Reality Check: Original Speed of Chopin Etude No.1 (Op.10)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ส.ค. 2024
- Tickets for my New Years Concert in Leipzig Gewandhaus:
www.gewandhaus...
Get the Heart of the Keys Merch:
heart-of-the-k...
More on TH-cam:
/ @anniquegottler5542
More on Instagram:
/ anniquegoettler
Support me on Patreon:
/ anniquegoettler
Visit my website:
www.annique-pi...
Get a lesson:
en.annique-pia...
Thank you very much! Stay safe, stay healthy and stay in the Heart of the Keys!;P
#chopin #etudes #needforspeed
Can’t wait to play my album release concert on October 6th 🎉🤩 tickets and infos here: www.easyticket.de/veranstaltung/annique-goettler-chopin-etudes-cd-release-concert/94675/
It's not so much that detail would be lost during the performance of this piece at its original tempo; "detail" (the harmonic intricacies) and "speed" can always be reconciled, given that the performer possesses the ... well, aptitude to do so. Chopin wrote the etude at 144, because that's how he ultimately played it upon its completion. Not many people then had the aptitude of this Polish guy, nor do many now have it, to play this composition the way it was intended to... As a result every variation we hear of Etude No.1 (Op.10), is a "watered-down" version of the original... As you said, it can be done (with all "detail"), but very few possess the talent to do so.... I would have loved to hear Glenn Gould give it a try - this guy was the modern-day Chopin.
A small note: Chopin’s piano had smaller keys the modern piano.
Smallet as in narrower? Do you know exactly how much narrowerer? If, for instance, a small-handed pianist could play an octave comfortably on today's pianos, but no more, how wide an interval would they have been able to play on the pianos of Chopin's day with an equal level of comfort?
I like Chopin's tempo here. Definitely difficult, but the first Etude is lightening and thunder & Chopin's tempo brings out the electrical excitement of the piece most effectively. It's not a thing of beauty, but of awe!
Yeah i agree. For me the higher tempo felt like the passage was flowing so well.
Interesting analysis….🤔…. Like it 🤟🏿‼️💯
right, original tempo expose brillantly the virtuosity of this piece
In my first two years of college, we had recitals given by the winners of an annual piano competition. Each of them played Op. 10/1 as their encore, and I seem to recall that they had practiced it to technical precision at something close to Chopin’s tempo.
I like the fast tempo. It moves the listening emphasis from the right hand to the left, were you finally find melody.
You are on such a HOT STREAK, Annique! This quality content roll out is magnificent
+1
It is pretty much the tempo Murray Perahia plays it in his 2004 recording.
Its very interesting that with a faster tempo, the melody on the left hand come out more and the right hand sound more lire a accompaniement. I like it.
Maybe that's true, but I don't was his intention.
@@alvodin6197 since improvisation was very important in does golden years, and he was a creative person, I’m sure he played it in a varied way,
A beautiful section that becomes enchanting at speed
There is a recording of 13yo Martha Argerich playing it in Buenos Aires in 1955 which is done absolutely ridiculously fast. Also the Cziffra warming up video version comes to mind 😅
Actually Cziffra plays it quite a bit faster than Argerich here. I just checked it out. I was in the Festival Hall when Cziffra played his first London recital. It was awe inspiring.
@tanelimp, here’s an update:
D. Kharitonov 1:38
G. Cziffra 1:40
Dong H Lim 1:40
Marie Kiyone. 1:42
Fialkowska 1:43
G. Ohlson 1:44
M. Argerich 1:45
Sehun Kim 1:45
Hannah Sun 1:47
Esther Park. 1:47
Soo Jung Ann 1:48
G. Szymczak 1:48
E. Kissin 1:48
Several at 1:49
And many at 1:50
All the hard work you put into the Chopin album seems to have taken your playing to a whole new level. You are on fire, Annique! 🔥🔥
Unfortunately still quite average
I would not trade the details for speed. As soon as it sounds rushed, the magic is over, at least for me. The transition from a well thought out classical piano study with a lot of room for artistic interpretation to a "party piece" is quite short, imho. Ok, Pollini did it in that tempo, and it does not sound like a party piece. The personality of the artist should shine through the interpretation, so I believe you know very well how fast you can go without losing your artistic goal.
Completely agree
I mean why not both lol. Chopin intended it, other pianists have played it like that already.. so it's all up to you how much you want to practice it to get that speed and quality. There's no hard rule you need to follow. But if you want to be the best..
The funny thing is once you brake through the tempo barrier you are liberated and any tempo is doable and playable in a nice way. (I played this etude at 200+ comfortably, not that I would do it in concert …)
@@wimvanmoerbekehow does it sound at 200. Do you like it?
@@PianoturtleX Very fluid, though you must get it right (by which I mean you have to feel no tension, not feeling rushed ... which happens in the beginning because you are not at ease yet)
Congratulations on your upcoming concert🎉 Your love of the music and your exhuberance come shining through your playing! Have a blast!
A lovely chat about 10/1, and big congratulations on your album!
I've been learning this piece for months on months now, about halfway through. I must admit your version is my favourite, the clarity, emphasis, expression and emotion, a big inspiration for me.
Music is always possible. It's the amount of interest you have in it that makes it impossible or possible.
I studied all 12 etudes as well and this is crazy! The improvement becomes exponentially more difficult the faster you go
Beautiful playing. You have a lovely tone.
Your knowledge and explanation makes you a great teacher!
Superb artistry in the total sense of the word!
I will be checking in to continue to learn.
I would not play it sooo fast...the beauty of music, even studios, is to hear all the notes...Good Luck for Your concert!
It sounds great, and very stylistically correct.
Once you've played it at the faster tempo for a few weeks, it will feel and sound "easy"!!
I like the very fast tempo, it's how the piece should sound for me, has to be so electrifying
I have gotten to explore a 1913 Erard grand, and the key action is so much lighter and easier than any other piano. It becomes easy to imagine the speed feeling better on a piano Chopin probably used himself.
Very interesting, instead of hearing the notes I felt I heard more the flow of the piece. Of course you should play the tempo your feel most comfortable in. And I love your interpretation of the Etudes, have never heard them played that way.
I’ve never heard someone play the two accented notes for each up and down so clearly. I honestly didn’t even know those notes could be accented in such a beautiful way till I saw your performance.
Wow the Wim Winters conspiracy theorists got here fast!
I'd have thought they'd have taken twice that amount of time...
They're famously inconsistent with their theory, so I'm sure they have an explanation for the speedy arrival
Cziffra's tempo on this is astounding
J😂
j's on you too bro@@animeingmajor4404
You should definitely play the faster version! It sounds terrific, and on level with Pollini and Gregorz Niemczuk:)
Superbe! At that tempo you hear the melody that is definitely in the left hand!
Dear Annique,
Thank you so much for bringing up this topic. I believe all your comments in your thoughtful video bear important weight.
I appreciate when you point out, the instrument at the time of Chopin is different from our modern piano. And furthermore, that we pianists should likely compensate for those differences when trying to play this music on our modern piano.
I see that Chopin wrote not for his specific instrument, but rather it was the only instrument available: there was no other choice. So Chopin simply wrote music for the piano. But it is not likely he would have envisioned the changes to the piano that were yet to be developed.
If I may please add a bit to what you have said? After I wrote this, I looked at it and realized it’s quite long. I hope it all makes it into the comments here!
My comments also hold a personal value for me because in my lineage of Piano Teachers, tracing that history, one of my teachers goes back to Georges Mathias, pupil of Chopin, and teacher at the Paris conservatoire starting about 14 years after Chopin‘s death. I myself currently am a private Piano Teacher.
Perhaps, first and foremost, is that we musicians, like it or not, are the sole representative(s) of the composer to the world and to ourselves. The composer typically is not alive to give us his or her view on their art. And as such, we must speak for and on behalf of the composer, as if we were his or her amanuensis.
Except that we cannot report a static or verbatim work of art, because as we realize, music does not have life until it is liberated from the page and floats in time and space, as re-created art in sound. Our musical score is but a mere skeleton.
We must provide the heart, the blood vessels, the brain, bodily systems, the organs and skin as it were, and then find a way to breathe life into that whole physical apparatus. And to find all those things through that skeleton, we call a musical score. What a job we have to do!
I would say that each of our unique approaches to the composers music can never be as the composer would have played it, no matter how much we may each personally try to make the case that our interpretation is the “correct“ one. And I think we likely know this, though we may not necessarily want to admit it to one another.
This is perhaps more challenging for those teachers who are not at complete liberty to choose all their students, but teach at institutions of higher learning, who have a boss to report to and peers who can potentially exert control over that teachers employment. Are we all free to really say what is on our hearts and minds?
And if we find we are all playing any work of music exactly the same as one another then I suggest we may have betrayed our art and likely disappointed our beloved composer’s intention?
One case in point is that so many renowned pianists play the Mozart A major sonata, the theme and variations, playing the theme with the same inflection, the same tempo, The same phrasing and flow, as if uniqueness and creative musical art had flown out the window. An exact replica unfortunately, can never serve the art of music in my view. Because the moment we have an exact replica, in truth, we unwittingly have a forgery.
In the case of Chopin, it is known he did not perform the same work in the same manner, if he played it a second or more time. But more than that, he took special effort to make sure it was different because it was his nature to do so. And as you so insightfully point out, Annique, the tempo affects the character of the piece most directly.
Have you ever played on an instrument constructed near the time of Chopin? It is most interesting. The key depth is noticeably shallower, The key width ever so slightly narrower, such that the span of the octave is narrower than our modern grand, the depth the key travels before arriving at the bottom of the key bed is also noticeably less than our modern piano. Also, that the idea of precision manufacturing was somewhat in its infancy. Not to mention, it is strung with straight strings from front to back, no crisscrossing of strings we have in our modern piano, and so the timbre and tone quality and ability to sustain sound is markedly different than our modern piano. Overall, the sound is thinner and sustains less. That’s not a bad thing at all it is simply different. One needs to approach playing a straight strung piano differently from our modern grand. In many ways, it has more varied character and a much different “speak“.
Another point overlooked by some is the different systems of tuning at the time of Chopin compared to the early 20th century and continuing to the present moment. So-called equal temperament is actually not always the same, nor was it ever necessarily “equal“ as we might conceive of the meaning of this word today.
This may be a surprise to some, but even at the time of JS Bach “equal“ temperament as a modern engineer would conceive of the meaning of “equal“, did not exist- many of us have been taught incorrectly by our college professors though they believed they had the correct information. I don’t blame them at all. They did the best they could with the information they had at hand at the time. Yes, the tuning system at the time of Bach allowed one to play in all the major and minor keys, and to modulate; however, the tuning was not “equal” temperament as has been colloquially referred.
Certainly, I believe Chopin would have found our approach to tuning our modern piano, which is much more equal in pitch distance , half step to half step compared to his piano, quite bland and lacking in color. But that is another topic for another day, perhaps.
But it does have an effect upon our modern interpretations, because to compensate for lack of a more interesting and colorful tuning, we are forced to put inflections and weights on certain keys for particular effects. We may do this unconsciously as we feel it is intrinsic to the character of the music we are trying to express.
Overall it takes less physical effort to play on a new grand piano constructed in the 1820s, 30s or 40s, compared to our modern 20th century and 21st century artist level grand pianos.
And so when we on our modern piano, try to match the metronomically very quick tempi Chopin left, in some of his études, we instantly may have lost some finesse, lightness and delicacy inherent in that music, and perhaps other qualities, because our modern pianos require a marked degree of athleticism, comparatively, to simply play them at all.
Perhaps one more étude of Chopin in which this tempo mismatch is obvious is Op. 10 no. 12 in C Minor. The so-called revolutionary étude. Has anyone heard a recording from a renowned pianist, a Chopin interpreter so-called, who actually plays 160, Chopin’s tempo? I think you’ll find 128-ish is more near the norm.
And I would make the case they play it at that slower tempo because they instinctively know they lose character and other qualities by making it too fast. The fingers can move that fast, but is it really worth it?
Yet these pianists don’t talk of that. They simply “do“ it.
And so, since about the 1920s onward, our ears have been perhaps spoiled by not hearing Chopin‘s music as Chopin and his contemporaries would have heard it because the grand piano itself had so many changes since then. The ideal Chopin sound, if there ever was one, has perhaps become lost in antiquity. It is now but a dream we desperately try to identify and hopefully re-create. And it is with great hope, and enthusiasm, that we all try!
No other Instrument has gone through such dramatic changes to the point it changes the character of the music being realized on the instrument. Concerning a string Instrument such as violin or cello - generally the older the better is the prevailing belief and experience. Modern wind instruments benefit from a greater technology to play more in tune, and more nuances due to increased ability for response to breath control and embouchure. (at least this is some of what I have heard from other colleagues)
One could perhaps make at least a partial case our modern orchestral instruments are easier to play with musical intention than their more ancient counterparts.
But the modern piano is a different thing entirely. it seems to be going in the opposite direction of that.
If only someone could find the real blueprints and manufacturing details of the Erard Piano Chopin loved, to create a precise new instrument, not a “replica”. This could turn classical pianism on its head. In a good way.
I have heard many have attempted this, but my understanding is the actual original blueprints and detailed manufacturing process was not preserved. And that the piano Craftsmans ear and experience was the final input.
Although there’s one pianist that managed to avoid some of those problems, because he had his piano specially tweaked, in ways he did not completely share with the public, and generally insisted to only use that piano in performances. That was Vladimir Horowitz. Smart man.
So I think the bottom line dear Annique is that you should keep doing what you are doing!
I feel you are on the right track, putting the music’s character as the arbiter of the right tempo, and all other elements of a truly artistic and beautiful rendition of Chopin, or any other composer, as the first and foremost goal. And then do the best one can with our modern instrument to realize and bring to life that music.
I feel the constant challenge of modern classical musicians is to continue to make that music relevant to modern life. It’s really up to all of us now as to the future of classical music.
Best wishes to you always,
James Heuser
This is a masterclass of a comment. I really really appreciate you taking the time to share your insights.
Thank You, this is most interesting !
Good comment!
Wasn't Chopin the Pleyel- and Liszt the Erard-Man?
Hello@@bernhardfbuttner5694 . Yes, you are right. I said a wrong word in my comments; I meant Pleyel, but said Erard. Thank you for pointing this out. Details matter. All for the love of music. One additional comment and it's about tempo and the entrance of the mass produced metronome at about 1815 or so from Maezel. From what I read historically and from what my teacher, Mr. Robert Brownlee - from where the Chopin lineage comes, said once to me: there were two camps of what constitutes a "beat"; for example the quarter note in 4/4 time. At the center of this was the pendulum. It was used (prior to JS Bach) by some musicians as a means of keeping time, as setting a tempo initially (since it runs out of steam by the force of gravity), AND, as a concept in that.... the "original" understanding of one beat is the swing out of the pendulum, followed by the swing back of the pendulum to its original position. Once the return to the original position is achieved we have one beat/count/pulse. The second "camp" of this debate is that the swing out only of the pendulum constitutes one beat/count/pulse. So, the question becomes do we look at the pendulum as 1-and; or do we look at it as 1-2. This difference is from philosophy of music predating the Renaissance, as we look at, for example, the Troubadour's and their music mystery school. It is esoteric teaching at the core of the understanding, concerning how this all started. So for Chopin to define specifically quarter note as 176 in the first edition of this C Major Etude, is a major redefining of that dynamic. It puts front and center specifically what Chopin wanted for tempo. However, not all pianists, though they want to, actually put the composers intention as front and center. It becomes a matter of convention and development of an instrument over time, such as the piano, that can inadvertently remove a composer's intention in what the performer actually plays. And this occurs often without the performer being aware, though their honest intention is to be true to the composer. The first movement of Beethoven's op. 27 #2 C# minor piano sonata is a great example. The so called "Moonlight" sonata. Beethoven did not give it that name. How most people play it today is not really Beethoven's concept of sound, since the piano of his day could sustain a sound of the key depressed about 7-9 seconds, when played at a dynamic of "piano", compared to maybe 30 seconds or more on a modern grand piano. So, his instruction in the music, the long Italian instruction - the last part "...senza sordino" literal translation is "without dampers". That truly means press the pedal down and keep it there through the whole movement. I have played on a unrestored 1798 Broadwood grand, with only strings replaced, in incredibly preserved condition and this is the reality of this instrument. This is an example of instruments very near the time/year that sonata was composed. And to achieve this effect Beethoven gave the adagio as cut time, not common time as so many play it today, so that the "beat" is 2 per measure. It is Adagio in 2, not Adagio in 4. So, Beethoven's tempo is quicker that modern interpretations; and this was necessary in Beethoven's time because the piano's resonance over time, dropped off quickly compared to our modern instruments. Playing it on an original period instrument NOT fully restored is essential to get this understanding. It creates a totally different atmosphere than is created in modern concert halls for this piece. That instrument still exists, I need to go back to it and create a TH-cam video about all this. When I can carve out the time. :).
jamesheuser4262, quote: «Perhaps one more étude of Chopin in which this tempo mismatch is obvious is Op. 10 no. 12 in C minor. The so-called revolutionary étude. Has anyone heard a recording ….»
If Wim Winters’ version in double beat has the correct speed (4:20) being Chopin’s tempo 2:10. I find many who ply several of Chopin’s etudes even aster then single beat tempo, but among the many performances of op 10/12, I have so far only found two:
Yundi Li 2:06
Richter 2:09
But why are almost no pianists playing the etude fast enough? The considerable differences between the instruments then and now may explain something. But an equally important reason is that «al» pianists in this etude forget that they are playing an etude! As they nears the end, they think they are playing a nochturne, they are suddently going to interpret and put tons of emotions into the play, and the result: «A tempo» disappears more and more. Of ourse, then it becomes impossible to reach Chopin’s MM.
I really love this kind of videos
I think Seong-Jin Cho performs it at that tempo, perhaps even a few clicks faster. The clarity, attention to detail, and control are still unbelievably in tact!
That tempo definitely makes sense, it gives another pace/weight/meaning to the left hand voice ☺ I'ts not human, ok, but who said Chopin was human? 😁
Your concert is on the same day as my birthday, i dont think ill be there but id love to, i asked my parents as a present and they are thinking abt it im so excited
Großartige Pianistin und reflektierte Künstlerin! Viel Erfolg in Stuttgart!👍
The mid-19th century grand pianos used to have very light hammers, shorter blow distance (hammer to string distance), shallower key dip and narrower keys. All that contributes to extremely light and nimble action. Remember that Chopin mostly played in salons. The needs for a grand piano to be louder and fill a bigger concert hall with sound came later when they started making them with cast iron frames that can withstand the enormous tension of the thicker (and more) strings, that in turn required bigger and heavier hammers with longer blow distance, etc. A modern piano is much louder and brighter but is also much heavier in touch and is more sluggish due to the high hammer inertia. WIth all that in mind, it's quite possible that Chopin really meant those tempi, only not on a modern piano.
Debussy : music is the space between the notes
Chopin and Liszt : wtf hahahah hold my beer
ok Annique’s piano skills are amazing but can we talk about HOW CRISP THE EDITING IS
Most people didn't understand this Etude. The relevant melody lies in the BASS!!!
The right hand does only "decorate" the melody and schould be as light as possible. For this purpose high speed is useful.
There's a YT video of Ashkenazy playing this as an encore at a live concert and he's quite fast. It does make it a real high-wire act!
I love her. Wish I could attend her concert.
Ich freu mich schon mega auf dein Konzert am 6.10!!!
Congrats for that album😍
Good luck at your recital. I once was a critic for Stuttgarter Zeitung and might well have covered the event if it had happened then but I live in Milwaukee now.
It's a study. It's desined to push the student foward. It doesn't mean that you have to perform at the fastest tempo, but you have to try to go always a little faster with ease and with a nice sound.
Great work!
There's a theory that states that tempo marking, when composers started to write it down, until last decades of '800, meant a complete oscillation of the metronome as a unit.
So a tick would represent an octave in 4/4. This would mean that the author meant the composition to be played at half of the marked tempo as we would try to interpret it today.
We will never know the truth, but try to play Chopin at half of its marked tempo and it's much more musical.
Moreover Chopin made a living out of sales of his sheet music to every house that had a piano. And most of the pianists were amateur, so it's quite reasonable that Chopin didn't mean to sale virtuoso compositions for the average amateur pianist. If true this would be quite a revolution in the interpretation of Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin, etc.
I wrote a comment before reading yours, I totally agree with you
True pls look into it
100%agree.Wim Winters.
paolovolante, Annique is a serious music student, she understands that the theory is a music-historical falsification. It is only people without knowledge who are fooled by Wim Winters’ manipulations. Because there are many people who know more than me, I need them to know manipulations I can’t reveal myself.
Actually, it’s a very interesting speed 😮 I thought it sounds pretty good also
There's a youtube channel called Authentic Sound that (if I understand correctly) indicates we are misreading these metronome markings from the 19th century. His point is that the metronomes of the 19th century used a pendulum and that the full cycle of the pendulum from its starting position back to its starting position represented the whole beat. Since the "click" occurs for each half cycle of the pendulum, that would mean it's actually 2 clicks to the beat. Therefore when you set a metronome at, for example, 120bpm for the quarter note, you are actually playing double-time (playing one quarter note per click instead of one quarter note every two clicks). As a result, if Authentic Sound's position is correct (and assuming I understand his position), it means we are actually trying to play pieces from this era twice as fast as intended by the composer. The owner of Authentic Sound's youtube site has clearly done a lot of research and has tremendous knowledge and has even talked about Chopin on his channel. I don't have the expertise to opine, but it is interesting to listen to his point of view. There's a lot of logic in it. His channel is worth a listen.
Pls look into it
Wim Winters is a con man, and all his theories are cherry picked to come to his desired conclusions. There are documented concert programs from the 19th century that disprove his claims upon a cursory glance. It's a shame that his channel is convincing aspiring pianists to abandon practice in favour of pseudoscience.
I have seen Wim Winters theory and it seems compelling. Nevertheless, some of the proposed tempos seem good for some pieces while for others it seems terribly slow. Given that today’s virtuosos are able to play at frightening tempos, like Pollini, Argerich or Kissin, I’m compelled to believe pianists that were known virtuosos at their time wouldn’t be for far behind in terms of playing with power and speed. After all some of them, like Liszt were known to generate enormous euphoria amongst its listeners, only the top of the top virtuosos can do that today or something similar.
Authentic Sound is right - but obviously concert pianist wants to Play at fast as possible
anders, Wim Winters sometimes manipulate and censors. If you don’t have the knowledge, you are not able to discover the manipulations. «Liquentsrollant» looks further than you, quote: «Wim has the advantage that most people(like me) don’t know enough to prove him wrong»
Amazing 👍🇬🇧🥁❤️
You should do a 1 minute 10 minute 1 hour challenge with Chopin Scherzo No. 2, It's a little challenging and really fun to learn
I'm genuinely inspired😗 Everytime I watch you play I just wanna hop on my piano and just try to learn which ever song that you were playing but then I'd stop because my skills are nowhere near yours... 14 years old, selfteaching doesn't really get me anywhere😕
Fascinating and so great to have these insights on the wonderful Chopin Etudes! A key issue with Chopin's tempi is that he was using pianos with much lighter actions than we have today, so velocity and leggiero playing were slightly easier to achieve, especially in a piece like 10/1. On the other hand, the trade-off is the pianos of the 1830s didn't have quite the same depth and richness of tone. So perfectly acceptable (and maybe more appropriate musically) to take the tempo a couple of notches slower on a modern grand.
The short answer is yes. A friend of mine has played it at 200+bpm pretty flawlessly, so ~180 is definitely possible.
Can you please do heroic polonaise with 60 seconds 10minutes and 1 hour challenge?
OMG do a full version of this piece where you play at the original tempo🥰🥰🥰🥰
I think you dont need to play that fast. You already play it pretty beautiful and fast❤
Because Chopin says you should?
@@nehuge If you already play at this temp like Annique you can play faster but if you’re gonna make mistakes its better to not play faster. Its a choice
@@nehugeNope, it's a modern interpretation of Chopin's MM. Whole beat vs double beat is extremely relevant here. Not to mention the historic records of the duration of chopin playing this piece. Even Liszt never played it this fast, and he KNEW Chopin.
maleahlock, you don’t know what you are talking about. You prove it yourself with «Whole beat vs double beat…» Whole beat and double beat are the same thing, WBMP being a third term for Wim Winters’ historical falsification. Be nice to Annique, she’s trying to be a serious musician, and then the manipulator Wim Winters has no interest.
luv it ❤
The right tempo is the one you can play correctly and with clarity. 73
My motto is: if I can play it slow, I can play it... even slower! 🙂
You are a double beater? 😂
I really like the way you play this. It's relaxed and brings out some nice touches. However, the question as to whether it can be played at Chopin's tempo marking is answered by Cziffra when he is practising for a recording. It's called Cziffra Improvisation. He plays it at around the 200 mark, way beyond even Chopin's tempo. And he plays without any mistake.
Nooooo I live near Stuttgart and couldn't go to your concert nooooooo I want to cry 😭
You have to make one in Freiburg! 😅😅
The Pleyel piano Chopin used is much easier to play fast. I know for sure since my teacher just tried it.
what chopin used was still a piano right? how would playing on today's piano and those days' piano make a difference to what speed you can play?
A Series with the Etudes will be great!
I interpret Chopin's etude metronome markings as maximums, warning the pianist not to exceed those tempi, not as requirements.
Hello ! I have Etudes from (Schirmer's Library of Musical Classics and the velocity written is 144 BPM for the quarter note . If it was over 170 BPM , it should have been Presto and not Allegro. This etude is a very deep one and increasing the tempo takes off this depth IMO. I wish you all the best for your concert! Viel Erfolg !!
Your recording is the closest to the real piano sound I have heard. Usually recordings sound too different from a real piano, but I can see a big change here.
Then at what tempo (the 'metronome number) 'do you usually play this piece Annique?!
Hey Annique (srry if i didnt write your name correctly) but I was just wondering if you could do a 1 min 10 min 1 hour challenge with "The howl's moving castle -- Main theme" Its my fav song and i think it would be incredible if you managed to play it. Thanks again and good luck if you decide to give it a try ;))
Do you think Chopin himself would be able to play his own works at their given tempos on the modern concert grand?
Pianos in chopins times had lighter action so fast playing on them was in fact way easier for a trained pianist.
Couldn't Liszt sight read all of Chopin's etudes perfectly? And didn't he perform at least some of them for Chopin? So that implies that Liszt likely performed this etude at the higher tempo perfectly immediately, right? Crazy to think about.
To your point, I think the accents in the right hand, the interior melody, can be forte, the rest much lighter.
You amaze.
You playing The Fingerbreaker.
I think the evidence shows that was not the intended tempo of the piece. The "A Tempo" project has done some very thorough research on this and it would be good to check them out.
maleahlock. I am glad you’re mention Bernhard Ruchti’s A Tempo project, and not Wim Winters’ manipulative videos. Bernhard Ruchti also flirts with the double beat theory, but he does not hesitate to prove the many factors that do not confirm the theory. BR, quote from «Historical Metronome Markings (Part II/III)»
1:08 «Looking at the 19th century no such discussion can be found. Noone ever seems to have wondered wether the peticular metronome marking was intended as single beat or as double beat. Also is it striking to see that people who had already in the 19th century criticized early metronome markings never concidered a double beat option….»
Yet it is from children and drunk people that we hear the truth. Here at TH-cam, there are many videos of children, 7-12 years old, playing Chopin’s etudes much faster than double beat tempo. We know that there was competition between pianists in Chopin’s day, it was about doing to impress other pianists, music journalists and audiences. Chopin, the composer, was about 20 years old when he composed opus 10. So he had about10 more years to reach a virtuoso level, and Wim Winters thinks Chopin played a lot slower than the kids, 7-12 years old - it is totally illogical! Beware of the manipulator Wim Winters, but be curious about Bernhard Ruchti’s remarks.
Ling ling practice for the win! :)
176 is very possible, so many people have done it at that tempo.
I would love to see how you would approach a piece like "Souvenir de Paganini - Chopin"
A small note: Chopin’s piano had smaller keys the modern piano.
You have a very unique and cool interpretation of this piece but I really advice to check out Kzysztof Jablonski's interpretation in national edition - played in original Chopin speed and true sound of Chopin. It is very fast and almost no rubato but it is interpreted so beautifully and no details are left out, and like you said, a very complete and smooth flow was there. Recommended!
On your suggestion I've just checked out one of Jablonski's performances, namely watch?v=89TLGRXeT78&list=PLusvwRonlFwa50MRj7FWj-hbsvIFXwIEk, but must say that my having become accustomed to Annique's performances, I prefer her interpretation.
@@Lennythewinner I think Annique has more feelings put into phrasings so it’s more emotional, while Jablonskis version is more strict and clean. I enjoy both enterpretations, also depending on what you are looking for in this piece 👍
@@siqizhao5821interpretations
Keep in mind that 10.1 might not have been written with your hand size in mind.
Independently of that, this etude has done more damage than good for me personally; Liszt's Feux Follets was the clear winner for me, as it has done more for push my technique forward and rethink how to correct old bad habits than any other piece.
See that's the thing! What fine line do we draw that strikes the perfect balance between velocity, control, accuracy, musicality and comfort / preventing injuries?
The piano was a very different instrument back in Chopin’s day (the same for Mozart, Beethoven, . . .). Much lighter action, much shallower key depth, far less string tension, not to mention the temperament(s) that was/were used. All of that influenced tempo/metronome marking.
Wow, the pianists of today must reach warp speeds on those. Why not bring them back to see which pianist can go the fastest on them?
But seriously, I very much doubt that you can play on them faster than on a modern piano.
@@insignificantfool8592 There are quite a number of original fortepianos around, and even more very faithful repoductions, and lots of pianists who specialize in the period play them easily as fast and faster than on a modern piano.
most I could do was somewhere around 160. I'm amateur. it stretches my hand so hard, if I take a break to have a tea, I will have to warm up for 20 mins again to reach that 160 speed.
Cziffra is fantastic
I know this etude by heart. I could even write you the entire piece without looking at the sheet music. The proposed tempo drives me crazy. The best I have done is 140bpmish with a not so clean sound to be honest. I’m done with it for now, the proposed tempo for Op 10 no 2 is also ridiculous. I’m inclined to believe Chopin’s metronome was different somehow.
It absolutely was! Modern interpretations of MM are MISinterpretations. It's better to look at the detailed recorded performance time of the piece as played by the composer for their intended speed. You can find these records easily online. Chopin NEVER played it this fast.
maleahlock. Wim Winters’ «historical tempo» can not be right, because:
Here on TH-cam we find many videos with children, 7-12 years old, playing Chopin’s etudes much faster than WW’s «historical tempi». Chopin was about 20 years old when the etudes were published. So the composer had around 10 more years to reach a virtuoso level, and does Wim Winters tell you that Chopin played the etudes much slower than the kids?
You should also be familiar with the phenomenon of competition in Chopin’s days:
Frank Boyce, quote: «Obviously the tempi of the compositions (the piano repertoire in this case) were lightning fast because of the factor : COMPETITION! They obviously tried composing pieces which were at the brink of being impossible to play to prove their skills to other pianists, critiques, and the mainstream public!»
Here a few word about the young Beethoven: «Beethoven was concerned to maintain his preeminent position and regarded any accomplished pianist as a potential rival. In mid-1794, he wrote to Eleonore von Breuning of his «desire to embarrass» and «revenge myself on» the «Viennese pianists some of whom are my sworn enemies».
juanramonsilva 1067. Is it that hard to think for yourself? Be happy with 140 bpm! But don’t let your disappointment contribute to falsifying music history. There are maybe 10.000 people who run 100 meters in competitions, but very few do it in 10 seconds, or faster. Should those who don’t run so fast claim that there must be something wrong with the clock? No, they realize that not everyone can run 100 meters in 10 seconds. And then you should also understand that 176 bpm is not for everyone.
Looking in my 1st copy of the Etudes---I had marked getting it @ 176 on my 22nd BD.
I like160 now-----it's pretty daft to try tempi written for 100's of years old super light pianos.(???) Like his Pleyel..
If Chopin tried my Bosendorfer Imperial 97 keyed 9 foot 6----he inevitably would rethink all tempos to modern concert grand standards----or like Horowitz make yr key weight 30-40 grams instead of the normal 52( often higher) effectively " cheating.
Or Josep Hofman founder of the Curtis Institute--who had all the keys made smaller to avoid stretching.
The lengths pianist will go to ! It's murderous!!
Annique!
I would absolutely love it if you gave theory advice!😩
Fun video! A super light hand is key, try fake playing the piece to warm up by playing through the piece without pressing (most) of the keys, just barley making contact with the pads of your finger. My fastest performance is around 1:35 to 1:40 (120% of 176bpm... just above 210bpm) - while still holding on to most of the details but with mistakes lol. Annique is right at some point you risk losing total control and that's not a line you should probably cross like I do (can never get 2 measures completely right at full speed, I think it's the D on the 8th run up and the C D# A D# in the middle). My best good runs are at least 1:50 long when my hand is the lightest, most relaxed state. The proper length at 176bpm is 1:58.5.
I’ve tried playing it at 176 bpm strictly mechanically it should be exactly 1:47 without a fermata at the last note 😉🙂 for those who are interested to know 😂
@@Sekiyo1212 My calculation was done over 5 years ago and included the fermata... makes me want to go back and check how I got to the number again.
were metronomes significantly different in the 19th century from what they are today?
Have you ever tried to exaggerate the tempo? If you were to study it on e.g. 190, and you disregard the errors this entails. Your hands then get a certain memory effect, making tempo "176" suddenly seem easier.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻😍😍😍
Thank you for making me realise I am allowed to play faster.
As if this Etude wasn't difficult enough... then that tempo marking is there and my god. When it comes to closest recording I would say Maurizio Pollini's recording of this etude from the 80s is the fastest.
@Lisztomaniac, here is an update:
D. Kharitonov 1:38
G. Cziffra 1:40
Dong Hyek Lim 1:40
Marie Kiyone 1:42
Fialkowska 1:43
Garrick Ohlson. 1:44
M. Argerich. 1:45
Sehun Kim 1:45
Hannah Sun 1:47
Esther Park 1:47
Soo Jung Ann 1:48
G. Szymczak 1:48
Evgeny Kissin 1:48
Naomi Kudo 1:49
Mr. Forte 1:49
Pollini, 1:50, together with many others.
I once heard Francesco Libetta playing this etude twice the Chopin's tempo. I'm still shocked.
volodya2. It’s impossible to play Chopin twice as fast as Chopin intended. It is Wim Winters who play the etude half the pace it should be. So Libetta play Chopin own tempo mark.
For an etude point of view, I would say the faster tempo is better. In the end of the day it's a technical piece. From a musical point of view, I like the slower interpretation (and similarly for several etudes, like Op25 No2)...
Luv u
Speed should be the goal if you're playing this as an etude, which is a technical exercise foremost, just like Hanon works better the faster you play them. Chopin just made them sound more pleasant than Hanon so you have more patience and can spend more time achieving mastery without going crazy. Of course if performance is your only goal, just play it so it sounds comfortable to the ear of your audience and don't sweat it.
Couldn't play either tempo myself, but in this case, the faster tempo sounds right to me.
Argerich is the queen of this etude
have you ever played any of alkans etudes?
Argerich's 1965 version in Chopin Competition is roughly about 1'45" ( th-cam.com/video/jg91_MDzo7s/w-d-xo.html ).
Did she meet the 176 speed, or even faster? 🤔
There's 320 quarter note beats in the piece, so 176bpm is 1'49". So Argerich was faster, ~183bpm. But the fastest I've seen is 200bpm, by Dong Hyek Lim. Of course, there is also Cziffra during his warm-up which was probably faster, but that wasn't quite a fully complete performance.
@@Chopin-Etudes-Cosplay
I have rewatch this video, and compared to some other versions on YT by Argerich in 1965 (I'm not sure if they are from the same performance) the duration should be around 1'47", still a very tiny bit ahead of Chopin's original default. So, it is possible, and was played by the Laureate of Chopin Competition. (But generally I'm not a fan of Argerich's Chopin, too fast for me to sense feelings from her play. Or maybe, the way she expressed under such speed.)