Often is the students themselves doing it. Me being one...

Mon partenaire pensait qu'il serait romantique de m'emmener en week-end. C'était charmant jusqu'à ce qu'il se rende compte que j'avais emporté plus d'en-cas que de lingerie. Les priorités, n'est-ce pas 🌺

This is a very interesting interpretation, and I appreciate the effort you put into exploring this piece. However, I have a slightly different perspective based on historical references and Chopin's documented thoughts. There is a Polish pianist specialized in Chopin's music called Grzegorz Niemczuk, who has deeply researched his life, including his diary from 1831, letters, and his students' notes. From these documents, it becomes clear that what made Chopin's playing so special was that he slightly changed the tempo a thousand times while playing a piece, using a lot of rubato. While he may have played with strict timing when teaching students, his performances in salons were known for their dynamic tempo variations. This piece was written in 1831, during the November Uprising in Poland, when Chopin was 20 years old. At that time, Chopin wrote in his diary that he wished to be in Poland and that the thing he most wanted to do was to "end the life" of the Russians occupying Warsaw. Chopin was very furious and even doubted the existence of God (despite being very Catholic). He wrote about his family and friends suffering, and he used a lot of strong words in his diary during this period. He was really, really angry, and, like other pieces where Chopin wanted to depict a very violent storm or his fury, he always played it very fast (like Ballade No. 2, Prelude Op. 28 No. 20, which was written in the same period to convey a similar emotion, and the storm in Op. 9 No. 3, which has a left-hand pattern similar to the Revolutionary Etude). So I don't think this is the tempo Chopin intended for this piece. There are many pieces where people play at a different tempo than Chopin indicated, like Op. 10 No. 3, which should be played faster, Op. 55 No. 2, which should be played slower, and his Waltz in B Minor, which also should be played slower. (This piece actually doesn't have a tempo indication, but Chopin wrote that it should be played "con dolore," and the best way of representing what Chopin was feeling at that time-when he was 19 years old-is to play it slow. At that time, he was in love with a girl, and he composed this piece because, probably on that day, she didn't say "good morning" to him, so he wrote it to express that he was in love but not loved back.) But in the case of Op. 10 No. 12, this piece needs to be played at a fast tempo. I also noticed in bar 11 and similar sections, where the melody "answers the question," Chopin indicated it should be played softly (piano). Even though this is a fury-filled piece, the melody represents Chopin doubting the existence of God. Chopin indicated the "question" should be played loudly (forte), but then he instantly regrets it, and the "answer" should be played softly, representing how scared he was at the same time. That said, I respect your artistic interpretation and the effort you put into sharing this with the world. My intention is only to add some historical context based on sources like Chopin's diary, his letters, his students' notes, and the Fryderyk Chopin Institute. Your video is a valuable contribution, and I truly appreciate your work!

these slow tempi are ridiculous....

Chopin Etudes are and will remain to be the most difficult in piano repertoire. One must be a complete pianist to perform each one with effectiveness

👏 I feel there is a growing interest in whole breat recently. Keep it up! 🤗

this is played at 74, not 69

Now it sounds like a march for real, and a Turkish march at that. The percussive qualities of the clavichord sound like Turkish boots stomping in time. I can see the scene in living color. Bravo!

I like when you give us books to read. I read the book "Copin viewed by his pupils" based on your suggestion and it was a very interesting and gave great insight on the composers mind. Thank you for your work Wim!

Load of rubbish.

Thank you Wim.

All pianists formed a club and nobody from the outside allowed in

Shades of Cobra, spare me.

I loved your clavichord version with your daughters...this is no less and maybe even more wonderful.....

at least when gould played the first movment this slowly he wasn't trying to claim it was the original intention of the composer

Yes. Transcendental humans do exist. Look at track and field. Husain Bolt is an example. It’s an unachievable physical ability for even professional athletes. But throughout history come certain people that break the physical barriers and set certain aspiration markers for the evolution of that art form. This is an important part of human evolution. The .01%.

This is all unnecessary. Romantic period music is a lyrical impression of an idea. Allegro con fucco for this Revolutionary Etude needs to paint the intention of this piece. If your able to convey it with slower tempo then good. If not, then you need the speed to convey the intention. Chopin himself played differently from day to day as documented by his students. Also, virtuosity is a major attribute in classical instrumental music. Pushing human abilities is an inherent part of instrumental music. Some pianist have the dexterity and ability to articulate at faster speeds. This is what separates them from me, him, and them. This is why music evolved over the centuries. Breaking physical barriers are a part of musical evolution.

where can we hear albertos performances on youtube?

From Presto Con Fuoco down to Allegretto.....

Just play one note at a time, and don’t be overwhelmed.

If you are truly open, if "the door is open," as you write in comments section, then you have an obligation to take into account evidence that tips the argument decisively against you. Those arguments are: 1) Liszt heard Chopin play and played Chopin's etudes -- we have recordings of Liszt's students and none of them play at this half-tempo you suggest. 2) Planté was about 10 years old when Chopin died and we have recordings of him playing etudes at the age of 88 or 89, and even at that old age he plays closer to modern tempos. 3) You cannot play Op. 10 no. 4 at half-tempo and have it sound "presto con fuoco". So in the end it's just so obvious that your double-beat theory is wrong. ADMIT it! But that is not to say that many players these days blast through the etudes too quickly; I agree with Yoffe that many interpretations are too fast.

With all due respect, what is your mission here? One just has to use their ears and basic musical instincts to see that while your argument is interesting it is completely anti musical. The works you’re talking about sound absolutely horrible at the speeds you suggest. As simple as that.

So crisp, so well calculated and so expressively delivered with just-so phrasing and articulation. Why is it that I cannot give this video the multiple likes it deserves? Thank you KZbin for another revisit.

Another great video. Bravo. When did composers stop using whole beat ? Early 20th century ?

bro i watched the whole video and i still don't get what your point is....

Nothing comes close to Alkan as difficulty on avergae works

In my opinion, this is a laudable attempt to approach what could be a "period" interpretation, but the result is regrettably unsuccessful. Even in the antecedents of classicism, the strict rigidity of tempos allows alterations as an expressive element of the performer. There are three unwritten and tacit rhythmic alterations, and they are perfectly documented: 1.- the pairs of unequal notes. (generally eighth notes, in which the first is slightly lengthened and the second is shortened. 2.- Lengthening of the dotted note, particularly in slow tempo pieces. 3.- binary rhythms that are subtly infected by ternary rhythms due to the existence of triplets. These rhythmic alterations are inherited from the French interpretative style, very refined, with a very subtle rhythm, derived from dance. (At the time there were 2 clearly differentiated styles, French and Italian) During the period of classicism, rhythmic alteration continued to be practiced, but “the tempo giusto” that is, the right time, is considered vital for the effective interpretation of a work, where it is necessary to take into account: 1.- the value of the notes that form the pulse, 2.- the character and style of the work, and 3.- the type of notes used (faster or slower). A kind of “rubato” is also used, but it is aimed at a certain dislocation between accompaniment and melody; we are not talking about the “romantic rubato” which would be clearly anachronistic. There is a general recognition that tempo cannot be something mechanical, and can be lengthened or shortened organically, in fact it is something indispensable for a “sensitive” interpretation, but as long as certain limits are not exceeded. (For this reason, already at this time some musicians thought that the invention of the metronome was not a panacea either. It was not considered necessary in all circumstances.) And what would be those limits that should not be exceeded? This answer takes us back to the Renaissance and the establishment of the “tactus” or what we call today pulse. This “tactus” is based on the human heartbeat. It is certainly not an exact and mechanical measurement, as it differs from person to person, but it is very effective, because the concept is universal and implies an underlying regularity. The problem is that this interpretation, in its attempt to escape from mechanism and prioritize rhythmic freedom, eliminates the internal pulse. Therefore, what we hear here, not only an irregular “tactus”, but a severe arrhythmia in need of urgent cardiologist LOL

The proof of the pudding is to eat the pudding, right? Polish Chopin Institute of Music issued a CD edition on period instruments, 2 Erard (1837 &1849) and 1 Pleyel (1842). And started beside the "classic" Chopin competition another edition on period instruments. Some competitors were honoured with a CD (the winner of the 2018 edition). So let's compare the tempo (sorry, I'll do it the easy way - playing time) So Tatiana Schebanowa (*1953, Chopin Etudes op 10&25, Erard 1847), op 25/5 Shebanova - 4.08 Tomasz Ritter (*1995, Pleyel 1842, 1st place, jury member Mrs Yoffe) 3:41 Lang-Lang 3:58 Lisitsa 3:40 So i suggest, that its possible to speed it up on historical instruments. If someone should do it - is another question. I prefer the version of Mrs Shebanova.

I have been a reluctant observer of your theory but I'll say one thing in defense of it (although I'm not 100% there yet). Chopin marked Etude #2, Op.10 "sempre legato" and etude #1 "legato." For the latter, at quarter = 176, I wonder why he would have asked for legato at single-beat speed. At double-beat tempo the performer could conceivably play these two etudes non-legato, which would obviate their technical challenge. So he writes "legato." I don't know, I'm just thinking aloud, which I usually don't do.

Interesting topic. Three times you are explaining the very same thing, repeating yourself… I am pretty sure that when Chopin would have used the later pianos, the tempo would increase naturally as well.

These are really interesting comments and seem to put paid to many arguments made against slower tempos, which I personally much prefer. But one question I would ask about the double-beat concept is how it works with metronome figures in triple time, such as dotted minim (dotted half note) equals 116. Although I have watched many videos and read many comments, I have not found this issue dealt with. Did the metronomes of the time perhaps tick only once every two swings? Or was one expected to play three against two? Perhaps someone here has an answer, or it has already been given?

The moment I learned about WBMP everything became clear and fell into place. Classical music suddenly made sense. I still wonder how the single beat can be taken as truth by intelligent people. It scares me.

Actually they played even faster. The old pianos of that time were very light touch and keys were narrower. So it was natural to play in very fast tempi compared to nowadays pianos that are hard to play and had heavy keys.

I like it in single beat lol

You are always right. I studied at Juilliard and I’m tired at all the speed today in everything that’s played

They play too fast and you play too slow sir. With all do respect.

I regularly hear pianists playing pieces too fast. If you cannot hear the discomfort in the music caused by a tempo that is too fast then there is something wrong with your musicality. Performance is more about presenting the music than yourself.

Hilarious. "If we take the 'problem' seriously" it is not a problem unless and until you claim it is a problem. I dont care care about tempos or articulation or even what key you decide to transpose to. The only thing that matters is whether or not I found a performance 'nice'

We have to accept that young pianists participating in competitions have ambitions, dreams to win, and one way to do it is by demonstrating "virtuosity". I also prefer slower playing, except that some gifted pianists manage to make their fast performances very pleasing. For example, my favorite version of the Waltzes is the slow one by Geza Anda, yet I admire the one by Dinu Lipatti that is twice as fast. So, should we discourage the virtuosity of playing fast, by eliminating competitions, or should we make them with period instruments that don't accept fast playing? Or should we just accept reality and listen to whichever versions we prefer? After all, I am not watching your video in an old period black-and-white television, but in the latest state of the art big screen. One thing we don't know: if the Great composers of the past would play the keyboard today, would they do it on their period instruments of their days, or would they choose the best concert grand of today? I would bet that Chopin would have today a Steinway grand in his living room and play... a little faster.

Thanks a lot, Wim. I discovered classical music late in my life. So for me there are many pieces to rediscover. I sometimes can't follow the pace of the performances. So I ask myself whether to attend a concert or not. I want to enjoy music with my heart and my mind and not let it pass me by. Maybe we should tell the Formula 1 pianists that they could be commercially more successful simply because we can follow and understand what they play, even if we don't know the piece.

Aerospace. The most emotional interpretation I've ever heard. Thanks Alberto

Just because her claim that pianists play too fast nowadays does not mean that she supports that everyone should literally play twice as slower as usual. In fact, there are recordings of pianists whose teacher’s teacher is Chopin himself such as Alfred Cortot and they play just as fast as how pianists play today and previous generations that were recorded. The French pianist Plante himself heard Chopin playing and his recordings even in his late 80s are not even close to the tempo of the “double-beat” theory you are trying to support. There are so much evidence that are against your claim.

Also, this argument doesn’t hold ground if we take for example Rachmaninov. He plays so fast that even Juya Wang could be envious. Rachmaninov swallows his piano concerto 3 in 35 mins as compared to the average of 45 min from the best modern performers - and yes some parts are cut out but they make 3-4 mins max - on an arguably inferior to modern grand piano. No ine comes CLOSE! Listen to Prokofiev play his Third concerto - Marta Argerich lags behind in her interpretation ! So, I can understand your point but from many many other angles it doesn’t hold ground.

There’s also no way virtuosos like Chopin or Beethoven did not play brilliantly which includes fast. All this talk about playing slow misses the point that music - especially long composition - have structures that require faster playing. And it makes amateurs, amateurs, which is NOT encouraging quality of playing.

All composers play fast by what no-composers consider ‘fast’ Listen to any recordings of great composers that exists. Chopin didn’t play his Revolutionary that slow, no matter what theory is put forward

I have been saying this for decades. Chopin wrote for the salon. I could be wrong but I can't imagine audience wanted to hear insanely fast playing.

While I (amateurishly) consider this to be way too staccato or stunted in tempo... I still love the performance. A different interpretation perhaps? But well above anything I could attempt. I LOVE the harsh string sounds

I only practice by candlelight or oil lamp, just to be more historically accurate.

This presentation makes much verbose ado about how the metronome was used in Beethoven's time, with different interpretations changing the tempo by a factor of 2. That does not address the issue of why many conductors take some movements slower than the published metronome markings, but by far lesser factors. For example, the second movement of the second symphony is marked as 8th notes at 92, but most performances I have heard take it between 60 and 80. In my daydreaming I imagine asking Leonard Bernstein or Bruno Walter, who chose a relatively slow tempo, why they ignored Beethoven's published intent. I would not be surprised if they simply thought it was a better effect, Beethoven's reputed intent notwithstanding. The first time I heard an HIP recording take it at 92 I thought it was frantic. Out of curiosity I used Audacity software to speed Walter's recording up to 92 and it did not seem so frantic. He had a gentle touch that held at the faster tempo.

You can use the pleyel at terrific speed though you might hit a speed limit of how fast you can trill. I wonder how fast Chopin played it. I think faster than we want to believe