a "good allegro", the what's left for presto and even prestissimo. in 1801 when this composition was written, you couldn't get more than about 7 nps repeating. That was about the max.
Again, Quantz liked 80 to the half for allegros when the fastest note value was an 1/8. That's 5.33 nps.
These tempi are not only acceptable, utilising half beat would render them unplayable on a period instrument, sorry ... :(
Vito Lattarulo Thanks, but why did Beet not use di molto then? We could agree that the word implies different connotations. I always have interpreted assez and assai as “sufficiently”, coming as they are from an earlier “ad satis”. It is similar to the Spanish bastante, which I try to not use it as “very”, as it’s used today, but try to preserve its meaning of “sufficient“.
Vito Lattarulo I understand what you say, but using one word over another implies a criterion, albeit pedestrian. Still, to me it sounds allegro; the 12/8 is not meant to be rushed. I tried Schnabel’s (120) and Czerny’s indications at single beat, and I imagine a lively dance. I cannot even imagine what a vivace or prestissimo would be... I know that it may sound like I’m speaking about taste, but am I? With the videos I’ve watched from Wim, I’ve come to perceive notation differently and in a more efficient way. If everything was meant to be so, so fast, why bother with so many subdivisions (even graphical: lines dividing measures)?
We must remember that a 12/8 means 12 beats per measure with a super-layer(?) of 4. So the combination of the layer of how many pulses you feel, creates the general sensation. When in this allegro assai come the 8ths, and specially the 16ths, you get more the sensation of the 12 pulses, which are rather animating, and you ‘get’ why the tempo indication. I don’t even address the MM because it’s already there. :p
Vito Lattarulo You’re right, this is not important in face of every day life nowadays, but... are you sure that just by there being trills, we should slow it even more? I refer to the general feeling of the 12 beats per measure, trills or 16th notes notwithstanding. Also, we are not determining tempo, just interpreting the MM in score. And at a single beat reading, this music is just afflicting and constricting, not allegro. Just some ideas to entertain... Let’s continue learning and living :) and thanks for the Bach, I’ve listened to a bit of it and liked Schiff’s take here on UA-cam.
Hi Vito, I no longer see your comments here, but thank you for the introduction to the FB page and the literature; I will look into it for sure! And also for mentioning Leopardi; I'll read his poems. About the music: all this matter is about objectivizing the subjective. Beethoven, when using tempo terms and a notation tradition, was also trying to do that. The topic of harmony is indeed interesting, because if this music were to be played at single beat, the harmony is quite trepidant and elusive as to be obnoxious; so I sense that this Whole Beat performance is right. And for me, that is the key: sensing. I value intution in this subject because: 1. Beethoven was famous and his music enjoyed by many. I have seen how many people these days don't get Beethoven's or whoever classical composer's music. 2. I "grew" up with Ashkenazy's performance of Les Adieux and Apassio, and the favorites. But deep inside, I felt something was wrong. People next to me did not like the music. They do not find it enjoyable. I even sensed how listening to those performances made me feel flustered. 3. When using the metronome, I have always searched for the dammed middle beat between the ticks! I think you surely have also done that, and multiple other people! It's like a necessity, if I may! So, after knowing the informaiton on heartbeat, harmonies, enjoyability, and all the evidence for the WB practice, and the evidence against SB, including Beet's symphonies' MM; and Beet's use of the word Allegro and not Vivace or prestissimo, I find it natural to go with a sensible degree of intuition. Nice to speak with you, and congratulations on your career, which I'm finding about!
48:25 Admire that page turn! 🤩
I heard Rudolf Serkin play this in person in 1971 -- spellbinding, but a little too fast. I honestly don't know how fast Beethoven intended it to be played, but I find Claudio Arrau's interpretation the most pleasing to the ear. I never played it quite so fast as that, and I will stick to my own tempo.
Vou estudar sua interpretação compasso por compasso. O piano de Beethoven era diferente do que existe hoje. Certamente ele compôs algo totalmente diferente do que estamos acostumados a ouvir. Eu estou refinando a minha execução da Appassionata. Seu vídeo veio na hora certa. Parabéns!!!! Bravo!!! Que ousadia e coragem. Chega de interpretações enlatadas.
Wim, I like your historical tempi investigations, but even at slower speeds you sometimes play too metronically, play slowly but with more freedom. It looks a bit like a deconstruction, although very interesting. Pogorelic has been playing slowly for a long time - does he also read out these tempos like you do it in your theory, or does he simply feel it?
I’m guessing he does both! One recent performance of his of the 3rd Chopin Ballade is way slower that customary. It is in UA-cam.
Whether the Whole Beat hypothesis is true or not I don't know. But I'll tell you this:
This is a great practice exercise. Playing this slow is much harder than it sounds!
It also allows you to hear everything better, instead of just picking up a normal performance and setting the playing speed to 0.5%
So thank you for your work sir!
In case anyone is interested in contrast, Valentina Lisitsa has just put out a video of this sonata which seems to just about follow Czerny's metronome marks in single beat as far as I can tell (given the tempo flexibility inherent in the style). Probably not to everyone's taste given its breakneck speeds, attainable only by virtuosi and far beyond what the vast majority of pianists could reasonably achieve with musical results and without injury , but a very interesting comparison to make with Mr. Winters' recording. What would really be interesting, but will likely never happen, would be to hear Lisitsa play this sonata on a pianoforte such as Mr. Winters' beautiful instrument - after some time to get used to the pianoforte and preferably without breaking it through over-enthusiasm :-)
those speeds only work on a Steinway. Lisitsa would be completely lost at the Fritz.
@@AuthenticSound I believe you. It would be interesting, however, to see just how far a pianoforte like the Fritz could be "pushed" by a pianistic virtuoso speed demon to determine what the limits are of the instrument. Of course this would only be meaningful if the pianist had sufficient practice time to get used to it, the Fritz (or any early piano) being such a different animal from a modern Steinway. I have some difficulty adjusting just between a digital and an acoustic, or an acoustic and a grand :-)
@@dorette-hi4j I had not heard of Ronald Brautigam before but just listened to it on You tube. Fantastic ! I was so impressed that I ordered the complete Beethoven Sonatas CD set with him from Amazon. I may get his Beethoven CD-s as well . Thank you so much for pointing out this artist to me ! I
I almost fell sleep with this interpretation, i have to put it in x1.50 speed
Then you have a very limited attention span. Me and my 10 year old brother listened to the entire thing. He loved it. Are you telling me that a 10 year old has a wider attention span than yourself?
@@roberacevedo8232 Well, yes
Hope you slept well
@@AuthenticSound lol
You've figured out The Authentic Sound approach: slowing everything down. Everything, and bolstering that aesthetic with historic liner notes. It's an approach or a gimmick, depending on if you're clapping wildly or rolling your eyes at the result. You decide. My mind's made up. Have a great weekend, wherever you're having it. 😀
This sounds like a very good speed... for sightreading.
you're a genius
Thank you, Wim. That was incredible, like hearing this piece for the first time. ❤️ Bravo
Beautiful instrument! But I was able to have breakfast lunch and dinner and you were still playing when I came back.
Is it really likely that Beethoven conceived this piece to be almost an hour long? All metronome markings aside this just doesn't fit the description "allegro" (first movement), isn't that the most important thing? Every interpretation is valid, but this is really unbelievably slow to the point of the piece not being recognisable. I think it's a really bold statement to call any interpretation the "correct" one, so what is the reasoning behind this apart from liking the Glenn gould recording.
This recording follows Czerny's metronome numbers of the piece read in a metrical way. Czerny was a longtime friend of Beethoven and also his best piano student, according to Beethoven himself.
@@teodorlontos3294 It's at half the tempo indicated by Czerny. What's also important to remember is that in 18th century the current obsession with loyalty to the score didn't exist, and every pianist had free reign to edit a piece as they wished. To me it's simply inconceivable that this tempo is accurate to what Beethoven wanted. I don't want to say it's incorrect or wrong or misleading or anything like that, but making the statement that any interpretation is "correct" over others is extremely risky and frankly arrogant. None of us were there when this was composed and no one can say which version is correct. My main point of contention remains that at no point do any of the outer movements sound "allegro" And the final Presto lacks all impact as it's played at a tempo barely above Andante. Relying on metronome markings makes no sense since its very very unlikely that Beethoven conceived his tempos in terms of numbers rather than moods and impressions. It's enough to analyse the harmony to see that he clearly doesn't want the same harmony to sound for 20 seconds without moving forwards. In the first movement the pulse is so driven and agitated and this effect is completely lost when the tempo is too slow.
@@shanefee7304 As someone else notes in these comments.... "Allegro" means very brisk. It always did.
If Beethoven wanted it this slow then he would have written alternating notes as semi quavers rather than as trills. I think Czerny's metronome markings reflect Czerny and not Beethoven. I can also imagine any composer taking an axe to their forte piano as soon as they upgraded and obtained a pianoforte.
@@shanefee7304 Your problem is to assume that your idea of allegro was their idea of allegro. How do you know? If you your vision of allegro is what they have taught you all your life, then of course you will say it does not sound like your version of allegro. It's like asking a sloth what allegro would sound like and then telling it "You're wrong!"
@@oscarmoreno7774 I actually think it's all much simpler than people are making it, there's so much academic nonsense going on that people are ignoring common sense. If you take a Beethoven violin sonata for example, if the adagio is to be played at 1 beat a minute in order to sound even slower than an incredibly slow allegro, obviously the violin bow is not long enough to hold a note for two bars.. which it is required to do? I think it's a lot more important to feel this stuff than analyse it. Of course everyone's idea of "fast" is slightly different, but these tempos are at a snail's pace slow, no one could ever call this "allegro" let alone "presto" which means as fast as possible?
I was listening to the piano roll recording of one of Liszt's students and logically thinking, we can hear fast thrills, arpeggios and everything. I know that Liszt was born like 50 years apart from beethoven, but he was one great interpreter of him and was known for it. It was a legend that nobody could play the fugue at tempo in the hammer klavier sonata, and Liszt was one of the firsts to do it. Fast thrills for example, also exist at the violin and classical guitar, wich are really old instruments. It makes sense for them to exist in the piano as well. Just look at the klavichord. It was some sort of guitar itself, it just worked with keys that would elevate a pick that plucked a string. I don't know, a lot has changed throughout the years, but there's one thing hasn't changed at all, wich was the human body. Beeing at the edge of we can do hasn't changed that much, and therefore, Beethoven and Chopin compositions must've been as hard as they're today to have the kind of comments that they had, as long as they're played in a fast tempo, lets say. Fast isn't relaitive. It is absolute. It means that it is the higher speed a human can play, as long as we have a human playng ofc (wich we do). If people can play fast now, why couldn't they in the past? They could, and they did it in order to be the most "virtuoso" or just to push the boundaries of what the human body could do.
Where is it written the fugue of the Hammerklavier wasn't playable? ANd we know that piano rolls often are sped up, that's just a fact. As we know that the pupils of Liszt themselves wrote that Liszt wouldn't be able to to what they did around the 1920's.... facts are simply facts...
@@AuthenticSound ok, so how about Francis Planté recordings? He heard Chopin play, he has the fluctuations in tempo like other older pianists, but he's not far from today's interpretations. I'm sure you know him so I won't bother explaining
@@AuthenticSound i only heard a few minutes but I really enjoyed your Schubert's fantasy in four hands, I appreciate your work, man! I don't like how standardized performaces have become and I sure see the value in your ideas.
Realizing how much of our expectations and taste have been forged over years and years of "mainstream" (for lack of a better word) interpretations and instruments (I had never listened to a fortepiano before, shame on me!) is a fascinating experience. Can't be more grateful to the author of this channel for giving me the opportunity to expand my horizons and dive into a rather different world! Would you care to recommend books/recordings I could refer to in order to learn more about the kind of musical research you carry on? (Pointers to online resources are also very welcome, of course.)
Apart from the great music, let me congratulate you on the excellent video editing: lighting and sound quality are excellent.
P.S.: just to be clear, I love and admire lots of musicians and interpreters. I am not suggesting that there's a "good" way and a "bad" way of making music. I do appreciate the effort of those who chose the unbeaten path. Kudos to them!
I liked very much.
So diferent...
Es interesante .... sin embargo solamente adoptaria estos tempos hisotricos para estudio. En el proceso de aprendizaje es factible poder estudiar a este tempo, pero a la hora de tocarlo en un concierto raramente creo que alguna persona quiera escuchar esto asi... Y mucho menos pagar por verlo! (que es lo mas complicado!) . Entiendo que tenga muchos detractores el canal de Authehtic Sound... sin embargo veo muy provechoso y valioso sus estudios y analisis Musicales . Mis respetos por este canal y sobre todo por el tiempo invertido en hacer estos videos!. Saludos desde Argentina!
Edit - How open-minded of you to block my comments or whatever you did to prevent me from replying. I showed your video to my pupils, we're talking about 10 years old children, and they instantly told me that you lacked work. Even children recognise how lame this is.
Original comment - Taking Gould as a reference on this piece is a self-inflicted joke upon yourself. Gould plays almost every Beethoven piece two times faster than everybody else. He tried something else with his appassionata, and it didn't work. Not because people were close-minded, if you think of the time they first heard Gould playing Bach without the pedal, that time, they were struck by the clarity and the precision of the playing. No, his appassionata was a scandal because it simply doesn't work. As much as I love Gould, his Mozart doesn't work, his appassionata doesn't work. He was never made to play everything, and he knew it. You seem to be the only one oblivious to that fact. Not every Gould scandal was sparked for the same reasons. You're deforming and popularising the story to backup your point. You keep repeating that you hold Gould as a genius, yet you believe that you know better than him. That's pretty delusional, thinking you're smarter than Gould.
Many classical recordings today are also way too slow, just as many are way too fast. It's not about going slower or faster, it's about making sense of the music. Any good musician knows that you can use the tempo you desire, it's not a state secret. As long as it's for the heart of the music, and not because of some arbitrary intellectual reason, it can work.
The way you appeal to people's emotions in your description is shallow and demagogic. Anyone can say generic stuff like "the beauty of music is what makes our hearts communicate with our souls". It's hollow and meaningless, a ploy used by people who are trying to pass on intellectual endeavours as heartfelt ones.
Your historical references are melting into one another, you're jumping between periods of time, composers and interprets without any meaningful point.
As for the core of it all, your interpretation doesn't work. It sounds like a beginner practising their scales. Funny you're using Czerny as a basis for your reasoning, because your pieces sound exactly like a Czerny exercise. It's awfully bland and it oozes of that mainstream, rigid, short-sighted way to teach music which a lot of people suffer from with bitter teachers. Saying some mellow words and throwing vague historical references to save appearances isn't enough. The work you've put into this is mediocre at best, you need to work more on yourself, and accept that you're not Glenn Gould sheltered in his genius bubble. You're trapping yourself in a bubble of mediocrity. Justifying the use of a tempo through an intellectual process is a very rigid way to view tempo, even if you're trying to make it sound as if you're freeing yourself from the norms, it's just the same, with a slower tempo. The right tempo comes from working on the piece, something you so obviously lack.
I'm pretty sure you're aware of all of that on some level, but you keep going for it because you're afraid trying to play actual music won't sell as much as taking dramatic stands.
I'm afraid you missed the entire point - what we do is try to understand the original meaning of the metronome marks (tempo indications) composers like Beethoven left. The current view is unattainable. What musicians do with that information, is up to them. The point with GG is that when musicians leave the desire to technically shine on stage behind, they instinctively come very close to the whole beat interpretation of these authentic tempi. And btw, one can think today that tempo choice is the individual's privelegde, but that doesn't mean Beethoven and co did feel the same about it. They didn't. That's not an opinion, that's a fact.
I finally got to listen to this, and I have a question. When you were practicing the first movement, have you tried using the pedal to see how it sounds ? I know you are opposed cause its not on the score, but you didnt even tried to see how it sounds ?
The pedal is like a drug; once you've begun using it is very difficult to stop. It all depends on what you are using the pedal for. Many piano students regrettably use the pedal to make a "fake legato". The pedal was an effect in Beethoven's time and should not be in constant use but rather during specific passages, those that Beethoven indicated in his score.
the deepest immersion into the music ! every time i listen to Wim's interpretation , i discover things never heard earlier !
Great to read!
I think ultimately Mr. Winter makes a logical and factual argument. It is hard to dispute him. Either you play this piece twice as fast as intenfed by the modern reading of the metronome. Or at this speed. To play it at 1.5, 1.7 times as fast makes no logical sense. Classical musicians are just embarrassed to admit that as time went on people just started playing faster to show off. To play this price at this tempo is not an inferior firm of playing. It doesn't take away from the piece in fact adds many details to the masterpiece. Unfortunately since our childhood we are used to fast tempi playing so it sounds weird to us in the beginning. You also have to realize that people those times had much longer attention spansx they could listen to these pieces for 50 minutes it was a gift for them to sit at the piano and listen to a pianist.
The Appassionata is not an ancient piece of music which anyone has the right to guess how it should be played.
The Appassionata is a two century old piece, who has been brought to us, not only through the stave but by well known transmission lines from the era of Beethoven until now.
No pianist and no Beethoven transmission line has ever played the Appassionata so slow - with the said exception of Glenn Gould.
The doctrine of Sola Scriptura may be interesting or not in theology, but its application in classical music is much more limited.
There is no Romanticism through the eyes of John Calvin. Sorry Sir.
the kind of tradition you describe never existed, especially not before 1950 but still not today - what students play at their 50th still like their teachers? Even in the era of recording technology interpretations are not kept similar
@@AuthenticSound Of course it existed. Beethoven's transmission lines through Czerny - Liszt or Leschetizky are well documented, let alone the variety of teachers who had heard Beethoven and his associates performing, in Vienna and elsewhere. You think for instance that Ignaz Mosheles, the friend and collaborator of Beethoven didn't know the right tempo for the Sonata? The great Anton Rubinstein (whom Liszt described as "Van II.") the friend of Moscheles, didn't know how to perform that Sonata and couldn't teach his students in the Moscow conservatoire?
There have obviously been differences of expression and mentality, but no one has suggested a tempo as slow as yours and claimed to be the authentic.
Extraordinary, like a symphony for the keyboard. The historically correct tempo gives us a revelation into Beethoven mind. It's as if he composed for orchestra on the piano.
thanks
Yes that's right, Beethoven's piano works are orchestral in character.
Well, that was the slowest presto I've ever heard. I don't dislike it. In fact, I frequently slow down music so I can better analyze it....you just saved me the trouble. I like to hear the intricacies and complexities of the harmonies. There are layers you miss when the piece goes by so fast.
And those layers dictate the presto, not the overall 'feeling'
this takes me back to those hot summer days in Texas
I dont want to hurt your feelings but i am a composer and know many composers in person. Most of them are not interested in being played "correct" by someone thinking what is correct and telling others how not to play them. They contribute to something divine beyond human mind which should bring enjoyment, and deepness to the musicians and to the audience. If you think in terms of correct, wrong you are far from understanding what authenticity in music means. Let people express themselves freely. Do not use old masters to fuel your Ego plz. There is no such thing as a correct interpretation. Every composer knows it. I heard some composers saying, wow that guy girl played my music in a much better way, then i ever imagined, my music was ment differently but his, or her play is much better than what i intended... So be free, let free plz.
This channel is about recalling how these pieces might have been interpreted by the masters themselves. Czerny and several others were in fact interested in "preserving", for example, Beethoven's wishes that his music be played a certain way. As you begin to see more content here, you will begin to notice that it isn't even the artists' interpretations here; it's about the composers. I compose as well, and I probably put a MM number on there, including an Italian word or two, and a certain time and key signature because I would prefer that they played the piece as I had written it. If you write your music to allow any/everyone else forever to play it as they see fit, that's great. That's not quite what we do here. :D
Ok dude, first of all, what does the fact that you are a composer, that you know other colleagues and the fact that you don't mind how your music gets played have to do with what a composer who lived 200 years ago might or might not have wanted in his works? You are assuming that Beethoven's expectations on the performance of his music are the same as yours just because you both happened to be composers? now that's a compelling argument, I am fully sold!
Second, we are not preventing anybody from playing the way he or she wants. We live in a free world and everyone can choose and being responsible of his own interpretation. So you should tell us in what way we are limiting people's freedom.
Third, I can point to you what the real problem is with what we do on this channel and why this activates the crocodile brain of so many people here into defensive mode.
The problem is that we are playing the music of the composers of the past according to the metronome numbers that they left, which were meant as precise speed indications of how they would have played their own music. And the implementation of these MM, results in a slower performance that makes this music sound completely different from what teachers and musicians claim today to be the authentic way. Also they teach what they believe the composers wanted, but yet I don't see anybody complaining about a limitation of freedom.
And why does what we do here get rejected so often as a threaten to the music world?
Well that's simple, most musicians are not ready to continue to play the way we do today, with the awareness that they are not playing according to what these composers had in mind.
Because that is the real use of composers's music as an "ego booster", not ours. It would be interesting to know from you, what is about "fueling our ego" in trying to play according to the composers's intentions. We are just bringing to the world the historical tempo reconstruction of this music, based on the metronome numbers they left.
Does it bother people? Yes
Is it our problem? No
Alberto
@@AuthenticSound While I was reading, I was thinking "Wow, Wim is really going off on this poor guy..." Then I read "Alberto" and I'm like "Oh... 😂"
@@AuthenticSound Then lets get real dude. You pretend to understand how Beethoven, Bach etc. would like his music be played. But you just simply PRETEND to understand. Then you read stuff, think and come up with a (subjective) conclussion and feel like a genius. (a bit like Bach and Beethoven) Quite ridiculus, because unfortunately Bach can not speak for himself anymore to tell you the truth. Which is very practical isnt it? You understand and interpret the music as only YOU see it and try then make up a academic fact in bringing up some sudo science. Allways met guys like you, i call classical music police department. Perhaps you should have look for an officer job so you can do your pedantic thing and telling people what is right, what is wrong. By the way, even from an academic perspective you tell nothing correct here. But however. It does not bother me, i tried to be kind and telling you the truth to prevent you from wasting your (and others) time in a ego game of bullshitting your self and others and instead of it practicing more, so you can play like the artists you criticize one day. Oh dear, you even do not understand what the principle behind the metronome is, and what rhythm is... clinging yourself onto numbers of timing and numbers.... Ask yourself why the metronome is a pendulum, why you cannot breath with ticks... You do not see the forest through the trees. But yes, this IS YOUR PROBLEM, not that of the musicians you tell your stuff. With my compassionate regards. If you would be less on war with teachers and musicians instead you would be more humble and define your way more as a subjective view instead of scientific fact, THEN you would be a win for the music. No one likes pedantic preachers. Creative subjective views and interpretations of music are welcome.
@@AuthenticSound By the way, you know what "Appassionata" means? Why do you think Beethoven gave this title to this Sonata? Think about it before clinging onto numbers of a metronome. Does your play sound like Appassionata? Does your play (because of a stupid metronome number somewhere) fit into the whole of Beethovens works, including his Symphonies? There you go my friend, why you are on the wrong path. I would not write all this, if i would not sense your huge love for music deep inside you beyond all this brainf..k. Find your love inside you for this music again.... End the war. BE APPASSIONATA!
A tremendous and brave artist! Thank you Wim Winters 😃❤️🙏🏼
A question... you are capable of playing it in the "wrong" way? i mean, faster?
No offense, but this is a immature question in many ways. First off, it doesnt really matter. Also, your intereptation changes with the tempo you choose. So if he invents an interpretation for a specific tempo he chose, he practicing this exact interpretation, an not one for a faster tempo. He is a competent pianist, of course he could excplicity practice the piece for a faster tempo, but why would he spend the time? Pianist who choose tempi or ways of playing, which are different from the mainstream may hear this question many times. The answer of the pianist himself would often even be, that he cant. Because it's the smartest answer to such an immature question, otherwise he would be put in a position to prove it. And they know that it doesnt matter, if they can.
And I dont know if your playing piano yourself, but I guess if you did, you should know that when you can play a piece so secure and robust, its really no problem speeding it up step for step (until you eventually nearly reach the tempo of some popular performers, but to what price?)
Don’t even bother. Mr Winters is playing according to what he studies and believes is the authentic way to play. Why would he need to prove himself to anyone?
In the case that he can’t
(Which is unlikely) it doesn’t affect his goal.
Very interesting. Beautifully played. Wonderful instrument, works great for this tempo. Maybe, a slightly excessive resonance at low frequencies, probably due to the position of the instrument/microphone near the corner of the room, I suspect the instrument could sound even clearer. I understand your studio is not meant just for recording though! Thank you for this rendition of this piece...
WOW! JUST WOW! this interpretation is incredible. I felt the meaning of every single note and most of all, I felt the deep meaning every single rest!
It's incredible how you made the left hand playing and incredible meaningful role along with the right hand melody. Perhaps I was particularly receptive today, but I was in tears during the whole second movement. Thanks for everything you are doing here Wim. Deeply appreciated :'-)
Thank you so much for sharing
Are you going to be doing Beethoven's late piano sonatas, as well (Nos. 30, 31 and 32)? Can you tease us with a potential date? Waiting with baited breath for this one.
Alberto will arrive on Thursday and prepares for recording all of them!
Yes PLEASE! Waiting for No 32!!!
People are just brainwashed with INSTANT gratication. Too occupied with speed to digest the beauty of going slow. With WBT, every piece and every note has a chance to breathe and a chance to express itself withou speed destroying all nuances...
Played at 2x speed sounds perfect to me
than there is a long way in front of you
Lol it sounds silly at ×2 speed
like warp speed Chopin
Glenn Gould plays the third movement allegro ma non troppo and presto... and it may be the best version ever.
I'm just gonna sit here and wait until Monday! Lol can't wait!! Will be interesting to hear all the things I've never noticed before! And this is one I won't even attempt myself so yes, very much looking forward to this!
I want to hit like again! It was fantastic!!
But it's not on time! I get the new old tempo but i need to still have the pulse!
Probably it should be done something with third part. Technically it's hard part also in slow tempo.
Wim! You are amazing! Thank you a million trillion times. You are the most important musician in at least a century. More like Gailieo, you are!
Could this piano once be tuned professionally, including the octaves and unisons?
Thank you for sharing!🌻
Thanks for watching!
The "experts" are those who have taken over the way in which knowledge should be imparted, without really being experts or the pinnacle of knowledge, research or the arts. What's more, many times they coin the title without being good artists or scientists like those they criticize. They have always been the bullies who prevent the advancement of civilizations by blocking paradigms when they can no longer support knowledge and need to be modernized with new discoveries. By the way love the interpretations of Gould and Horowitz, no show but their interpretations reach the public in the biggest way.
With the many anecdotes of Glenn Gould you use in your descriptions, I wonder if you are aware of the "Glenn Gould Reader"? (edited by Tim Page, to clarify the book I'm talking about)
I bought a copy at a book store on a whim many years ago, and, as someone interested in Gould, I found it a very insightful read. Much of the writings are in Gould's own "Gould character", but they still let you get in his head a little bit.
Will have to check it out, Gould remains so impressive in all aspects
2-3 weeks ago I started learning this with the "whole beat" approach thanks to your channel. I didn't have Czerny's markings (until now) so I used the Hammerklavier marking as a clue; but this is even slower! Congratulations on your tremendous work.
I'm also pleased to notice that Beethoven repeatedly reaches the bottom note of the keyboard . . . not shrinking from the lowest note during his, perhaps, lowest point.
Glad to help!
@@AuthenticSound Wait . . . q.=108 is actually faster than my original h.÷2=138÷2. Speed demon!
Ah, something interesting:
My original math conversion (÷2) was obviously flawed, equating HK's half note with AP's _dotted_ half note.
If we do it correctly in the most technical sense, we must convert the HK half note into a dotted one first, and then ÷2 since HK's time signature is /4 while AP's is /8.
To be honest I don't know if this is correct, but . . .
Adding a dot to a half note is adding .5 to its value;
Adding .5 the value to 138 is 207;
207÷2=103.5
That is _awfully_ close to 108.
AP is "Allegro assai," assai meaning "very" . . .
Maybe "Allegro" would be q.=~103.5 while "Allegro assai" is q.=108? 🙂
Precise math does seem to evoke the Apollonian culture of the era!
On the other hand, I pause because adding .5 to a note value makes it longer while adding .5 to a metronome value makes it shorter. Flawed again?
wim winters is not interested in having a respectful debate over these tempos. any ideas contrary to his are labelled as not rooted in 'fact', is 'wrong', and then immediately banned.
if you're not willing to engage in a respectful debate over this then i think you're grossly misrepresenting the musical lineage of piano technique
All the time he'd waste debating, would be less time to practice. He's a busy, full time performer now.
In life, there are the talkers, and there are the do-ers. Guess what he chose to be.
@@surgeeo1406 at that speed what practice is needed? He could simply sightread the music
@@paolohudson We heard it all already. We're not responsible for your ignorance 🙂
@@surgeeo1406 this isn't a red pill/blue pill situation. It's not like listening to this interpretation all of a sudden explains Beethoven and everything in music makes sense now and we've been fed a lie this whole time.
There are so many unanswered questions to just blindly accept this theory (which I will elaborate at a later date) and one of them is how do you explain the MASSIVE leap in technical ability over the course of 10 years? How do you go from Beethoven, Hummel, and Clementi at these supposed tempos (which are technically speaking the most difficult of their day) to Liszt, Alkan, and Debussy which are lightyears further in technical demands?
In my understanding of piano technique and development, it took decades for keyboard technique to get to Liszt's level and beyond, so how did we get there if we are to believe these are the supposed "true" speeds Beethoven intended his music to be played at?
@@paolohudson I rather practice...
As the most loyal Beethoven's follower and lover, I recognize this efford for achieve such an historical reconstruction, but I didn't like It. The sound of the fortepiano is sweet and expresive, but not the speed.
Playing the pieces at your own piano in WB shines a lot of light...eventually.
Please know that this tempo is almost certainly NOT the historical tempo. This is based on a fringe theory which doesn't hold up to historical scrutiny. You are well justified in preferring Beethoven's intended, fiery tempo!
i like it, still waiting for your interp of ballade 1
I actually noticed that Chopin quoted the finale in his coda. Now I realize that the G-minor Ballade is full of covert references to the Appassionata. I believe the last of the ballades may also borrow from the Appassionata at its route, being in F minor from start to finish.
I have enjoyed your recording. You instrument collection is astonishing. Have you any interest in an old Broadwood piano. I believe Beethoven had one. The Roderts Pianos in Oxford just made an assessment of one which could be free to a restorer. I am a sucker for old pianos and homeless dogs.
Good!
Does this mean that this sonata lasts almost an hour?
No. This is not a historical reconstruction. The interpret is a delusional egomaniac who thinks he's a genius because he plays everything at half the correct tempo.
Playing an instrument has always had an obvious element of "showing off" your agility and dexterity. I'm not saying that's right, but that's just how it is. It's always been the case, it's insane that you suggest that this is a "modern tendency". Go listen to drummers in Africa or Indonesia or the Amazon. God, even 4years old when they start learning, all they want to do is to play "fast". Now, you're trying to convince us that a "Presto" for Beethoven, the fastest that he wanted his pieces to be played, is this slow motion performance? He never wrote anything at 20 notes per second on the piano? That is just impossible to believe. A man that had the ability to use music language as he pleased, and expressed all kind of thoughts and feelings simply didn't write anything to be played as fast as possible? He just refused to use one entire dimension of the sound? He refused to show off his skills on the piano where he spent his life playing? No way you even believe this yourself.
Are you trying to convince us? Or are you talking to yourself in front of a mirror? (Alberto)
Even though the premise is interesting, one would expect (as Czerny attests) quite a lot of freedom and rubato (and accelerando!), especially at a slow, more fantasia like tempo. Interesting...
Omg the 3rd movement here is agonizingly slow. Have you heard Richter's recording?
The 3rd movement is the best movement in this recording, I think. It's very intense and never calms down. Relentless darkness and horror
I just listened to Richter and was rather disappointed. He missed a lot of notes in the Presto and did not bring out the accents well which made the passage rather bland, imo
I'm glad i've found this channel, your interpretations change the point of view of musical history, and how different were the sound perceptions in the past. Can you make a Hystorical Tempo reconstruction of Bach's Brandemburg concerts?.
Keep on the great work!
EDIT: I've already found a video of my question in your channel, you are amazing for sharing these materials!
Glad you enjoy it!
Why are the repeated notes - say, around 2:40 - so uneven?
there is something that does strike me as odd.
Some notes/runs are not even. Is this by design? Is it rubato?
McCluhan famously said “the medium is the message.” What is the medium: a recording? No. The piano? Some may say so, but musicians throughout the ages would gainsay that. The medium the composer left us is the pure composition, best represented by notes on page; the score. A musician (capitol P) Performs the music from that score. It is a moment in time-an interpretation. Music, like dance, has two aspects: composition and performance (I believe that’s one reason they marry so beautifully-whether in ballet, opera, theater, modern dance, whatever). Recording it-a completely different art-is capturing a moment of time; but it has nothing to do with the interpretation of a gone or long gone composer. So to the question of what is the “correct” interpretation of a composition penned 50, 100, 200, 300 years ago... We can probably agree a chimpanzee in front of a piano would not qualify-reading music and being able to play the instrument is a necessary pre-requisite. Should the composer’s tempi guidance be followed? Probably. Can we be certain that what it meant then is what means today? I’m inclined to allow a degree-just a degree-of flexibility in deference to the performer’s musicianship (who then sinks or swims accordingly); I’m suspicious of rubato applied more than sparingly unless explicitly called for but don’t believe or like music to be played metronomically. Does that sound like a contradiction? It isn’t, it’s performed music that is *live* and not mechanical. Listen to Horowitz, for example. Bursting with life. I am NOT a fan of Gould. He is technically meticulous-but to my ear, devoid of life. Rubinstein, overflowing with life; a surfeit of life. Perhaps too much. That, for the listener, becomes a matter of taste-and choice. And that’s another very important point: as we all know the same composition can be played by the same musician on the same instrument different ways; by different musicians on the same instrument; same musician different instrument; different ways; different instruments-different TYPES of instruments... In every case, different listening experience. Most of them within the scope of the composer’s intent. All of them, in my opinion, valid. Are all of them good? Who knows. Only the listener can decide-it is Art. It is magic. It is wonder. We get to transport genius through the centuries-how wicked brilliant is that?! So as I started: the medium is the message: the medium is an abstract communication, an ordered sequence of notes representing pitches of approximate duration and volume struck, plucked, blown or voiced at relative volumes-alone or in concert with other like representations. (my specialisation was computer/electronic music-does it show? 🙂). The only important question is do you like THIS performance; you can like as many as you like! By the way, despite the metronome, the performance by our host I would call “live”-and I enjoyed it.
Beethoven marked this movement"allegro assai."[Italian, very fast] A directive to perform the indicated passage of a composition at a very fast tempo;this cannot be reconciled with the chosen tempo of Wim
5:09 is quite fast. One must look at the fastest passage of the composition to choose a good tempo
Except that allegro means happy, cheerful, or merry.
depends which note values you take as pulse
I just listened to Arrau's performance of this movement, which is about twice Wim's tempo. The funny thing is that speeding it up does not make it any more Allegro (cheerful, merry, happy), but if anything imparts more of a sense of foreboding. I don't find the whole beat tempo really cheerful either--not in the simple sense anyway. I find it expectant, anticipatory, but also hopeful and not foreboding of doom. Yet neither is it a happy peasant dance or something. If that is your interpretation of the tempo indication, then neither performance speed fulfills it.
Clearly Beethoven means something different by "Allegro" here. Perhaps it has to do with personal philosophy and experience. When we are young, "cheerful" may mean a carefree sense of pleasure or joy. As we grow older and have experienced more, joy more often comes mixed with anticipation and some foreboding. That is my experience at least. Rarely are our youthful dreams fulfilled so easily as we may have anticipated. Perhaps it is a social idealist who finds the world cannot be changed so easily as he thought, or a musician who discovers his hearing loss is worsening and now irreversible. But any way you take it, whole beat or half, this is not your ordinary Allegro.
@@SiteReader See Wim's video on the different meanings of 'Allegro', posted about 8 months ago.
This is my favourite sonata of Beethoven. At first glance even though it seemed a little off from the customary, it exiceted me and made me think more. I saw that there are some hidden beauties that I couldn't see before.
Great to read!
False and misleading to represent this as historic
yr comment? yes.