Wim has been accused of being like a conspiracy theorist in his presentation of ideas, but this video is the strongest one I've seen of his so far to show that there is a real mystery here and that the double beat theory is taken seriously by people who are just trying to soberly make sense of the literature available.
Great videos. really helpful. I am writing a paper for the university about the Reger' Kanons book for piano in all keys. I should explain why he wrote those books. I had been looking for information about it, but i can not find much material about it. Can anyone guide me in this matter? Thnx
This is fascinating. It makes me think also of the disparity of ideas about the correct tempo at which to play Schumann's Träumerei. To me it sounds better a little faster than the speed most people play it at, but the tradition, apparently dating back to Clara Schumann herself, was to play it at around 50 crotchets per minute while the M.M. marking was 100 per minute. Also I remember that Bartok was horrified to hear a radio performance of his Allegro Barbaro at about half the speed that he had indicated. As a result of this he lost confidence in the metronome indications and, while he continued writing them, he also indicated the duration of each section to avoid possible, future misunderstandings. It would seem that at some time in the early part of the 19th century there may have been a switch to indicating single beat metronome markings where earlier indications had indicated the half beats or 'double tempos'. I don't know. But it would be good to hear your views on that.
The Bartók-issue is not originating from the WBMP vs SBPM. The reason behind the "Adagio barbaro" transcription was that the first edition of the piece appeares with faulty MM numbers!
My organ teacher in the early 1960's, Hans Klotz, used to quote a remark by Reger to the organist Gerhard Bunk in 1910: "Young man, let's not play my things too fast! Play everything quite deliberately, even though it's notated faster!"
Many times teachers will tell students to play more slowly in order to get the student to play more musically within his skill level. As I always taught my students, learn it slowly and with an consistent and even tempo, we can ratchet it up much more easily once your brain has control of the work in a consistent slower model. It does NOT mean I wanted the work to be played slowly by a finished artist in performance.
But can you, or any of your students play any study of Czerny's opus 299 in the indicated speed? if no, we do have a problem in understanding, not? Since that metronome was ticking at those speeds, with real people behind the keyboard. So what do we do with that information. Speeds went up in the 19th c, there is no counter evidence for that. And today, we are at about 25% (on average) of the MM indications, so we believe that with some more practicing we arrive there (if anyone takes those indications into consideration). So it is our individual responsibility how to explain this. The only thing is/// nobody is playing the fast movements in the MM we have, isn't that strange? And yes, people back then really found that very important... and no, their metronomes were not out of function. How to solve this? You might want to listen to the interviews with Lorenz Gadient, there is way more theoretical background on this than one may think...
Well, yes, Craig Matteson, of course, and as a teacher of organ and harpsichord I've said exactly that to my students, many many times. But that wasn't the context in which Klotz would tell that story; he was talking about tempo in performance of Reger's works, and that's the way he played them. In a big European church, any faster would have been a hopeless blur, though Klotz's technique was capable of it; but as his tempi, as I heard someone once say, "It sounded as if the organ were on fire!" And we must remember that Klotz knew Straube, was an authoritative performer of Reger, and prepared the complete edition of Reger's organ works for Breitkopf & Härtel (1987 - )There is a short English discussion of Klotz's ideas on Reger performance in the English edition of his "Das Buch von der Orgel": "The Organ Handbook", translation by Gerhard Krapf, Concordia, 1969.
AuthenticSound no one plays it at the indicated tempo. Nor does anyone play the Hammerklavier at the indicated tempo. But I think they do sound better at faster than half tempo.
But we do have a connected tradition. For example, while I am no piano god or virtuoso, I did study with a teacher who was a pupil of Arthur Friedheim (and who taught Van Cliburn's mother), who was a pupil of Liszt, who was a pupil of Czerny, who was, of course, a pupil of Beethoven. What you are discussing was NEVER part of the tradition I was taught. Nor did I hear about it at my 8 years studying music theory at the University of Michigan School of Music. Although, we did discuss, often, the problem of playing much too fast. And, of course, the problem of Hammerklavier was always argued about. In my view, musical pulse relates to our heart beat and breathing. It has to make sense to one's inner pulse and that can vary by artist and can be slightly different on different days. I personally know nothing about Reger.
So you are saying that all of a sudden, Liszt just decided to play everything twice as fast and no one called him on it? That seems kind of odd to me. Imagine if someone today all of a sudden just started playing the pop tunes from the 1960s twice as fast, they would be called on it. And the notion that we don't have recordings so we can't know seems odd, as well. We have piano rolls. We have tradition. We have our internal sense of pulse and breathing. We don't breathe twice as fast. Our hearts beat buh bump as they always have. We don't say the old timers counted two heartbeats as one heartbeat to get a pulse count do we?
If you are going to say there is something wrong with the speed of the piano rolls, I know that the piano rolls of Arthur Friedheim, while not satisfying to Friedheim, are correct because my teacher, who KNEW and studied under Friedheim told me that is how he played, except better. He was just tossing off the rolls because he didn't much like the process.
You can as well proof the earth is still flat, easily. If it were so easy as you state it here, we all would be happy :-) ! Concerning Liszt, there are important quotes stating he DID play slower than the rest, the most important one, being from Ch.M.Widor's pen, stating - after having heard Liszt practice in Paris at the Erard's castle, that he played only Beethoven, and all almost twice as slow as at the time usual. He btw, also states the same of a conductor he heard in Hungry, who played under Haydn. So, there is plenty of evidence in that direction. And the double beat structure; only think how you consider the two different approaches to our term 'Day'. It is both 24 and 12 hours. O, and I'm actually a student of Bach, since van Oortmerssen studied with MCAlain, she with Dupré, he with Widor, he with Lemmens, he with Hasse, and so I could continue... But hey, if you want to be part of this journey, be welcome, no problem if you doubt, friends forever. To start with it: take Czerny opus 299 and just start playing it in the metrical understanding, and then switch to single beat. See for yourself what works. The rest comes later, I can read this all is very new to you, so it'll need time !
OK. How does that change one's internal pulse and sense of beat? Two heartbeats are now one heartbeat. Of course, we can each play the music how we wish.
Again, practice is different than performance. So, Czerny taught both Liszt and Leschetizky, who in turn (along with Anton Rubinstein) taught everyone. Why do we see almost NOTHING of the slower tradition anywhere?
More foolishness about tempi, now relating to Reger?Tempo markings are not absolute commands, they are advisory. They depend on taste, instrument, acoustic etc. So there's nothing to explain.
@@AuthenticSound A metronome mark is as I said advisory. You think a 'double beat' theory is an explanation? I think (a) it doesn't need explaining (b) the double beat theory has no evidential basis. So that's where we differ.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Wim has been accused of being like a conspiracy theorist in his presentation of ideas, but this video is the strongest one I've seen of his so far to show that there is a real mystery here and that the double beat theory is taken seriously by people who are just trying to soberly make sense of the literature available.
This is an excellent way to put it
Great videos. really helpful. I am writing a paper for the university about the Reger' Kanons book for piano in all keys. I should explain why he wrote those books. I had been looking for information about it, but i can not find much material about it. Can anyone guide me in this matter? Thnx
This is fascinating. It makes me think also of the disparity of ideas about the correct tempo at which to play Schumann's Träumerei. To me it sounds better a little faster than the speed most people play it at, but the tradition, apparently dating back to Clara Schumann herself, was to play it at around 50 crotchets per minute while the M.M. marking was 100 per minute. Also I remember that Bartok was horrified to hear a radio performance of his Allegro Barbaro at about half the speed that he had indicated. As a result of this he lost confidence in the metronome indications and, while he continued writing them, he also indicated the duration of each section to avoid possible, future misunderstandings. It would seem that at some time in the early part of the 19th century there may have been a switch to indicating single beat metronome markings where earlier indications had indicated the half beats or 'double tempos'. I don't know. But it would be good to hear your views on that.
The fact that Bartok's piece was performed at half the indicated speed shows that double beat was a practice!
@@charleyfeng2054 It certainly suggests that it might have been.
The Bartók-issue is not originating from the WBMP vs SBPM. The reason behind the "Adagio barbaro" transcription was that the first edition of the piece appeares with faulty MM numbers!
@@nzsfromhungary Ok. I didn't know that. Thanks.
Thank you! I am studying the B.A.C.H. these days, and I find the markings ridiculous. Now I feel free to play as I please😊
As a big admirer of Reger's music this is very fascinating!
Fascinating analysis.
Fascinating video and publication!
Great you liked this !
Last year I visited Max Regers birthplace in Fichtelgebirge. This was a wonerful time and it brought me Reger even nearer.
He was a great composer indeed !
My organ teacher in the early 1960's, Hans Klotz, used to quote a remark by Reger to the organist Gerhard Bunk in 1910: "Young man, let's not play my things too fast! Play everything quite deliberately, even though it's notated faster!"
It was what Reger often said later in his life !
Many times teachers will tell students to play more slowly in order to get the student to play more musically within his skill level. As I always taught my students, learn it slowly and with an consistent and even tempo, we can ratchet it up much more easily once your brain has control of the work in a consistent slower model. It does NOT mean I wanted the work to be played slowly by a finished artist in performance.
But can you, or any of your students play any study of Czerny's opus 299 in the indicated speed? if no, we do have a problem in understanding, not? Since that metronome was ticking at those speeds, with real people behind the keyboard. So what do we do with that information. Speeds went up in the 19th c, there is no counter evidence for that. And today, we are at about 25% (on average) of the MM indications, so we believe that with some more practicing we arrive there (if anyone takes those indications into consideration). So it is our individual responsibility how to explain this. The only thing is/// nobody is playing the fast movements in the MM we have, isn't that strange? And yes, people back then really found that very important... and no, their metronomes were not out of function. How to solve this? You might want to listen to the interviews with Lorenz Gadient, there is way more theoretical background on this than one may think...
Well, yes, Craig Matteson, of course, and as a teacher of organ and harpsichord I've said exactly that to my students, many many times. But that wasn't the context in which Klotz would tell that story; he was talking about tempo in performance of Reger's works, and that's the way he played them. In a big European church, any faster would have been a hopeless blur, though Klotz's technique was capable of it; but as his tempi, as I heard someone once say, "It sounded as if the organ were on fire!" And we must remember that Klotz knew Straube, was an authoritative performer of Reger, and prepared the complete edition of Reger's organ works for Breitkopf & Härtel (1987 - )There is a short English discussion of Klotz's ideas on Reger performance in the English edition of his "Das Buch von der Orgel": "The Organ Handbook", translation by Gerhard Krapf, Concordia, 1969.
AuthenticSound no one plays it at the indicated tempo. Nor does anyone play the Hammerklavier at the indicated tempo. But I think they do sound better at faster than half tempo.
But we do have a connected tradition. For example, while I am no piano god or virtuoso, I did study with a teacher who was a pupil of Arthur Friedheim (and who taught Van Cliburn's mother), who was a pupil of Liszt, who was a pupil of Czerny, who was, of course, a pupil of Beethoven. What you are discussing was NEVER part of the tradition I was taught. Nor did I hear about it at my 8 years studying music theory at the University of Michigan School of Music. Although, we did discuss, often, the problem of playing much too fast. And, of course, the problem of Hammerklavier was always argued about. In my view, musical pulse relates to our heart beat and breathing. It has to make sense to one's inner pulse and that can vary by artist and can be slightly different on different days. I personally know nothing about Reger.
So you are saying that all of a sudden, Liszt just decided to play everything twice as fast and no one called him on it? That seems kind of odd to me. Imagine if someone today all of a sudden just started playing the pop tunes from the 1960s twice as fast, they would be called on it. And the notion that we don't have recordings so we can't know seems odd, as well. We have piano rolls. We have tradition. We have our internal sense of pulse and breathing. We don't breathe twice as fast. Our hearts beat buh bump as they always have. We don't say the old timers counted two heartbeats as one heartbeat to get a pulse count do we?
If you are going to say there is something wrong with the speed of the piano rolls, I know that the piano rolls of Arthur Friedheim, while not satisfying to Friedheim, are correct because my teacher, who KNEW and studied under Friedheim told me that is how he played, except better. He was just tossing off the rolls because he didn't much like the process.
You can as well proof the earth is still flat, easily. If it were so easy as you state it here, we all would be happy :-) ! Concerning Liszt, there are important quotes stating he DID play slower than the rest, the most important one, being from Ch.M.Widor's pen, stating - after having heard Liszt practice in Paris at the Erard's castle, that he played only Beethoven, and all almost twice as slow as at the time usual. He btw, also states the same of a conductor he heard in Hungry, who played under Haydn. So, there is plenty of evidence in that direction. And the double beat structure; only think how you consider the two different approaches to our term 'Day'. It is both 24 and 12 hours. O, and I'm actually a student of Bach, since van Oortmerssen studied with MCAlain, she with Dupré, he with Widor, he with Lemmens, he with Hasse, and so I could continue... But hey, if you want to be part of this journey, be welcome, no problem if you doubt, friends forever. To start with it: take Czerny opus 299 and just start playing it in the metrical understanding, and then switch to single beat. See for yourself what works. The rest comes later, I can read this all is very new to you, so it'll need time !
OK. How does that change one's internal pulse and sense of beat? Two heartbeats are now one heartbeat. Of course, we can each play the music how we wish.
Again, practice is different than performance. So, Czerny taught both Liszt and Leschetizky, who in turn (along with Anton Rubinstein) taught everyone. Why do we see almost NOTHING of the slower tradition anywhere?
More foolishness about tempi, now relating to Reger?Tempo markings are not absolute commands, they are advisory. They depend on taste, instrument, acoustic etc. So there's nothing to explain.
but a metronome mark is 😁
@@AuthenticSound A metronome mark is as I said advisory. You think a 'double beat' theory is an explanation? I think (a) it doesn't need explaining (b) the double beat theory has no evidential basis. So that's where we differ.
Schwachsinn.