Beethoven at the piano: the extra notes of tradition and why you shouldn't play them

P.S. To put it into a scheme, it is as if Beethoven had said 70. Now the subjectivity of art comes in, that thing that compels the artist to feel it a little slower or a little faster. Let's say we like to stay between 60 and 80. Any infinite variation is perfectly fine: 60.1 - 60.01 - 60.001 - ... . But can we at least agree on the fact that 30 is objectively out of range for the simple reason that it is completely outside the composer's idea?

Small OT: cobra is so lively....mmmmh the video froze at 11 sec with him looking into thin air...hilarious!

But I completely agree... (even on the fact that Cobra is... hilarious....)

What I do not agree with (and not just me... the entire academic world) is this tendency to turn music into a "science."

Besides being subtly offensive, it is extremely dangerous.

TheSimon wrote:

- ... . But can we at least agree on the fact that 30 is objectively out of range for the simple reason that it is completely outside the composer's idea?

. . . and what c@@ . . . !

Celibidache wrote:

But I completely agree... (even on the fact that Cobra is... hilarious....)

What I do not agree with (and not just me... the entire academic world) is this tendency to turn music into a "science."

Besides being subtly offensive, it is extremely dangerous.

mmm . . . it's quite a leap to set boundaries and make it a science (exact!) ...

LucaCavaliere wrote:

mmm . . . to make a science out of setting boundaries (an exact one!) is quite a stretch...

Deo Gratias

And the fortepiano is being rediscovered

Antonios are making a comeback! And I must say I like them quite a lot, I won't deny it.

Antonio2000 wrote:

Give the fortepiano back

I remember the existence of Early music, if it was mentioned in this topic

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/3892-la-solita-questione-filologia-o-no/

Coincidentally opened by yours truly ahahah

Considering the character and structure of the sonatas, Beethoven, as a genius and totally deaf as he was, probably already had in mind which characteristics and possibilities would later be achieved with the modern Steinway concert grand... otherwise, after all, we would never have gotten there...

I doubt he would want to return to the Broadwood...

So basically, a deaf person who couldn't even follow the sonic developments of the pianos of their era would have even had to imagine the sound of a piano from 200 years in the future. It seems to me that the reasoning is backwards!

Stefanus wrote:

So practically a deaf person who couldn't even follow the sonic developments of the pianos of their era would even have to imagine the sound of a piano from 200 years in the future. It seems to me that they are reasoning backwards!

Exactly. Reasoning "backwards" is typical of genius...

Celibidache, you should have been a politician!

Stefanus, for me it is a compliment...

However, I truly believe that in his head he had, I won't say the exact formulation, but the idea of what would later become the modern piano, which is nothing other than the refinement and "purification" of what can be heard in those rudimentary instruments contemporary to him.

Not to mention that his complete deafness kept him far from the impressions and habits of the sensory world.

In one way or another, he was forced to "dream them up," the sounds and, all things considered, it is much easier to imagine a perfect, ideal sound than one full of compromises like that of a fortepiano of that time.

A photo negative is always the same photo "in reverse". There is no genius involved... if anything, it's about non-conformity or wanting to be a contrarian.

That being said, I re-read the topic proposed by Frank; in effect, it was more likely that Beethoven had a pf closer to the modern one than Schumann... not in terms of sound, but in terms of mechanics. That is, if it is confirmed that he had one of the first Cristofori pianos

I remembered this topic Beethoven's piano

Celibidache wrote:

Stefanus, for me it is a compliment...

Despite the fact that I do not agree with you on this matter, in certain respects I did...

Celibidache wrote:

However, I truly believe that he had in mind, I won't say the exact formulation, but the idea of what would later become the modern piano, which is nothing more than the refinement and "purification" of what can be heard in those rudimentary instruments contemporary to him.

i.e., the 'ideal' sound (in a Platonic sense) of the piano?... (if I understood correctly)

LucaCavaliere wrote:

that is, the 'ideal' sound (in a Platonic sense) of the piano?... (if I understood correctly)

Exactly Luca... after all, the poor thing heard nothing and the most natural thing for the human mind is to create a perfect, ideal sound, certainly not full of defects.

Who can imagine an hammerklavier played on a fragile fortepiano that already needs retuning at the very first chord? In fact, to tell the truth, "fortepianos" are all decidedly "un-tunable," given their design aspects. But the fragility of the sound itself, the character...

Already the attack of the Pathétique has little to do with period instruments, and at the time noblewomen would skip the first tempo to go directly to the adagio cantabile...

We cannot be certain, but I believe Beethoven would have welcomed, with a sigh of relief, if not with wonder, a brand new Steinway fresh from the factory... (not those counterfeit and out-of-tune ones that currently circulate in concerts)