This is a relief to me to learn that classical music is NOT stuck in a rut trying to enforce an orthodoxy based on what some experts believe Chopin or other composer would have played their compositions. There are so many great pianists today who through their own improvisational talents enhance the original or even stumble onto what Chopin was seeking. A beautiful composition can be made even more beautiful as time goes on and the world changes. New and better instruments, new techniques, ... new ears inspired by old music to add their own contribution and make it relevant for today...
Well, I am old, so for years Chopin’s classics were „engraved in stone” in my brain. To the extent that when some performers started to incorporate variations, I would look with disbelief at the radio or tv, angry that they played falce music. Even when I learned about Chopin improvisation skills, I was still sure that only the „official” versions were correct. Time was passing and things started to modernize. Two of polish brilliant jazz pianists, Adam Makowicz and Leszek Możdzer setup a concert in Carnegie Hall, playing jazz variations of Chopin music. This performance at Carnegie Hall in 2004 was a new opening for me because it was a perfect example of how Chopin’s improvisational spirit lives on. They took Chopin’s music and reimagined it with jazz, blending classical beauty with modern creativity. It felt so spontaneous and full of energy, just like how I imagine Chopin might have played in his time. I love how Chopin’s music often used Polish folk themes, and I think Możdżer and Makowicz added their twist by mixing in jazz harmonies and rhythms. Their performance was really brilliant thanks to their technical skill and the emotional depth that makes Chopin’s music so timeless. Watching them play, I felt like they were having a conversation through the piano, just like Chopin’s improvisations must have been-responsive and alive. I recommend performances like this because they keep Chopin’s legacy fresh and relevant. His music isn’t stuck in the past-it’s alive and inspirational. Such playing will not help classical pianists winning in Warsaw I suppose, but its a lot of fun to listen to.
Yes, I know this feeling extremely well. It's because the inner ear is "holographic" so to speak-- it tracks lines (and internal sounds) in a much more complex way than you can at the piano-- lines have a life of their own, all the notes have a very deep and highly patterned connection among each other, and so on. Part of the problem is that the modern piano is detuned, whereas internal sounds are always harmonious-- so when you try to reproduce a dream or audio hallucination on the piano, it sounds wrong. What might sound beautiful to others will always sound as sour as a lemon to the one who originally heard the ideas.
Oh great, that you covered the improvisation aspect in Chopin, Ben! :) Such a huge part of good musicianship in the 19th century (and earlier), yet so little mentioned because we have only a handful of actual material naturally, given the nature of improvisation art. Studying Chopin's life and musicianship, I got the impression that he very much preferred to be free and unrestricted by rules as a musician. But once he went through that unloved process of writing his ideas down and perfecting the piece, he probably preferred that people respect the "soul" that the piece got and, indirectly, acknowledge the torturing effort that it took him to produce it. You certainly know this anecdote about Liszt showing off by wildly improvising a Chopin piece in Chopin's presence. It's said Liszt's changes vexed Chopin, who then told Liszt to play his "music like it was written or not at all". I'm not sure right now how authentic that story is, or if it is one of the many legends, but it sounds very much like the two of them. On the other hand, it's also said that Chopin "never played any of his pieces the same way twice". Again, I'm not sure if any contemporary from Chopin's lifetime was in the position to confidently make such a claim (who was around to hear each and every salon/concert/home performance of Chopin for 25 years?). Though, assumed that this is true, it does give Frederic a bit of a hypocrite flavour at first. But then, it doesn't. He himself was certainly the only person who could improvise his own music without changing the specific meaning, colour, flavour and feeling that he wanted it to have. The harmonies of all the pieces that he published himself are so incredibly refined that it would take a mind-reader to know what exactly he meant to say. As far as I know, we know only about one pianist that he gave the "licence" to play his music as he pleased, that was the musical genius boy Carl Filtsch, because Chopin felt completely and utterly understood by the young boy (which is astonishing and makes the early death of Filtsch so much more tragic). However, what I meant to say with all my scribble was that I don't think Chopin's Opus pieces should be changed/improvised at all (existing variation from the master's hand aren't changes, they still came from Chopin's own mind). No-one really knows what his harmonies made Chopin feel/think, or what he tried to express. But personally, I would hate the musical sobs, outcries, laughters, screams, chatter, raging, boiling blood, whispers, sweet-talk... all that world of human emotions that I can clearly hear in his music to be destroyed through incompetent improvisation, incompetent not because the musician was unskilful but unknowing or ignorant. If Liszt, who knew Chopin so well, couldn't satisfy him (given that story is true), how can we, 180 years later? Having said that, I would be more open when it comes to Chopin's unpublished pieces from his drawers. Pieces he did not think of as worthy for the public and "unfinished" in his brutally self-critical opinion. Just as an experiment, to see what could be done by talented improvisers, that would be refreshing!
Even as the fantasy is meant to be an improvisatory piece, his fantasy in F minor has to one of the most finely and meticulously crafted pieces in the whole Chopin repertoire... Excellent Video as always Mr. Laude !! :)
This is exactly true and an excellent insight. Other composers including Cochran report exactly the same fact in interviews. Improvising is essentially the default state, and compositions are often diminutive of the more expansive developments during improvising. Mozart also wrote in his letter that his improvisations are far more advanced than his compositions but added that they wouldn’t be suitable as written works as the performer would go mad trying to interpret, or words to that effect.
I honestly thought the E-flat Nocturne sounded absolutely THRILLING with Chopin's included variants! WONDERFUL! When are we going to be privileged with a recording of Chopin's music WITH some of the "authentic additions and variants"? NOT soon enough, I'm afraid.
I think that it is not entirely accurate to say that Chopin „hated” composing. However, his letters reveal a complicated relationship with the process: one marked by frustration, emotional intensity, and a relentless pursuit of perfection. While composing was not a source of unbridled joy for Chopin, it was also an essential part of his identity and artistic expression. The Struggles of a Perfectionist Chopin was a meticulous perfectionist, often dissatisfied with his work. He revised tirelessly, frequently discarding material that did not meet his exceptionally high standards. In one letter, he lamented: "I am writing and erasing and rewriting again, and in the end, I am dissatisfied with myself. This obsessive attention to detail often made composing feel like a daunting and exhausting task. His creative process was a cycle of trial and error, reflecting his desire to achieve a balance between technical brilliance and emotional authenticity. Chopin’s fragile health amplified the difficulty of composition. The act of translating his innermost feelings into music was physically and emotionally draining. He described the burden of inspiration in almost painful terms: "You cannot imagine how it exhausts me to write something that satisfies me, and even then, I am left uncertain." For Chopin, composing was not just an intellectual exercise but first of all an emotional journey. It required him to dig deeply into his psyche, which could leave him feeling depleted. Despite the struggles, Chopin recognized that composing was an integral part of his being. In a letter to his friend Julian Fontana, he confessed: "When I cannot compose, I feel as though I have lost a part of myself." This duality-the pain of creation and the necessity of self-expression-defined his relationship with composing. While the process was often grueling, the act of completing a piece brought him a sense of fulfillment. Chopin’s ambivalence toward composing can best be understood as a reflection of his perfectionism and sensitivity. On one hand, the process was fraught with difficulty; on the other hand, it was through composing that he expressed his deepest emotions, preserved his heritage, and created timeless masterpieces. Rather than hatred, it is more accurate to describe Chopin’s relationship with composing as one of intense struggle-a struggle that ultimately gave his music its extraordinary depth and emotional power.
acctualy we should be very happy that some of the clasiccal music composer (centuries ago) were so disciplined that they write their pieces onto paper as a sheet of notes & chords -)
@ 100% but at this point, that’s not the issue. The issue is what’s been lost during the 100+ years just staring at those sheets and trying to play the right notes.
Chopin was a frequent improviser, but not necessarily when it came to the performance of his published works. When Chopin's student, Zofia Zaleska, showed up at her lesson without the score for Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, Chopin said, "I don't want any of this...I want to teach either precisely or not at all." [from Eigeldinger, Chopin Pianist and Teacher as Seen by His Pupils, p. 28] He obviously did not want her to wing it. In my opinion, this is an argument for textual accuracy. The purpose of the large number of supplemental ornaments for the 2nd. Nocturne, that Chopin gave to his students, is speculative, according to Eigeldinger, p. 152. Possibly they were for pedagogical purposes.
@@williamsmyth5047 it could also be an argument for a certain pedagogical approach to amateurs of a certain skill level. As I understand it (from the Eigeldinger), he shared variants with more talented students.
@@williamsmyth5047 if it’s between “winging it” and precision, you choose precision for sure. Chopin was right. The argument among historical improvisation advocates though is not to just wing it, but to develop the skills to speak fluently enough in the musical language that you can ornament idiomatically, or be able to improvise freely within stylistic parameters. It’s a very liberating thing that most classical pianists don’t know anymore, and yet was more common/fundamental to ordinary training in the 18th-19th centuries - but Chopin’s students didn’t necessarily have strong enough musicianship backgrounds either. It’s probably one of the reasons a market for sheet music was developing and the whole canon of masterpieces would soon come to define classical music practice. In that sense Chopin’s works were ironically part of the larger de-skilling of musicians that would take place over the ensuing century.
Agreed with Yunchun and Ben. Appreciate the quote and discussion but Chopin and some unprepared student are world's apart. Look at the skill of an improvising musician like Charlier Parker. Certainly not winging it! His improvisations are crystalized in music history, and often seen as textbooks for music education.
If you do a google search on the words Chopin, Liszt and gangsters, you will find similar prints. One of them is called Piano Mafia starring Chopin - Liszt. Quite hilarious. I also found a very similar (and equally hilarious) print to Ben's T-shirt, but with the text "Did you practice?" below the picture featuring Fryderyk (as Jules) and Franz (as Vincent). I suspect that it is the same as the one that Ben is wearing here, although I could not see with any certainty whether Ben had this same text on his T-shirt in this clip.
I understand where you're coming from, and yet this is the kind of sentiment that has stunted the musicianship of multiple generations of classical pianists. In my opinion (as a classical pianist who basically worships the masterpieces of the 18th-19th centuries and was not trained to improvise), I believe that gaining fluency in the language these composers spoke would contribute to the elevation of our musical culture and foster a deeper appreciation for the works that were crystallized from the past and the kind of musicianship that produced them. If it doesn't currently rise above the level of schmaltz to your ears, that might just be proving my point: classical musicians as a whole lost general competency in improvisation, and it might require going through a schmaltzy phrase to bring it back. But I think it's a worthy effort.
Improvising is fundamentally different from consciously composing. In the former, you allow yourself to let musical ideas flow through you that you would never hope to think of consciously. And I’m not talking about flourishes or decorations, but entire musical ideas. Sit down at the piano and play an idea. Then without any plan, pursue that idea, explore it, expand upon it. Eventually you’ll discover ideas and sounds that sound alien. It’s exciting and fascinating, I highly recommend it.
As a jazz pianist improv to me is just composition without writing anything down. If I want to write it down then I'll do some improv over and over, write down what I like and then form it into shape from there. I hope going forward we can come up with better ways to teach music which will incorporate the technical knowledge we've developed in classical music and the language, improv and harmony knowledge we've developed in jazz and use the best parts from each.
I believe all great music appears spontaneously and whole in the mind of the composer. It represents something meaningful that emerges from the subconscious. For something like that to be crafted deliberately would be highly unlikely, makes me think of the likelihood of the proverbial monkeys eventually producing the works of Shakespear at the typewriter (our conscious self, no matter how learned, being the monkeys). There is plenty of testimony about the phenomenon of having a piece of music spontaneously appear in the mind. “Music was not invented by the composer but found” said Nadia Boulanger. In an interview that is on youtube, Tori Amos stated she is “given” her pieces. She says just like some novelists believe their characters existed before they wrote about them, they just find them, she also thinks her pieces existed before she found them. I think this idea of pre-existence has to do with the fact that the piece has its own "being", a meaningful character of its own. And an inner logic. Like when people ask "is Math invented or discovered?" It's both. Someone invents the math but in a sense it was pre-existent because it is derived from simpler principles of logic. It's not arbitrary, not subjective. It seems strange to state there is a sense in which great music is also not aribtrary, not subjective. But I feel it is so. Maria João Pires stated: “Music is not just a human creation. There is more to it. A composer has forces within him that we cannot explain. But he also has them from somewhere, somewhere from all over the world, from the universe. As an artist, I am simply a channel to transmit the music.” John Fahey stated “I never considered for a minute that I had talent. What I did have was divine inspiration and an open subconscious.” Multiple great novelists have conveyed this type of experience. Goethe said “I wrote the book almost unconsciously, like a somnambulist [sleepwalker], and was amazed when I realized what I had done.”
I deeply believe in this. I like to say that Bach's music was discovered, not invented - just like the question you mention with regards to mathematics. Of course, it's both - and invention contains discovery within it.
imagine how many piano pieces were lost in history just because authors did not write it onto sheet of music -( nowdays if somebody just make short piano improvisation , even very cheap electronic musical instrument (synthesizer ) directly record every touch of keys and able to export data as MIDI file -)
@@DelsinM perhaps, although I think we at least have a hint. But what’s more interesting is what kind of improvising can be compelling in the here and now, and how the study of historical improvisation can allow us to revive the musical language Chopin was speaking and make it meaningful again today. We pianists would be much better Chopin players if we could actually do this, his works being elevated “poems” written in a language that is still spoken.
@@benlawdy Yeah, far be it from me to discourage anyone. It just seems an early experience with music which combines 1) time, space, and encouragement to cultivate divine creativity and 2) thorough mastery of music theory, is extremely rare these days. When we consider, for example, that Bach improvised multi-voiced fugues, it makes one wonder whether human intelligence is simply declining.
@ yeah the conditions that produced Bach simply don’t exist anymore. Not sure it’s a reflection of a decline in intelligence though. If there were still families of musician that sang and improvised together every night, there would be more Bachs today. But I suppose there are other forms of family entertainment now!
It must have been devastating and he must’ve known how miraculous his own work was it he wouldn’t have bothered to save it for posterity, and we are all so glad he did so we owe him the time it takes to learn what he has wrenched from his soul. Even a genius has his struggles.
Competition removes the music as the focal point and it's simply which player you like the best. Nothing wrong with it, but it's just not about the pure enjoyment and connection of a piece of music, which was the intention of the composer.
@@pottedrodenttube I’m not sure they’re mutually exclusive. At least in my experience, comparing interpretations often helps bring into relief details of a piece that I didn’t notice before and makes me appreciate the music even more. So then it’s less about “who’s better?” and more about considering many perspectives on the same masterpiece, which keeps light singing on the music. (Having said that, there is plenty of what you describe - I just don’t think it’s either/or, and it depends on the level of the discourse around a competition.)
05:01 Very interesting. In practice though, just how receptive are Chopin competition juries (not just Mr Rink) _really_ to candidates incorporating their own improvisatory variants into their performances? I had always assumed that any straying at all from Henle et al is viewed as very poor form.
I believe judges like Rink or John O'Conor (whom I've asked the same thing in Episode 2) when they say they'd be delighted to hear a competitor improvise variants. I don't know if they're representative of the norm though, but I think it's more and more embraced. I think part of the issue is that contestants just don't do it. It's not only that juries can be conservative; pianists are conservative too!
My improvisations are mostly musical anarchy, even intentionally putting my digital piano in a weird minor temperament, to make the music even less ordered.
Is a performance a participation in a living tradition, a weekend re-enactment by an enthusiasts' club, or a museum quality reproduction of an ancient culture long gone? If I were capable of the latter (maybe next life?), I think I'd want to go for it from time to time... even if I could improvise like Bach or Chopin.
@@GizzyDillespee absolutely - but the latter is 99.9% of classical music culture for the last century. So, would love to resurrect the former (and, maybe less so, the middle option ;)
In regards to interpreting written pieces, I think it’s a little sacrilegious to add things to established pieces. To me, changing the tone/emphasis/pace of a piece is not just acceptable but necessary for interesting interpretations. But adding material must be done with extreme prejudice if at all; the notes are already on the paper, perfected, play them as you will but do not insert your own material
In certain contexts, of course that's true. But when that's been the dominant context of classical music performance for more than a century, and has contributed to the stunted development of generations of classical pianists who cannot speak the musical languages that they recite, it becomes a problem.
VERY nice video - Horowitz does his own variant (or maybe it was one Chopin wrote) in one of the Chopin pieces... can't remember which one. I remember thinking 'oh well - I suppose Chopin is not as great as Beethoven'. Now I am a bit happier with what he did, having listened t this video. What do you think of my proof that the Chopin waltz was a fake? I posted a lengthy comment on your last Chopin video. Feel slightly insulted that no one even gave it a thumbs up.
doodling = lack of emotion and the music leads nowhere. It has no direction. Improvising can be regarded as composing on the spot. You still need to work with a motif or theme and develop it when improvising, just as every composition is made of a motif. Another way to approach improvisation is to take a specific feeling or image that serves as a starting point and guideline and then express it musically
Improvizing the ''walk through the gallery' theme in Pictures is as bad as Ravel orchestrating the whole piece. Something akin to Liszt making a mess of Schubert's songs by tinkering with them.
The full audio of Episode 8 is in the works and will be released VERY SOON, with 9 & 10 following close on its heels. Thanks for your patience!
This is a relief to me to learn that classical music is NOT stuck in a rut trying to enforce an orthodoxy based on what some experts believe Chopin or other composer would have played their compositions. There are so many great pianists today who through their own improvisational talents enhance the original or even stumble onto what Chopin was seeking. A beautiful composition can be made even more beautiful as time goes on and the world changes. New and better instruments, new techniques, ... new ears inspired by old music to add their own contribution and make it relevant for today...
Supports even more the case of Chopin being the progenitor of Jazz
4th ballade is results of massive improvisations
Well, I am old, so for years Chopin’s classics were „engraved in stone” in my brain. To the extent that when some performers started to incorporate variations, I would look with disbelief at the radio or tv, angry that they played falce music. Even when I learned about Chopin improvisation skills, I was still sure that only the „official” versions were correct. Time was passing and things started to modernize. Two of polish brilliant jazz pianists, Adam Makowicz and Leszek Możdzer setup a concert in Carnegie Hall, playing jazz variations of Chopin music. This performance at Carnegie Hall in 2004 was a new opening for me because it was a perfect example of how Chopin’s improvisational spirit lives on. They took Chopin’s music and reimagined it with jazz, blending classical beauty with modern creativity. It felt so spontaneous and full of energy, just like how I imagine Chopin might have played in his time.
I love how Chopin’s music often used Polish folk themes, and I think Możdżer and Makowicz added their twist by mixing in jazz harmonies and rhythms. Their performance was really brilliant thanks to their technical skill and the emotional depth that makes Chopin’s music so timeless.
Watching them play, I felt like they were having a conversation through the piano, just like Chopin’s improvisations must have been-responsive and alive.
I recommend performances like this because they keep Chopin’s legacy fresh and relevant. His music isn’t stuck in the past-it’s alive and inspirational.
Such playing will not help classical pianists winning in Warsaw I suppose, but its a lot of fun to listen to.
Yes, I know this feeling extremely well. It's because the inner ear is "holographic" so to speak-- it tracks lines (and internal sounds) in a much more complex way than you can at the piano-- lines have a life of their own, all the notes have a very deep and highly patterned connection among each other, and so on.
Part of the problem is that the modern piano is detuned, whereas internal sounds are always harmonious-- so when you try to reproduce a dream or audio hallucination on the piano, it sounds wrong. What might sound beautiful to others will always sound as sour as a lemon to the one who originally heard the ideas.
This is what Reinterpreting Chopin by B. Syroyid does.... It is an album based on improvisations based on works by Chopin
Oh great, that you covered the improvisation aspect in Chopin, Ben! :)
Such a huge part of good musicianship in the 19th century (and earlier), yet so little mentioned because we have only a handful of actual material naturally, given the nature of improvisation art.
Studying Chopin's life and musicianship, I got the impression that he very much preferred to be free and unrestricted by rules as a musician. But once he went through that unloved process of writing his ideas down and perfecting the piece, he probably preferred that people respect the "soul" that the piece got and, indirectly, acknowledge the torturing effort that it took him to produce it.
You certainly know this anecdote about Liszt showing off by wildly improvising a Chopin piece in Chopin's presence. It's said Liszt's changes vexed Chopin, who then told Liszt to play his "music like it was written or not at all". I'm not sure right now how authentic that story is, or if it is one of the many legends, but it sounds very much like the two of them.
On the other hand, it's also said that Chopin "never played any of his pieces the same way twice". Again, I'm not sure if any contemporary from Chopin's lifetime was in the position to confidently make such a claim (who was around to hear each and every salon/concert/home performance of Chopin for 25 years?). Though, assumed that this is true, it does give Frederic a bit of a hypocrite flavour at first. But then, it doesn't. He himself was certainly the only person who could improvise his own music without changing the specific meaning, colour, flavour and feeling that he wanted it to have. The harmonies of all the pieces that he published himself are so incredibly refined that it would take a mind-reader to know what exactly he meant to say. As far as I know, we know only about one pianist that he gave the "licence" to play his music as he pleased, that was the musical genius boy Carl Filtsch, because Chopin felt completely and utterly understood by the young boy (which is astonishing and makes the early death of Filtsch so much more tragic).
However, what I meant to say with all my scribble was that I don't think Chopin's Opus pieces should be changed/improvised at all (existing variation from the master's hand aren't changes, they still came from Chopin's own mind). No-one really knows what his harmonies made Chopin feel/think, or what he tried to express. But personally, I would hate the musical sobs, outcries, laughters, screams, chatter, raging, boiling blood, whispers, sweet-talk... all that world of human emotions that I can clearly hear in his music to be destroyed through incompetent improvisation, incompetent not because the musician was unskilful but unknowing or ignorant. If Liszt, who knew Chopin so well, couldn't satisfy him (given that story is true), how can we, 180 years later?
Having said that, I would be more open when it comes to Chopin's unpublished pieces from his drawers. Pieces he did not think of as worthy for the public and "unfinished" in his brutally self-critical opinion. Just as an experiment, to see what could be done by talented improvisers, that would be refreshing!
Even as the fantasy is meant to be an improvisatory piece, his fantasy in F minor has to one of the most finely and meticulously crafted pieces in the whole Chopin repertoire... Excellent Video as always Mr. Laude !! :)
This is exactly true and an excellent insight. Other composers including Cochran report exactly the same fact in interviews. Improvising is essentially the default state, and compositions are often diminutive of the more expansive developments during improvising. Mozart also wrote in his letter that his improvisations are far more advanced than his compositions but added that they wouldn’t be suitable as written works as the performer would go mad trying to interpret, or words to that effect.
I honestly thought the E-flat Nocturne sounded absolutely THRILLING with Chopin's included variants! WONDERFUL! When are we going to be privileged with a recording of Chopin's music WITH some of the "authentic additions and variants"? NOT soon enough, I'm afraid.
There is recordnings from Mikulis pupils
Excellent work, Ben.
Thank you ever so much!
I think that it is not entirely accurate to say that Chopin „hated” composing. However, his letters reveal a complicated relationship with the process: one marked by frustration, emotional intensity, and a relentless pursuit of perfection. While composing was not a source of unbridled joy for Chopin, it was also an essential part of his identity and artistic expression.
The Struggles of a Perfectionist
Chopin was a meticulous perfectionist, often dissatisfied with his work. He revised tirelessly, frequently discarding material that did not meet his exceptionally high standards. In one letter, he lamented:
"I am writing and erasing and rewriting again, and in the end, I am dissatisfied with myself.
This obsessive attention to detail often made composing feel like a daunting and exhausting task. His creative process was a cycle of trial and error, reflecting his desire to achieve a balance between technical brilliance and emotional authenticity.
Chopin’s fragile health amplified the difficulty of composition. The act of translating his innermost feelings into music was physically and emotionally draining. He described the burden of inspiration in almost painful terms:
"You cannot imagine how it exhausts me to write something that satisfies me, and even then, I am left uncertain."
For Chopin, composing was not just an intellectual exercise but first of all an emotional journey. It required him to dig deeply into his psyche, which could leave him feeling depleted.
Despite the struggles, Chopin recognized that composing was an integral part of his being. In a letter to his friend Julian Fontana, he confessed:
"When I cannot compose, I feel as though I have lost a part of myself."
This duality-the pain of creation and the necessity of self-expression-defined his relationship with composing. While the process was often grueling, the act of completing a piece brought him a sense of fulfillment.
Chopin’s ambivalence toward composing can best be understood as a reflection of his perfectionism and sensitivity. On one hand, the process was fraught with difficulty; on the other hand, it was through composing that he expressed his deepest emotions, preserved his heritage, and created timeless masterpieces.
Rather than hatred, it is more accurate to describe Chopin’s relationship with composing as one of intense struggle-a struggle that ultimately gave his music its extraordinary depth and emotional power.
@@andyz3666 don’t take the thumbnail too seriously :) but as always thank you for sharing your thoughts
@@benlawdy thank you. I just like the subject very much and can’t help blending myself in…don’t want to be annoying
@@andyz3666Your comment is great. I totally agree with you. Thank you
acctualy we should be very happy that some of the clasiccal music composer (centuries ago) were so disciplined that they write their pieces onto paper as a sheet of notes & chords -)
@ 100% but at this point, that’s not the issue. The issue is what’s been lost during the 100+ years just staring at those sheets and trying to play the right notes.
Chopin was a frequent improviser, but not necessarily when it came to the performance of his published works. When Chopin's student, Zofia Zaleska, showed up at her lesson without the score for Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, Chopin said, "I don't want any of this...I want to teach either precisely or not at all." [from Eigeldinger, Chopin Pianist and Teacher as Seen by His Pupils, p. 28] He obviously did not want her to wing it. In my opinion, this is an argument for textual accuracy. The purpose of the large number of supplemental ornaments for the 2nd. Nocturne, that Chopin gave to his students, is speculative, according to Eigeldinger, p. 152. Possibly they were for pedagogical purposes.
@@williamsmyth5047 it could also be an argument for a certain pedagogical approach to amateurs of a certain skill level. As I understand it (from the Eigeldinger), he shared variants with more talented students.
@@williamsmyth5047 if it’s between “winging it” and precision, you choose precision for sure. Chopin was right. The argument among historical improvisation advocates though is not to just wing it, but to develop the skills to speak fluently enough in the musical language that you can ornament idiomatically, or be able to improvise freely within stylistic parameters. It’s a very liberating thing that most classical pianists don’t know anymore, and yet was more common/fundamental to ordinary training in the 18th-19th centuries - but Chopin’s students didn’t necessarily have strong enough musicianship backgrounds either. It’s probably one of the reasons a market for sheet music was developing and the whole canon of masterpieces would soon come to define classical music practice. In that sense Chopin’s works were ironically part of the larger de-skilling of musicians that would take place over the ensuing century.
So insightful! Great discussions here ! Thanks for sharing❤
Agreed with Yunchun and Ben. Appreciate the quote and discussion but Chopin and some unprepared student are world's apart. Look at the skill of an improvising musician like Charlier Parker. Certainly not winging it! His improvisations are crystalized in music history, and often seen as textbooks for music education.
I love the tempi of these Nocturnes. I talked with another aspiring pianist that bemoans the fact that too many of his scores are played too fast.
I love John Rink
I need that shirt
Good to see u here bro
If you do a google search on the words Chopin, Liszt and gangsters, you will find similar prints. One of them is called Piano Mafia starring Chopin - Liszt. Quite hilarious. I also found a very similar (and equally hilarious) print to Ben's T-shirt, but with the text "Did you practice?" below the picture featuring Fryderyk (as Jules) and Franz (as Vincent). I suspect that it is the same as the one that Ben is wearing here, although I could not see with any certainty whether Ben had this same text on his T-shirt in this clip.
@@SR71YF12 here’s the one on wearing without text www.teepublic.com/t-shirt/4205453-chopin-and-liszt
Most gifted composers are doing the same thing
….a most amazing Musical mind, coupled with his advances in technique. Creativity
I suggest to listen to the new album "Chopin selon Chopin" released by Sony and recorded by Francesco Libetta.
….a most amazing Musical mind, coupled with his advances in technique. Creativity. For others to tamper & modify, schmaltz is a possible end point.
I understand where you're coming from, and yet this is the kind of sentiment that has stunted the musicianship of multiple generations of classical pianists. In my opinion (as a classical pianist who basically worships the masterpieces of the 18th-19th centuries and was not trained to improvise), I believe that gaining fluency in the language these composers spoke would contribute to the elevation of our musical culture and foster a deeper appreciation for the works that were crystallized from the past and the kind of musicianship that produced them. If it doesn't currently rise above the level of schmaltz to your ears, that might just be proving my point: classical musicians as a whole lost general competency in improvisation, and it might require going through a schmaltzy phrase to bring it back. But I think it's a worthy effort.
I think improvisation in some cases can be composing also
Improvisation has been very central to who i am, since i was 16.
Improvising is fundamentally different from consciously composing. In the former, you allow yourself to let musical ideas flow through you that you would never hope to think of consciously. And I’m not talking about flourishes or decorations, but entire musical ideas. Sit down at the piano and play an idea. Then without any plan, pursue that idea, explore it, expand upon it. Eventually you’ll discover ideas and sounds that sound alien. It’s exciting and fascinating, I highly recommend it.
That is the greatest shirt ever made Ben
Now, I finally understand myself 😂
As a jazz pianist improv to me is just composition without writing anything down. If I want to write it down then I'll do some improv over and over, write down what I like and then form it into shape from there. I hope going forward we can come up with better ways to teach music which will incorporate the technical knowledge we've developed in classical music and the language, improv and harmony knowledge we've developed in jazz and use the best parts from each.
Great video ✨ do you ever plan on doing some sort of series on Liszt?
I believe all great music appears spontaneously and whole in the mind of the composer. It represents something meaningful that emerges from the subconscious. For something like that to be crafted deliberately would be highly unlikely, makes me think of the likelihood of the proverbial monkeys eventually producing the works of Shakespear at the typewriter (our conscious self, no matter how learned, being the monkeys). There is plenty of testimony about the phenomenon of having a piece of music spontaneously appear in the mind. “Music was not invented by the composer but found” said Nadia Boulanger. In an interview that is on youtube, Tori Amos stated she is “given” her pieces. She says just like some novelists believe their characters existed before they wrote about them, they just find them, she also thinks her pieces existed before she found them. I think this idea of pre-existence has to do with the fact that the piece has its own "being", a meaningful character of its own. And an inner logic. Like when people ask "is Math invented or discovered?" It's both. Someone invents the math but in a sense it was pre-existent because it is derived from simpler principles of logic. It's not arbitrary, not subjective. It seems strange to state there is a sense in which great music is also not aribtrary, not subjective. But I feel it is so. Maria João Pires stated: “Music is not just a human creation. There is more to it. A composer has forces within him that we cannot explain. But he also has them from somewhere, somewhere from all over the world, from the universe. As an artist, I am simply a channel to transmit the music.” John Fahey stated “I never considered for a minute that I had talent. What I did have was divine inspiration and an open subconscious.” Multiple great novelists have conveyed this type of experience. Goethe said “I wrote the book almost unconsciously, like a somnambulist [sleepwalker], and was amazed when I realized what I had done.”
I deeply believe in this. I like to say that Bach's music was discovered, not invented - just like the question you mention with regards to mathematics. Of course, it's both - and invention contains discovery within it.
imagine how many piano pieces were lost in history just because authors did not write it onto sheet of music -(
nowdays if somebody just make short piano improvisation , even very cheap electronic musical instrument (synthesizer ) directly record every touch of keys and able to export data as MIDI file -)
I have a feeling that the modern boutique "improvisers" give us almost no hint of what Chopin actually sounded like at the piano.
@@DelsinM perhaps, although I think we at least have a hint. But what’s more interesting is what kind of improvising can be compelling in the here and now, and how the study of historical improvisation can allow us to revive the musical language Chopin was speaking and make it meaningful again today. We pianists would be much better Chopin players if we could actually do this, his works being elevated “poems” written in a language that is still spoken.
@@benlawdy Yeah, far be it from me to discourage anyone. It just seems an early experience with music which combines 1) time, space, and encouragement to cultivate divine creativity and 2) thorough mastery of music theory, is extremely rare these days. When we consider, for example, that Bach improvised multi-voiced fugues, it makes one wonder whether human intelligence is simply declining.
@ yeah the conditions that produced Bach simply don’t exist anymore. Not sure it’s a reflection of a decline in intelligence though. If there were still families of musician that sang and improvised together every night, there would be more Bachs today. But I suppose there are other forms of family entertainment now!
How do I get that Chopin/Liszt gunslinger T-shirt??
@@S.Lander www.teepublic.com/t-shirt/4205453-chopin-and-liszt
Where can we see Gadjiev’s full improvisation?
@@yahyamhirsi he sent it to me privately. I can ask if he’s willing to share
I think I (We) desperately need a link to order your Chopin T-shirts (and other apparels if you have!!! Please!!!
@@nolango6160 www.teepublic.com/t-shirt/4205453-chopin-and-liszt
The other Chopin shirts are from archivalapparel.co - I think they were limited edition, but they have a similar groovy Chopin one available now
I have to pay attention and read carefully. At first I read "Chopin hated composting."
In a way, it's true. Consider the George Sand quote read at the beginning of the video.
I prefer improvising and giving it a little structure so ig thats something me and chopin have in common 😂, also whens this episode releasing?
Hopefully tomorrow. Sorry for the delay. Lots more on the way this week!
It must have been devastating and he must’ve known how miraculous his own work was it he wouldn’t have bothered to save it for posterity, and we are all so glad he did
so we owe him the time it takes to learn what he has wrenched from his soul.
Even a genius has his struggles.
I like your video titles. You make sure that the viewer clicks your post
@@VinayMusicCorner hopefully the content made the click worth it!
@ absolutely. I am a lifetime member of Tonebase. Your tonebase videos are one the key reasons for me to join tonebase as life member.
Competition removes the music as the focal point and it's simply which player you like the best. Nothing wrong with it, but it's just not about the pure enjoyment and connection of a piece of music, which was the intention of the composer.
@@pottedrodenttube I’m not sure they’re mutually exclusive. At least in my experience, comparing interpretations often helps bring into relief details of a piece that I didn’t notice before and makes me appreciate the music even more. So then it’s less about “who’s better?” and more about considering many perspectives on the same masterpiece, which keeps light singing on the music. (Having said that, there is plenty of what you describe - I just don’t think it’s either/or, and it depends on the level of the discourse around a competition.)
05:01 Very interesting. In practice though, just how receptive are Chopin competition juries (not just Mr Rink) _really_ to candidates incorporating their own improvisatory variants into their performances? I had always assumed that any straying at all from Henle et al is viewed as very poor form.
I believe judges like Rink or John O'Conor (whom I've asked the same thing in Episode 2) when they say they'd be delighted to hear a competitor improvise variants. I don't know if they're representative of the norm though, but I think it's more and more embraced. I think part of the issue is that contestants just don't do it. It's not only that juries can be conservative; pianists are conservative too!
Is there a caption on the bottom of that shirt? Hilarious.
My improvisations are mostly musical anarchy, even intentionally putting my digital piano in a weird minor temperament, to make the music even less ordered.
Is a performance a participation in a living tradition, a weekend re-enactment by an enthusiasts' club, or a museum quality reproduction of an ancient culture long gone? If I were capable of the latter (maybe next life?), I think I'd want to go for it from time to time... even if I could improvise like Bach or Chopin.
@@GizzyDillespee absolutely - but the latter is 99.9% of classical music culture for the last century. So, would love to resurrect the former (and, maybe less so, the middle option ;)
In regards to interpreting written pieces, I think it’s a little sacrilegious to add things to established pieces. To me, changing the tone/emphasis/pace of a piece is not just acceptable but necessary for interesting interpretations. But adding material must be done with extreme prejudice if at all; the notes are already on the paper, perfected, play them as you will but do not insert your own material
In certain contexts, of course that's true. But when that's been the dominant context of classical music performance for more than a century, and has contributed to the stunted development of generations of classical pianists who cannot speak the musical languages that they recite, it becomes a problem.
VERY nice video - Horowitz does his own variant (or maybe it was one Chopin wrote) in one of the Chopin pieces... can't remember which one. I remember thinking 'oh well - I suppose Chopin is not as great as Beethoven'. Now I am a bit happier with what he did, having listened t this video. What do you think of my proof that the Chopin waltz was a fake? I posted a lengthy comment on your last Chopin video. Feel slightly insulted that no one even gave it a thumbs up.
o.o
Where is the line between improvising and doodling?
doodling = lack of emotion and the music leads nowhere. It has no direction. Improvising can be regarded as composing on the spot. You still need to work with a motif or theme and develop it when improvising, just as every composition is made of a motif.
Another way to approach improvisation is to take a specific feeling or image that serves as a starting point and guideline and then express it musically
The variants don't sound good.
one word and this guy ruined Chopin for life
First 🏊♀️
😂
Improvizing the ''walk through the gallery' theme in Pictures is as bad as Ravel orchestrating the whole piece. Something akin to Liszt making a mess of Schubert's songs by tinkering with them.
Can you credit the pianists that are playing??
I do, no? The names are displayed: Dmitry Ablogin, Michael Szymanowski, and Alexander Gadjiev.
@benlawdy I see now. They are very brief credits...