Wim Winters Hates this Sonata

Original Video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/e4vPnquebqupm5o

[@TheodoreServin]

I literally just attended a Florian Noack concert yesterday! Wonderful pianist. Interesting timing to be recommended this video today :D

[@thepianocornertpc]

Yes Mr. Noack is indeed a fantastic pianist.

[@f.hounderclay1368]

They're watching you

[@jorislejeune]

yes, some Belgians can actually play fast... and musical. Who would have thought so?

[@jorislejeune]

@Themis :)

[@LukeFaulkner]

I think I was stuck behind Wim Winters in traffic the other day. He was going 30 in a 60.

[@justinandmaxgames5472]

I literally laughed out loud when I read this.

[@RodrigoFernandez-td9uk]

@@justinandmaxgames5472 Me too!

[@DomFileoreum]

Original historical speed reconstruction

[@Graph1159]

In the USA, Wim Winters determines the speed limits.

[@utvpoop]

"Oh no I mean, "as fast as possible" back in the day was twice slower... I mean, in metric tempo measurement"

[@thekeyoflifepiano]

www.theguardian.com/science/2018/jun/04/the-days-are-getting-longer-but-very-very-slowly

[@thekeyoflifepiano]

Well he can't play it that fast so he would call this tempo "Faster than possible".

[@JoshyG]

@@thekeyoflifepiano Thanks for the inspiration I will write a piece with that tempo marking

[@Piflaser]

The first mistake is doing this on a modern piano.

[@pedrodavila9270]

@@JoshyG Max Reger, in the 6th of his Op. 45 Intermezzi, writes “So schnell wie nur irgend möglich” after having written “So schnell wie möglich” in the 4th one. So basically something like “even faster than possible!” - you must play faster than you possibly can! Love it.

[@pavaomrazek]

He would say something like: "As fast as possible meant a different thing back in the baroque era because musicians weren't so good and instruments weren't so advanced as they are today..." Or he would pull something like: "Eight notes don't sound like eight notes" or something... As fast as possible means as fast as possible just like 80 bpm means 80 bpm. It's really as simple as that!

[@lluisrafalessole-classical5068]

Spectacular 🎹

[@thekeyoflifepiano]

Glad you like it!

[@Nodalema]

Hysterical title 🤣

[@vaultboy1488]

Wow, amazin performance

[@michaeledwards1172]

If he hates it, why did he bother learning it? And why does he hate it, anyway?

[@emmanuelsales149]

Poor Scarlatti.

[@cosainsegnarealmentelatorr4532]

Avrei voluta tanto sentirla con il tocco di Michelangeli. Ma bravissimo questo pianista.

[@MrRicksStudio]

I’m sure this sonata hates W i m W i n t e r s as well.

[@monicacaramelo7085]

And what about Schumann's op 22 first movement?

[@faustianliszt]

He'd probably take that to mean you set the metronome to 208 (or whatever was the highest on his old school metronome) and set the 8th note to it. It's borderline reasonable but completely misses the point in the most obnoxious way possible and fails to recognize an obvious anachronism. Then he would tell you how foolish you are for thinking any differently, to elevate himself into believing he can actually play the thing that he's tragically dedicated his life to but still can't achieve. Then maybe throw in something absurd like the speed of the action on keyboard instruments back then not allowing for this tempo even when it's demonstrably not the case. Ticks all the boxes.

[@pjbpiano]

Do you believe Scarlatti himself played as fast as this rendition?

[@8beef4u]

@@pjbpiano probably. He was known as a virtuoso

[@valtrberg901]

@@8beef4u a virtuoso in the 17 hundreds was different than being virtuoso in the 19 hundreds liszt was probably faster and more proficient in his playing than baroque composers wouldnt u agree

[@defaulttmc]

@Themis way more musicians today than back then. There's way more competition thus the technical standards are raised. In sports, athletes run faster, jump higher, lift stronger. If we reduce musical performance to pure athletics, it's absurd to think their best musical athletes back then are better than ours.

[@Eliza-yd7fi]

@@defaulttmc but we don't. It's not just about athetics. Back in Bee's time for example, they had lighter action keys so it was easier to play repeated notes.

[@RodrigoFernandez-td9uk]

Mozart scoffed at Clementi because he wrote "presto" and played allegro. That wouldn't happened in the planet of the snails, turtles and slots where WW lives.

[@insignificantfool8592]

Simply let a computer play it as fast as possible. Or would that be cheating?

[@jeffreyadams648]

The path of least resistance, is best. The road well trodden. Epicurus, I believe.

[@josephgranata13]

Screaming at the title 🤣

[@Nooticus]

Excellent title 🤭

[@charliegold3227]

What if Scarletti intended it…

[@HatemSinokrot]

good title

[@Tizohip]

I know the reference. 😂❤ love wim winter interpretations

[@francescodurante1684]

@@dejuren1367 literally nobody cares how fast u can play

[@gerry30]

Wim living in people's heads rent free. 😂

[@micetro614]

Facts

[@williamspringer737]

Wim going through the drive-thru of people's heads occasionally for the low-low price of making a complete fool of himself publicly and dedicating his life to a fantasy which produces results of disturbingly low quality.

[@gerry30]

@@williamspringer737 Those are just bizarre and reactionary opinions by the people that can't think and are told what to think. What Wim actually points out is the ad hoc absurdity of people that claim to be adhering to a composers wishes and then totally dismissing specific tempo indications. Sometimes single beat, sometimes double beat, many times about halfway in between single and double beat. I would state that Bernard Ruchti's explorations into "slower tempos" especially in his "Hammerklavier" based on wrotings about LIszt's performances are exquisitely superior to the hash that Schnabel makes out of the piece in his "landmark" recording.

[@williamspringer737]

@@gerry30 You want fries with that?

[@gerry30]

@@williamspringer737 Sure, but when you fry them, ignore all temperature settings, burn some of them and add some that are almost as cold as ice.

[@asliuf]

LMAO

[@qzrnuiqntp]

😄

[@3r7s]

😅😅😅

[@Daniel-qx6bg]

seems easy enough

[@caiopagano284]

listen to harpsichordist Fernando Valenti for a revelatory performance, that will tell how this and many other works of SCARLATTI were inspired by Spanish music of the time.

[@marcussfebruary9104]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/laDXpWOjZpWqeLs For anyone interested in hearing it interpreted by Andreas Staier, on an actual harpsichord.

[@martinbennett2228]

A performance on a modern grand is rather meaningless, certainly no guide to Scarlatti's intentions.

[@sebastiantarebustos244]

So, in which circus was he playing?

[@thekeyoflifepiano]

The circus where Wim Winters is a clown (AKA reality).

[@EruannaArte]

why do you people hate Win? he doesnt talk about others with such vitriol and hate@@thekeyoflifepiano

[@wolfie8748]

I dont know he is actually really good player. Musicaly. Ofc he is no virtuosy or anything@@EruannaArte

[@dorette-hi4j]

@@EruannaArte His usual mode is passive-aggressive. "X is a wonderful pianist, here are fifteen things that X gets wrong, but of course I still think X is wonderful." But he can on occasion get really nasty: for example, his video "Oxford University plans to kill the Metronome" is a vicious (and unjustifiable) attack on the scholar Alexander Bonus; he is scathing about Paavo Jarvi in "Paavo Järvi's GRANDIOSE B.S. "Solution" to Beethoven's Metronome Problem". And his followers in the comments become even more vitriolic, something he does nothing to discourage. And also, he has shadow-banned many commenters who disagree politely with him. So he has earned a certain amount of 'hate'.

[@davidalvarez297]

​@@thekeyoflifepianothe circus where you are the clown, in fact 💁🏻‍♂️

[@PianistStefanBoetel]

Wim sets the YT player to 0,5

[@jowr2000]

Because he can’t play it!

[@luisenriquezapataarellano7591]

Actually I think this is how it all started. He is not proficient at playing, so he created a narrative that distorts reality so that he is not a loser anymore. We get it, slow is also beautiful, but slow and mechanical?, And then whoever plays it at the indicated speed, even if it's a virtuoso piece is wrong? Give me a break

[@CatkhosruShapurrjiFurabji]

Wrong! It should be twice as slow.

[@michaeledwards1172]

Okay - who is Wim Winters, and why does he hate this sonata?

[@geiryvindeskeland7208]

michaeledwards. Wim Winters supports a theory that claims we misunderstand the use of the metronome and composers MM numbers.(metronome numbers) We are used to counting 60 beats per minute when the composers say crotchets MM = 60. But the theory that Wim Winters supports holds that we should count two beats for every crotchet. This means that, in theory, the music’s tempo will be half as fast as we are used to. Therefore, it is important for Wim Winters and his followers to weaken the composers information about virtuoso tempi. And that’s why WW «hates» music examples lie this one. The theory in its original form, was refuted in the 1980s. The theory receives little support among professionals, therefore WW relies on the masses with a low level of knowlegde to strengthen its position. Simple logic + old written sources tell me that the theory, as Wim Winters presents it, cannot possibly have worked in reality. He has his own channel, «AuthenticSound.» But ask yourself: If Wim Winters is right, why must he censor and manipulate his listeners/viewers?

[@wolfie8748]

@@geiryvindeskeland7208 I understand his theory and I think it sounds beautiful that way ofc its subjective only problem is so symphonies also are x2 longer than usual so if beethoven is going to conduct a symphony 9 will it be 2x time than the usual ? that just sounds wrong

[@geiryvindeskeland7208]

Wolfie, notice that I am not writing «Wim Winters’ theory» because that’s not his theory. Already in 1980, R. Talsma wrote a book in which he launched the theory of double beat in fast movements, then Wim Winters was 8 years old. Later came Lorenz Gadient, which believes that even slow movements should be played at a double beat pace. It is this variant that Wim Winters supports. Take note of all comments that write «I believe in your theory» or «Your theory is correct!» -and notice that Wim Winters never corrects and makes people aware that it’s not his theory. I think that says something about the person WW, and not in a positive way. If you want to be respected and listened to in your comments, you should turn your back to WW. Instead you should familiarize yourself more with Bernhard Ruchti’s videos. He also flirts with double beat theory, but he puts himself on a more factual level and recognizes that double beat stands weak in a historical context. You certainly have a good point when it comes to Beethoven’s symphonies playing time in double beat tempi. The English conductor George Smart met Beethoven and went through the symphonies with the composer. Isn’t arrogant of WW to think he’s better oriented than George Smart? When it comes to playtime for the 9th, we have the playing time separately for all four movements. According to Smart, the first movement lasted 14 minutes, a movement without repetition. In Maximianno Cobra’s orchestral version in double beat, the first movement lasts 28 minutes. Total playing time 1 hour 56 minutes. Cobra’s version is on KZbin. Wolfie, if Wim Winter is right, why does he sometimes have to manipulate and censor listeners and viewers?

[@wolfie8748]

I have no idea and to be honest I dont really care. All I care is musicality and enjoyment. these composers made great music and people can play whatever they like. some pieces sound better in double beat some dont. It is just personal preference.@@geiryvindeskeland7208

[@somchaisaelee328]

Baroque etude.

[@karlpoppins]

Scarlatti did call these works of his "sonatas".

[@elaineblackhurst1509]

Scarlatti was an Italian working for the latter part of his life in Spain; Italian was essentially the musical lingua franca across Europe in the 18th century to the present day. Really not sure what is the relevance of introducing the misleading and anachronistic French word ‘etude’ with its 19th century connotations into a discussion of this sonata. Very few Scarlatti sonatas were published during his lifetime apart from the 30 that were issued in London in 1739 (now K1-30) which were published as ‘Essercizi’, with a preface possibly by the composer himself.

[@robertklein-oo9nm]

What is as fast as possible? As fast as musically possible? As fast as humanly possible? As fast as mechanically possible? As fast as the laws of physics allows?

[@handavid6421]

fast as sensibly possible. if you play any instrument you know what it means.

[@jeremydoody]

Sorry, but I don’t get why he would hate it. Wim’s point isn’t that they played everything slow, it’s that they used the metronome differently. He often says that when a piece is marked allegro, you should be able to imagine playing it much faster, or else it would have been marked presto. This piece is marked presto, and the further indication is “as fast as possible”, and there’s no metronome marking (obviously, it’s Scarlatti). So your title just shows your misunderstanding of Wim’s position. Nice try though. If Wim was saying something very different than what he is actually saying, this might have been clever 😉 Also, just a side note. I’d be willing to bet that this performer is physically capable of playing this music much much faster than he does in this performance. I wonder why he chose to ignore the composer’s instruction in favour of a slower tempo. Maybe because taking “as fast as possible” literally, given his modern technical skill and a modern instrument, would have resulted in music that made less sense and was less expressive and listenable than the tempo he decided on… 🤷‍♂️

[@eX0dusmods]

nobody is reading all this

[@MicheleAngeliniTenor]

If you are under the impression that tempo indications have any actual, distinct relation to metronome markings (which are indications far older than the metronome), then you’ve missed the point entirely. The thing that separates an Allegro from a Presto from a Vivace is the CHARACTER of the music and the interpretation of musical and rhythmic gestures withing the context of the metric relationship indicated by the time signature and the choice of notation. Vocal music immediately disproves Wim’s theories because not only would operas last twice as long, but no one would ever understand a single word, singers would never be able to complete a full phrase or make the text intelligible. It’s not about “slow,” it’s about playing music without any regard to rhythmic drive and intensity, forward motion, and musical gesture.

[@jeremydoody]

@@eX0dusmods shhhh, grownups are talking

[@jeremydoody]

@@MicheleAngeliniTenor I’m not under any such silly impressions. I’m a professional musician and educator with a graduate degree in performance. But if you have some specific examples of vocal music where the metronome marks disprove the whole beat theory, I’d be interested to see them. My mind’s not made up, and I’m always open to new evidence. I will say this, though. There are tons of historical examples where things were sung so slowly as to be unintelligible (think cantus firmus in early music), so that’s not enough on its own. Intelligibility of lyrics was not exactly a guiding principle for opera composers in general. There are too many examples in normal performance practice where it’s impossible to understand what is being said (multi part textures where competing lyrics are sung simultaneously, for one) for this to be a knock down argument, but I would take your examples seriously if you provide them.

[@eX0dusmods]

@@jeremydoody you’re talking to a wall, i think you mean “grown up is talking but no one is listening”

[@bvsiness]

U2slow 'cause u play the wrong instrument!

[@gerry30]

So, is the point, if Murray Perahia can't play it as fast as Arturo Benedetto Michelangeli did, it's therefore Perahia is wrong and Michelangeli is right?

[@GSHAPIROY]

Did Scarlatti skip his counterpoint lesson before he wrote this sonata? The parallel fifths in m. 8 and 9 between the soprano and the tenor are rather disturbing...

[@alexandercarroll9707]

rather distrubing indeed i must say fellow chap

[@danielwaitzman2118]

The E in the soprano is a “Bad” note-i.e., on a weak beat: hence no parallel fifths. Nor are they musically objectionable in this context. Scarlatti was composing music, not species counterpoint. Vive la différance!

[@alexstudy7628]

Actually, I enjoyed it more at 0.5 speed. You can hear all the notes and follow the music. At 1.0 speed it just becomes a mess at some point and sounds like "stereotypical" classical music you hear as background in some videos or movies...

[@MicheleAngeliniTenor]

…which misses the point of musical texture and harmony if you can “hear all the notes.” Music is not about taking dictation of what one hears but it is about creating impressions and visual imagery and sensations through sound. There is a difference between being sloppy and intentionally, as the musical gesture appears, blurring the edges to create a larger picture, just like in painting. We mix colors and blend them-so, too, with sounds and rhythms. Wim’s absurdist misinterpretation of metronome use and markings eliminates both the blending of sound and rhythmic interest.

[@nickb220]

yea it was too fast for even the pianist. he hasn't mastered it at that tempo

[@alexstudy7628]

@@MicheleAngeliniTenor I couldn't agree more with your first sentence... if it's about music that is meant to be played fast, like the modern music of Debussy or Rachmaninoff. In fact, the general definition of fast/slow, clear/blurry is so abstract, that some people call Debussy's interpretation of his own works "absurd" because of how fast he plays them. Music, like any other art, has always been about personal interpretation and freedom of expression. That's why there are such interpretations like Chopin's minute waltz played under a minute or Bach's prelude in C major played twice the speed. People think it sounds "cool" because the rich harmony structure stands out so clear to the ear. Some people might even attempt to play like that themselves. Both are totally fine and there is nothing wrong with that as it all comes down to personal preferences. Now, the problem a lot of people have with Wim Winters is that they think he is dictating on how to play correctly. I agree that his videos tend to look like clickbait, specially because of titles and thumbnails he chooses... but as I see it, he is simply providing an alternative look into possible interpretations according to historic references. He does provide evidence in some cases as to how people might have played music back then, but for me that's more of a history lesson rather than a music lesson. We humans can't grasp the concept of time and how much time passed. I truly believe that people 300 years ago had a way different perception of music than we have today. Knowing that most of the people were illiterate and could hear a certain piece only once in their lives, I believe that music was the main way of enjoying art and that people could understand the meaning behind the notes much better than we do today, hence the specific decision of the composers regarding intervals, tempo, key signatures and etc... But nothing of the above should tell you on how you should feel or play the music. Those are just ideas on different perspectives that help us create our own view on music. You can play fast Clair de Lune like Debussy or slow Chopin Etudes like Wim Winters. It is up to you at the end. I personally didn't like the interpretation of this sonata as it was "too much" and my brain couldn't follow either the notes or understand the harmonic development throughout the piece.

[@TobyHonest420]

If you can't follow the notes (not even with a score in front of you!) then you really need some ear training. There's no need to make up ridicolous conspiracy theories to justify your lack of training

[@alexstudy7628]

@Chlorinda I think that we can both agree on the fact that we will never know what the authentic speed for nineteenth-century and earlier truly is, as there is simply not enough evidence to make a clear statement about it (such as recordings). I must admit I am not 100% familiar with all of Wim Winters content, but from what I saw, he is trying to link spread out facts/assumptions about the increase of the playing speed and make a decisive conclusion. It is interesting to listen to his explanations and theory nonetheless, as he gives insight to some details that I personally have never heard about and that surprisingly to my understanding they ended up making sense. Specially when he shows examples on how ridiculously fast some pieces would get if played by the modern tempo standards, and how the performers are forced to adapt to a slower tempo in order to perform the pieces (i.e. "Liszt paganini etude nr 4, 1838 version" or " Czerny op 299, op 740"). As to his dictating opinion, all I've heard is that he simply suggests trying it out yourself and see if you can feel the music and if it makes sense to you. If he indeed forces you with a "must", then I don't agree with that at all. To my knowledge, people in baroque era were for the most part illiterate and the baroque music was mostly performed in churches in order to connect the common people with religion. It is also known that only educated people could perform music, which as any other profession back then, required a lifetime dedication, therefore the majority could only hear music from a performer. I think that personal preference plays a major role in music appreciation. Imagine if we had a uniform standard for all interpretations that are supposed to meet exactly the criteria that the composer himself intended, we wouldn't have as many pianists as we have today, we could simply listen to the one perfect recording for the rest of our lives. The freedom of approaching a piece is what makes every musician stand out in its field. Some play a certain piece fast, others play it slower, and accordingly there are people who like or dislike these interpretations. (i.e. the Pogorelich interpretation of Chopins Sonata no.2 made him lose the competition, but to me, it is the best one I have ever heard). You are free to say it is a different piece of music, but I would rather enjoy a variation that resonates with me the most, without discrediting the composer of course.

[@geiryvindeskeland7208]

My comment has nothing to do with this sonata, but because Wim Winters prevents me from commenting in his channel, I have to take other opportunities. «It is from children and drunk people that we hear the truth.» Now we skip the alcohol and get to know the kids better instead. Please join my time machine, we travel 190 years back in time. Chopin and other master pianists have just played several of Chopin’s etudes, and now they are discussing technical details. In one corner sit three young women, who admire both the pianists and the virtuoso music. But suddenly more children enter the room. One by one they play the same etudes, but much faster than the master pianists themselves. Then the question arises: How do master pianists experience such a thing? After all, they are humiliated, ridiculed by children! And it doesn’t get any better when the master pianists look at the women, who try to hide that the children impressed them even more. What an embarrassment for the virtuosos! But such a thing never happened. The virtuoso pianists had 10-15 more years to achieve a virtuoso level then it is unlikely that children played the etudes must faster. «Such children do not exist!» Oh yes, it’s the kids telling the truth, and they are here at KZbin. Let us get to know some of the kids better. Michael Andreas Hearinger, age 8 and with a teddy bear on the piano! He plays Chopin’s opus 10 no 2, version 1:52. Sure, there are some minor flaws, but still! The following year, at age 9, without a teddy bear, he plays the same etude in Chopin’s own tempo proposal, version 2:23. Then we hear Umi Garrett, 11 years old, also with teddy bear on the piano. She plays opus 10 no 4, version 2:17. Now! - compare these versions to Wim Winters’ «Real Historical Tempo» or «Chopin’s Original Tempo.» Is it really just me who realizes that something isn’t right here? And there are many more video showing children 8-14 years old play Chopin’s etudes much faster than whole beat theory.

[@thekeyoflifepiano]

I have a no-ban policy, except for very extreme cases.

[@geiryvindeskeland7208]

Themis- if1xs. You didn’t understand the psychological point of mentioning the kids with teddy bears. The teddy bears makes the children even more childish and therefore even more capable. Besides, I mentioned those kids because they play the same etudes that Wim Winters plays at a whole beat pace. In this important matter - convincing people that the whole beat theory is not historically correct, musicians from Asia are a strong recourse! And there were many of the ones I had in mind when I concluded with: «And there are many more videos showing children 8-14 years old play Chopin’s etudes much faster than whole beat theory.» Here are some children from Asia: Yaohui Du 9 years, opus 25 no 6. Zai Zai 9 years opus 25 n 12. Jessica Li 12 years opus 25 no 11. Ryota Yamazaki 10 and 12 years opus 25 no 11. HAOCHEN ZHANG 11 years plays whole opus 10!

[@defaulttmc]

@@geiryvindeskeland7208 How do children virtuosos today have any bearing on WBMP? As more people learn music, we should naturally expect more virtuosos, younger virtuosos, and better virtuosos, as the competition increases. In fact, the increase of virtuosity today implies that there was less virtuosity in the past, thus supporting Wim's position. The pieces back then were originally played slower because musicians back then lackes the ability to play them faster.

[@geiryvindeskeland7208]

defaulttmc, quote: «In fact, the increase of virtuosity today implies that there was less virtuosity in the past, thus supporting Wim’s position. The pieces back then were originally played slower because musicians back then lackes the ability to play them faster.» I recently presented three examples of Wim as a manipulator. He also cencors some posts. Someone who needs to censor and manipulate to retain credibility, is such a practice good enough for you? There are a number of written sources, 150-200 years old, that tell of virtuoso piano playing.

[@thepianocornertpc]

@@geiryvindeskeland7208 Exactly. One just need to have a close look at the score of Alkan and Liszt to understand what incredible virtuosos's they were. I mean,"Chemin de Fer" in double beat? Ridiculous....Wim Winters is. Wim Winters, according to a psychiatrist friend of mine, exhibits all the characteristics of a narcissistic psychopath. Enough said.

[@Manx123]

I’ve heard it played much faster than this, though.

[@Alix777.]

"much" faster ? Who

[@Manx123]

​@@Alix777. kzbin.info/www/bejne/oHSulquwa7ONb6M

[@Manx123]

@@Alix777. Actually, on a further relisten, she plays I think she plays this piece at a less even tempo, I guess playing some parts at a faster tempo than others, and abruptly slowing down or pausing a lot.

[@subplantant]

Honestly people are so full of it

[@petertyrrell3391]

Scarlatti did not have an instrument like a modern piano at his disposal with its escapement mechanism. His indication must mean much the same as "prestissimo", which never meant playing so fast as to be musically incomprehensible nor did it mean the music was to be played as a superficial finger exercise.

[@petertyrrell3391]

@Anonymous Granny He didn't have a piano, and anyway early pianos could not be played as fast as a modern one except for short runs. The question remains whether Scarlatti would have wanted so fast a speed as to make musical comprehension impossible.

[@thecatalogcollector]

On a harpsichord the repetition, especially for trills and fast passages as are in Scarlatti, is actually quicker than on a modern piano-the key is much shallower and lighter, so although the mechanism doesn’t have the escapement a piano does, it’s still easier to play fast Scarlatti on a harpsichord than on a piano. Also, Scarlatti was Italian during the baroque, so playing so fast as to be musically incomprehensible is certainly a possibility.

[@tcs5623]

This performance is hardly “musically, incomprehensible” - it’s clear, coherent, well-phrased, and logical. We also have easily available recordings of this sonata being played, at this speed, on a period harpsichord, showing that this performance is not out of line with what Scarlotti may have intended to be played on the instruments of his time. That said, there is nothing wrong with preferring a slower tempo on purely aesthetic grounds. Some piano études, for example, were intended to be played quickly, but can sound more lyrical and sonorous at a slower tempo. Even if that isn’t what the composer intended, it’s not “wrong” to like it at a slower speed; the problem is, however, when a personal preference is dressed up as a historical musicological argument and presented with incomplete or misleading sourcing.

[@petertyrrell3391]

@@tcs5623 There is written evidence for a fairly constant increase in tempi from Baroque right up to the modern period. Extrapolating backwards from now would suggest that Baroque tempi were rather slower than now. It is a danger to apply modern concepts of tempi to early periods as is your labelling of deductions from musicological evidence you don't like as personal preference. I can't hear any "phrasing" in this performance because it is simply too fast to carry out any phrasing, and it sounds like computer generated music. It says more about the performer than the music.

[@Pablo-gl9dj]

There is little in the way of timings to indicate tempos radically increased. And what to make of letters written by famous pianist referring to speed and facility of scales, thirds, octaves etc., of other pianists.

[@dskinner6263]

This is a little brutal, but the problem isn't the tempo or the modern instrument. It's not terrible, but it isn't beautiful either.

[@dskinner6263]

@Chlorinda I would have to hear more recordings of this performer to guess at their intention. As far as what Scarlatti meant, I take the point well, that there can be more than one approach. This playing doesn't appeal to me - but it doesn't have to, there are lots of others to whom it may 🙂

[@haomingli6175]

@@dskinner6263 Scarlatti says "presto, as fast as possible". With this it is almost certainly the case that he wants this to be first and foremost exciting.

[@dskinner6263]

@@haomingli6175 thank you

[@luisenriquezapataarellano7591]

It's beautiful to me. Just that it's intended to make you happy, not to be in the background

[@luisenriquezapataarellano7591]

You can like things slowed down too, there's nothing wrong with that. We have in Mexico "cumbias rebajadas"

[@solesius]

Technically very impressive…musically just one big blur of notes.

[@thekeyoflifepiano]

Too fast for your ears doesn't mean too fast

[@zelop9632]

Sounds musical to me. "Idk about the one big blur of notes" part

[@defaulttmc]

@Chlorinda Fast can be musical only if the music is meant to be played so fast. The simpler musically a piece is, the faster it can and should be played. I've never heard this piece before, and I find myself wishing to hear a slower performance of it. I have no patience for repeat listenings in order to understand the piece. If a performance is unable to make the music comprehensible on the first listen, that is the failing of the performer, not the audience.

[@solesius]

@Chlorinda actually in a world without internet, streaming services , instant gratification. Music was only one of the few forms of entertainment…a way of telling a story other then a play or reading it for example. So if it is impossible to follow the story you either have failed as a composer or a performer. Telling a story from a book and making it come alive is all about articulation, pronunciation, ornament's. Using your voice in every meaningful way possible. Blurring notes in the shortest amount of time, without any regard for the story, the articulation, the ornaments does not make the music come to life…quite the contrary. Nothing to do with slow ears or slow brains. So no need to pat yourself on the back. All brains have a limited capacity for recognizing details either by ear or sight or memory etc.

[@Reichthoff]

​@@solesius actually musicians in early times played faster, not slower. Just look at piano rolls made by Scriabin, Rachmaninoff's 2nd and 3rd concerto recordings, look at how fast Emil von Sauer (a student of Liszt) plays Ricordanza (normally a very slow piece in modern piano recordings), look at how fast Gieseking played the Schumann concerto. And this was on heavier pianos than the harpsichord of Scarlatti's era. Listen to how fast the oldest "music recording" (the Haydn piece) is. Musicians before weren't playing in retirement homes like most classical players do today. They were playing for the old time equivalent of a modern rock concert or rap battle. Most of them died in their 30's and 40's. Life was too short for the sort of tedious, nocturnal soundscape today's public thinks represents classical music.