Beautiful - delightfully gentle and self absorbed......Can it be that you are able to be so brave with the slow tempo because you know the limits and sonority of your lovely instrument , as well as your intimations of the composer's intentions/feelings ?
It's probably because I don't know anything that the only chance I have is to listen to the instrument and the music to come up with some form of solution. With this approach these slow tempi somehow come naturally. I find that the feelings are embedded in the sounds, so by listening we may perceive them.. if we allow 'time' for the sound to speak we perceive even more...
Very nice rendition and perfect tempo. I wanted to ask how you determine tempo in these older pieces. Since no metronome markings are given and we typically just get some vague tempo indication (e.g., "andante"), if anything at all, how do you approach figuring out the tempo? I'm interested in the WBMP, but find it much more difficult to apply to "pre-metronome" music.
Thank you! I don't have a 'scientific' method. For suites with allemandes, courantes etc.. I use my own internal 'pulsometre' 🙃 Factors influencing it may be the 'Affekt' of the piece, the notation, its intricacy, and then the balance between the different movements of the suite. I have sort of found my own way of finding a tempo that works within the mode in which I operate, which resonates with the WBMP approach anyway. If I find more than one tempo solution for a piece I decide which one to use by trying it out enough times to convince myself of one result rather than another, in the context of that given moment (things could change months later but would always gravitate around the same area anyway). After a while one gets used to certain tempi for certain types of pieces. For pieces (or sonatas) with Allegro, Andante etc.. I use pretty much a similar approach. However, having found some difficulty with specific pieces in the past, I consulted Quantz's table of 'pulse speeds' with their 'translation' into metronome marks (in The Interpretation of Early Music by Donington). Often to find, anyway, that the solution I had 'found' was in the same region of tempo that Quantz had prescribed taking his pulse indications as a double beat. Funnily enough Donington comments that Quantz's tempi are 'problematic and unrealistic' (or something like that..), which shows an obvious single beat approach, and only that, in his mind. In summary, I do things mostly intuitively, with some reference when it is possible to have it. I have found that the more I play pieces of a certain type or style, the more easily I manage to find tempi for them. I guess that accumulating experience, even as little as the one I have, helps. We have to sort of open our own path if nobody else who is playing 'pre-metronome' music (and could be a 'reference') realises that WBMP is a fact and as a consequence the 'older' music also was considerably slower and more rhetorical than what we could define as 'mainstream standards' of today. It is somewhat difficult to explain in words all of this. I hope that some of it makes sense to you :-)
@@theclavierist Thank you very much for this detailed explanation. I think I'm more or less on the same page with you. As a starting point, if I have a tempo indication, like "andante", I typically set my metronome to that tempo and then halve it. But I find that I'm able to eventually arrive intuitively at a tempo that makes sense to me by feeling the piece, which may not comport with the metronome at all. Similar to you, I do return to piece later on to find that I should've played it a bit faster or a bit slower; but usually within the same range. I've been told many times that I play too slowly. It's fine. I do. But that's how I hear the music; and that's how I like to play it. Thanks for the reference to Quantz. I'll definitely look into that. Keep up the great work on your channel.
@@theclavierist one of the reasons why I keep coming back to your channel is the feeling you play with; I think the stereotype about classical musicians being overly pedantic/conservative is largely true, and it is the reason why people often find classical music boring. And to me, a rendition doesn't have to be quicker to be interesting; it just needs to be authentic. Anyway, keep playing "too slow", I guess. :)
@@its_eis thank you for this nice comment. I guess that my lack of formal musical education and my connections with folk music inevitably influence my interpretation of 'classical music'. I do try to be authentic to myself and I am glad you perceive that :-)
Great piece!
Well done!
Beautiful - delightfully gentle and self absorbed......Can it be that you are able to be so brave with the slow tempo because you know the limits and sonority of your lovely instrument , as well as your intimations of the composer's intentions/feelings ?
It's probably because I don't know anything that the only chance I have is to listen to the instrument and the music to come up with some form of solution. With this approach these slow tempi somehow come naturally. I find that the feelings are embedded in the sounds, so by listening we may perceive them.. if we allow 'time' for the sound to speak we perceive even more...
Very nice rendition and perfect tempo. I wanted to ask how you determine tempo in these older pieces. Since no metronome markings are given and we typically just get some vague tempo indication (e.g., "andante"), if anything at all, how do you approach figuring out the tempo? I'm interested in the WBMP, but find it much more difficult to apply to "pre-metronome" music.
Thank you! I don't have a 'scientific' method. For suites with allemandes, courantes etc.. I use my own internal 'pulsometre' 🙃 Factors influencing it may be the 'Affekt' of the piece, the notation, its intricacy, and then the balance between the different movements of the suite. I have sort of found my own way of finding a tempo that works within the mode in which I operate, which resonates with the WBMP approach anyway. If I find more than one tempo solution for a piece I decide which one to use by trying it out enough times to convince myself of one result rather than another, in the context of that given moment (things could change months later but would always gravitate around the same area anyway). After a while one gets used to certain tempi for certain types of pieces.
For pieces (or sonatas) with Allegro, Andante etc.. I use pretty much a similar approach. However, having found some difficulty with specific pieces in the past, I consulted Quantz's table of 'pulse speeds' with their 'translation' into metronome marks (in The Interpretation of Early Music by Donington). Often to find, anyway, that the solution I had 'found' was in the same region of tempo that Quantz had prescribed taking his pulse indications as a double beat. Funnily enough Donington comments that Quantz's tempi are 'problematic and unrealistic' (or something like that..), which shows an obvious single beat approach, and only that, in his mind.
In summary, I do things mostly intuitively, with some reference when it is possible to have it. I have found that the more I play pieces of a certain type or style, the more easily I manage to find tempi for them. I guess that accumulating experience, even as little as the one I have, helps.
We have to sort of open our own path if nobody else who is playing 'pre-metronome' music (and could be a 'reference') realises that WBMP is a fact and as a consequence the 'older' music also was considerably slower and more rhetorical than what we could define as 'mainstream standards' of today.
It is somewhat difficult to explain in words all of this. I hope that some of it makes sense to you :-)
@@theclavierist Thank you very much for this detailed explanation. I think I'm more or less on the same page with you. As a starting point, if I have a tempo indication, like "andante", I typically set my metronome to that tempo and then halve it. But I find that I'm able to eventually arrive intuitively at a tempo that makes sense to me by feeling the piece, which may not comport with the metronome at all. Similar to you, I do return to piece later on to find that I should've played it a bit faster or a bit slower; but usually within the same range. I've been told many times that I play too slowly. It's fine. I do. But that's how I hear the music; and that's how I like to play it. Thanks for the reference to Quantz. I'll definitely look into that. Keep up the great work on your channel.
@@theclavierist one of the reasons why I keep coming back to your channel is the feeling you play with; I think the stereotype about classical musicians being overly pedantic/conservative is largely true, and it is the reason why people often find classical music boring. And to me, a rendition doesn't have to be quicker to be interesting; it just needs to be authentic. Anyway, keep playing "too slow", I guess. :)
@@thehalf-bakedorganist send me an email to theclavierist@gmail.com and I can send you Quantz's table.
@@its_eis thank you for this nice comment. I guess that my lack of formal musical education and my connections with folk music inevitably influence my interpretation of 'classical music'. I do try to be authentic to myself and I am glad you perceive that :-)