Resonance pedal

I will say only one thing... I stopped using it 9 months ago

Why???

Changing repertoire is changing instruments, especially... I play a 1776 Johann Andreas Stein (copy); it would have the knee lever to lift the dampers if desired, but I practically don't use it since my current fortepiano repertoire ranges from Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach to Mozart

Hi Francesco, you have opened a fundamental discussion, not only regarding the use of the resonance pedal but also, I would add, the left sostenuto/una corda pedal.

It is clear that the resonance pedal is indissolubly linked to interpretation and, as we well know, it has many variations in usage depending on the composer and the historical period.

To give a simple example, it will be difficult for a pianist to use the pedal in the same way when performing a Mozart sonata compared to a Chopin Nocturne, or a Scarlatti sonata compared to a piece by Debussy.....

This is because, following the evolution of the instrument, the "technology" of pedal usage has also adapted, passing through various historical moments dictated by composers, piano compositions, and piano builders :)

But so far, I think I have highlighted some aspects regarding the subject that every pianist should know well.

(It is natural to suggest that the aforementioned pedal should be used while studying scores and editions as close as possible to those indicated by the composer.)

It is evident, however, that every pianist (and school of thought) removes or adds pedal to compositions to highlight their own interpretive style.

For example, personally, I often use half-pedaling to create slurs and phrasing while seeking particular atmospheres, which however requires at least a minimal knowledge of basic harmony to avoid unpleasant dissonances.

Between the pedal and harmony (understood as a compositional form), there is a very close link that cannot be ignored; in fact, good use of the pedal contributes greatly to giving meaning to a musical phrase and highlighting the bel canto required by many composers of the Romantic period.

The sostenuto/una corda pedal, on the other hand, is often and willingly snubbed too much. This is because we trust the sound control of our fingers too much :)

But why not let it help us and remind us to use it?

In many cases it is extremely useful (especially if well regulated); it helps us in those difficult pianissimos to be executed, especially when speaking of legato.

One of the great pianists whom I have seen use the left pedal very often, as it happens, is the great Benedetti Michelangeli, whom I had the fortune of hearing live in Brescia in 1980.

I look forward to your thoughts on the matter and thanks to Francesco for opening this important discussion.

A discussion as vast as Africa!!!! Perhaps it is better to treat the subject.... in episodes!!!

So, I would like to begin by reflecting on the fact that modern instruments are not at all the same as period instruments. Scarlatti played on the harpsichord and today we find ourselves performing his sonatas (assuming we do not choose an instrument similar to the period one, for example a simple harpsichord) on a Steinway, perhaps a grand piano. What should be done? We must make an interpretative choice. Some pianists are horrified to hear Scarlatti's sonatas performed with the sustain pedal. They leave the hall and have all the easy "nasty comments" at their disposal to criticize an execution that might be interesting. They let themselves be heard, saying aloud the phrase: "...and then all that pedal..." The pianist performing the concert could respond: "...In my opinion, when playing on a modern instrument, one should not renounce and/or sacrifice its sound, and my interpretation becomes current, destined for a contemporary listening and interpretative aesthetic".... Well....

Others teach or insist that it would be better to play the classics and, let alone, harpsichordists without pedal. Dry sound and technique that is almost non-legato, imitating the period sound. I leave the difficult judgment to you. I only say that all too often the sustain pedal is demonized and rather, as Marcy63 argued, one should teach how to use it better, perhaps even the sostenuto pedal, which is very little used, and feel the change of harmony clearly. End of the first episode... already too many things

P.S. Mozart himself, using the early Steinways with knee pedals, implemented his "expression". What can be said of the D minor world, performed with generous pedal? (listen to Serkin in the Philips collection of piano and orchestra concertos, probably a live encore)

Wait a moment, wait a moment... according to Czerny, however, Mozart was someone who practically never used knee pads... and if the Stein only had resonance, Walter already has even 1 string... Now we can agree that Czerny never knew Mozart, but his information was certainly quite reliable...

Not to mention that we should better define what we mean by the expression...

I always use it in the same way based on a very precise principle: the diaphragm and the alternation of tension and relaxation. Depending on the historical context, I modify the amount of pedal, but not its principle (or at least what it is to me). It is extremely difficult to explain in words how I pedal; perhaps if we were to meet... Anyway, I can say that on excellent pianos I can even overdo the pedal without ever making it muddy, even with very staccato phrasing. As far as harmony is concerned, everything is correct (for example, on a dominant chord I use a more generous pedal compared to a tonic chord precisely because there is more tension). However, in some cases, I believe it is legitimate to "muddy" the harmony.

For me, it is unthinkable to play the modern piano without using the sustain pedal. But that is just my opinion.

Regarding the left pedal (called "una corda," not "sordina"), I use it generously, but, as always, rationally. Let's not forget that the timbre is modified! Like the sustain pedal, I use it in various degrees of depression because, even if I don't depress it enough to eliminate a string, a different hammer zone is still used. And then the string would still sound through sympathetic resonance.

Regarding criticism, if a musician is open to criticism, they are on the right track. WE musicians are sometimes closed-minded, whereas we should open our views to new things, even interpretative ones. I am not a particular lover of philology for various reasons. Playing while respecting and differentiating historical periods, without however overdoing it.

Francescopianist wrote:

I always use it in the same way based on a very precise principle: the diaphragm and the alternation of tension and relaxation. Depending on the historical context, I modify the amount of pedal, but not its principle (or at least what it is to me). It is extremely difficult to explain in words how I pedal; perhaps if we were to meet... Anyway, I can say that on excellent pianos I can even overdo the pedal without ever making it muddy, even with very staccato phrasing. As far as harmony is concerned, everything is correct (for example, on a dominant chord I use a more generous pedal compared to a tonic chord precisely because there is more tension). However, in some cases, I believe it is legitimate to "muddy" the harmony.

For me, it is unthinkable to play the modern piano without using the resonance pedal. But that is just my opinion.

Regarding the left pedal (called "una corda," not "sordina" [mute]), I use it generously, but, as always, rationally. Let's not forget that the timbre is modified! Like the resonance pedal, I use it in various degrees of depression because, even if I don't depress it enough to eliminate a string, a different hammer zone is still used. And then the string would still sound by sympathy.

Regarding criticism, if a musician is open to criticism, they are on the right track. WE musicians are sometimes closed-minded, whereas we should open our views to novelties, even interpretative ones. I am not a particular lover of philology for various reasons. Playing while respecting and differentiating historical periods, without however overdoing it.

You are right Francesco, una corda pedal.......see what it means to abandon music for years, you return to being a novice:))))

But no marcy63 Nothing is lost of what has been learned. A bit like when you put something aside and have to look for it years later, but it's there, among so much stuff. I left, betrayed, music, but she never betrays! After 5 years I started again and better than before.

marcy63 wrote:

not only on the use of the sustain pedal but also, I would add, on the left soft pedal.

... and the tonal pedal?

As far as the tonalizer is concerned, I don't think it's fundamental (I'm speaking for myself). It is absent in my piano and I have never felt the need for it. When it is present, it can provide extra help in some cases, but personally I have never used it.

So far I have rarely felt the need for it. Perhaps due to the type of repertoire, or perhaps because in those passages where I could have used it, I managed to maintain the resonance of the sounds I wanted without "muddying" the others even with just the resonance... an instinctive gesture nonetheless that I wouldn't be able to explain..

The pedal is a friend and an enemy... sometimes strange and repetitive habits are taken up and one would put it everywhere like salt... personally I don't use it very well, but I believe that sometimes (I am calling upon good Simon) it is worth eliminating it altogether by listening carefully to the search for the most important "legato".

Francescopianist wrote:

As far as the key is concerned, I don't think it is fundamental (I am speaking for myself).

It depends on the piece; if the composer indicates it... it is fundamental (it is also frequently found in transcriptions); in some cases it can also be a choice of the performer, but it depends heavily on the composer.

nancy wrote:

Perhaps the type of repertoire.

Certainly, there are pieces written for tonal use; one cannot use it "at will." Knowing how to use it well is a skill; it is "heavy," and if not well integrated, it could result in some notes acting up.

I started using tonality in Debussy ....but I don't remember well... anyway, in the repertoire and the studies I did subsequently, I didn't use it anymore. That too must be a wave unto itself... complex, I mean.

Note, perhaps useful

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/1388-pedale-di-risonanza

I agree regarding the elimination of the pedal during practice. Strange habits are acquired. Thanks to Egidio for mentioning my remark about the 'pedale in battere' (downbeat pedal). Listen to Rubinstein's recording of Chopin's waltzes, which uses the downbeat pedal rigorously, as indicated by Chopin himself. Naturally, it is more evident in waltzes because the third beat is almost always devoid of it. If one tries the ordinary pedal, one will see, in these compositions, how the bass note sounds muffled (it is played at the moment when the 'pedal is changed'). Yet, many concerts are heard where one can even see the ordinary pedal being used where 'it does not fit'. The downbeat pedal is also mandatory in some Beethovenian passages, whereas the ordinary pedal is changed smoothly where a melody unfolds over different harmonies. In more experienced pianists, the downbeat pedal is difficult to perceive thanks to the skill of changing it perhaps very close to the beginning of the measure or the beat—the downbeat—and thus the misunderstanding arises. Furthermore, the downbeat pedal favors great 'cleanliness' of attacks. Listen to some of Pollini's recordings, for example Schumann's Concerto without Orchestra op. 14 or his Schubert Wanderer, and you will notice what power of attack it provides, especially after the correct breaths, which many pianists 'refuse' believing they are 'losing time'. The management of breaths and calm phrasing must absolutely account for pedaling. In fact, we can achieve breaths without or 'under' the pedal. Very often we listen to the greats and perceive that in speed 'everything is calm'; others, at the same speed, seem to 'make us lose our breath'. Exactly so. The pianist and instrumentalist in general must learn from the start how to breathe and convince themselves that the 'tranquility' of exiting and entering one phrase after another does not 'make them lose time'. For this reason, the continuous and imposing use of the metronome is merely 'DESTRUCTIVE'. That is, in my opinion, it teaches the pianist to unconsciously forbid themselves, for the rest of their life, the possibility of making time flexible. All this, naturally, must account for the character and context of the piece. We certainly cannot continuously slow down or speed up at will. Therefore: breaths, pedal, tempo... are not secondary qualities of the instrument and the acoustics of the listening venue. Everything must be guided by taste and common sense, and therefore by a rich, comprehensive musical cultural education. Listening to good musicians live and noticing the solutions they adopt in 'that certain listening environment' is extremely useful, as is comparing their same performances recorded in a studio. I like to remember (repeating to myself) the phrase that Celebidache said to one of my Teachers while correcting a composition assignment. He, Celebidache, caught the student's dissent out of the corner of his eye and said without looking at him: '....I am not correcting these two fifths because they are an error... but because they do not fit here'.

I conclude these excessive .............. mental reflections by saying that even the pedal must account for taste and naturalness, which could even justify some excess.

Thank you for reading me

Thank you.