A very authentic Interpretation. Especially the 3rd Movement. Soon, I love to hear you playing Mozart's Rondo in D Major K 485. It's a very beautiful piece even it translated in this authentic metronome practice.
Beethoven and Mozart wrote music for the people. This is music for academics. It's so obviously wrong. Bach's music sounds good at any tempo. Not Mozart.
Cheers for the Video clip! Apologies for chiming in, I am interested in your opinion. Have you heard about - Riddleagan Piano Master Remedy (Sure I saw it on Google)? It is an awesome one of a kind guide for revealing an easy way to learn the piano minus the hard work. Ive heard some amazing things about it and my friend Sam at very last got cool results with it.
Does anyone seriously believe that this is what Mozart intended? The Mozart that said of Italians "They write 'Allegro' and play 'Andante'" ? I suggest all those commenters that praised this performance to listen to Horowitz's version, then see if they still have the same opinion of M, Winter's version
@@truBador2 there are plenty of detractors. There is no evidence that this guy’s “half beat” theory was true. Even if it were, the piece sounds awful at this tempo.
The melodies' beauty here shines itself at these MM tempi, together with your special way you touch the keys and articulate. Thanks a lot for this upload.
Beautiful performance as always! Have you ever spoken with or corresponded with Robert Levin regarding the tempo of Mozart's compositions? He certainly seems to be one of the most preeminent resources of knowledge when it comes to Mozart and specifically the structure, tendencies and specific qualities of his music. Thank you again.
Are there performers who are known to have played famous pieces by Mozart, Beethoven, etc. at a slower tempo, like you do? Have others sought to be faithful to the speed of the times? Thank you for your reply!
Hello Wim, I watched some of your video's regarding your hypotheses and you seem to have arrived at a strict rule; namely that the original metronome markings should be taken at half speed to what we are used to (you call it whole beat theory). You are a very capable musician that should not be led by such dubious reconstructions, but IMHO you should choose your own tempo based on your musical imagination, your instrument and the acoustical conditions instead. The historical info regarding tempo is contradictory in the least and you cannot use it to "reconstruct" anything. This recording shows that you arrive at ridiculous results which only harm your own reputation as a musician. I will mention one source to prove my point. Mozart wrote a wonderful piece for clock organ (the Fantasia in F minor K608). This imaginative late Mozart piece was played by the clock in "hardly nine minutes", as we know from a description made in Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, I (Sept. 1799), cols. 876-79. It consists of three parts, Allegro/Andante/Allegro and is nowadays most often played by organists. They usually take about 10 to 11 minutes to play it which in your theory would be MUCH too fast. Playing it at your tempo for allegro/andante parts would lead to someting like 25 minutes for this Fantasia at least. It is NONSENSE to play the piece that slowly and certainly not "historical correct". The same goes for K330. It does NOT make sense at all. It is NOT possible to "reconstruct historical tempo". What we know is that tempo and style could vary widely between performers. It still did at the beginning of the 20th century, when the first recordings of pianists where made. All these pianists sound very different. There was not one general style of playing or tempo or rubato or expression. I would urge you to stop trying to "reconstruct" or "find the truth". Musical expressiveness depends on the player, his capabilities and understanding, as well as the instrument and the conditions. But NOT so much on historical sources, which can give some guidance, but not more then that IMHO.
Answer me: if someone writes NONSENSE in capital, would you answer him? I can give you more durations than that one, more problematic even than MMs. And yes there is a solution for, an easy one.
@@AuthenticSound Hi Wim, maybe I would answer, maybe not. What matters is the quality of the arguments and the discussion. I stressed the word because I believe it does not make sense to play K330 this slowly. Not that it bothers me if you want to play it so slowly (I just won't listen it), but it is the fact that you stress strongly that this is a "historically reconstructed tempo". I believe it is a lot better to just make music as you feel. You do not need any kind of justification. But stop pretending it is historically correct. There are plenty of arguments; including the one that I gave you on the duration of K608. This elaborate piece took nine minutes to perform, at the tempo the composer wanted, by the clock which did not fail to be precise. His contemporaries adored the piece as one of the best written by Mozart. There is no doubt at all how fast it sounded. So what do you make of the historical info on K608? And what does that mean in general for Mozart Allegro and Andante/adagio sonata movements?
I am looking forward to your CD recording of all Mozart keyboard works. In the meantime, it would be nice to have a longer Mozart video... the one that we have has the first 6 sonatas. How about K330, 331, 332, 333? Admittedly, in this embarassment of riches, I should not be too demanding, so I apologize.
I have never understood what is intended by repeated notes with dots over them, but under a slur, as at the beginning of the andante. This pattern seems to occur in a legato context, so I would suggest these repeated notes have to be as legato as possible for repeated notes. Anyone have any ideas?
First of all I want to say I love the work you’re doing dude. It’s very interesting to hear your renditions of classical pieces. But since Mozart never wrote his own metronome markings on his music how can we tell if this is truly how he would want it to be played? Not to downplay your interpretation, or the whole beat practice, but I’m just curious what you based it off of. I love your videos and I’m really just curious
Using tempo ordinario and the intricated speed system used since the baroque era. Allegro without semiquaverd is fast, with semiquavers is slower; andante is half the speed of Allegro but with double the accents and largo is half too but with the same accents of allegro (largo and adagio where exchanged and became classical andante and largo), and so on. No doubt Mozart learned it from his father and Beethoven from Neefe. Moscheles and Czerny gave M. M markings as a testimony of what they heard during Mozart and Beethoven's lifetime. Same happen with MM in Beethoven. Both Czerny and Moscheles where purists, accomplished musicians and reliable sources for tempi.
Well, as the description says; it is Mozart in Czerny's tempo. Think about it this way: if Czerny tomorrow gave a Mozart concert, wouldn't we go and listen? I do think it the tempo is close to Mozart, but that in fact is another topic. Hope this helps!
A possible topic for a future video is the process you use to come up with a tempo for a piece that has no metronome mark from the composer or anyone else.
I think the real speed is somewhere between this one and the prevailing one. The normal popular performances are way too fast and this is a bit too slow. It would be better somewhere in the middle
I'll upload a new ala turca soon, with long appo. I first was copying other great fortepiano players but when reading L. Mozart, that is probably not the way Mozart intended it (but ornamentation is complex!) th-cam.com/video/PAAeSTuwlvE/w-d-xo.html
@@AuthenticSound I am not sure Mozart agreed with his father's book particularly considering he differentiated the notations (ornamented sixteenth and slurred sixteenth) in the same piece. Even assuming arguendo that is the case, we should not forget the book is about violin playing. How to imitate the slurred short sixteenth in violin playing with piano remains unanswered. It should be played with piano (in nature the percussion instrument) like you expressed previously even when you decides to follow his father's book.
Agree with all your historic tempo reconstructions, your reasoning, and the exquisite and always exciting, often surprising musical proof you unearth. And I have done so for years. BUT: I'd love to hear solo pieces by Dusík or Seixas or Benda or J. Chr. Bach or ... Mozart's piano sonatas simply are not such great music (heresy) as his concertos, and there is so much neglected repertoire of the period. And a lot of Dusík has more languor and passion and harmonic surprise to it then - more heresy - early Beethoven. If anyone can bring them back to life it is you.
Hummel states in his Method that C or 4/4 is a doubled 2/4 meter. In the same chapter, he names the 2/4 "the four quaver" measure and not the "two crotchet". He even indicates 6/8 to be conducted within 4 movements of the hand, just like Tactus Inequallis shown by Lorenz and guess what: Hummel names them "unequal" measures. Do these facts don't even raise a single question? It is a mid. XIX theoretical and practical treatise so important that every major composer was aware of its existence. He even gives us, in Part Three, metronome markings in minims for a 4/4 measure Allegro, and guess what: dotted crotchet M.M for 2/4 measures, clearly resembling the unequal conduction of 6/8. But hey, , maybe they are misprints no one noticed in the reprints and translations...the blindfold of vanity. This easily searchable facts (for anyone) are enough for at least a reasonable doubt regarding the double beat system or structural beat system, as I sometimes call it - somethimes the "uncomfortable truth" system too! . By the way, Wim, I am having the best of the times reading your research documents in the AS Patreon during my lockdown. Totally worth it!
Bravo! All of these suprisingly "little" tidbits, facts, and anecdotes put a picture together that the mainstream "won't" look at. I don't blame them because they have to come to grips with their existence, but after all, truth will out. Great post, Sebastián!
Listening to "modern" performances of the Mozart sonatas over many years, I always felt a certain triviality in the music - pleasant enough, but lacking in depth. Now, in this series of recordings, I can actually hear for the first time the nuances that before I had to imagine.
Dear Wim: Bravo! By the way, do you like Malcolm Bilson? Did you meet him when you played in Cornell? Here is one of his last videos: th-cam.com/video/geUwFLLqO3o/w-d-xo.html
This tempo makes it for me much more easy to follow the melodies: th-cam.com/video/9O2VxbQQkFE/w-d-xo.html And I find it is winning a own beauty which is lost playing so very slow. Historic truth is one thing. And I think Mozart was a good pianist. What he really did playing piano nobody knows, except he has a time-machine. Very interesting the tempo reconstruction, but perhaps not a thing for every day and for listening music in a car. I think that man has changed since this time fundamentally without noticing it. Wim gives us instruments to notice that. It is surprising but irreversible.
Many 2/4 indeed is to be felt as 4/8, especially when the composer uses faster than 16th, or harmonic structure allows it, and that of course, influences the tempo
@@lewisjones2666 In the bad old days I was taught that 2/4 only meant 2 beats in a bar. But there is a quote from Kirnberger somewhere which says moreorless that 4/8 was written in 2/4. Counting 2/4 pieces with lots of demisemiquavers in 4 is thus more logical and practical.
@@AuthenticSound Yes, it would be fast for sure but that doesn't change the fact that this is what Mozart must have intended when he wrote allegro moderato. Whether it is playable is another matter. Apparently, Mozart could play it, otherwise, he wouldn't have written it that way. What you played is, in no way allegro moderato and that goes against Mozart's intentions. Remember that great composers have always pushed the boundaries of what s thought to be playable. For instance, Beethovens Violin concerto was widely thought to be unplayable in his time. Now it is played by everyone.
If this truly is the speed Mozart intended it and Mozart was considered the best piano player of his time; I must be like the 5th best in Austria during that time and i started playing a month ago.
Very good listened to this while writing about the Cuban Missile Crisis
Beautiful work Wim, thank you for spreading joy across the world!
A very authentic Interpretation.
Especially the 3rd Movement.
Soon, I love to hear you playing Mozart's Rondo in D Major K 485. It's a very beautiful piece even it translated in this authentic metronome practice.
I am studying this sonata in these lockdown days for an exam at the conservatory. Great job and beautiful recordings. Greetings from Italy.
Best of luck!
If you want to pass don’t play at this tempo! Just a suggestion.
Beethoven and Mozart wrote music for the people. This is music for academics. It's so obviously wrong. Bach's music sounds good at any tempo. Not Mozart.
It really is gorgeous, it becomes a different piece in whole beat. Thanks for your work
Cheers for the Video clip! Apologies for chiming in, I am interested in your opinion. Have you heard about - Riddleagan Piano Master Remedy (Sure I saw it on Google)? It is an awesome one of a kind guide for revealing an easy way to learn the piano minus the hard work. Ive heard some amazing things about it and my friend Sam at very last got cool results with it.
La mia anima con i tuoi tempi respira
This is actually the sound of mozart
Good job,I enjoy it 😊
Does anyone seriously believe that this is what Mozart intended? The Mozart that said of Italians "They write 'Allegro' and play 'Andante'" ? I suggest all those commenters that praised this performance to listen to Horowitz's version, then see if they still have the same opinion of M, Winter's version
No one believes this is what Mozart intended except for the guy playing 😂
It is astonishing that there are no detractors concerning the tempi. Extraordinary...
Cannot be bothered!
@@truBador2 there are plenty of detractors. There is no evidence that this guy’s “half beat” theory was true. Even if it were, the piece sounds awful at this tempo.
Grazie
The melodies' beauty here shines itself at these MM tempi, together with your special way you touch the keys and articulate. Thanks a lot for this upload.
Con questo tempo riesco a fare meditazione e contemplazione
Beautiful performance as always! Have you ever spoken with or corresponded with Robert Levin regarding the tempo of Mozart's compositions? He certainly seems to be one of the most preeminent resources of knowledge when it comes to Mozart and specifically the structure, tendencies and specific qualities of his music. Thank you again.
Are there performers who are known to have played famous pieces by Mozart, Beethoven, etc. at a slower tempo, like you do? Have others sought to be faithful to the speed of the times? Thank you for your reply!
Yes, but the pressure of the system is really hard on musicians that want to go to try different paths
Hello Wim, I watched some of your video's regarding your hypotheses and you seem to have arrived at a strict rule; namely that the original metronome markings should be taken at half speed to what we are used to (you call it whole beat theory). You are a very capable musician that should not be led by such dubious reconstructions, but IMHO you should choose your own tempo based on your musical imagination, your instrument and the acoustical conditions instead. The historical info regarding tempo is contradictory in the least and you cannot use it to "reconstruct" anything. This recording shows that you arrive at ridiculous results which only harm your own reputation as a musician. I will mention one source to prove my point. Mozart wrote a wonderful piece for clock organ (the Fantasia in F minor K608). This imaginative late Mozart piece was played by the clock in "hardly nine minutes", as we know from a description made in Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, I (Sept. 1799), cols. 876-79. It consists of three parts, Allegro/Andante/Allegro and is nowadays most often played by organists. They usually take about 10 to 11 minutes to play it which in your theory would be MUCH too fast. Playing it at your tempo for allegro/andante parts would lead to someting like 25 minutes for this Fantasia at least. It is NONSENSE to play the piece that slowly and certainly not "historical correct". The same goes for K330. It does NOT make sense at all. It is NOT possible to "reconstruct historical tempo". What we know is that tempo and style could vary widely between performers. It still did at the beginning of the 20th century, when the first recordings of pianists where made. All these pianists sound very different. There was not one general style of playing or tempo or rubato or expression. I would urge you to stop trying to "reconstruct" or "find the truth". Musical expressiveness depends on the player, his capabilities and understanding, as well as the instrument and the conditions. But NOT so much on historical sources, which can give some guidance, but not more then that IMHO.
Answer me: if someone writes NONSENSE in capital, would you answer him? I can give you more durations than that one, more problematic even than MMs. And yes there is a solution for, an easy one.
@@AuthenticSound Hi Wim, maybe I would answer, maybe not. What matters is the quality of the arguments and the discussion. I stressed the word because I believe it does not make sense to play K330 this slowly. Not that it bothers me if you want to play it so slowly (I just won't listen it), but it is the fact that you stress strongly that this is a "historically reconstructed tempo". I believe it is a lot better to just make music as you feel. You do not need any kind of justification. But stop pretending it is historically correct. There are plenty of arguments; including the one that I gave you on the duration of K608. This elaborate piece took nine minutes to perform, at the tempo the composer wanted, by the clock which did not fail to be precise. His contemporaries adored the piece as one of the best written by Mozart. There is no doubt at all how fast it sounded. So what do you make of the historical info on K608? And what does that mean in general for Mozart Allegro and Andante/adagio sonata movements?
I am looking forward to your CD recording of all Mozart keyboard works. In the meantime, it would be nice to have a longer Mozart video... the one that we have has the first 6 sonatas. How about K330, 331, 332, 333? Admittedly, in this embarassment of riches, I should not be too demanding, so I apologize.
Beautiful details in this sonata come out from behind the clouds and shine in Whole Beat. Thank you, Wim. Bravo!
I have never understood what is intended by repeated notes with dots over them, but under a slur, as at the beginning of the andante. This pattern seems to occur in a legato context, so I would suggest these repeated notes have to be as legato as possible for repeated notes. Anyone have any ideas?
This is an indication for a special touch that is only possible on the clavichord.
This makes me wonder if either of them assigned a MM to the K511 Rondo in a.
Wonderful interpretation, Wim! What could be better in these difficult times than Herr Mozart on the clavichord. Peace and best wishes to all!
First of all I want to say I love the work you’re doing dude. It’s very interesting to hear your renditions of classical pieces. But since Mozart never wrote his own metronome markings on his music how can we tell if this is truly how he would want it to be played? Not to downplay your interpretation, or the whole beat practice, but I’m just curious what you based it off of. I love your videos and I’m really just curious
Using tempo ordinario and the intricated speed system used since the baroque era. Allegro without semiquaverd is fast, with semiquavers is slower; andante is half the speed of Allegro but with double the accents and largo is half too but with the same accents of allegro (largo and adagio where exchanged and became classical andante and largo), and so on. No doubt Mozart learned it from his father and Beethoven from Neefe.
Moscheles and Czerny gave M. M markings as a testimony of what they heard during Mozart and Beethoven's lifetime. Same happen with MM in Beethoven. Both Czerny and Moscheles where purists, accomplished musicians and reliable sources for tempi.
Well, as the description says; it is Mozart in Czerny's tempo. Think about it this way: if Czerny tomorrow gave a Mozart concert, wouldn't we go and listen? I do think it the tempo is close to Mozart, but that in fact is another topic. Hope this helps!
A possible topic for a future video is the process you use to come up with a tempo for a piece that has no metronome mark from the composer or anyone else.
Great stuff! Thanks for the replies! My questions have been answered haha. I think it’s great what you guys are doing and keep it up!
One of my all-time favorite Sonatas! Thanks so much for this!
Superb as always Wim!
Always nice to read you here Luca!
Thank you for a new ancient perspective :)
Wonderful to hear every note and therefore the melody
I think the real speed is somewhere between this one and the prevailing one. The normal popular performances are way too fast and this is a bit too slow. It would be better somewhere in the middle
When you say 'real' speed, what value do you attribute to the MM marks of Czerny, a pupil of Mozart's pupil Hummel? Was Czerny wrong?
I know the feeling!
What happened to the appoggiatura in the slow movement? I remember you (Wim) expressed it differently in the Turkish march of the same composer.
I'll upload a new ala turca soon, with long appo. I first was copying other great fortepiano players but when reading L. Mozart, that is probably not the way Mozart intended it (but ornamentation is complex!) th-cam.com/video/PAAeSTuwlvE/w-d-xo.html
@@AuthenticSound I am not sure Mozart agreed with his father's book particularly considering he differentiated the notations (ornamented sixteenth and slurred sixteenth) in the same piece.
Even assuming arguendo that is the case, we should not forget the book is about violin playing. How to imitate the slurred short sixteenth in violin playing with piano remains unanswered. It should be played with piano (in nature the percussion instrument) like you expressed previously even when you decides to follow his father's book.
Agree with all your historic tempo reconstructions, your reasoning, and the exquisite and always exciting, often surprising musical proof you unearth. And I have done so for years. BUT: I'd love to hear solo pieces by Dusík or Seixas or Benda or J. Chr. Bach or ... Mozart's piano sonatas simply are not such great music (heresy) as his concertos, and there is so much neglected repertoire of the period. And a lot of Dusík has more languor and passion and harmonic surprise to it then - more heresy - early Beethoven. If anyone can bring them back to life it is you.
Hummel states in his Method that C or 4/4 is a doubled 2/4 meter. In the same chapter, he names the 2/4 "the four quaver" measure and not the "two crotchet". He even indicates 6/8 to be conducted within 4 movements of the hand, just like Tactus Inequallis shown by Lorenz and guess what: Hummel names them "unequal" measures.
Do these facts don't even raise a single question? It is a mid. XIX theoretical and practical treatise so important that every major composer was aware of its existence. He even gives us, in Part Three, metronome markings in minims for a 4/4 measure Allegro, and guess what: dotted crotchet M.M for 2/4 measures, clearly resembling the unequal conduction of 6/8. But hey, , maybe they are misprints no one noticed in the reprints and translations...the blindfold of vanity.
This easily searchable facts (for anyone) are enough for at least a reasonable doubt regarding the double beat system or structural beat system, as I sometimes call it - somethimes the "uncomfortable truth" system too! .
By the way, Wim, I am having the best of the times reading your research documents in the AS Patreon during my lockdown. Totally worth it!
Bravo! All of these suprisingly "little" tidbits, facts, and anecdotes put a picture together that the mainstream "won't" look at. I don't blame them because they have to come to grips with their existence, but after all, truth will out. Great post, Sebastián!
What is this source you speak of ? Can I find it on imslp ?
Listening to "modern" performances of the Mozart sonatas over many years, I always felt a certain triviality in the music - pleasant enough, but lacking in depth. Now, in this series of recordings, I can actually hear for the first time the nuances that before I had to imagine.
Dear Wim:
Bravo!
By the way, do you like Malcolm Bilson? Did you meet him when you played in Cornell? Here is one of his last videos: th-cam.com/video/geUwFLLqO3o/w-d-xo.html
Unfortunately I hadn't got the opportunity to meet him!
This tempo makes it for me much more easy to follow the melodies: th-cam.com/video/9O2VxbQQkFE/w-d-xo.html And I find it is winning a own beauty which is lost playing so very slow. Historic truth is one thing. And I think Mozart was a good pianist. What he really did playing piano nobody knows, except he has a time-machine. Very interesting the tempo reconstruction, but perhaps not a thing for every day and for listening music in a car. I think that man has changed since this time fundamentally without noticing it. Wim gives us instruments to notice that. It is surprising but irreversible.
Lovely!
Wim, do you consider both the outer movements to be in practice in 4/8?
Could you please explain what underlies your question?
Many 2/4 indeed is to be felt as 4/8, especially when the composer uses faster than 16th, or harmonic structure allows it, and that of course, influences the tempo
@@lewisjones2666 In the bad old days I was taught that 2/4 only meant 2 beats in a bar. But there is a quote from Kirnberger somewhere which says moreorless that 4/8 was written in 2/4. Counting 2/4 pieces with lots of demisemiquavers in 4 is thus more logical and practical.
How is this Allegro Moderato? Are you so persuaded by your own theory of Tempo that you are ignoring Mozart's own direction for tempo? Just curious.
Imagine that from Allegro moderato you should be able to see the prestissimo at about double that speed.
@@AuthenticSound Yes, it would be fast for sure but that doesn't change the fact that this is what Mozart must have intended when he wrote allegro moderato. Whether it is playable is another matter. Apparently, Mozart could play it, otherwise, he wouldn't have written it that way. What you played is, in no way allegro moderato and that goes against Mozart's intentions. Remember that great composers have always pushed the boundaries of what s thought to be playable. For instance, Beethovens Violin concerto was widely thought to be unplayable in his time. Now it is played by everyone.
La velocità nervosa è sintomo di materialismo e di potere...
If this truly is the speed Mozart intended it and Mozart was considered the best piano player of his time; I must be like the 5th best in Austria during that time and i started playing a month ago.
I’m sorry but why do you think this was the historical tempo? Mozart would have played it so much faster.
you find the answers to your question doubtlessly on our channel :-)
Even if your crackpot theory were true, the piece sounds terrible at this tempo. It completely misses the spirit of the piece.
First! HAHA!!! "Point"!
Why am I not surprised? 😄
This is insider knowledge guys... He must be getting precise timings for the uploads...
@@surgeeo1406 Nope. I actually landed on a lucky square this time! :D
@@kaybrown4010 I live on Authentic Sound! HAHA!!!