The Problem with Beethoven's 5th Symphony...

Did you know that Beethoven's 5th symphony is played often in exactly the same tempo? A handful go faster, a handful go slower. But imagine you would time travel to Vienna 1808, listening to the premiere of the C minor symphony with Beethoven as a conductor. What story would you bring back?
--
Beethoven V in WBMP on fortepiano, now on CD! www.authenticsound.org/produc...
--
Related episode: • BREAKING: Beethoven's ...
--
Video excerpt from "How I Met the Opera": • Comparing 5 conductors...
--
🙋We need YOU to continue on (full) speed! THANK YOU for even considering becoming a patreon!▶ / authenticsound
--
Our solution to the metronome problem is called the WBMP (Whole Beat Metronome Principle). Many other 19th century metronome marks is to read them in -what we believe - was the old way: in Whole Beat. In this reading, like the pendulum is still used today by physicians, the metronome ticks indicate the subdivision of the note value in the metronome mark. So you end up counting like one AND two AND three AND... That results in a different tempo yes, but a tempo that exactly matches the metronome mark given by the composer. In our current reading of these metronome marks, we are not able to do that for the simple reason most are way too fast. A logical consequence from actually doubling (yes) the intended tempo. New to the WBMP? Start here: • How Fast did Beethoven...
--
📩One weekly mail in your mailbox? 👉bit.ly/as-mailinglist
--
📱 Website: ▶www.authenticsound.org

[@NN-rn1oz]

I just came back from the trip to 1808 in Vienna, and what I saw shocked me to the core. There was no orchestra, no audience. It was just Beethoven, in a small dark room, sitting side by side at the piano with an unidentified adolescent male, playing his symphony on the piano at the slowest pace imaginable. I immediately turned away from the ghastly sight, but alas, the slow pounding sounds they made will haunt my nighmares forever.

[@xara_gaiteiro]

This just makes sense. I think people also lived slower. Modern day society would be so shocked. No bus no train no car... Orchestras were not as prepared as today by the way. I know it's shocking for some people but just keep it up Wim, someday you'll get proper recognition as you deserve.

[@artemasgray]

Answering the question: yes, I definitely hear sixteenths

[@danielshapiro5660]

Regarding why Beethoven didn't write 16th-notes if he heard them in the fast tempo (given by Gardiner et al): If he did so he would have had to write either 1/4 time, which is impossible, or at least 2/4 time. But the problem is that there are some places in the movement where there are three-bar periods (as the bars as currently printed are). In these places, Beethoven would either get what would be his whole metric sense messed up in every ensuing bar of the piece (having emphases on the wrong part of the bar etc) or else have to change meter a few times in the movement, which really wasn't done at that time. So in short Beethoven (perhaps reluctantly) had to write a barline for every 4 notes, and therefore had to write eighth-notes.

[@olofstroander7745]

I think the obvious reason for notating with eightnotes in 2/4 is that it's the only way to get a downbeat on the last note of all the four-note motives. The notation is chosen for the character of the music. If you write it in 2/4 or 4/4 with sixtheens, every other motive lands on a weaker part of the bar.

[@johnb6723]

In the single beat method, the 1/8 notes would not sound like fate knocking on a door, but probably more like someone knocking on a door like an over excited teenager.

[@johnb6723]

@Chlorinda Not so.

[@tytuswoyciechowski7317]

@@johnb6723 “Fate knocking at the door” is attributed to Beethoven by Anton Schindler, who is not a very trustworthy source. But, if we do take it to be accurate, Schindler also suggests a tempo of crotchet = 126 for the first five bars, i.e., almost half tempo, before beginning Beethoven’s minim = 108 after the fermata.

[@ComposedBySam]

Exactly!

[@MK-qu2ql]

Note: I recognize that this is not supposed to be a discussion video so my aim is not to upset anyone and start a discussion. I would just like to provide some material for thought. :) I don't hear note values. I listen to Gardiner or Zander and I hear "Allegro con brio" ("fast with vigor"). Then I look at the score, I see 8th notes, I see the metronome mark, and continue listening without any problem. If which note value we feel is so intrinsic to the tempo, then why not the italian marking we feel? If we think of the last movement of the same symphony we can even hear the first movement in quarter notes. But we could also imagine 16th notes. There is no rule for which speed the composer feels must correlate with which note value. There are rules on which note values are appropriate (more on that below). There is a song by Beethoven for which in a letter he expressed the thought of doubling the note values in order to give the right character. So he himself explains that choosing a note value does not mean choosing a tempo. Doubling the note values does not mean half the tempo nor does halving the note values mean twice the tempo. There was a similar point in a video on the Waldstein-Sonata years ago, stating that the fast 8th notes we hear at the beginning are (quote) "really 16th notes". I ask: Who says that? The 8th notes are only the second fastest values in the first movement so in order to avoid using constant 32nd runs in a fast Allegro, which (reference to above) is the kind of rule that does exist, Beethoven naturally chooses 8th notes for the beginning. Anyone who looks at the entire work of Beethoven will see that his use of tempo and notation was very consistent and calculated. But it was not choosing the one right note value because for every piece there are many options. Going back to the 5th symphony, as stated at the beginning, 16th, 8th and quarter notes would all follow the general rules of which note values are commonly used for that certain speed, since we find other compositions (like the last movement) which do use those values. He simply selected the one which in his mind would convey the right character. From the last movement (and other works) we see that he reserved the quarter note notation for Prestos and 16th notes might not have implied in the same accentuation so 8th notes is what we got. If the tempo was already relatively clear only be the feeling we get from listening then why did Beethoven (and others) care so much about giving precise italian markings? Think about it. The whole struggle of notation, value, tempo was in the end always the effort to convey the right music. There was no one way otherwise composers would not have had this struggle. This issue is exactly what the metronome marks were for, as we all know. Had it existed from the beginning, note values would be irrelevant. Pieces with only metronome marks could be anything if one just looked at the score. Adagio, Moderato, Prestissimo... Again, as with most other, regular pieces, notation, note values, italian tempo and metronome mark perfectly fit together like a puzzle without missing pieces. Thanks for reading :) PS: Again, I don't intend to start a raging debate (although of course I appreciate replys), the reason my comments turn out so long is because it is difficult to comment on a specific point since everything is closely interwoven. Nonetheless I try to stay as close to the point as possible without leaving out important aspects.

[@pizzacheeto]

I agree. So many people stop caring about the meaning of the textual mark. Anyone who listens to Beethoven 5/1 at whole beat will agree that it DOES NOT sound "Allegro con brio" (except maybe the WBMPers but I'm not sure if they ever consider the Italian marking)... for all I care you could prefer the whole beat tempo but to claim that it was Beethoven's conception is utterly outrageous...

[@superblondeDotOrg]

if you don't hear note values then you are not a composer. composers hear (imagine) what they notate, and notate what they hear (or imagine), these become connected skills in the brain. "I don't hear note values. I listen to Gardiner or Zander and I hear "Allegro con brio" ("fast with vigor"). Then I look at the score, I see 8th notes, I see the metronome mark, and continue listening" you would also hear the time signatures quite clearly, if you were a composer. and again to restate, if you were writing all this music completely fresh from your imagination, or at your piano, you would also hear/see the note values, pitches, time signatures, everything, as if the score were in front of you, before even writing it out.

[@MK-qu2ql]

@@superblondeDotOrg Thanks for the reply. I admit, the phrase "I don't hear note values" may not be ideally formulated. What I meant by it is the following: In the video (and others) it is stated that for example the 1st movement of Beethoven's 5th symphony couldn't be meant to be that fast because it is written in eighth notes. But this assumes that there is a fixed range of speed associated with every note value, which is completely unheard of. Of course a composer (and I am also capable of that but that's of lesser importance) imagines every aspect of a composition, as you wrote, often in advance. But there is no rule that states: "quarter notes must not be faster than ....., eighth notes must not be faster than....." and so on. How fast a certain note value is, depends on the time signature and the tempo marking and can vary drastically: If you take a look at the very end of the 5th symphony, there are quarter notes moving ever so slightly faster than the eighths at the start (112 instead of 108) In a typical "Adagio" from Beethoven's sonatas (and there are plenty) a single quarter note gets the MM of 40. So in one instance, four quarter notes fit into one beat at 108 bpm, in the other instance, a tempo of almost a third, 40 bpm, only accomodates one quarter note. This is a most basic exapmle, but it shows how vastly different the duration of a note value can be based on different tempi. There is no such thing as 'heavy' quarter notes. In an adagio they might be, where you find a lot of very small notes as well, but not in an allegro or presto where they are the only note values being used (!) A little ancdote: When I was younger and lacked theoretical knowledge, on one occasion I made exactly that mistake, which is made in the video, which I was trying to point out. I bought a score of Beethoven's "Pathetique" sonata. Upon opening the first page of music, I thought there was an error. I knew the beginning had to be slow, but there were all those sixteenths notes and even shorter ones in dotted rhythms. What I did was, I assumed that those note values had to have a certain speed in order to feel like sixteenths. Just like in the video, where it is argued that eight notes have to be slower. But no - it all depends on the tempo. I realized that the "Grave" marking on the score was the key factor. In the 5th symphony, it's the "Allegro con brio" which gives the speed. Using smaller note values is completely unneccessary. In fact, music itself teaches us that through "Alla Breve". It only takes one peage of instruction by Czerny (Op.500) to see that the same music can be notated in 4/4 using sixteenths, or in Alle breve (2/2) using eights. Without changing the tempo. The difference is only in the way you count and think about the phrasing, so accordingly the composer chooses the one that fits best. It shows that the speed of a note value is not set in stone and entirely subject to the surrounding parameters. If you take the first movement of the "Hammerklavier" sonata, rewrite it into 4/4 using sixteenths instead of eighths, turn the MM from half note = 138 into quarter note =138, arrange it for a trio (piano, violin, cello) - i bet hardly anyone would complain. It is only the way it is written, for solo piano, where pressing keys fast is strenuous, combined with the original eighth notes, which make us feel that it has to go slower. Let's say we would rewrite the 1st movement of the "Hammerklavier" or the 5th into sixteenths, in order to satisfy the arguments made in the video. Nothing would change. Because "Allegro con brio" refers to the speed of the fastest note value and not universally to the sixteenth regardless of the notation. As pointed out by others, the eighths were chosen, simply to have the downbeats in the right places. I apologize for the lengthy reply but explaining musical subjects without being able to demonstrate them is rather difficult.

[@superblondeDotOrg]

@@MK-qu2ql there is a range of tempo associated with 8th notes when composing music. and there is a range of tempo associated with 16th notes when composing music. so your statement is not correct: "But this assumes that there is a fixed range of speed associated with every note value, which is completely unheard of." it absolutely is heard of, and common in composing, to choose the note value which represents the feeling of the music, regardless of tempo. fast note values at q=100 may indicate a more furious section, just as slow note values at q=200 may indicate a more plodding section (even though a computer would play them exactly the same). to a human they are visually different and imply a different musical feeling to play. that is a fact. it seems there are tooooo many comments on this overall topic from those who are not composers and do not understand the subtle details of how music is written.

[@MK-qu2ql]

@@superblondeDotOrg My apologies, to avoid making the comment even longer, I didn't make that point clear enough. Of course a composer has an idea of what note value to use in combination with which tempo, time signature and so on and there are of course common uses of notes for specific tempi. But what I wanted to point out is that this is not strictly defined anywhere. Therefore the argument (made in the video) that 'eighth notes at half note = 108 would not fit the tempo because eighths are 'slow' note values' does not hold. Of course, nobody would compose an allegro using only whole notes and half notes, but to claim that in this example (the 5th) sixteenths would have been required to convey the speed of an "Allegro con brio" is not a sensible argument. Because: There is no statement such as: "An Allegro in 2/4 time must always be written in sixteenths." The way the 1st movement is written, is in no way unusual, and when compared to other works, it fits perfectly. As you correctly wrote, and as is obvious, different notes feel different. But different does not imply twice as fast. The thought experiment I described shows this clearly: Even if the movement was written in sixteenth notes, the MM would be quarter note = 108. You would have the same music with different accentuation, which is precisely why the eighth note notation was used instead. Concerning subtle details of how music is written - as a musician I do understand how a composition works. Nothing of what you replied is incorrect. But I hope from this answer it is more clear than before that the diefferent feel that different note values imply does not matter in this exapmle because the eighths work just fine. The problem arises when trying to discover something using only one note or one measure, without looking at the whole subject. I respect the work presented on this channel and various websites in the sense that it is clearly done with the right intent, but unfortunately not the right methods. For example: Pretty much any website that presents something about tempo issues cites only the "Hammerklavier" sonata and nothing else. If they would look at the rest, things would be much clearer.

[@thidang6247]

We literally have historical concert programs with their durations and they are consistent with how we play the music today. How do people still believe this nonsense?

[@troll7589]

If you look at most music from the classical era, allegros are often notated on eighth notes, while adagios are often noted with sixteenths. Following your logic, should we play adagios faster then allegros? Ore could it be that notation etiquettes change over time?

[@classicgameplay10]

No, most alegros have 16th notes as the most common and smallest notes.

[@classicgameplay10]

@Chlorinda not really, the smallest note on 4/4 is pretty much always 16th. In Bachs case, pretty much is mostly completely 16 either on the right or the left hand. In the case of Mozart too. Even the nannerl notenbuch alegros are mostly 16th. Of course when it comes to melodies, you have to change rythm a little bit, but mostly, you will pretty much always see 16th either on left hand or right hand.

[@classicgameplay10]

@Chlorinda the movement you are talking about is a 3/4, not 4/4. In the case of cut time or 3/4, yes, in general 8th are playing the same role as the 16th note in the case of 4/4 movement. You can again look at Bachs or Mozarts minuets, scherzos or bouress to see it. But im not talking about baroque, look at the Mozart and Haydn sonata.

[@chegadesalzburg]

Two journeys or just one journey? Nice touch on this rethorical question.

[@romualdkowalewski4373]

the first time - thirty-second note , the second time - a quarter note

[@accordiontv1]

It’s not a question of whether you think of eight notes or sixteenths, it’s to do with the emphasis of the first beat of the bar which is strongest, hence the way big Beethoven chose to write it like this

About the exercise, I would write Gardiner's performance with 16th notes, and your and Alberto's performance with 8th notes. Of course I would.

[@islaadele1212]

Surely there must be historical reports, letters, documents from the period indicating perhaps how long a performance lasted? Surely that would solve the argument?

[@Freawulf]

The following is a quote from another user's comment on another video by Wim, but I believe it answers your question in a most conclusive manner, which I'm inclined to agree with (phrases *bolded* by me): "@giacomo2511 1 month ago I once (maybe 2-3 year ago) highlighted in this channel that Sir George Smart (english director who personally met Beethoven in September 1825 and heard all main themes of Beethoven's symphonies by Beethoven himself in his house) used to note the durations of his performances of the Beethoven symphonies. *All of that records are perfectly compatible with the durations we have today,* for instance: 35 min for 5th symphony, 60 min for 9th symphony, etc... This records are very detailed (nothing like "half an hour", or "one hour" that could be an approximation). He also could not believe when Beethoven told him (with his nephew and other friends confirming) that the first performance of 9th lasted not more than 45 minutes. Smart did not believe, stating that minimum 1hour is necessary for 9th symphony. If you look at the DURATIONS of pieces and concerts of 18th-19th century (there are many reliable sources) you can realise that tempi were approximately those ones we use today. I also check the description of metronome using in Czerny Piano School book: it is exactly as we use the metronome today..."

[@islaadele1212]

@@Freawulf Thank you for that. I guess this is all just a whimsical ramble down the path of 'what if?' then.

[@kmg2480]

The brilliance of Beethoven and most of his contemporaries is truly remarkable. We have instantaneous digital access to a vast number of scores and letters, which have been read and discussed on this channel, and many LP/CD recordings at various tempi to consider. The great composers of history however would have to search for physical copies of scores, which I assume was an arduous task in the 18th and 19th centuries; particularly for lesser known works. And even if, for example, Beethoven DID meet Mozart, imagine how sharp the mind would have to be to appreciate and remember the nuances of another composer in that one moment of time, which could likely not be replaced in the way we can watch a video or listen to an LP over and over again. They deserve great respect for that alone, I say.

[@classicgameplay10]

Accordiing to hummel, they did met, and Mozart scolded Beethoven for hammering the keyboard while improvising.

[@davidloveday8473]

The speed you suggest just isn't consistent with the "allegro con brio" marking, all the force and energy disappears from the piece, becoming soporific.

[@ComposedBySam]

Yes exactly. Also it is justifiable to notate the piece in 2/4 with 8th notes so that the last note falls on the strong down beat of the measure. It would be peculiar and hard to do so if it were written in 16th notes

​@@ComposedBySam Think about the time wasted on notating all those 16ths with a pencil! 😉

[@ComposedBySam]

@ yep. Exactly

[@classicgameplay10]

What is the speed you suggest then ?

[@ComposedBySam]

@@classicgameplay10 the usual. As it is played by modern orchestras. Maybe just a little faster than that.

[@danielhuertasferrer55]

I think using 2/4 for a fast tempo "in one" is possible and it shows in many Haydn and Mozart pieces. Also, you can find the example of Schumann 4th symphony; the allegro of the first movement was written in 2/4 in the same intention, more or less, as Beethoven 5, and when he revised it in 1854 he changed this movement to a 2/4 written in 16th notes, basically changing the main rythmic value from half notes to quarter notes. Showing, then, that his idea was the same with both notations and it was indeed common to conceive a fast movement like that in 2/4 with 8th notes.

[@channelelectronique]

I think you are spot on. Awesome video with clear evidence to support your conjecture.

[@herrdoktorjohan]

At the fast performance speeds I hear it as DUH-duh-duh DUNNNNN... so triplet 16th notes followed by a half note (or what have you) whereas in the slowest performance you can discern that the accent is on the second note, duh-DUH-duh DUNNNN, where it should be according to the score and the gravitas imposed by each of the "Knocks of Fate" implies 8th notes followed by a half note (or what have you). To answer the original question: I wouldn't want to step into that time machine. I like my comforts, and sitting in a near freezing concert hall for a few hours is not my idea of fun, even if the music is sublime.

[@Clavichordist]

That is exactly how I hear it as it's performed today at the fastest tempo. There is total disregard of the actual value of simple eighth-notes. I have mixed feelings on traveling back in time to hear the original concert. I might enjoy the music but I would not enjoy the cold or the miserable smell of body odor. People didn't bathe or use deodorant the way we do today. The concert too wouldn't be a few hours. These concerts went on a lot longer and the 5th symphony was one of many opuses performed that night with some only being fragments of full works. The orchestra too wasn't always a professional affair. If for some reason the pros couldn't make it, the theatre owner would pinch hit for the amateurs to come in and fill in the spots. That made for some cacophonous performances I'm sure, probably more in line with a high school performance than a professional orchestra.

[@matttondr9282]

I completely agree with you, the feeling of heavy beats is very important in 18th and early 19th century music, and the fast tempos completely ruin that here. Very much like they do in the Waldstein sonata. With the eighth notes written, one should be able to hear the pulse on the first and third beats.

[@matttondr9282]

@Chlorinda Doesn’t the fact that orchestras didn’t have too many rehearsals before performing a piece of this magnitude further suggest that the WB tempo is more plausible? Imagine a mostly amateur orchestra mostly sight-reading Beethoven’s 5th… At Gardiner’s tempo!! (While very cold as well.. As an organist myself, I know the feeling of playing with frozen fingers on a cold December morning) Or how about the fact that Liszt’s hellish piano arrangement was, supposedly, sight-readable by an average musical college student? What about Czerny’s collection of beginner pieces that have tempos challenging enough for professional concert pianists? I know the WB theory seems outrageous at first but it answers so many questions and fixes problems previously swept under the rug.

[@davidmdyer838]

Then why does the metronome click in both directions? Did people really have to listen to two clicks and ignore one of them? It would have been possible to make a metronome that clicked in only one direction but I don't know of anyone who did. This is nonsense.

[@brendanward2991]

Because Maelzel, the creator of the metronome, meant it to be used in single beat. But most composers used it in double beat. That's why Maelzel wrote a letter in 1821 to the "Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung" complaining that composers (he actually names Beethoven) were misusing his invention. That letter is part of the historical record. What is your explanation for Maelzel's annoyance?

[@olofstroander7745]

@@brendanward2991 Hi Brendan. Maelzel doesn't say anything about Beethoven using the metronome in a wrong way, he mentions his name along with a bunch of other composers who USE the metronome. He is trying to promote his invention. As I remember it his complaints are about some composers giving very different speeds for the same italian tempo indication. Not in relation to each other but in their own music. He explains the scale of the metronome and what he thinks is the right range for different tempi. It's been a while since I read that text but that's how I remember it. But I completely agree that Maelzel intended the metronome for single beat. Best Olof

[@brendanward2991]

@@olofstroander7745 If that's the case, then I guess my comments are not relevant. I stand corrected. (I think it was in a video by Bernard Ruchti that I heard of this letter. I haven't read it myself.)

[@Zaleskee]

Fascinating!!

[@robh9079]

I thought mvt2 of shostakovitch S4 n.8 was 16ths when I first heard it! I concur with you on the 1/16s 1/8ths in Beethoven's '5th'.

[@c-historia]

great video!

[@ryurc3033]

Honestly, most of what I listen to musically is far far far outside of this genre (metal) When I hear the faster version, that's where I actually start to feel interested. I like to imagine many famous artists from that era playing their piece exhaustingly fast, trying to make everyone talk about the show, and drumming up more work

[@matttondr9282]

For anyone questioning this, read the description of a pendulum on wikipedia. ;) “…..When released, the restoring force acting on the pendulum's mass causes it to oscillate about the equilibrium position, swinging back and forth. The time for one complete cycle, a left swing and a right swing, is called the period.” Is it really far fetched to think that metronome marks used to represent oscillations of a pendulum (which a metronome is a mechanical version of) ie the full motion and not only halves of it? Especially knowing that musicians used to use apples on a string to keep time?

[@happypiano4810]

Why would it be that a standard metronome makes the exact same click sound both ways then?

[@superblondeDotOrg]

musicians are uneducated in science (or anything else outside of music, mostly), and so the relationship to "period" which is a scientific term, indicates nothing to a musician.

[@dorette-hi4j]

Now read on, until you get to the part about "Use for time measurement". *"Each time the pendulum swings through its centre position,* it releases one tooth of the escape wheel (g).* Each time it swings through its centre position is a single swing - a swing in one direction. This is how clocks work - hence the term clockwork. The metronome works in exactly the same way. So yes, it is farfetched to suppose metronome marks represents the period, not the half-period. While you are at it, look up the definition of 'seconds pendulum' "whose period is precisely two seconds; one second for a swing in one direction, and one second for the return swing". This is the pendulum length (one meter) that was the basis for long-case clock mechanisms developed in the seventeenth century. Your 'apple on a string', if the string is 1 meter long, would be a seconds pendulum. When a metronome is set to 60, it is acting as a seconds pendulum.

[@achaley4186]

The truth that music, life, and breath, not only can be, but should be slower is nothing short of a healing balm for me. Thanks yet again Wim, for standing up for this fact, and for helping us to hear all the beauty that can only be brought out in time. ⭐🙏🏼🙂❤

[@planetproofreading2234]

There is plenty of evidence and musical references to the French revolution and French revolutionary songs in the fifth symphony. It's hard to imagine a composer, so passionate about liberty and freedom would be slowing down rather than speeding up this revolutionary composition. Furthermore, this trend continues throughout the 19th and 20th Centuries.

[@GiovanniESanto]

When I play on the piano, it loses aspects of the melody at high speed. Then listening to orchestras you see an unnecessary acceleration.

[@BRL1611]

Based on the sound of the recordings, I would hands down use the sixteenth/semiquaver for the main theme. The second recoding, I would use 8ths/quaver noted in the main theme.

[@Rene-uz3eb]

What’s missing is the fortissimo in the slower recording. I think properly played the correct half speed version will sound great. I think back then, starting a piece in fortissimo and off beat may have had the same surprise effect as today with the additional element of speed.

[@somejerkbag]

Love this! I love higher tempo classical 😊

[@picksalot1]

It is interesting to know what the Composer originally intended. But, if I did that with my own compositions, it may only be "accurate" for the day I wrote it down. I'm not a rigid clock out metronome. My mood varies and so do my tempos. I think this is typical of most musicians. Being rigid about tempos doesn't enhance my enjoyment of any music. In fact, with modern technology, if I find a recording too fast or slow, I just change the tempo to what I enjoy. It's a lot like food. If it needs more salt, I just add it myself, and don't bother asking the Chef for permission. YMMV 🤷

[@torosdepamplona]

Bravo!

[@vincentwood7036]

Look at the speed of music when paired with a human voice, people can only sing so fast after all. This could help greatly to inform the intended tempo of the instrumental pieces.

[@Cookster997]

​@Chlorinda I think the commenter's point is that if we look at how Beethoven wrote for the voice, we can make conclusions about how he wrote in general.

[@stefanp.6488]

Great Video Wim, loved it!!

[@hvuvtjs]

If I were to transcribe what I was listening to, I would definitely use 16th notes. However, the slower double-beat tempo doesn't feel like 'allegro con brio' to me. Maybe a power walk at best?

[@j-dub8399]

This is one of the MANY reasons I love Bach so much. Depending on my mood, I will perform the same piece at polar opposite tempos. I love the sound of Beethoven’s fifth at all spectrums for the same reason.

[@wolkowy1]

Excellent presentation of adding the crucial musical-component of tempo to other musical-components (started in the 2nd half of the 20th century by the authentic-historical musical movement) in the long hard way (almost not possible) of understanding the true intentions of the composer's interpretation and performance, as they were anchored and understood by musicians and music-lovers of his own time. Bravo! I'm sharing in my facebook.

[@7kyudo]

Dear Wim. I was trying to find your latest KZbin video. Very sadly I see that Clavichord International is stopping ? So what now just as I discovered the organisation ?

[@uumlau]

I think you're correct on the Czerny, per your older videos on this topic. I don't think you're correct on Beethoven's 5th. Hypothesis: Czerny had an idiosyncratic interpretation of metronome markings, but Beethoven didn't. The Czerny tempo markings are ridiculous, which is evidence enough that something is wrong, while "Allegro con brio" is consistent with the faster versions of Beethoven's 5th, but not the half-speed version. Another possibility - Czerny's metronome was very, very slow.

[@michaelschwaiger8071]

This is beautifully written! Very evocative reasoning!

[@Rollinglenn]

Brilliant explanation, Wim. Loved this video!

[@ikamadan]

5th symphony, third movement: When I look at the score, I see quarter and half notes. It reads Allegro. If I hadn't ever listened to any performances, I would have played it much much slower than the traditional speed. Your comparison of 8th and 16th notes for the first movement wouldn't work here. Am I missing something ?

[@sebastian-benedictflore]

You should take a look at the Brahms horn trio, 2nd mvt in particular (with respect to your point about "what rhythm do you naturally hear").

[@rhfactor2106]

It’s a great video Wim. Talking about the character..well, don’t u thinking for a “ victorious “ mood 54 is too slow? Yes I know it’s just since the World War II it’s been called a victory symphony.. I’m not in for 108 , definitely. But maybe 80 ish seems good ?

[@johnb6723]

Not correct though.

[@bakmanthetitan]

I would absolutely write those melodies as 16th notes, regardless of the tempo. It's more to do with the grouping than the speed. Not really unusual for a 2/4 movement.

[@charlesbyrne5594]

You need to get an orchestra to play this symphony at "half-speed". One thing that is very apparent is that the music immediately becomes far more rhythmically interesting.

[@azurbtkl3901]

Ok give me an example of a passage that becomes more "rhitmically interesting" please.

[@charlesbyrne5594]

@@azurbtkl3901 In my opinion at high speed often accents and articulation gets lost in the frenzy. The descending quavers at 8:09 in this video sounds more interesting to me. (Perhaps you will disagree, and that's fine). Great interpretation surely is the fruit of trying different things, perhaps sometimes taking radically different approaches to commonplace passages. kzbin.info/www/bejne/q5aZYoGCYpmrq5o

[@jere3558]

​@@azurbtkl3901I'd actually love to know that too

[@happypiano4810]

It may also become apparent that the wind instrument players are beginning to go a little red in the face.

[@allwinds3786]

How about Mahler 7 and the Klemperer recording?

[@ihaveneverwantedto]

So can you get an orchestra to do a double beat version with you?

[@johnb6723]

Maximianno Cobra certainly did, so I don't see why not.

[@Ricardo019s]

Maybe Beethoven was thinking in hipermeter?!

[@pablovogel6986]

He is nuts. It does not sound good at half speed. The score even start with a mute so there is no accent with the first note. So the accent go to the long note which starts the next bar it’s a matter of phrasing not speed

[@dmwalker24]

Perhaps not as slow as the slowest, but I far prefer the performances on the slower side. Barenboim's interpretation (tempo, and all other aspects) is just about perfect to my ears, whether or not that's what Beethoven actually intended. But given the opportunity, I would brave frostbite, and cannibals to be there for the premiere in 1808.

[@SiteReader]

Great point about the eighth notes, Wim.

[@bigfan2710]

Thank you. This is really interesting. I would accept your invitation, take a big coat and a hot water bottle, sit next to Prince Lobkowitz and clap very loudly!

[@josephciolino2865]

Wonderful video!! BTW, I was taught that the eighth note (especially for Bach) implied a "faster" interpretation and the sixteenth-note, slower. This seems to have been the case for most performances we hear, no? Would it be different for Beethoven? Who knows? I prefer the performances that make the music of the 5th the most profound. Too fast, silly. Too slow, melodramatic. In the end.... ?

[@Ezekiel_Pianist]

Honestly I heard 32nd notes haha in the fast recording and 8th notes in your recording!

[@danielfladmose]

Why do you play pop music in the background in the beginning?

[@Maestro-FR]

First we have to look for the units that make the flow. These are the 1/8. Of course these are fast, "con brio" and cannot be the beat (Schlag). So this is a fast flow, a torrent. However the beat is the oscillation. What we learned in basic physics applies. The oscillation is the full movement of the pendulum. Regardless of what Beethoven indicated, we learn from Hugo Riemann (1905) that the tempo must always be within 60-120, where these numbers are frontier (Grenzen). It follows that 108 means the frequency of the 1/4. However it does not follow that the maestro will do 108, he might well do 116 or 100. In fact there is no such thing as playing at the same tempo. The rule is that there must be agogic wherever the ending of a motive is feminine, in particular for the 2nd theme which is fully "feminine". There must be as well spots where the maestro will accelerate up to 120. The very first bars are non rythmic. There is no flow. There is no way to know as to whether it is ternary or binary, iambic or trocheic. We only know that there are 3 shorts followed by a very long tone, this what is offered to the ear. However bowing will structure a iambic articulation : V^V^____

[@EANNE1000]

If the time signature says 2/4, wouldn't it make sense to set the metronome speed as per the quarter note? Setting it by the half note is incongruous to me.

[@bartk07]

Great video, Wim, subtle, elegant, reasonable and very convincing. More videos like this, please.

[@tj-co9go]

As a classically trained musician, this video is just utter and complete rubbish. 8th or 16th notes don't indicate whether notes are slow or fast, their length differs based on tempo, and their emphasis on meter. Besides, I am fairly certain that the tempo marking b = 108 in combination with Allegro con brio means a brisk tempo Beethovenin often complained that interpreted played his music too slowly and in a sloppy manner - this indicates he wanted a fast tempo. The whole "spirit" of the movement works better in fast rhythm. It sounds daring, revolutionary, fresh - stretching the instrument to the limits of its capabilities. Dark, powerful.

[@rbk2745]

Beethoven was beyond his time...hmmm...time × 2?...time /2?...hmm...ok, he was a genius.😉

[@gravypatron]

Would he be conducting with most of his hearing gone in 1808?

[@antoniavignera2339]

Meraviglia della musica!Straordinaria abbinamento,immagini,direzione e tempo metronomico .Complimenti!

[@mantictac]

Not only does Beethoven's use of Italian tempo words match Quantz' description of Tempo Ordinario for "Allegro" in this case, it in fact undershoots it by a fair margin to account for the half note beat (especially considering that the tempo marking further exaggerates the affect). It's definitely true that the eighth note carries more significance and weight than the sixteenth, and in this way I don't think the work could even practically achieve the same effect with them, which tend to flourish over the quarter note beat without the relative exactitude demanded by eighth notes. The eighth note is grave and the quarter notes give the movement a march-like quality regardless of the fast tempo. 2/4 happens to be among the time signatures (with 3/4) that can be either in the "slow" movement (quarters and sixteenths) or the "fast" movement (halves and eighths). While I'm a proponent of using time signatures like 1/2 for the latter, this simply wasn't in practice at the time.

[@giorgosg4032]

Hey! When do you think the change in metronome readings happened and why? Have you explained this before?

[@toreoft]

If I make fast music I would not use much 32 og 64 notes but 8 notes, because easier to write.

[@theskoomacat7849]

Even if people disagree, I don't think you are forcing your opinion on anyone, therefore I believe there's no reason to be overly zealous in the comments. I think the way of listening to music that you present on your channel is very enjoyable. Since I discovered it, I got much more enjoyment out of every musical piece than ever before. (Interestingly including modern pieces that are written with our current usage of metronome marks and and feel of time signatures and note values.) I cannot claim any honest knowledge of its historical truth, since I am not a scholar of this field. That said, I have went through some of the historical evidence you laid out over the videos, and coupled with my now everlasting "whole-beat hearing", I find this historical model to be personally convincing. Please keep up the good work, you are doing no harm to anyone, let no one dissuade you from you passion. All the best, M. S.

[@Assalariado762]

It is not reasonable to imagine that the best musicians and virtuosos of that time, who studied their respective instruments since childhood-like Beethoven himself-had the notion of "Prestíssimo" suggested in the demonstrations in your videos. If this were true, any rural worker with less than a year of study could reach the level of a professional musician and virtuoso, ready to play a concerto at first sight.

[@AuthenticSound]

no, it is more reasonable that even andante and adagio tempi of that time are impossible to play. And try it, your sightreading (which by the way was a real thing back then, but I suppose you know all of that...)

[@Assalariado762]

I understand your point; there are certainly problems in both hypotheses. However, I will not simply consider the matter resolved or have a preference while ignoring other significant implications. Consider the metronome markings that Beethoven indicated for the Ninth Symphony, and from them, let's calculate how many weeks a single performance of Idomeneo lasted. Did Beethoven and Mozart have such different perceptions of time? I don't have a solution for this issue.@@AuthenticSound

[@michaelschwaiger8071]

Going back in time to this very moment would on the one hand surely quite interesting and answer a lot of questions (I’m sure the tempo would be wbmp). On the other hand it wouldn’t be a nice experience: living through this disaster of concert, feeling embarrassed for nearly deaf Mr. Beethoven struggling to communicate with his orchestra , seeing the poor organisation of the event, ashamed for the disrespectful behaviour of the audience, and the freezing temperatures in the room… Not my idea of fun!

[@DeflatingAtheism]

Are you thinking of the premiere of the 9th? In his middle period, Beethoven’s deafness was still incipient, and the 1808 concert featured him conducting the premieres of the 5th Symphony, the 6th Symphony, the Fourth Piano Concerto, the Choral Fantasy, and selections from the Mass in C Major. If ever there were a concert in human history to attend!

[@RicardoMarlowFlamenco]

The Great Kat has the correct tempo.

[@minerscale]

I think you're crazy but I respect your work very much.

[@cmcampbell]

Very interesting as always and all your videos. Thank you. I never studied music but this is fascinating. Anyway sorry about bringing this up but I really love Beethoven since the day I was born, and the fifth is a great masterpiece but for me not the 1st movement but the third movement. These are my favorites third movement interpretations the one from Carlos Kleiber (1974) and the one from Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra/Klemperer (1968). Sorry but when I compare those two with Von Karajan it was not as good to me. The one from Kleiber's brass section it is incredible. They both have different tempos I think. Those specific bars and parts is why I fell in love with classical music. Also if I was Klieber I will be even do slower tempo on that part. Thank you AuthenticSound ❤❤❤❤ love your channel. Trying to learn more. My fantasy is when I die to travel in time and hear Bach, Handel, Mozart, Beethoven and many others.

[@valkhorn]

Or what if Beethoven's metronome was running fast?

[@thomashughes4859]

If the tempo is too fast, the introductory motif's fermata is utterly lost! Right there gives an indication that the modern interpretation might be too fast. Furthermore, the formula is - and has been since its development - T = 2 🥧 (L/g)^0.5 - QED, mes amis ! 😁

[@thomashughes4859]

@@partytf2576 Please show me via link or reference; I know of no other formula from physics. I am familiar with an escape wheel formula, but Malzael was not pleased that folks thought his Metronome was a mere Black Forest clock. Please show me. Thanks.

[@thomashughes4859]

@@partytf2576 Don't be sorry unless you're from Canada ... a little Cajun humour - very little ... thank you very much! OK. In clock-building parlance, a formula exists whereby the escapement wheel can be reckoned to two pendulum swings per each tooth being past over the entire period of the pendulum swings. This is to figure how many revolutions the escapement wheel makes per minute to figure the gear ratios for the second wheel and the minute wheel. Though great for clockwork, this does us no good for music, which is based upon a certain time period per note, measure, &c. Mersenne indeed uses two definitions for the second minute part of the hour: 1) In music related to the measure ("which the Spaniards call a compas"); and 2) In physics where he reckons he second minute part of the hour to the sundial. I have read his original French (the reason I learnt French in the first place) for both of these definitions. He did not studder when he wrote both of these defintions. Of course, that was a century or more before Maelzel mechanises the Metronome with a spring (and he most likely used the clockwork formula for his initial French pinwheel escapement, which was, in fact, a brilliant escapement for this mechanism. Of course, if you take the seconds pendulum time period of two second minute parts of the hour, and "flip it", you'll get the beats per second or Hz, which is 0.5. Mersenne's and subsequently Wim's interpretation of the pendulum for the Metronome is revolutions per minute, not beats per minute. This solves all of the interpretation issues where Mersenne is concerned. The chief error of the Metronome was to begin using it to mark pulses instead of its original use to simply find the time period of the note in question. I'll let you look into these jewels I have placed here for further study. Fascinating topic. Thank you for your additions to this discussion. Be well!

[@toddgrossmanmusic2167]

16ths

[@magisterdixit1591]

It's incredible how you are ba at explaining simpler! Please, just put, befeore and after an original recording: 1st audio: "this is by single beat" (then play the audio adjusted to the single-beat spead) 2nd audio: "this is how Mr. Musician plays it" (then play the Musician's original recording) 3rd audio: "this is how doubble beat" (then play the audio adjusting to the doubble-beat speed) Only that, ok!!!!!!! JUST that!!!! Do it 15 times, in 15 different "demonstration" videos. Each one: 1st audio, 2nd audio, and 3rd audio. You have a too important message to mess it up with your badsplanation! Demonstrate. Only! Good luck. Nice job! Remember: [1st : sb, 2nd orig. exampl., 3rd.: db] just that! ;-))

[@countluke2334]

I'm pretty sure Beethoven knew how to use a metronome. If the speed we usually perform this piece today was double the intended speed, the same would be true to every other piece Beethoven put Metronome marks on. And that would be ridiculous especially on the already slower pieces and movements. It also wouldn't fit the historic descriptions about how long a concert took. Plus half the speed would probably be Andante, but certainly not Allegro con brio.

[@TheOneRaf]

I don't know why I think this, but if I'd be going back to 1808 to listen to the first time they play it, I imagine it to be quite crude. There's something that makes me believe there would be a crude quality to this concert. It's never truly how we imagine it.

[@DeflatingAtheism]

Certainly the ‘nautral’ (pre-valve) French horns and trumpets sounded ‘cruder’ than what modern audiences would expect.

[@ComposedBySam]

Am I the only one who enjoys such "crude" performances? I think it has a profound character

[@anthonymccarthy4164]

How about the other movements? Do their speeds correspond to the same practice in those movements? I agree with your points, as almost always, the notation supports your reading of it.

[@emilianoturazzi]

actually the notation supports the opposite point of view... and following his point of view we had to slow down all the other movements in order to, at least, haveing differences between "allegro con brio" and "andante con moto" (that by the way is faster than the tempo he chose for his version of the first movement). don't forget the meaning of the italian markings (that predate metronome and was already used with a more or less common meaning). "allegro con brio" is "cheerful with energy" or in a less literal way "fast with energy"...

[@anthonymccarthy4164]

@@emilianoturazzi You don't seem to understand the argument. I'm not really interested in arguing with people who don't address the issues as honestly as Wim and his colleagues have.

[@VallaMusic]

all i ask Wim, when we have our whole beat concert hall (named Winters Hall, of course) and orchestra, of which you are the principal conductor, of course (again), that you please perform for me some of the Schubert symphonies whilst I listen from the box above being transported to the heavens

[@JOHN-tk6vl]

I leave the theory to the buffs & just enjoy the music.

[@janvermeer3931]

If you only have a boring character yourself, you shouldn't transfer it to Beethoven. Beethoven knew how to use a metronome. Con brio = with vivacity. Take Beethoven seriously and don't spread conspiracy theories. Beethoven was a visionary and not a bore. And we know that the premiere in 1808 was too much for the orchestra. The Academy Concert of 1808 included the entire 5th and 6th symphonies, the 4th piano concerto, a concert aria, parts of a mass and the great choral fantasy. Played at half speed, nobody would endure this evening.

[@javiersusarte7294]

Congratulations for your explanation, Wim. I am totally convinced that what you say in this video is right, and I add without doubt that the most of the baroque and classic period performances up to now are mere bizarre played by excellent musics but misinformed. What a pity! And I repeat: by excellent musicians and very skillfully! We all live (conscious or unconsciusly) in a lamentable era of velocity and breaking record, almost always in hurry (between other many things), and nowadays music performances of those periods show it streaming the world over. What a pity! As I told you in a letter, dear Wim, I was fortunate enough to study with Willem Talsma while his last years of his life, and I think the reason why some persons do not agree with your four-hand performance of 5th symphony in some moments is because of the character (It happens to me, for example), but the metronome interpretation in this movement is right! Another reason, and I agree with you, is just we are used to modern performances, according to modern tradition. Of course the rule in not so simple as to put the metronome at half. The interpretation is not always so, because it depends on the measure, on the shortest notes, and on the metronomic indication words, and we must be very carefully particularly with the inappropriated call "slow" movements. As you well know, ternary measures deserve a separate chapter. Excuses everyone for my English. I studied it just to be able to translate the first book of Talsma into Spanish (he published it in Germany and translated into English, but he died before he could publish it). What a pity again! Dear Wim, though I do not agree with some of your performances sometimes, I want to mention what it is obvious for me and for everyone: that you are a wonderful keyboard player and musician. Thanks a lot for your labor, Wim! Regards, Javier

[@eytansuchard8640]

My physics professor who taught me General Relativity was professor Nathan Rosen, (EPR, ER) who was co-researcher with Albert Einstein. I did hear another professor from the M.I.T on KZbin. In my opinion, his way of teaching GR is better. It could be the same with music.

[@DohcHama]

As tempi began with the heart beat, if we take the pulse we get a figure of 72 bpm (average) but if we lift the left breast of a nubile and LISTEN to the heart beat we hear 144 sounds a minute. Mother nature giving us a duality of a single phenomenon. And if you notice, the heart spends more time filling than ejecting so the valve sounds a syncopated... Jazz anyone?

[@elaineblackhurst1509]

Really interesting video - thanks. Might just be worth taking a moment to be aware that the American-English ‘8th’ and ‘16th’ notes and the like (which originate from the German system) are absolutely never used nor understood in the rest of the English-speaking world - nor beyond - and are incomprehensible outside the US; it might have been worth recognising the more international origins of your followers and doubling-up by mentioning quavers and semiquavers as well. (The English terms are however reasonably well-known in the US as when I listened to a Leonard Bernstein talk on Beethoven’s first symphony recently). Similarly, a motive (US), is not the same thing as a motif (everyone else) which is how a Brit, Aussie, or Kiwi, et al would describe fate knocking on the door.

[@elaineblackhurst1509]

@Chlorinda I simply must restate my point that the American-English note values are neither used nor understood in the rest of the English-speaking world; neither are the English names of the notes ‘old terms’ as in some old-fashioned form of pre-metric system of weights and measures - they are the living language of music as I outlined. The English terms as I suggested are also rather more familiar in the US than the mathematical system is in the UK, Australia, New Zealand and every other country with historic British connections. I am surprised you take a slightly patronising attitude toward the French system as it is, like the British one, non-mathematical and the norm; the Italian system for example shares breve and semibreve with English, the blanche and noir of French become the Italian bianca and nera, whilst the quaver and semiquaver in Italian are a croma and semicroma. If we add the Spanish terms, they too are non-mathematical, so the comment about the French ‘bless them’ can be widely applied elsewhere. The additional problem with the American-English notation for wider English speakers is that in the British system, the whole note is the breve whilst in the American system it is a semibreve (semi obviously suggesting half); recipe for confusion. This discrepancy over a whole note therefore renders the note values meaningless if you try to convert them - a quarter note in the US must be a crotchet, but a quaver in the UK. My original point to Wim was just to point out that using the American-English system was confusing to everyone else - I am an adequate musician, but struggled to follow some of the talk; it was a valid and hopefully helpful point to make.

[@elaineblackhurst1509]

@Chlorinda Regarding the main point of Wim’s talk, and in answer to your interesting question - in truth, I really don’t know, which is why I found his video interesting. There appears to be so much conflicting evidence regarding tempi,* metronome markings, even of the metronomes themselves; also, I wonder sometimes if we are searching for the answer to a question that does not in reality exist. By that, I mean that if one plays a Beethoven piano sonata, then one chooses an appropriate tempo for each movement - the artistic interpretation will determine this within a range of Allegro, Andante, Adagio, and so forth. (This of course ignores the technical - and interpretive - difficulties in Beethoven which in effect limit the possible tempo options for all but quasi-professional pianists). Perhaps in regard to the symphonies, we are searching for a much narrower metronome-determined tempo that was never intended to be more than a guideline, and that we should not perhaps be thinking of it as a composer (or contemporary) instruction. * The contemporary metronome markings of Hummel and Czerny for example are not always the same, whether for Beethoven, Mozart or Haydn; some I find across all three composers to be very odd.

[@Renshen1957]

Fate knocking on the door, in 1/8th notes instead of a woodpecker in 1/16th notes. J S Bach’s Allemandes receive the same treatment, even the English version of Wikipedia has quotes from J G Walter’s Lexicon 1731 ( J S Bach was the Leipzig agent for his cousin’s book) and Mattheson’s Verkommene Cappelmeister (Hamburg 1739) quoted, and the Germany various Principalities Dukedoms Kingdoms were all obsessed with the French Nation and Court. Earlier, J S Bach was sent to purchase a Harpsichord from a builder Mietke who was brought before the law for selling counterfeit French Harpsichords (copies of late 17th century French instruments with the round tailpiece for the case still seen in the piano which Fleischer and Zell and Hass copied, while other builders in France and England followed The Ruckers design and also made counterfeit Ruckers Harpsichords.

[@thenecrons100]

I think that with lower quality of instruments at the time, they had to play slower, in order to express the same richness and depth. If they played the beginning as shown in the Gradiner version, it would've likely sounded in a mess, in my opinion.

[@emilianoturazzi]

in Gardiner video are used period instruments...

[@jeremypresle3412]

Great conclusion. I don't like the introductory music though.

[@theodentherenewed4785]

I think that you're on to something here - the standard of orchestral playing in 1808 was definitely lower than in 2022. Therefore, the musicians must have played slower back then, because they weren't as good. But Beethoven's 5th calls for a faster tempo. It's a matter of arbitrary judgement, yes, but it sounds better if played faster and the audience tends to agree on that. I don't agree that it's that important to follow exactly what Beethoven wanted - if you can improve by playing faster or slower, the orchestra should go for it.

[@superblondeDotOrg]

@@chlorinda4479 it is provable that instruments were worse in playability. and intonation worse. the orchestral playing was definitely worse as a result. for example even in as close as the 1970s, guitars were of varying quality and had to be individually chosen for playability, more difficult to play than today, where every guitar made is basically a pro-quality instrument and playable everyday out of the case.

[@superblondeDotOrg]

@@chlorinda4479 there are more instruments in a symphony than violin. use some critical thinking.

[@superblondeDotOrg]

@@chlorinda4479 Learn to think critically, before typing. Parroting "whaaat is your evvvidenceeee??" is not critical thinking.

[@superblondeDotOrg]

@@chlorinda4479 Review the compositional and live performance history of The Rite of Spring, in detail, to understand.

[@superblondeDotOrg]

@@chlorinda4479 " inferior instruments or inferior musicians were not an issue" incorrect, and studying the history properly will reveal more detail.

[@A.P235]

There is no problem to begin with. That tempo is perfectly attainable (which was proven by historically informed recordings included in the video - lighter bows as well as lack of exaggerated vibrato on every note allows for faster speed). We know that in larger ensambles (especially orchestras) the tempo tends to be getting slower during the performance (which is a commonly known issue nowadays just as it was back then, of which many composers including Beethoven have frequently complained about) therefore he gave faster tempo indications that musicians bear them in mind while playing and think forward instead of dragging. Not to even mention that here you contradict your own argumentation that you used to justify slower tempi in Bach’s pieces, where you claimed that minor note values as well as ornamentation indicate slower tempo (since they all need to be audible and 'take it’s own time'); while here you try to convince poeople of something utterly opposite - that sequence of plain unornamented quavers notated in more lucid way (by larger values) is supposed to denote slower tempo.

[@gradpigodemosviedaff]

Yeah, I thought about that contradiction too! And I think it is quite obvious, that this argument does not have any validity: Just look at how franko-flemish music was notated, very different from how we today perceive tempo and note values. And knowing that Beethoven was an eccentric, also in notation (I mean, e.g. the 2nd movement of the 9th is also when played as fast as Wim would play it quite counterintuitive to notate in 3/4), I think this argument from notation is not convincing. (But I get the feeling, that it tries to persuade emotionally: Also with this weird background music at the beginning...)

[@chel3SEY]

Very interesting, but so much rhetoric talking around the subject. I get what you're trying to do, create a sense of build-up and dramatic tension. But just get to the point please...

[@tedb.5707]

Beethoven too-fast. Chopin too-fast. Liszt too-fast. Modern interpretation has turned musicianship into human piano rolls.

[@antonioquarta9058]

Snail music.

[@jamesadlington4242]

What an irritating way of talking...

[@ottavva]

I would prefer to see/hear BACH or PURCELL perfoming, back in time