Interpreting tempo and rubato in Chopin’s music: A matter of tradition or individual style?

Li-San Ting

A thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

University of New South Wales

School of the Arts and Media Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

June 2013

ABSTRACT

The main goal of this thesis is to gain a greater understanding of Chopin performance and interpretation, particularly in relation to tempo and rubato. This thesis is a comparative study between pianists who are associated with the Chopin tradition, primarily the Polish pianists of the early twentieth century, along with French pianists who are connected to Chopin via pedagogical lineage, and several modern pianists playing on period instruments. Through a detailed analysis of tempo and rubato in selected recordings, this thesis will explore the notions of tradition and individuality in Chopin playing, based on principles of pianism and pedagogy that emerge in Chopin’s writings, his composition, and his students’ accounts.

Many pianists and teachers assume that a tradition in playing Chopin exists but the basis for this notion is often not made clear. Certain pianists are considered part of the Chopin tradition because of their indirect pedagogical connection to Chopin. I will investigate claims about tradition in Chopin playing in relation to tempo and rubato and highlight similarities and differences in the playing of pianists of the same or different nationality, pedagogical line or era. I will reveal how the literature on Chopin’s principles regarding tempo and rubato relates to any common or unique traits found in selected recordings. The selected recordings for this study are those made before 1962 by students of Mikuli, Mathias and Descombes, by pianists who are considered to be part of the Polish Chopin tradition, and by modern pianists who play on period instruments. I address issues such as tempo markings, and the use of certain types of rubato such as ritardando and hand displacement. Discovering the choices in the use of tempo and rubato in the performances of eminent pianists who are considered to be part of the Chopin tradition may help pianists to interpret and perform Chopin’s works, and piano teachers to teach Chopin works more effectively.

i PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I use the Henle, Wiener or Konemann Urtext editions for the musical examples that support the analyses and discussions in Chapters 3 and 4, except for the Mazurkas, for which I have used the Alfred edition, and the Etude Op.10 No.5, for which I have used the Paderewski edition, as these were available to me at the time. After adding the score examples into the thesis, I consulted the Henle Urtext editions and found no difference in markings that would be significant. Schirmer has published an 1894 edition of Chopin’s works, which have been edited by Karol Mikuli. This edition further confirms the pedagogical link between Chopin and Mikuli, with its detail in fingering and occasional notes about the fingering. However, these details are not relevant to the content of my thesis, which is why I have chosen to use the Urtext editions instead.

I acknowledge the record companies, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Selene Music, and Pavilion Records for granting me permission to copy recordings for the purpose of examination and subsequent deposit in the University of New South Wales.

Much gratitude is owed to my supervisor, Dr. Christine Logan for her generous contribution of time and effort in assisting with the completion of this document. She has been helpful in her guidance, expertise, and the translations from French text to English. I am also grateful to my parents, Mr. Yee Lee Ting and Mrs. Gek Sim Ting for their support of my studies in piano and music.

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………..………………………….i

PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………...…...ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………...... …...iii

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION: AIM AND SCOPE………………………………..……....1

CHAPTER 2 – THE CHOPIN TRADITION 2.1. Definition of a tradition and literature on Chopin tradition…………….……………...….10 2.2. Chopin as a teacher and pianist…………………………………………………...….....…14 2.3. Issues concerning tempo and rubato in Chopin performance…………………….…...... 26 2.4. The pianistic tradition of Chopin performance………………………………...…...…..…41

CHAPTER 3 –ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RECORDINGS……………….………..61 3.1. Berceuse Op.57………………………………………………………………..………..…65 3.2. Etudes…………………………………………………………………………..…..…..….83 3.3. Impromptus…………………………………………………………….….....………..….115 3.4. Mazurkas…………………………………………………………………….……………150 3.5. Nocturne Op.15 No.2………………………………………….………………….…....…174 3.6. Preludes………………………………………….…………………….…………..…...…189 3.7. Waltzes………………………………………….……………………..…….……...…….230

CHAPTER 4 – INDIVIDUAL FEATURES OF PIANISTS 4.1. Cortot……………………………………….……………….………..…….……………..274 4.2. Friedman……………………………………….……………….…….…..……………….291 4.3. Koczalski……………………………………….……………….………..…………...…..304 4.4. Lukasiewicz……………………………………….……………………...…………....….318 4.5. Michalowski……………………………………….……………………..……….…...….323 4.6. Paderewski……………………………………….……………………..…..…………….328 4.7. Pugno…………………………………………….………………….…..…..…….…...…335 4.8. Rosenthal…………………………………………….………………….…..………...….340 4.9. Smidowicz…………………………………………….…………………………...…...... 348 4.10.Turczynski…………………………………………….….…………………………...…352

iii CHAPTER 5 – CONCLUSION……………………………………….……………….…..….359

APPENDIX – COMPARATIVE TABLES…………………………………………..…….…369

DISCOGRAPHY….……………………………..…………………….…………….……..…479

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………..….…………………485

iv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: AIM AND SCOPE

The main goal of this thesis is to gain a greater understanding of Chopin performance and interpretation, particularly in relation to tempo and rubato. This thesis is a comparative study between pianists who are associated with the Chopin tradition, primarily the Polish pianists of the early twentieth century, along with French pianists who are connected to Chopin via pedagogical lineage, and several modern pianists playing on period instruments. Through a detailed analysis of tempo and rubato in selected recordings, this thesis will explore the notions of tradition and individuality in Chopin playing based on principles of pianism and pedagogy that emerge in Chopin’s writings, his compositions and his students’ accounts.

Many pianists and teachers assume that a tradition in playing Chopin exists and yet the basis for this notion is not made clear. Certain pianists are considered part of the Chopin tradition because of their indirect pedagogical connection to Chopin. Chopin taught Mikuli and Mathias, who themselves taught pianists such as Koczalski, Michalowski, Rosenthal, and Pugno. Descombes, who was a Chopin disciple, taught Cortot. Each of these pianists is considered part of the Chopin tradition because of their pedagogical lineage, while also being known for their outstanding or individual style of playing.

The idea of a tradition in Chopin playing is implied or overtly stated in many different kinds of studies. For example, Jeanne Holland’s doctoral thesis, Chopin’s Teaching and His Students (1972) aimed to find aspects of Chopin’s teaching that could be applied in the modern piano studio. Holland mentions a Chopin-Debussy tradition and a link between Chopin and Koczalski, through Mikuli, who taught Koczalski and was himself taught by Chopin. Holland states that Mikuli “took special care in training Koczalski, preparing him to be an heir to the Chopin tradition” and that Debussy’s piano teacher, “Mme. Mauté may have learned something of the Chopin tradition from hearing Chopin play” (1972: 306). In his book, French Pianism, Charles Timbrell (1992) claims a link between Chopin and the French school of piano playing since two of Chopin’s students, Georges Mathias and Emile Descombes, “passed on” elements of Chopin’s approach to piano playing. Timbrell asserts that Chopin’s playing ...has been well documented […] elements of his approach were passed on by […] Georges Mathias (whose students at the Conservatoire later included Raoul Pugno, Isidor Phillip, Santiago Riera, and Georges Falkenberg); and Emile Descombes (perhaps more of a Chopin disciple than an actual student, whose own students at the Conservatoire later included Alfred Cortot (Timbrell 1992: 21).

CD liner notes also refer to the Chopin tradition when describing certain pianists. Alan Vicat asserts in CD liner notes in Raoul Koczalski Plays Chopin (1990), that “Rosenthal, Koczalski

1 and Michalowski were all Poles. It is therefore quite probable that these three do indeed represent the true Chopin tradition, particularly Koczalski and Michalowski” (1990: 3). Vicat suggests that the early twentieth century Polish pianists are more likely to be part of the Chopin tradition, and even more so for Koczalski and Michalowski because they were Mikuli’s students. The recording company, Selene Music, produced a series titled, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition, which is recordings of pianists associated with the Chopin tradition, including Mikuli’s students, and by Cortot. Below are charts found in the CD liner notes of The Great Polish Chopin Tradition by Selene Music (Koczalski Volume V 1999 and Lukasiewicz 2000).

’

2

Leschetizsky is also linked with the Chopin tradition because he “acquired his fascination with the possibilities of varying tone colour from listening in the 1840s to Julius Schulhoff (1825- 1898), a pianist from Chopin’s circle […] Schulhoff had made the constant production of a beautiful sound the chief goal […] inspired by Chopin’s own example” (Hamilton 2008: 152). Some of Leschetizsky’s students are considered to be part of the Chopin tradition because of the way their playing seems to match descriptions of Chopin’s own playing, or their reputation for interpreting Chopin in unique ways. These pianists include Friedman, Lukasiewicz, Paderewski, and Turczynski, who was also a student of Paderewski.

There are also modern pianists who are associated with the Chopin tradition because of their vast Chopin repertoire and skill in interpreting his works. In particular, modern pianists who play on the Pleyel or Erard, such as those who have recorded with the Frederic Chopin Institute in Poland, could be representative of the Chopin tradition because they perform and record on pianos that are similar to the ones that Chopin would have performed on.

However, Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger states that unlike Clementi, Hummel, Kalkbrenner or Czerny, Chopin “did not create a school or institute a set tradition. It was not in his nature to impose his personality on pupils […] Chopin was content to suggest and imply” (1986: 4). In addition, Abraham argues that we “cannot trace the traditions of performance that were handed

3 down from master to pupil or copied from the practice of great artists” (1974: 3). My thesis will examine and test Eigeldinger’s claim that Chopin did not create a tradition in the light of counter claims. The analyses of recordings will show what similarities and differences there are between pianists who are associated with the Chopin tradition, with respect to tempo and rubato. Of the parameters that could be chosen, I have decided to concentrate on tempo and rubato, which are interrelated and are fundamental aspects of performance that greatly affect the character of a piece of music. Scholars such as Eigeldinger, Holland and Timbrell discuss the Chopin tradition primarily in relation to tone and touch, but tempo and rubato, which are also important aspects of Chopin interpretation, are not discussed in detail.

In the same way that some elements of Chopin's teaching have been passed down in the areas of tone and touch, it is expected or likely that there could also be a tradition or principles to be discovered in Chopin playing in the area of tempo and rubato, as pianists of the same nationality, pedagogical line or era are expected to have similar choices in tempo and the way they use rubato. Hudson has written about tempo and rubato in relation to some of Chopin’s music in his book, Stolen Time where he states, “Noting the considerable subtlety that Chopin exercised in dynamics, touch, accentuation, and pedaling, we might expect a similar sort of restraint in matters relating to rhythm and time” (1994: 176).

Tempo and rubato are related topics. In her book, Performance Practices in Classic Piano Music: Their Principles and Applications, Rosenblum notes that …choice of tempo is a fundamental yet elusive aspect of performance practice. Tempo affects virtually every other aspect of interpretation: dynamics, touch, articulation, pedalling, realization of ornaments […] Tempo also affects what the listener perceives, hence it bears directly on the effectiveness of the interpretation (Rosenblum 1991: 305).

Also, according to Bowen, tempo is an “especially important variable to study. In addition to being easily quantifiable, tempo has a long history of being considered the key interpretative element for all performers” (1996: 112). Bowen has studied aspects of performance which are most conveniently quantifiable, namely tempo, tempo modulation, duration, proportion and flexibility and has demonstrated that we can measure historical trends, duration and proportion in his 1996 journal article, “Tempo, Duration, and Flexibility: Techniques in the Analysis of Performance”.

Rubato is considered an integral part of Chopin interpretation, while measuring tempo is necessary for comparison between pianists and for comparison to any metronome or expressive markings on the score. A pianist’s choice of tempo also affects their use of rubato. For example,

4 a faster tempo could mean less quantity or extent of rubato, whether across genres or across different pianists playing the same piece. I will also measure tempo fluctuations between the beginning of a piece and the overall tempo to show to what extent tempo fluctuation can be used before becoming noticeable, and it may also reveal how common tempo fluctuation is amongst a range of pianists performing Chopin’s music.

Tempo and the aspects of rubato, including lengthening or shortening of beats, ritardando, accelerando, hand displacement, and arpeggiation are all associated with Chopin playing, and were crucial elements in Chopin’s composing, teaching or playing. Each of these aspects are discussed in more detail in Chapter 2. In summary, tempo was important to Chopin as revealed in his metronome markings for pieces composed before 1837. Metronome marks were the last thing he added to the score, but were edited later on, showing that Chopin considered the tempo of his compositions carefully before and after putting them in writing. According to Jackson, Chopin appears to have had …considerable difficulty in arriving at what he felt was a proper tempo. The tempo marking was usually the last thing he added to an autograph score, and a comparison of autograph manuscripts and early editions […] reveals that he often made changes along the way (Jackson 2005: 88).

However, after 1836, Chopin “discarded these indications in order to give greater freedom to the individual sensitivities of the performers” (Morski 2004: 154), and as a result, a “tradition became established which took no account of Chopin’s metronomic indications” (Morski 2004: 156). Morski’s comment could refer to the modern pianist’s solution to the problem of Chopin’s metronome markings being too fast for a piano with a heavier action. There is also the issue of how to interpret Chopin’s expressive markings, such as Lento, which according to Higgins, “were definitely faster than what we expect today and the differences […] cannot be shrugged off by the knowledge that his piano was lighter in timbre” (1981: 41).

Testimonies of Chopin’s teaching reveal that he was particular about rhythm when he taught his students. According to Lenz, Chopin “was almost impossible to please in the C sharp minor Waltz Op.64 No.2: he alone knew the right way to tie the single semiquaver to the following crotchet in bars 3-4!” (Grabowski 2009: vi). Grabowski also highlights noteworthy advice by Joseph Schiffmacher, “presumably derived from the composer himself, that the third beat in the left-hand accompaniment should be played in a lighter, more subtle manner throughout the C sharp minor Waltz, likewise his suggestion that the right hand sixth in bar 2 of the same piece should be arpeggiated” (Grabowski 2009: vi). In addition, descriptions of Chopin's playing attempt to describe Chopin’s unique use of rubato. When performing, Chopin used rubato frequently,

5 …accelerating or slowing down this or that theme. But Chopin’s rubato possessed an unshakeable emotional logic. It always justified itself by strengthening or weakening of the melodic line, by harmonic details, by the figurative structure. It was fluid, natural; it never degenerated into exaggeration or affectation (Mikuli/A. Michalowski 1932: 74-5 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 50).

Franz Liszt remarked, “The wind plays in the leaves, stirs up among them and the trees remain the same. That is the Chopinesque rubato” (Eigeldinger 1986: 51).

There have also been remarks about early twentieth century pianists’ use of rubato in Chopin’s music, especially in relation to their individuality, but there has previously been no detailed study on the use of tempo and rubato by these pianists associated with the Chopin tradition. For example, Knight affirms that …no one could play the Mazurkas as Friedman did. In almost every measure there was a special lilt, a slight rhythmic inflection, which seemed […] wholly authentic. Seemingly spontaneous these piquant rhythms were actually carefully considered. In his teaching of the Mazurka Op.24 No.4 […] he would advise a student to “hesitate and accent the third beat”. This audacious approach does seem to correspond to what we know of Chopin’s approach to his own works: Sir Charles Hallé had confronted Chopin about his rhythm in the Mazurkas, insisting that Chopin was inserting an extra beat in each measure (Knight 1999: 10).

Methuen-Campbell has mentioned that Koczalski’s “readings of the more rapid etudes feature frequent ritardandos at phrase endings” (1992: 196), but the specific etudes (or part of the etude where this occurs is not given), are not compared with what other pianists have done to see whether Koczalski is individual in his use of rubato or whether it was common amongst other eminent Chopin pianists too. Particular pianists’ use of tempo in Chopin’s music has also been discussed briefly by Methuen-Campbell. For example, Koczalski and Pugno recorded the F sharp major Nocturne, Op.15 No.2 […] their conceptions of the piece were quite different. Pugno takes an excessively slow tempo (M.M. Quaver = 52), which was reputedly passed on to him by Mathias (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 196).

However, this thesis will provide a more detailed discussion of how pianists connected to the Chopin tradition use tempo and rubato across different genres of Chopin’s music. It will also show similarities between the pianists and could reveal principles for interpretation with respect to tempo and rubato, as well as highlighting individual styles.

In Stolen Time (1994), Hudson discusses several of Chopin’s pieces briefly, including the Concerto Op.21, Mazurkas Op.6 No.2 and Op.7 No.1, and the Nocturne Op.15 No.3. Hudson gives structural and harmonic reasons for the use of rubato and its effects, particularly in relation to “prolonged beats”, melodic “flexibility” over a strict accompaniment, “delay” and

6 “anticipation”. His discussion refers to markings in the score rather than a comparison of recordings, which makes my study different from Hudson’s work. However, his discussion shows the validity of looking at clues in the score for possible reasons for the use of rubato, including lengthening, shortening, ritardando, accelerando, and the rubato techniques that allow melodic flexibility over a strict accompaniment, including hand displacement and arpeggiation.

Peres Da Costa has also used these parameters in his discussion of rubato in his book Off the Record: Performing Practices in Romantic Piano Playing (2012). Peres Da Costa's book is divided into chapters that focus on the value of early recordings, hand displacement (dislocation), unnotated arpeggiation, metrical rubato and other forms of rhythmic alteration, and tempo modification. He notes that …dislocation, arpeggiation, metrical rubato, and various forms of rhythmic alteration as well as tempo modification, were indispensable performing practices in piano playing around the turn of the twentieth century. […] important pianists […] made use of these techniques but they did so in a manner that does not accord with current notions of tasteful interpretation. Yet historical evidence has convinced me that the characteristics of such practices derived from long- established traditions. Recordings also demonstrate the progressive decline of these practices during the twentieth century (Peres Da Costa 2012: 309).

His book looks at a much wider variety of pianists than my study, including Saint-Saens, Pachmann and Grieg, and the music of other composers, such as Mozart, Beethoven, and Schumann. He also combines his discussion of recordings with written texts by the pianists, and suggests some hidden meanings to the texts. While Peres Da Costa’s study confirms my choice of parameters relating to rubato, which I had chosen ahead of the publication of his book, my thesis is a detailed consideration of tempo and rubato in the playing of a smaller range of pianists, including lesser-known Polish pianists, and those pedagogically connected to Chopin, many of whom are not included in Peres Da Costa’s study.

Tempo is measurable and rubato is audible and comparable through a detailed study of selected recordings. I will highlight similarities and differences in Chopin playing in relation to tempo and rubato between pianists of the same or different nationality, pedagogical line or era. If there is a tradition in Chopin playing in respect to tempo and rubato it may be expected that pianists of the same pedagogical line, nationality or era would have similar tempi and use rubato in similar ways, including frequency of use, common places and circumstances, while pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities or eras will have greater differences in their choice of tempo and use of rubato. I will reveal how the literature on Chopin’s principles regarding tempo and rubato relates to any common or unique traits found in the selected recordings. The selected

7 recordings are those made before 1962 by students of Mikuli, Mathias and Descombes, by pianists who are considered to be part of the Polish Chopin tradition, and by modern pianists who play on period instruments. The rationale for the works chosen for study and the pianists who perform them, as well as the methodology for analysis is detailed in Chapter 3.

In Chapter 2, I will give general principles from which the detailed study of tempo and rubato can be contextualised, and the literature relating to a tradition in playing Chopin will be explored through background information on Chopin as a teacher and pianist. This will give a reference for the analyses in Chapter 3. The notion of tradition will be discussed and defined so that we can determine whether the pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition actually represent the Chopin tradition as defined by scholars and pianists. Various issues faced by pianists when performing Chopin’s music in relation to tempo and rubato including tempi and expressive markings in the score, the use of tempo fluctuation in the accompaniment as well as in the melody, and the use of hand displacement and arpeggiation will be highlighted. In addition, I explain how each pianist selected for study is considered part of the Chopin tradition, either through pedagogical lineage or Polish nationality and have performed many of Chopin’s works. I also provide information about the modern pianists selected for analysis of recordings, and the rationale for their selection.

The discussion in Chapter 3 will utilize selected recordings by early twentieth century pianists who are connected to Chopin through pedagogical lines, such as Koczalski, Michalowski, Rosenthal, Pugno and Cortot, as well as those of the Polish tradition, such as Paderewski, Friedman, and Turczynski. I will compare older recordings with those by modern pianists playing period instruments, particularly the 1848 Pleyel and Erard, from recordings made by the Frederic Chopin Institute in Poland, because these pianists perform on the same Pleyel and same Erard piano in the same recording conditions. This also limits the selection of recordings by modern pianists. Koczalski’s recordings of the Berceuse, Impromptu Op.66 and Waltz Op.18 are performed on a Pleyel piano, but his other recordings are performed on a modern piano.

The works I have chosen for study are the Berceuse Op.57, the Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 No.2, Op.25 No.6, and Op.25 No.9, the Impromptus Op.29, Op.36, and Op.66, the Mazurkas Op.24 No.4, Op.63 No.3, and Op.68 No.2, the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, the Préludes Op.28 No.3, No.6, No.7, No.15, and No.19, and the Waltzes Op.18, Op.34. No.2, Op.64 No.1, and Op.64 No.2. I will discuss common ways rubato is used as this may show features of playing shared by pianists of different pedagogical lineage, nationality or era. I will compare pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras, as well as a range and balance of genres within Chopin’s music. I will compare the pianists’ starting and overall tempi, and their use of

8 lengthening, shortening, ritardando, accelerando, hand displacement and arpeggiation in each piece. I have chosen to look at these parameters because these are audible features of rubato that can be heard in recordings and have also been mentioned in relation to Chopin playing by scholars, such as Methuen-Campbell and Hamilton.

In Chapter 4, I will discuss the unique features of rubato usage by individual pianists, as it reveals different styles of playing and differences between pianists of the same pedagogical lineage, nationality or era. In addition I will discuss the circumstances in which rubato is used and the apparent reasons for the use of rubato in each instance. Markings in the score, such as phrase marks and dynamics give clues. Pianists use rubato in different places in a work, but a look at the score could reveal similarity of purpose. For example, pianists may ritardando in different bars, but in the same circumstance of delaying the end of a phrase. Similarities reveal agreement between pianists of different nationalities, pedagogical lineages or era on certain issues. Pianists may agree on an appropriate tempo, or frequency and extent of rubato techniques such as ritardando for a work or genre.

In the Conclusion, on the basis of the evidence from the literature, scores and the selected recordings, I will reveal whether the notion of a Chopin tradition can be traced in the area of tempo and rubato, or if the choice of tempo and the use of rubato in interpreting Chopin’s music is more of an individual matter. I will find out, if any, the features of Chopin playing in relation to tempo and rubato that tie together pianists of the same tradition, nationality or pedagogical line, as well as the individual characteristics of each selected early twentieth century pianist who is associated with the Chopin tradition.

9 CHAPTER 2 THE CHOPIN TRADITION

In Chapter 2 I discuss the definition of the Chopin tradition, describe Chopin as a pianist and teacher, discuss the issues concerning tempo and rubato in Chopin performance, and trace the pianistic tradition of Chopin performance.

2.1. Definition of a Chopin Tradition

As this thesis explores the notion of a Chopin tradition, there are questions that need to be asked and answered when determining what features or principles constitute a tradition, and whether such a tradition exists. A few of these are, Is it just a “perceived” or “apparent” tradition? […] Does it have validity? […] Should we draw the magic circle round “the piece” wide enough to include all rhythmic variants? If not, where will we place the limits? (Taruskin 1995: 191).

Tracing the passing on of the Chopin tradition is more problematic than showing of what principles the tradition consists. Pianists who are from a lineage of students descending from Chopin may not necessarily be considered as part of the Chopin tradition if their playing or teaching is not in line with the principles of pianism and pedagogy that Chopin practiced. Taruskin (1995) highlights the changeable nature of musical performance traditions and the absurdity of claiming to be part of a tradition merely through pedagogical lineage. Taruskin notes that the performance practices of the Classical period have been altered through time and an example of false association with a tradition is pianists who claim that they …had studied with someone who studied with Leschetizky who studied with Czerny who studied with Beethoven […] it is now clear beyond reasonable doubt that each generation modified what it had received from its teachers’ generation until the manner of playing music of the Classical period had been altered almost beyond recognition (Zaslaw in Brown& Sadie (eds) 1989 in Taruskin 1995: 181- 182).

Therefore, to belong to a tradition, one must uphold and communicate its most essential or unique features and principles, so that the tradition is still identifiable.

However, it is not essential for every one of Chopin’s principles of pianism to be embodied in the teaching or performances of those who are passing on the Chopin tradition. There may be some aspects of a Chopin tradition that are followed and passed on, and others that are ignored or altered. This could mean that only fragments of a tradition have been passed on, or those who could be considered part of the Chopin tradition follow the tradition in some ways while having individual characteristics of their own. Taruskin warns that the “idea that “real” traditions are

10 time capsules and only spurious [“apparent”, “perceived”] traditions modify what they transmit is seriously entertained by no one” (1995: 182). This is because by such a definition, there have been …no real traditions; to imply as much is fine strategy for undermining confidence in existing ones. But traditions […] modify what they transmit […] through the active intervention of the critical faculty, but also by what we might call interference. Oral traditions, especially in a musical culture as variegated as the Western fine art of music has become, are […] highly suggestible, receptive to outside influence (Taruskin 1995: 182).

Therefore, those who do not follow all the principles of Chopin’s pianism and pedagogy, but follow some of the essential and unique aspects of it will be discussed.

Gerald Abraham also discusses the idea of tradition. Abraham asserts that the “true essence of tradition, as I see it […] is perpetual life and change” (1974:1). Abraham asserts that tradition is the “product of three elements: continuity, variation, and selection” (1974: 4). According to Abraham, continuity preserves the tradition, variation springs from individual creative impulse, and selection pronounces the verdict of the community. In relation to the Chopin tradition, Abraham says that We have nothing to tell us except inadequate notation and hearsay: tradition. We know how Chopin played only through the playing of the pupils of the pupils of his pupils […] I doubt whether the traditions of how Chopin or even Clara Schumann played are much more reliable (Abraham 1974: 4).

Some of Chopin’s principles of pianism and pedagogy may not be unique to Chopin. Contemporaneous teachers or pianists may have conveyed some of the same principles as Chopin in their piano teaching and playing. It is important to discover what made Chopin’s teaching and playing different to his contemporaries, what principles originated with Chopin or were emphasized by him more than others during his time, and how Chopin influenced those around him. If the principles that have been passed on were not unique to Chopin, or if Chopin did not significantly influence the pianists or teachers apparently involved in the Chopin tradition in relation to other possible influences, then to call this passing on of principles a continuation of the Chopin tradition would be untenable.

Holland mentions the passing of the Chopin tradition from Madame Mauté to Debussy, in relation to fingering markings by Chopin, which were designed to produce a particular tone. Holland states that the “testimonies of Chopin’s students agree on most points and are supported by some advice Chopin left in his notes for a projected piano method” (1972: 304). Although Chopin

11 …produced no school […] Mme. Mauté may have learned something of the Chopin tradition from hearing Chopin play, and she may have passed that tradition on to Debussy. Debussy’s own letters indicate that he did receive the Chopin tradition through Mme. Mauté (Holland 1972: 306).

Holland’s thesis highlights how “Chopin’s fingering prescriptions, designed to produce a particular tone, anticipated certain practices of the era to follow him. Debussy, too, would strive for the ton juste” (1972: 306).

In a recent issue of Gramophone magazine, Jeremy Nicholas states that the “best Chopin players have an innate understanding of its structure, ebb and flow, and narrative. They have no need of textbooks” (2010: 38). However, this statement raises the question of what it means to be one of the best Chopin players and what an innate understanding of Chopin’s music derives from. In contrast to Nicholas’s optimistic attitude about the current standards of Chopin playing, Jonathan Bellman states that “students of performance practices know that the ‘Received Standard Chopin’ heard in conservatories and concert halls today is demonstrably different from what many of the composer’s contemporaries tell us about his own approach to the piano” (2004: 25).

The search for definitive components of Chopin’s performance style has not always been supported or deemed possible. Traditions of performance change as more evidence comes to light. In the 1960 journal article, ‘Chopin: Tradition and Myth’, Jan Ekier asserted that the “Chopin tradition does not exist as a specific style of performance, since we have no recordings made by Chopin himself” (1960: 78). Ekier also suggests that the testimonies of Chopin’s students cannot be relied on because they contain “widely differing conceptions of performance” (1960: 78). He expresses surprise at the enduring idea of a Chopin tradition, stating that all these “great differences of interpretation have invariably and persistently been accompanied by the legend of the Chopin tradition” (1960: 78). Ekier asserts that there is not “one truth” when it comes to performing Chopin’s music, and that pianistic schools or trends that claim to be of the Chopin tradition are unnecessarily “carrying on impassioned arguments” (1960: 78), when in fact others may be right as well. Ekier calls the Chopin tradition the “proverbial gnat’s nose, which no one has ever seen, but whose existence all believe in. This is one of the persistent myths in arts, in which – perhaps – it is pleasant to believe” (1960: 78).

In contrast to Ekier, John Rink has noted that …towards the end of the nineteenth century, several former pupils, Lenz, Mikuli and Princess Marcelina Czartoryska, expressed concern at the ‘steady supplanting of what they considered the true Chopin performance style by a ‘pseudo-tradition’ based on unorthodox agogic distortions (‘Rubato’) and other solecisms affecting

12 dynamics, pedaling, tempo and the notes, perpetrated in Chopin’s name, but conflicting with his intentions (Rink 1997: 39).

However, Rink does not provide detail as to what Chopin’s intentions were and how they have been contradicted. Kleczynski believed in a Chopin tradition, but saw it as a balance between discipline and freedom of interpretation. Kleczynski asserts, “truth in the principal features is one matter, but there are numerous secondary features which must be left to the individual mind of the performer” (1879: 62). Kleczynski’s distinction between principal and secondary features or ideas helps to explain why differing conceptions of Chopin’s music may be acceptable. Yet, Kleczynski does not identify what the principal features are. Kleczynski also asserts that a “perfect execution is impossible except when tradition is in accordance with the individuality of the executant” (1879: 63), but he does not give any detail as to what constitutes the Chopin tradition, or any examples of particular pianists being in accordance with it.

Bellman’s way of referring to Chopin’s style conveys a specific definition, where the Chopin style is the way that Chopin himself played, as we can know it. According to Bellman, the Chopin tradition has been overshadowed by the “conservatory” tradition, and therefore, the Chopin tradition needs revival. Irina Nikolska’s paper, ‘Russian Traditions in Chopin Performance’, describes Russian performance of Chopin during the first half of the twentieth century when Sergei Rachmaninov was active. Nikolska has also noticed that Russian pianists in the twenty first century have a “tendency towards excessive virtuosity, towards an oversimplification of the profound substance of Chopin’s music” (2004: 257).

However, others think of the Chopin tradition as being the way that Chopin’s music has been passed on since the composer’s death, regardless of whether this passing on has been in Chopin’s own style of playing. One scholar who thinks of the Chopin tradition this way is Kazimierz Morski. In his International Chopin Conference (2004) paper, “interpretations of the Works of Chopin, A Comparative Analysis of Different Styles of Performance”, he conveys that the Chopinian style is difficult to pin down and then pass on. The …definition of a style – in this case – Chopinian […] proves unstable and difficult to formulate […] one may wonder […] at what point a given work becomes false and loses the character of that constant value (Morski 2004: 164).

Morski speaks of different “versions” of the Chopinian style. He states that the …historical presence and force of persuasion of the great pianists from around the world, and by consequence the question of the various schools, that is, of such traditions that, sometimes superimposed upon the composer’s original conception, have given rise to different versions of the Chopinian style (Morski 2004: 155- 156).

13 Differences between the interpretations recorded by the pianists compared are inevitable. The idea of a Chopin tradition is perplexing because Chopin himself encouraged individuality. A closer look at the literature on Chopin’s teaching and playing in comparison with recordings will reveal what differences can still be considered as being in the style of Chopin’s playing, and which ones are of a different tradition or style.

When I refer to the Chopin tradition, I am referring to the passing on of Chopin’s principles of pianism by his students, colleagues, prominent performers of Chopin’s music, important piano teachers, and composers. To be considered part of the Chopin tradition, one must follow Chopin’s principles of pianism, and be influential in passing on or conveying these principles to others, whether they are students, or other pianists. The principles can be gleaned from Chopin’s writings, his compositions, his students’ accounts, and the accounts of Chopin’s colleagues. These may be considered authoritative sources because the documents corroborate each other. Eigeldinger identified principles such as the bel canto singing style, and its relation to a legato touch and rubato, in his book, Chopin: Pianist And Teacher (1986). Eigeldinger’s definition of Chopin’s rubato is one that aims “wherever apt, to release the melodic part from all metrical fetters and let it expand with the perfect freedom of inflection found in singing” (Eigeldinger 1986: 15). Quantifiable evidence plays an important role in determining the existence of a tradition because Chopin’s former pupils were concerned with the supplanting of their notion of a true Chopin performance style by a ‘pseudo-tradition’ based on measurable elements such as unorthodox agogic distortions (‘Rubato’) and tempo.

2.2. Chopin as a Teacher and Pianist

This thesis aims to pinpoint specific elements of the Chopin style in relation to tempo and rubato through a detailed analysis of selected recordings many of which have not been studied previously in detail. Although we have no recordings of Chopin playing we can perhaps glean elements of the true Chopin style (Rink 1997) and what the principal features (Kleczynski 1879) are by referring to testimonies of Chopin’s playing and listening to and comparing recordings by pianists who are considered to be part of the Chopin tradition. The following discussion of general principles, including interpretative freedom, opposing traditions and performance context, the “true Chopin spirit”, and the singing style, will be followed by a more specific consideration of tempo and rubato in Chapter 2.3.

14 Interpretative Freedom

Reports of Chopin playing his own works show that he was much more at ease when playing his own works and made lasting impressions on his audiences except when playing in a large hall. Robert Schumann describes Etude Op.25 No.1, which …was more like a billowing of the A flat major chord […] by means of the pedal; but through the harmonies were heard the sustained tones of a wondrous melody, and only in the middle of it did a tenor part once come into greater prominence amid the chords along with that principal cantilena (Schumann in Niecks 1973: 310).

Schumann observes Chopin’s skill in separating the layers of his music, and the singing style with which he played the melody. The tempo that Chopin chose would have allowed him to clearly portray these melodies, and any rubato used would have been in line with the singing style.

Henrietta Voigt, spoken of by the editor of Acht Briefe und ein Facsimile von Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy as the “artistic wife of a Leipzig merchant, whose house stood open to musicians” (Niecks 1973: 311), describes Chopin’s playing of an etude in a diary entry (1836), Wonderful is the ease with which his velvet fingers glide […] over the keys […] What delighted me was the childlike, natural manner which he showed in his demeanour (Niecks 1973: 311).

Voigt’s description of Chopin’s playing emphasises ease and a natural manner. There is an account regarding Chopin’s London visit, in which a writer (Niecks thinks probably J.W. Davison) reviews Chopin’s performance of his nocturnes and a scherzo in the Musical World of February 23, 1838: He is, perhaps, par éminence, the most delightful of all pianists in the drawing- room. The animation of his style is so subdued, its tenderness so refined […] the tout-ensemble so perfect, and evidently the result of an accurate judgement and most finished taste, that when exhibited in the large concert-room […] it fails to impress itself on the mass (Niecks 1973: 312).

This affirms that Chopin played in an improvisatory, yet refined style, which had more effect in a small room than in the large concert room.

Chopin also encouraged his students to play with freedom of interpretation and to be confident in their own feelings. [Chopin’s] technique was largely self-acquired, and this may well have had some bearing on its pronounced individuality. Moreover, this attempt to communicate it to pupils resulted in a teaching style quite unlike those of other pianist-teachers of the time (Samson 1996: 86).

15 Chopin told Maria von Grewingk, one of his students, “When you’re at the piano, I give you full authority to do whatever you want […] play with complete abandon” (Grewingk: 10-11 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 12). Chopin hated mechanical or timid performances. When Chopin, heard the colourless playing of some young artists, he exclaimed, “Put all your soul into it! Play as you feel!” (Kleczynski 1879: 62). Chopin’s encouragement to his students would have promoted individuality in their interpretation, even if subtle.

However, Chopin’s statements should be considered in the light of to whom he was speaking and the purpose of those statements. When Chopin gave “full authority to do whatever” to Grewingk, it was his way of inspiring a timid student to have “full confidence […] to sing like Rubini” (Grewingk in Eigeldinger 1986: 12). Kleczynski, who was a contemporary of Chopin’s students, acknowledges the paradoxical precept of playing as you feel, in that “wrongly applied, it injures the most beautiful works, and especially those of Chopin” (Kleczynski 1879: 62). Kleczynski explains that Chopin was directing his advice, “Play as you feel”, to those who “play badly because they do not give themselves the trouble to consult their own intelligence” (Kleczynski 1879: 62).

There is ample evidence for Chopin’s spontaneity in performance. Kleczynski affirms that it was “a characteristic of Chopin not to execute a musical thought twice in the same manner” (Kleczynski 1879: 63). F. Henry Peru further praises Chopin’s spontaneity in performance, revealing that he is …indebted to him for the ever-different expression he taught me to obtain in my playing of his works […] he would make me hear it in an entirely different way from the previous time […] it was wonderful each time! (Peru in Eigeldinger 1986: 55).

Alfred James Hipkins, one of Chopin’s piano tuners, also relates that Chopin “never played his own compositions twice alike, but varied each according to the mood of the moment’ (Hipkins 1937: 7). Chopin’s guidelines for creating differences in interpretation were to play the composition according to personal mood, but to keep the style of the composition in mind as well. Bellman adds that because of Chopin’s “vocalistic approach to phrasing no two note durations were precisely equal” (Bellman 2004: 26). Bellman implies the use of rubato is one of the keys to performing Chopin’s music with a Chopinesque vocalistic approach.

Although Chopin encouraged interpretative freedom in performing his works, he could be strict about rhythm. According to Lenz, Chopin “was almost impossible to please in the C sharp minor Waltz Op.64 No.2: “he alone knew the right way to tie the single semiquaver to the following crotchet in bars 3-4!” (Lenz in Grabowski 2009: vi). Grabowski also highlights the

16 advice by Joseph Schiffmacher, “presumably derived from the composer himself, that the third beat in the left-hand accompaniment should be played in a lighter, more subtle manner throughout the C sharp minor Waltz, likewise his suggestion that the right hand sixth in bar 2 of the same piece should be arpeggiated” (Grabowski 2009: vi).

One key to knowing what Chopin liked in a performance is in his admiration of Kalkbrenner’s playing. Chopin asserted that Kalkbrenner was “perfect and possessed of something that raised him above all other virtuosos” (Niecks 1973: 239). M. Marmontel (n.d.) describes Kalkbrenner’s playing, as …sustained, harmonious, and of a perfect evenness, charmed even more than it astonished; moreover, a faultless neatness in the most difficult passages, and a left hand of unparalleled bravura […] perfect evenness of the fingers […] tranquillity of the hands and body (Niecks 1973: 239).

Therefore, Chopin’s idea of freedom of interpretation requires a virtuosic technique that conveys tranquility in playing.

Opposing Traditions

Scholars are in agreement that there is a tradition that opposes the Chopin style of playing, with the different labels given to this opposing style including the ‘modern tradition’ or the ‘Russian tradition’. Bellman claims that there is a Chopinesque style that is only possible using the pianistic resources of Chopin’s time. Bellman laments that the people who were …renowned for their intimate, subtle, elegant, Chopinesque style of play (such as Antoine de Kontski, Eduard Risler, later Raoul Koczalski) never enjoyed the fame of their more extroverted colleagues, and as Chopin’s contemporaries departed, and that school of performance faded, so inevitably did the memory of the real magic of Chopin interpretation using all the pianistic resources he had at his disposal (Bellman 2004: 38).

Pianists have “played their part in the separation of performance and text, as that modern institution, the piano recital, likewise developed its two opposing cultures” (Samson 1996: 12). A well-known example of a pianist who played in a way that is different to Chopin’s style of performance is Anton Rubinstein (1829-1894), who is considered to be part of the Russian tradition of piano playing and who passed on his performance ideas to his students, especially Josef Hofmann (1876-1957), who was Rubinstein’s most talented pupil.

Nikolska notes that Anton Rubinstein was the “pioneer of a certain aesthetic in Russian pianistic culture, initially a pianistic tradition which included the interpretation of Chopin” (Nikolska 2004: 250). Rubinstein’s

17 …repertory encompassed virtually the whole Chopin legacy, and – according to […] first hand witnesses – he achieved astonishing results. One of Rubinstein’s most dazzling renditions was that of the Sonata in B flat minor (Nikolska 2004: 50- 251).

Samson asserts that it was “above all Anton Rubinstein who acclimatized Chopin’s music to the public concert in the later nineteenth century, forcing it into a new kind of performance arena, bending it to his will and in the process changing it utterly” (Samson 1996: 12). Furthermore, Methuen-Campbell believes that It is to the Russians that one must look to find another definite tradition. Anton Rubinstein’s pupils Ossip Gabrilowitsch and Arthur Friedheim, together with the Pole Josef Hofmann, all […] taught numerous pianists in the United States and Canada. Hofmann […] embodied many aspects of his teacher’s style in his own performances (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 203).

Rubinstein’s “temperament was one of violent contrasts and he used this to great effect in his playing […] conflicting moods were applied to works […] with devastating results – audiences were stunned” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 199). This was …the public recitalist exerting control over someone else’s music […] where the text […] may indeed be reshaped, culminating in the arrangements and transcriptions of pianist-composers such as Godowsky (Samson 1996: 12).

Nikolska notes that Chopin was at first familiar to most Russian listeners for his tender elegies, sorrowful reveries and beautiful haze of melancholy, but Rubinstein “sensed in his music something which had hitherto passed virtually unnoticed” (Nikolska 2004: 251). Rubinstein described Chopin’s music as “lyric, heroic, dramatic, fantastic, soulful, sweet” (Rubinstein in Nikolska 2004: 251). This new way of playing Chopin was one that was “dissociated from the salon: it was Chopin fitted for the concert hall” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 199).

Rubinstein’s treatment of Chopin’s works did not meet the approval of Chopin’s students. It was “largely antithetical to what they understood to be the authentic Chopin style with its emotional restraint” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 199). Sir Charles Hallé labeled Rubinstein’s playing as “clever, but not Chopinesque” (Niecks 1973: 103). A less flattering description of Rubinstein’s playing is by a reviewer for the New York Times in 1873 (possibly Frederick Schwab), who felt that “the vigor and dash of his execution are sometimes detrimental to the effect of the vaguely beautiful and ever-changing harmonies, and the elaborate arabesques of the Polish artist’s writings” (Rosenblum 2004: 336). It is unclear from this account whether the “vigor and dash” of Rubinstein’s playing is in relation to faster tempo or to louder dynamics. Thus, Rubinstein’s playing contrasted to Chopin’s own playing, which has been described as being much less aggressive.

18 Performance Context

Consideration of different performance styles leads to the issue of the performance context that is most suitable for the performance of Chopin’s music. Chopin did not produce huge dynamic effects, even in a concert hall. At a concert in Manchester in 1848, Chopin’s “tone was inevitably too small, and his performance too dependent on nuance, to make any real impact in such a large hall” (Samson 1996: 256). Moscheles relates that Chopin’s “piano is breathed forth so softly that he needs no vigorous forte to produce the desired contrasts” (Eigeldinger 1986: 272). Chopin’s pianistic aesthetic “was above all intimate, most effectively communicated to a few […] friends around the piano” (Bellman 2004: 26). Chopin “did not care that people felt that he played too softly, or that his celebrated rubatos and rhythmic inflections were misunderstood” (Bellman 2004: 26). This was a “pianism that was […] universally acknowledged to be magical [….] different from what we practice today” (Bellman 2004: 26).

Chopin’s well known preference for the Pleyel is notable in terms of tempo and tonal decisions. The instrument used affects the choice of tempo, especially in faster pieces. The Pleyel was “an instrument with a light touch on which one can nuance with more ease than on a fleshy sounding instrument” (Lenz 1872: 62). Chopin liked the Pleyel pianos because of their “silvery and slightly veiled sonority and their lightness of touch” (Liszt in Eigeldinger 1986: 25). Despite an early liking for Viennese Graf instruments and a later interest in Broadwoods, Chopin’s …enduring love was for French pianos, and especially Pleyels. In his early days in Paris he played mainly on Pleyel fortepianos, with single escapement action, and their transparency and registeral differentiation perfectly suited the intricacies of texture in which he revelled, highlighting especially the contrapuntal dimension of his harmonic practice. Later he used larger concert Pleyels noted for their mellow, rich tone and sensitivity of touch (Samson 1996: 109).

Benjamin Vogel’s chapter, ‘The Young Chopin’s Domestic Pianos’, reveals that towards the end of the 1820’s, Chopin’s domestic instrument was a pianoforte made by the Warsaw manufacturer Fryderyk Buchholtz. The most important feature of the piano, for Chopin ‘was that the mechanism be efficient and ‘steerable’ ” (Vogel 2004: 71). Bellman elaborates that the Pleyel was a “sensitive instrument that betrayed the finest subtleties of touch that are all but impossible on a modern Steinway or Yamaha, and […] differed substantially from register to register” (Bellman 2004: 26).

Chopin’s preference for pianos reflects his concern for nuance. The difference between Chopin and Liszt is highlighted by Lenz who exclaimed, “Erard – Pleyel! Liszt-Chopin!” (Eigeldinger

19 1986: 92). A similar testimony is given in a passage from an article in the musical periodical Le Pianiste (1834), which reads, Give Liszt, Herz, Bertini and Schunke an Erard; but to Kalkbrenner, Chopin and Hiller give a Pleyel; a Pleyel is needed to sing a Field romance, to caress a Chopin mazourk […] the mellow tone of the Pleyel […] loses a little of its intensity in a large concert hall (Eigeldinger 1986: 92).

Further evidence of Chopin’s relatively light touch emerges in Szulc’s 1873 monograph, “Frederic Chopin and His Musical Works: A Contribution to the artist’s biography and an assessment of his compositions”. According to Skowron (2004), Szulc’s work is the first wide- ranging study in Polish. Szulc “would appear to have possessed every prerequisite for writing a work on Chopin both from the position of a biographer equipped with philological craftsmanship and as an experienced musician, and a pianist in particular” (Skowron 2004: 12). Skowron rates Szulc’s account of Chopin’s playing as superior to Liszt’s biography because it “descends from […] exuberant fantasy to the level of facts’ (Skowron 2004: 13). The firsthand witnesses, which Szulc invokes, are Heinrich Heine, Wilhelm Lenz, La Mara, Charlotte Moscheles, Julian Fontana, Louis Enault and Antoni Wodzinsku, as well as opinions from Jan Kleczynski and Stanislaw Tarnowski. (Skowron 2004: 113). Szulc writes of Chopin’s playing, He had no patience with rough or hard attack […] he tolerated a force immeasurably smaller than that which was frequently used by other pianists, namely Liszt […] He himself had fingers that were long and slender […] with which he seemed more to stroke the keys than to strike them (Szulc in Skowron 2004: 14).

Szulc also said that Chopin set such great demands on the performer through his music that virtuosi who expend almost all their time on forging a huge technique and inexhaustible strength, gradually lose “their softness and sensitivity of touch, and rarely is any one of them capable of singing a melody” (Szulc in Skowron 2004: 15).

Chopin’s conception of dynamic levels is softer than modern pianists conceive them to be, and this would affect tempo, as it is usually easier to play at a faster tempo when using a lighter touch. However, the dynamic level at which pianists should perform Chopin’s music is still open to debate. Eigeldinger thinks that an “authentic interpretation on modern pianos has to take into account Chopin’s dynamics while adapting them to present pianos” (1986: 126). Eigeldinger highlights Michalowski’s reasoning that if Chopin had known the modern pianoforte, would he “not have explored all its sonorous effects? According to Mikuli, Chopin had a naturally deep and resonant touch” (Michalowski in Eigeldinger 1986: 127). In 1932, Michalowski suggested that on “Bechsteins and Steinways it would certainly suffice to produce the level of forte which in former times […] resulted in an artificial and unpleasant tone” (Michalowski in Eigeldinger 1986: 127).

20 The testimonies of those who heard Chopin play confirm Chopin’s playing was more appreciated in an intimate setting because one of the most valued aspects of Chopin’s playing was a delicate touch that is capable of many nuances of tone. A critic who heard Chopin play wrote in the Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitlung that the “exquisite delicacy of his touch […] the subtle finish of his graduations in tone […] reveal a virtuoso richly endowed by nature” (Brook 1971: 57). Another critic, from the Wiener Theaterzeitung wrote that Chopin’s “touch is neat, but has not the brilliance displayed by our virtuosi […] He plays quietly” (Brook 1971: 57). Many accounts are “coloured by the conviction that Chopin rarely passed the threshold of fortissimo, and imparted extra vigour to his tone only in flashes” (Skowron 2004: 18).

Hector Berlioz, a composer who heard Chopin play, stated, “Chopin’s talent is of an entirely different nature [from Liszt’s]. In order to appreciate him fully, I believe that he has to be heard […] in the salon” (Berlioz in Eigeldinger 1986: 272). This means that a pianist who is aiming to perform in the style that Chopin performed might need an intimate setting rather than a large concert hall in order to be fully appreciated. Samson notes that all are “agreed on the originality of his technique […] perfectly suited to the soirée intime” (Samson1996: 86).

Even though performances of Chopin works were ideally executed in a smaller setting, this does not rule out effective performances of Chopin’s works in a concert hall. Even Anton Rubinstein, who was considered to be a performer of a different tradition to Chopin, received reviews that praised his understanding of the importance of nuance and his delicacy of tone. For example, a review of Rubinstein playing the Berceuse reveals that his performance was “exquisitely perfect in its way; such purity and even delicacy of tone we never heard surpassed […] the notes run like oil, yet are distinct as pearls” (Rosenblum 2004: 336-337). This commentary further blurs the distinction between the Russian tradition and the Chopin tradition.

While dynamics are important in contrasting performance styles, it is not possible to compare the dynamics of different pianists through recordings because of the difference in recording qualities and circumstances. The two musical parameters that will be the focus of this study, tempo and rubato may be discussed with more certainty.

The “True Chopin Spirit”

After Chopin’s death, certain ways of playing Chopin’s music were considered to be more in Chopin’s style than others. In the chapter, “A composer known here but to few’: Reception and Performance styles of Chopin’s Music in America, 1839-1900”, Sandra Rosenblum indicates

21 that by the end of the nineteenth century, expectations for Chopin performances are revealed by the comments of critics. Rosenblum notes that for …American critics, Chopin’s music required the utmost subtlety in performance […] One phrase that reviewers of Chopin playing used was “the true spirit,” coined in 1858 by the anonymous-t when he wrote of a performance by Mr. Goldbeck in New York: the pieces “were correctly played, but without the true spirit” (Rosenblum 2004: 334-335).

One essential component of the “true spirit”, according to A.A.C in New York, was a “poetic, “spiritual approach”, to express “the true Chopin mood, that indefinable zal”, a Polish melancholy tinged with grief, remembrance, or regret” (Rosenblum 2004: 335). For example, with reference to Goldbeck’s performance of Chopin’s Prelude Op.28 No.15, a reviewer said in 1857, “he seemed not to have entered at all into the spirit of that tender, sighing first part, but played it in a really matter-of-fact manner […] with nothing of the ‘rubato’, which it so evidently requires” (Rosenblum 2004: 335).

Raoul Pugno is a pianist who aimed to put Chopin’s intentions before his own. In 1905 a reviewer for the Boston Evening Transcript wrote, Mr. Pugno puts Chopin on the keyboard and lets him play himself […] we get a Chopin that is refreshingly new, until it strikes you as being the Chopin we ought always to hear; done without any sobbing, in perfect rhythm (Rosenblum 2004: 339).

The American critics equated composer centered playing with an effective performance of Chopin’s works. Idiomatic rubato emerges as one of the keys to playing Chopin in the “true spirit” in these reviews, which also mention the soft touch, an ethereal, capricious or morbid character and a sense of balance.

Scholars and pianists relate the appropriate use of rubato in Chopin’s music to the Classical style. Samson highlights the Classical influence on Chopin through Chopin’s compositions, noting that “at the heart of Chopin’s imaginative piano writing lies a re-creation, in terms entirely idiomatic for the piano, of Bach’s ornamental melody, figuration, and counterpoint” (Samson 1996: 125). When we add up the verbal descriptions of Chopin’s playing, and the playing of contemporaneous and later pianists, to the evidence of editions of Chopin’s music, it “seems clear that the music was increasingly reinterpreted from the standpoint of a late- romantic aesthetic essentially alien from Chopin himself” (Samson 1992: 39). However, “in his general aesthetic, Chopin remained close to Mozart and […] he viewed himself as firmly rooted in classical traditions” (Samson 1996: 66).

22 The Singing Style

Chopin said that we “use sounds to make music just as we use words to make a language” (Chopin Projet de méthode in Eigeldinger 1986: 42) and he was attracted to the art of singing, especially through bel canto. The vocal school of the 1830s in which the “art of declamation and its dramatic expression in music were harmoniously united […] the ideal and definitive model for interpretation” (Eigeldinger 1986: 14). Chopin …regarded the piano as a singing, legato instrument […] The close relationship between Chopin’s music and the vocal arts may also be seen in his overall approach to musical structure. A listing of Chopin’s earliest works reveals a […] decided preference for the most vocal of all forms – namely, the ternary (Covington 1987: 20).

Mikuli reveals that under Chopin’s “fingers each musical phrase sounded like a song, and with such clarity that each note took the meaning of a syllable, each bar that of a word, each phrase that of a thought. It was a declamation without pathos” (Mikuli/Koczalski in Eigeldinger 1986: 42). Abraham mentions Chantavoines essay, ‘L’Italienisme de Chopin’ in Musiciens et Poetes (Paris 1912), which …contends that Chopin based his famous tempo rubato on the practice of ‘the tenors and sopranos of the Italian Opera who compelled the conductor to respect their “good notes”’ and all the rest of the virtuoso singer’s stock-in-trade. It is certainly true that the invention of tempo rubato has been attributed to an Italian singer-composer, F.A.M Pistocchi (1659-1726) (Abraham 1980: 65).

Insight into Chopin’s performance aesthetic can be gained form Wilhelm von Lenz’s first-hand description of a dress rehearsal on two pianos organized by Chopin for his pupil Filtsch, who performed at least the first movement of Chopin’s Piano Concerto Op.11 on various occasions, such as at Baron de Rothschild’s salon on 11 January 1843 (Rink 1997). Lenz said that in this piece the pianist “must be first tenor, first soprano – always a singer and a bravura singer in the runs, which Chopin wanted the pianist […] to render in the cantabile style” (Rink 1997: 24).

Chopin “mastered the art of legato playing to such an extent that he could make the piano sing as vividly as any vocalist” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 193). Morski affirms, “Chopin’s music is dominated by the element of respiro, or vocalist’s breathing, which naturally arose out of the composer’s love of opera” (2004: 157). Chopin used the wrist in a way that reflected the vocal character of his music. Chopin noted in his Projet de Methode that the wrist is “respiration in the voice” (Chopin cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 45). A slightly more detailed description for this action given by Kleczynski is that Chopin “detached the hand after having diminished the tone” (Kleczynski 1913: 55 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 45) at the end of a slur.

23 Kleczynski provided other general instructions on how to shape phrases in Chopin’s music, which gives clues for appropriate places to use rubato. According to Kleczynski, a …long note is stronger, as is also a high note. A dissonant is likewise stronger, and equally so a syncopated note. The ending of a phrase, before a comma, or a stop, is always weak […] notice must be taken of natural accents. For instance, in a bar of two, the first note is strong, the second weak, in a bar of three the first strong and the two others weak (Kleczynski 1896: 41-2 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 42).

Eigeldinger similarly comments that the general rules about metric accents, which may be part of the “principal features” (Kleczynski 1879: 62), “have no rapport with the type of rhythmic accentuation – deriving from Graeco-Latin prosody – practised by Beethoven, who studied and applied it systematically” (Eigeldinger 1982: 109). Schindler, a student of Beethoven, relates that Beethoven preferred to bring out the rhythmic accent, while the melodic accents “were handled more according to necessity; he took special care only over appoggiaturas, especially semitone ones in cantabile” (Schindler 1973: 471 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 109). In contrast, Chopin “gives precedence to continuity in the cantilena, whose line he does not want broken by pronounced accentuation […] Hence Lenz’s astonishment at the way Chopin phrased the variations in Beethoven’s Sonata Op.26” (Eigeldinger 1982: 109). Also, Chopin “had a horror of all exaggerated accentuation, which, in his opinion, took away the poetry from playing and gave it a sort of dry pedantry” (Karasowski 1877: 94 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 54). Eigeldinger adds that in a review of Chopin’s playing in the Wiener Theaterzeitung, a critic wrote that Chopin “accentuates only gently, like a person conversing in the company of cultured people” (Eigeldinger 1986: 125).

One of the features of Chopin’s compositions that reflect the influence of the vocal school is the use of fioriture in his melodies. There are differing opinions on how these should be interpreted, particularly in relation to the use of lengthening and ritardando. Kleczynski said that fioriture …most frequently appear when the same motif returns several times, first the motif is heard in its simplicity; afterwards, surrounded with ornaments, richer and richer at each return. It is, therefore, necessary to render this motif with very nearly the same shadings, whatever the form in which it reappears […] ornamental passages should not be slackened, but rather accelerated towards the end; a rallentando would invest them with too much importance (Kleczynski in Eigeldinger 1986: 52- 54).

Bellman acknowledges that Kleczynski’s approach is commonly heard today, such melodic returns being shaded like the original statements. However, “witnesses agree that the composer played his own works, and melodic returns within them, with myriad variations” (Bellman 2000: 155). One example is in the Nocturnes, where “melodies often have different indications for phrasing and articulation at each return” (Bellman 2000: 155). Kleczynski also said that Chopin

24 …differed, in his manner of using arabesques and parenthetical ornamentations, from the usual manner of his time; which was to dwell upon such passages and to imbue them with importance, as in the cadenzas attached to the airs of the Italian School (Kleczynski in Eigeldinger 1986: 52-54).

Bellman notes that Kleczynski’s comment is contrary to other documents and believes that in fact, Chopin “based his cantabile aesthetic on Italian bel canto, and he constantly urged his pupils to hear good singers” (Bellman 2000: 155). This is confirmed by Szulc, who said that to “attain naturalness in one’s playing Chopin advised listening to Italian singers […] He always put forward their simple, broad style and facility for producing and using their voice as an example for instrumental playing” (Szulc 1986: 104 cited in Skowron 2004: 15). Furthermore, “contemporary pieces modelled on Chopin’s cantabile aesthetic suggest that Kleczynski also has this idea wrong” (Bellman 2000: 155). According to Szulc, “one exceptionally important property of Chopin’s articulation was its modelling on Italian singers. This he saw as the cornerstone […] of his phrasing and accentuation” (Skowron 2004: 15). Chopin “recommended not dividing a musical idea into small, brief parts, but singing so far as possible in long phrases” (Szulc 1986: 104 cited in Skowron 2004: 15).

Summary

Although there is debate about the existence of a Chopin tradition, there is a view that there is a tradition or way of playing that is opposed to the Chopin style. Bellman notes that the modern way of playing is very different from how Chopin would have played, and there is also the view that the Russian tradition, particularly the playing of Anton Rubinstein, is not always in line with the principles that Chopin taught and adhered to. The literature on Chopin’s style of performance when playing his own works reveals that he played, and encouraged his students to play, with ease and interpretative freedom, although Chopin could also be strict about how the rhythm should be played in his pieces, which shows the importance of studying the suitable use of tempo and rubato in Chopin’s music. According to witnesses, Chopin had a relatively light touch, making it more suited to the salon than the concert hall. His ideal instrument was the Pleyel, as it was suitable for a lighter touch, subtle nuances in tone and other effects that could only be achieved on an instrument of unequal temperament. Chopin’s preference for an instrument that could achieve subtle nuances in tone and performance in a smaller setting than a concert hall suggests that Chopin would have also used rubato in subtle ways. There are certain ways of approaching Chopin’s music that are more in line with Chopin’s style, such as aiming to put the composer’s intention before the performer’s, having a Classical, rather than Romantic approach to phrasing and rhythm, and bearing in mind the influence of the vocal school in the

25 way that phrases are shaped and notes are accented. These general principles affect the way that tempo and rubato is used in Chopin performance, as highlighted in the following section.

2.3. Issues Concerning Tempo and Rubato in Chopin Performance

In this section I outline the issues concerning tempo and rubato in Chopin performance that have been raised by other scholars.

Tempo in Chopin’s Music

It is generally agreed that Chopin’s metronomic indications are what he intended in relation to his Pleyel piano, but they also think that some of the markings may be too fast for a pianist performing on a modern piano. According to Jackson, Chopin appears to have had …difficulty in arriving at what he felt was a proper tempo. The tempo marking was usually the last thing he added to an autograph score, and a comparison of autograph manuscripts and early editions, wherein he often added pencilled indications, reveals that he often made changes along the way. For example, the Etude Op.10 No.12 was changed from presto con fuoco to allegro con fuoco, and the Etude Op.10 No.3 from vivace ma non troppo to lento ma non troppo (Jackson 2005: 88).

Higgins’ article, ‘Tempo and Character in Chopin’ in The Musical Quarterly, reveals that Chopin ‘understood the specific terms of lento and andante as representing faster tempi than are generally taken today” (Higgins 1973: 114). Higgins conveys that “a number of tempi seem too fast – the Nocturnes Opus 15, No.3 (first edition), and Opus 27, No.2 (autograph and first edition), the studies Opus 10, No.3 and 6 (first editions)”, but the fact that “none seem too slow, is vexing” (Higgins 1973: 114).

According to Higgins, although the metronome markings seem fast today, they are what Chopin intended to write and should be followed as closely as possible by the modern pianist. For example, in the Op.10 Etudes, for which there are “fourteen different manuscript sources” (Higgins 1973: 109), the differences in metronome rates between the autographs and first editions are tiny. Therefore, “one can accept either and know he is close to Chopin’s ideas of tempo in these pieces” (Higgins 1973: 110). There is also “evidence that Chopin’s own tempi in performance, especially in lyrical, cantabile sections, were faster and more fluent than is usual today” (Samson 1992: 38). Jackson notes that in 111 compositions, Chopin’s “original tempo markings are present. In the nocturnes, the range of tempi is very wide, from MM40- MM132; in the polonaises, however, it is very close, MM80-MM96 […] Chopin’s markings are

26 on the fast side, but a more rapid tempo is credible if one plays the works on a Pleyel grand” (Jackson 2005: 88).

Methuen-Campbell says that “Chopin’s own metronome markings, for the most part to be found only for those pieces composed before 1837, have to be viewed within the context of the lighter-actioned pianos he had in mind when writing; many of the tempi prescribed are on the fast side” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 191). Higgins acknowledged that for a pianist playing on a modern piano, a few of Chopin’s tempi seem too fast. However, the “great majority are entirely credible when combined with the evidence provided by the sound of the Pleyel grand, and an imitation of the soft and slender tone which marked Chopin’s performances” (Higgins 1973: 115).

According to Higgins, a pianist will need to adapt the metronome marking that Chopin indicated to fit the modern piano. Modern pianos with heavier timbres are not appropriate for some of Chopin’s music. For example, on “some modern instruments – those with broad and heavy timbres – some of Chopin’s left-hand arpeggiated accompaniments cannot be played at the rates marked without distorting their character” (Higgins 1973: 115). However, on a “light- sounding instrument, or even an average one, almost all of Chopin’s tempi can be made to sound entirely right at this rate if the tone is kept soft” (Higgins 1973: 115).

Although the lighter action of Chopin’s piano needs to be kept in mind, this should not be an excuse to play significantly slower. In a later article, titled ‘Chopin’s Practices’ in The Piano Quarterly, Higgins notes that Chopin’s tempos, especially his Lentos, were definitely faster than what we expect today […] the somewhat lighter tone of instruments contemporaneous with Chopin cannot be used as a defense for the lugubrious, and numbingly slow tempi we hear today as a matter of course in recitals and concerts where Chopin’s music is played (Higgins 1981: 41).

The idea that Chopin’s Lento may be faster than what an audience would expect today will be explored in the analysis of the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, which has a tempo marking of Lento, as well as a metronome marking of Crotchet = MM116. Morski has also revealed that performances of the Etude, Op.10 No.3 are “always played at a slower tempo, at least in the opening section of the work, than ensues from the composer’s metronomic indications” (Morski 2004: 156).

One of the solutions to Chopin’s fast metronome markings is to make the articulation and texture of the music clearer, which creates an impression of a faster speed. Methuen-Campbell

27 notes that “pianists in our own time frequently hold articulation and clarity of texture as a priority, and this gives an effective impression of greater velocity” (1992: 192) while Morski affirms that a “tradition became established which took no account of Chopin’s metronomic indications” (Morski 2004: 156). Morski’s comment could refer to the modern pianist’s solution to the problem of Chopin’s metronome markings being too fast for a piano with a heavier action. Incidentally, “after 1836 the composer himself discarded these indications in order to give greater freedom to the individual sensitivities of the performers” (Morski 2004: 154).

One performer who played much slower than Chopin’s metronome markings is Francis Planté, who recorded seven of Chopin’s etudes in 1928. Methuen-Campbell asserts that “given his age, these are valuable documents, for Planté not only had contacts with several of Chopin’s pupils, but was active as a mature concert artist from the 1860’s” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 202). Planté’s interpretations, …despite being a good deal slower than the authentic metronome marking, have incomparable rhythmic buoyancy and one hears a considerable amount of unexpected detail highlighted in the left-hand parts, most notably in the C major Etude Op.10 No7. The effect of much of this detail would be lost at a faster tempo (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 202).

Planté’s slower than authentic tempi are a case of the performer seeking “his or her own path, frequently departing from the musical text, sometimes respecting a certain tradition or the written will of Chopin, which, however, the public may no longer perceive or may not accept” (Morski 2004: 156). Methuen-Campbell does not mention the specific tempo that Planté uses or the use of any rubato. This shortage of material justifies my own analysis comparing other pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition.

Rubato in Chopin’s Music

Hudson (1994) notes that Chopin frequently used terms to describe the mood or rhythmic flow in his earlier works, but after the Op.24 Mazurkas (1835), there is a decline in his use of such terms, and in the number of metronome markings. However, Chopin continued to use terms such as rallentando, ritardando and ritenuto. Hudson asserts that there was a distinction between rallentando and ritenuto in Chopin’s time. Like Beethoven’s ritente, Chopin’s ritenuto “seems related to the expressive broadening indicated by dots and a slur (portato), dashes (tenuto), or accents (like small decrescendo signs)” (Hudson 1994: 179). Hudson (1994) observes that Chopin uses the word ritenuto “when the music must be held back for some intensely expressive reason and this is usually accompanied by a richness and warmth of tone colour. In contrast, Chopin uses the word rallentando when he wants a “more relaxed dying out

28 of movement after the main expressive thrust has run its course” (Hudson 1994: 180). Therefore, it is important to use an edition of the score that shows the difference between Chopin’s markings, rather than being shortened to rit., as in Paderewski’s editions (1949-61). Hudson also comments on the difference in Chopin’s terms that indicate speeding up. Chopin uses accelerando “for less intense structural situations, whereas stretto, or less often stringendo, acts like ritenuto, as a more expressive effect” (Hudson 1994: 182).

Hudson (1994) believes that Chopin marks the word rubato for the three purposes of articulating the repetition of a unit of music, to intensify an expressive high point or appoggiatura, and to establish a particular mood. Also, in most cases, Chopin marks the word in locations similar to those where singers, violinists, and keyboard players were “accustomed to performing the earlier type of rubato. Furthermore, these are the same sort of locations […] where the most urgent reaching motives occur” (Hudson 1994: 214). When Chopin marks rubato in a score, it usually indicates a “momentary effect, the termination of which is not marked” (Hudson 1994: 216). Hudson reasons that Chopin wrote sempre rubato with dashes to show duration of two and half bars, so the term rubato must indicate an even shorter duration.

Nocturne Op.15 No.3 – Bars 1-5:

Rowland suggests that when Chopin included the word rubato in the score, it was in relation to “passages where a particularly extreme form of rubato was intended” (1994: 213), considering the “extent to which Chopin’s commentators remarked on the use of rubato in his playing” (1994: 213). Chopin always made use of the term rubato in relation to simple note values rather than groups of irregular notes or passages of decorated melody (Rowland 1994: 213), which implies that Chopin expected a pianist to interpret those types of passages with rubato and he did not need to mark the term rubato in the score. In addition, Eigeldinger has noted that the term is used most in the genres connected to Polish folk music, so it is “likely that the non- synchronised style of rubato should be combined with that which keeps the bar-length regular, but stretches certain beats” (Rowland 1994: 213).

29 Franz Liszt remarked, “Look at the trees! The wind plays in the leaves […] the trees remain the same. That is the Chopinesque rubato” (Eigeldinger 1986: 51). When performing, Chopin used rubato frequently, …accelerating or slowing down this or that theme. But Chopin’s rubato possessed an unshakeable emotional logic. It always justified itself by strengthening or weakening of the melodic line, by harmonic details, by the figurative structure. It was fluid, natural; it never degenerated into exaggeration or affectation (Mikuli/A. Michalowski 1932: 74-5 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 50).

Henry F. Chorley wrote in a review of a recital played by Chopin in London in 1848, that …after the “hammer and tongs” work on the pianoforte to which we have of late years been accustomed, the delicacy of M. Chopin’s tone and the elasticity of his passages are delicious to the ear. He makes a free use of tempo rubato; leaning about within his bars more than any player we recollect, but still subject to a presiding sentiment of measure such as presently habituates the ear to the liberties taken. In music not his own we happen to know that he can be as staid as a metronome (Chorley 1848 cited in Hudson 1994: 177).

Chopin’s knowledge of rubato must have come to him through listening to operatic singers and as a keyboard performer, with “both activities encouraging him to think of the device mainly as displacement between melody and accompaniment” (Hudson 1994: 215). Dubois explains that Chopin often “required simultaneously that the left hand, playing the accompaniment, should maintain strict time, while the melodic line should enjoy freedom of expression with fluctuations of speed” (Mathias cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 49). Szulc relates that Chopin …kept the bass in a calm and uniform measure, whilst the right hand played freely with the beat […] In this way, his playing, liberated […] from the strictures of the beat, became dreamy and poetical, the contours fading and disappearing in a transparent haze […] He used his to great effect not only in […] the nocturnes and the Lullaby, but even in many mazurkas (Szulc 1986: 109-110 cited in Skowron 2004: 15-6).

In addition, Mikuli states that the …metronome never left his piano […] the hand responsible for the accompaniment would keep strict time, while the other hand, singing the melody, would free the essence of the musical thought from all rhythmic fetters, either by lingering hesitantly or by eagerly anticipating the movement with a certain impatient vehemence akin to passionate speech (Mikuli 1880: 3 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 49).

Mikuli’s description of how rubato should be used in Chopin’s music is favoured by Paetsch, who notes that fluctuations of the tempo in the accompaniment is contrary to what Chopin told his students.

Paetsch recommends that pianists use “vocal rubato”, which refers to the “improvised modification of melodic notes in relation to a steady metrical pulse in the accompaniment,

30 whether used by pianists or singers” (Paetsch 2009: 156). This type of rubato is described in “vocal and instrumental treatises of the late eighteenth century […] as well as in singing treatises of the early nineteenth century and later” (Paetsch 2009: 157). In 1874, Theophile Lemaitre stated in the French translation of Tosi’s book: The Italian singers have a manner of delaying the singing or losing the precision of the time at will, while the orchestra continues its prescribed movement, which has a great effect, when it is done with taste and when the singer knows how to regain his balance […] This method may be called vacillare, which means to vacillate, hesitate, falter, waver (Lemaitre 1912 cited in Hudson 1994: 87).

Paetsch reveals that by the early twentieth century, accounts of Chopin’s rubato were being filtered through late-nineteenth century sources, and that the “meaning of rubato may have been shifting in keyboard parlance as early as the beginning of the nineteenth century” (Paetsch 2009: 158). Paetsch indicates that in Louis Adam’s 1805 keyboard treatise, Méthode de piano, Adam describes the concept of rubato, where the accompaniment keeps strict time: Undoubtedly the expression demands that one slow down or press (speed up) certain notes of the melody, but these retards should not be continual throughout the piece, but only in those places where the expression of a languorous melody or the passion of an agitated melody demand a retard or a more animated tempo. In this case the melody should be altered, and the bass should keep strict tempo (Adam 1805: 160 cited in Paestch 2009: 158).

Notably, Adam avoids the use of the term rubato, which shows that rubato had a changing meaning in the nineteenth century. Paetsch affirms that the …generation of pianists after Michalowski and Kleczynski may have assumed rubato meant the same thing to Chopin as it did to many other pianists of their own time: that is, a series of fluctuations in a given tempo that involved both melody and accompaniment simultaneously (Paetsch 2009: 167).

Paetsch argues that we should not assume that localised fluctuations in the tempo affecting both the melody and accompaniment are intended for use in Chopin’s music. The “vocal rubato” that Paetsch advises for use in Chopin’s music, is “more frequently and consistently documented by writers of singing treatises until well into the nineteenth century than by contemporaneous writers of keyboard treatises” (Paetsch 2009: 160).

However, there are recommendations for the use of overall slowing down and speeding up in Chopin’s music, the kind of rubato described by Czerny in his Complete Theoretical and Practical Piano Forte School, Vol.1: Many passages will not produce their intended effect unless they are played with a certain gradual slackening, holding back or retarding of the time: just as others require that the degree of movement shall be gradually accelerated, quickened, or hurried towards (Czerny 1839: 189 cited in Paetsch 2009: 159).

31 Szulc advised that if a “piece should last for five minutes, then provided his overall time is not exceeded, then the tempo can vary in individual places – this is rubato” (Szulc 1986: 109 in Skowron 2004: 15). This advice can be confusing because Szulc also relates that Chopin would say, Rhythm and measure […] are wholly and generally not to be touched. The left hand should be as a Kapellmeister; not for a moment should it waver or hesitate. It is a clock; with the right hand do what you like and are able (Szulc 1986: 109 cited in Skowron 2004: 15).

The rubato described above is the one that Mikuli prescribes and is the “vocal rubato” that Paetsch recommends. Szulc’s advice to vary the tempo in individual places, as long as the overall time is not exceeded seems to be contrary to what he claims Chopin said.

However, it is not easy or even suitable to strictly follow Chopin’s concept of rubato, as the modern pianist, Emanuel Ax reveals, It’s a nice thing to aspire to […] take it as a broad concept rather than as a rigidly metronomic instruction […] if you can feel a single pulse arising from the basic underlying movement and play your rubato off that pulse, that’s certainly possible. I don’t believe Chopin […] wanted every note of the left hand to be an exact mathematical measurement (Siepmann 1995: 256).

One argument for the use of tempo fluctuations is put forth by Rink, who states that even Chopin, …who was exacting in matters of interpretation tolerated a certain flexibility in performance. To Filtsch he remarked: ‘we both understand that in different ways, but play it your way, do as you feel, it can go like that as well’, while another student, Georges Mathias, reported that Chopin, performer of genius, interpreted Mozart, Beethoven with the feeling of Chopin, and it was extremely beautiful, it was sublime (Rink 1997: 39).

According to Rink, Chopin translated works of other composers into his own musical language, “achieving a degree of conviction necessary for “authentic’ performance but without imposing himself on the music” (Rink 1997: 39).

The musical analyst, Carl Schachter thinks that Chopin “made a distinction between true rubato, which I think was a kind of free melodic declamation against a steady beat, and other kinds of liberties with time” (Siepmann 1995: 256). An example he highlights is the F minor Concerto, where …in several places he actually writes ‘rubato’ into the piano part – in the last movement, in the A flat section, and when he does that, the orchestra has nothing, but when he writes ‘rallentando’, or even ‘stretto’ in the piano part, it’s also written in the orchestral parts. I don’t think Chopin ever intends that everything should be metronomic […] Descriptions of his own playing suggest that he played with very

32 great rhythmic freedom, but never at the expense of a kind of rhythmic structure (Siepmann 1995: 256).

Even if Chopin did use tempo fluctuation, he would have used it subtly, as he “hated all lingering and dragging, misplaced rubatos, as well as exaggerated ritardandos” (Niecks 1902: 341 cited in Hudson 1994: 177). Chopin’s dislike of exaggeration in rhythm mirrors Louise Adam’s complaint in 1804, in his Method de piano, Some have wanted to make playing out of time fashionable and to play every type of music as a fantasy, prelude, or capriccio. They think they give more expression to a piece thereby, and they alter it in such a way that it is unrecognizable (Adam 1804 cited in Hudson 1994: 151).

Chopin practised and taught rubato in its “traditional and original meaning, at a time when the practice was on the decline, if not already abolished, in other piano music” (Eigeldinger 1986: 119). Using the example of Chopin’s Etude, Op.10 No.3 again, Samson notes that the Etude’s melody …must be performed as a living, breathing organism. This means not just a respect for Chopin’s own phrase and dynamic indications, but some discreet application of rubato […] evidence suggests that Chopin’s rubato was closer to baroque-classical practice than to the exaggerated tempo fluctuations of some of his contemporaries. In the E major Etude it is clear that melody and accompaniment are closely tied together, and that the one must breathe with the other (Samson 1996: 105).

Samson points out that in Etudes Op.10 Nos.9 and 12 Chopin “composed in a rubato of this kind” (Samson 1996: 105), especially in the more passionate passages. The pianist, Vladimir Ashkenazy, also links Chopinesque rubato with the operatic singing style. Ashkenazy said, “I think the most helpful thing here is to remember the very important fact that Chopin loved Italian opera” (Siepmann 1995: 257). Ashkenazy advises that when …we play something like the second movement of the F minor Concerto, and the E minor Concerto too, we must think “how would a great singer do this?” […] The natural use of the human voice is something other than rubato (Siepmann 1995: 257-8).

However, the styles of Chopin’s music change in different periods of his composition, so the use of rubato will also be different. Ashkenazy notes that late Chopin is different, as there …isn’t so much of this bel canto, fioritura style anymore […] His late nocturnes, the F minor Ballade, the Fantasy, the Polonaise-Fantasie, have very little of that (Siepmann 1995: 257-8).

The analyses in Chapter 3 will investigate the idea that the use of rubato will differ for each genre.

33 The way that Chopin determined metronome speed shows the importance of rubato, as tempo fluctuation, in his music. Higgins reveals that it would “seem more reasonable to suppose that when the time came to set the tempo, he simply began to play the piece, and then measured the basic pulse. If this is the way Chopin used the metronome, then the player makes a mistake to set the device and try to match its rate over long stretches” (Higgins 1973: 116). An example given by Higgins is in Nocturne Op.9 No.1, where the …pick-up measure and the first full measure […] are quite steady, but at the end of the poetic phrase […] one senses a slight slowing down in the music, just as in the natural reading of a line of poetry. If a player observes this natural slackening, he will fall behind the mechanism. In almost all of Chopin’s music where he used the metronome, the basic pulse is felt as steady and constant […] on the contrary, phrase endings, natural punctuation, and the charming hesitations that marked Chopin’s own playing – all should be sensibly accepted as beyond the scope of the metronome (Higgins 1973: 116).

Higgin’s advice could be easily misinterpreted to allow ritardandos everywhere. In a similar way, Dunn suggests that It would have been impossible for Chopin, even by a meticulous system of notation, to record those minute rubato inflections, those microscopic lengthenings and shortenings of notes, and quickenings and slackenings of the speed that are essential to the interpretation of every page of his works (Dunn 1971: 58).

Dunn’s comment conveys that tempo fluctuation in a performance of Chopin’s music should be barely noticeable and it is essential to use it with taste and discretion. It is difficult to ascertain how to interpret Dunn’s advice because taste and discretion mean different things to different pianists. Perhaps the same rules of “strengthening or weakening of the melodic line, by harmonic details, by the figurative structure” (Mikuli/A. Michalowski 1932: 74-5 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 50), which apply to the true rubato as understood by Chopin, also apply to the use of tempo fluctuation, and this idea is explored in the study of the recordings in the next chapter.

Methuen-Campbell notes that this type of rubato, where the “whole tempo shifts into a faster or slower speed for a particular episode, such as in various bars of the Berceuse” (Methuen- Campbell 1992: 194) can be heard in the “discs of this work by Koczalski, Rosenthal and Pugno, each of whom studied with pupils of Chopin. Methuen-Campbell suggests that this type of rubato “can be used to hurry on the progress of the music towards material of special significance” (1992: 194), based on the fact that pupils of Chopin’s students used it in this way. However, the playing of the students of Chopin’s students does not necessarily match the way Chopin himself played. It will always remain a mystery whether Chopin used tempo fluctuation or lengthening of beats in the accompaniment of his pieces or not, except maybe in his Mazurkas.

34 There have been many discussions about the timing of the second beat, and how it is often of great importance in Chopin’s music. The pianist, Michael Roll relates, “judging the feel of the rubato in Chopin is the most difficult challenge […] it’s often got to do with speeding up of the second beat” (Siepmann 1995: 257). Roll also notes that Chopin’s “dramatic use of rests is another vital feature of his rhythm, a source of great power” (Siepmann 1995: 257).

Hallé’s description of Chopin’s rhythm in the Mazurkas suggests that in the Mazurkas, the performer can linger on the first note of the bar while still sounding in time. Hallé relates that a remarkable feature of Chopin’s playing was the “entire freedom with which he treated the rhythm, but which appeared so natural that for years it had never struck me” (Hallé 1896: 34 cited in Beale 2007: 31). Hallé recalls that It must have been in 1845 or 1846 that I once ventured to observe him that most of his mazurkas […] when played by himself, appeared to be written, not in 3-4, but in 4-4 time, the result of his dwelling so much longer on the first note in the bar […] he laughed and explained that it was the national character of the dance, which created the oddity. The most remarkable fact was that you received the impression of 3-4 rhythm whilst listening to common time. Of course, this was not the case with every mazurka, but with many (Hallé 1896: 34 cited in Beale 2007: 31-2).

Another eye witness, Henry Chorley noted in 1848 that In music not his own we happen to know he can be as staid as a metronome; while his Mazurkas, etc. lose half their characteristic wildness if played without a certain freak and licence […] we are now sure of it after hearing him perform them himself (Chorley in Rowland 1994: 210).

Beale comments that this “incident has been noted as indicative of the extent to which Chopin employed rubato in playing his own compositions” (2007: 32).

Chopin’s relatively free use of rubato, in the sense of tempo fluctuation and lengthening of beats, in the Mazurkas might not apply to the rest of his compositions. Rowland asks, What exactly did ‘the strictest rhythm’ mean to Chopin? The answer appears to have varied according to the music’s genre. In the mazurkas […] a considerable degree of distortion took place (Rowland 1994: 210).

Rowland asserts that the mazurkas were a “special case […] Chopin was not normally so rhythmically pliant. In certain circumstances he was very strict in his adherence not only to the length of the bar, but also to the beat” (Rowland 1994: 211).

Mikuli’s portrayal of Chopin’s playing as being more strictly in time is slightly different to Hallé’s description. Mikuli claimed that despite the “great and intense feeling, which he placed in delivery, it was balanced, pure, even elegant. Chopin was extremely scrupulous in

35 maintaining rhythm […] there was always a metronome on his piano” (Ekier 1960: 78). Perhaps part of “maintaining rhythm” was the addition of lengthened beats where it is appropriate to the character of the piece, which would mean that in the Mazurkas, the second and third beats may be longer than the first beats of the bar. Rowland notes that the type of rubato where the left hand accompaniment keeps strict time and the right hand melody may hesitate or anticipate the beat is the one that Mikuli witnessed, and would have applied to pieces other than the Mazurkas.

Another way that rubato can be used appropriately in Chopin’s music is to observe the clues given in the way that Chopin wrote the ornamentation. Dunn relates Chopin’s ornamentation to the tempo rubato in saying that we “often find that the slight delay incidental to the execution of an ornament suggests the correct rubato delivery. In particular: a highly ornamented note often points out to us the climax, or slowest phase of the rubato” (Dunn 1971: 21). Dunn explains, Chopin often compensates for a loss of speed by giving the player more notes to perform, thus making it “worth his while”, as it were, to linger over the retarded episode […] we must read between the lines for possibilities of rubato when Chopin […] adds to the number of his embellishments (Dunn 1971: 23).

Dunn’s recommendation makes sense, although there is no documentary evidence that Chopin lingered over passages with more notes. The study of recordings in Chapter 3 will show where pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition use lengthening at ornamented part of the melody or where there are more notes in the beat.

One way of using tempo fluctuation in Chopin’s music is to slow down at the end of phrases. Higgins says that Chopin’s music sometimes demands the “gentle slackening at the end of many of the poetic lines defined by the master’s slurs” (Higgins 1981: 41). This perhaps contentious recommendation will be discussed in relation to artists such as Raoul Koczalski. Methuen- Campbell asserts that Koczalski’s “readings of the more rapid etudes feature frequent ritardandos at phrase endings” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 196). This comment will be examined in more detail in Chapter 3. The suggestion to include frequent ritardandos at phrase endings may be dangerous advice if overdone.

For Chopin’s music, the issues of ornamentation and improvisation are linked to the idea of spontaneity in performance and to the use of rubato. When performing and teaching, he …ornamented and elaborated works he had already composed and published […] he situated his own interpretative tradition close to the operatic one he loved so well, in which the performer’s options (and, indeed, responsibilities) included interpretative ornamentation, changing a melodic line for the better (Bellman 2004: 26).

36 There are two categories of ornamentation in Chopin’s music. The first is ornamentation that appears in his published works, and the second is the improvisatory ornamentation that does not appear in his published works, but would have been expected of a performer of Chopin’s music.

Evidence from contemporary documents and recent scholars suggests that Chopin’s ornaments should be interpreted in a way that allows for melodic rubato, particularly the rolled chord and the notated ornaments. The ornaments that have been written as symbols are to be played on the beat, including trills, mordents (Holeman 1958), appoggiaturas and acciaccaturas (Higgins 1971). The only way in which the scholars might disagree is about whether the bottom note or the top note of the rolled chord should fall on the beat. Starting the rolled chord on the beat would allow for melodic rubato as suggested by Fritz. In his 1981 article, ‘How Did Chopin Want His Ornament Signs Played?’ Fritz refers to several treatises, such as those by C.P.E Bach, Czerny and Hummel to determine Chopin’s own performance preferences for ornaments that he indicated by signs, including rolled chords, trills and turns. Pencil indications concerning ornamentation that Chopin marked are the most direct evidence of Chopin’s ornamentation habits, and the most valuable group of such marks are in the fascimile scores of Camille O’Meara Dubois, who was Chopin’s pupil from 1843 until 1848.

Fritz explains that the rolled chord is to be played from bottom to top whether it is indicated by a sign or written out, and the rolled chord helps with achieving melodic rubato. Fritz notes, “all thirty-eight of Chopin’s pencil indications for rolled chords in O-Meara and Oxford specify the roll starting from its bottom note on the beat” (Fritz 1981: 46). In this way, the “delay of the final note creates a rubato in the top melodic line, and the starting note gains prominence” (Fritz 1981: 46). According to Fritz, melodic rubato is “one of the most crucial and misunderstood aspects of Chopin’s style” (Fritz 1981: 46). It is one of the ways in which a performer of Chopin’s works can maintain a steady beat in the accompanying hand while accelerating or slowing down the melody according to vocal ideals. Although Chopin “allowed the accompanying hand rhythmic flexibility, he […] strongly opposed frequent or exaggerated changes in the beat” (Fritz 1981: 46). Fritz points to examples from O’Meara’s scores. One is from Chopin’s Nocturne Op.15 No.2 in bar 8, where “inner line s accorded unique prominence by his choice of large notes to start each roll, his marks of alignment, and his addition to a note preceding the first roll” (Fritz 1981: 46). Another example is in Nocturne Op.37 No.1, bars 37- 38, where the rolls are “notated less explicitly and aligned similarly by Chopin” (Fritz 1981: 46).

37

Fritz notes that “today this passage is seldom played as Chopin presumably intended, with the inner line delicately stressed and the upper melody freely delayed” (Fritz 1981: 46).

Chopin’s way of writing the notes indicates his preferences. One example is the placement of the lower notes of the rolled chord. Fritz reveals that “when Chopin wants the rolled chord to anticipate the beat and its top note to fall on the beat, he places its lower notes ahead of the bar line” (Fritz 1981: 46). Fritz states that this notation is rare in Chopin’s music, but reasons that …anticipation is likely the most satisfactory performance for the many chords that are rolled in the left hand or between the hands […] anticipation in rolled chords was so widely practiced during his lifetime that indications for it were unnecessary (Fritz 1981: 46).

This comment suggests that Chopin and his contemporaries used arpeggiation when it was not marked in the music in order to create melodic rubato. This matter will be discussed further in relation to the selected recordings.

Kleczynski provided other general instructions on how to shape phrases in Chopin’s music that relate to the rhythmic accent. According to Kleczynski, a …long note is stronger, as is also a high note. A dissonance is likewise stronger, and equally so a syncopated note. The ending of a phrase, before a comma, or a stop, is always weak. If the melody ascends, one plays crescendo, if it descends, decrescendo. Moreover, notice must be taken of natural accents. For instance, in a bar of two, the first note is strong, the second weak, in a bar of three the first strong and the two others weak. To the smaller parts of the bar the same direction will apply. Such then are the rules: the exceptions are always indicated by the authors (Kleczynski 1896: 41-2 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 42).

Eigeldinger comments that the general rules given by Kleczynski about metric accents “have no rapport with the type of rhythmic accentuation […] practised by Beethoven, who studied and

38 applied it systematically” (Eigeldinger 1982: 109). Schindler, a student of Beethoven, relates that Beethoven preferred to bring out the rhythmic accent, while the melodic accents “were handled more according to necessity; he took special care only over appoggiaturas, especially semitone ones in cantabile, giving them more emphasis than one hears from others” (Schindler 1973: 471 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 109). Also, Chopin “had a horror of all exaggerated accentuation, which, in his opinion, took away the poetry from playing and gave it a sort of dry pedantry” (Karasowski 1877: 94 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 54). In a review of Chopin’s playing in the Wiener Theaterzeitung, a critic wrote that Chopin “accentuates only gently, like a person conversing in the company of cultured people, avoiding […] rhetorical aplomb” (Eigeldinger 1986: 125).

Asynchronization and arpeggiation are related to the concept of true rubato and can be artistically used in Chopin’s music, as described in Kenneth Hamilton’s book, After the golden age: romantic pianism and modern performance. Saint-Saëns learned from Pauline Viardot that the …accompaniment holds its rhythm undisturbed while the melody wavers capriciously […] This […] requires complete independence of the two hands; and those lacking this give […] the illusion of it by playing the melody in time and dislocating the accompaniment so that it falls beside the beat […] It would be a hundred times better just to play […] with both hands together (Hamilton 2008: 151).

Playing hands together in time is a refuge for those unable to master a flexible and imaginative dislocated rubato.

Higgins (1981) also advocates the use of asynchronisation in Chopin’s music. Higgins asserts that rubato must be “considered in its historic meaning, i.e. a flexible melody over a stable accompaniment. This obliges the hands to sound sometimes “out-of-sync.” (Higgins 1981: 41). Higgins acknowledges, Most teachers of today and critics of the popular press abhor the result, but Chopin’s student Georges Mathias confirmed it, and what is the ideal, really? – that we be slaves to the fashion of this generation […] or participate in a restoration of Chopin? (Higgins 1981: 41).

Hudson also affirms that Chopin’s “powerful sense of melodic flow may have made it possible for him, like Mozart, to perform with such independence of hands that he could conceive of rubato, like a singer, in a completely linear fashion” (1994: 215).

Pianists must avoid simply alternating the hands. In 1853, Thalberg, in his book, ‘L”art du chant appliqué au piano’, advised,

39 …avoid that manner […] of delaying with exaggeration the striking of the melody notes long after those of the bass, and producing […] the effect of continuous syncopation. In a slow melody written in long notes, it is effective, especially on the first beat of every measure or at the beginning of each phrase, to attack the melody after the bass […] with an almost imperceptible delay (Thalberg 1853 cited in Hudson 1994: 196).

Higgins believes asynchronisation should be used in the final movement of the F minor Concerto, the “poco rubato” in the Nocturne in E flat major, Op.9, and in the “languido e rubato” in the Nocturne in G minor, Op.15. Chopin himself used asynchronisation according to Mikuli’s description of Chopin’s rubato, where the “hand responsible for the accompaniment would keep strict time, while the other hand, singing the melody, would free the essence of the musical thought from all rhythmic fetters” (Mikuli 1880: 3 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 49).

As mentioned, arpeggiation is appropriate for helping to bring out the top notes of a melody, which contributes to the singing style. Mikuli wrote that in chords and double notes, Chopin “demanded that the notes be struck strictly simultaneously; breaking was allowed only where the composer himself had specified it” (Mikuli: 4 in Eigeldinger 1986: 41). However, evidence suggests that Chopin allowed unmarked arpeggiation. Bree’s treatise of the Leschetizky method advises that One must not always arpeggiate where a chord is too widely spaced in to allow simultaneous attack. Arpeggiation is also suitable where a softer expression needs to be brought out. Here the right hand arpeggiates, while the left hand strikes the chord (Bree 1903: 59 cited in Hamilton 2008: 145).

Hamilton thinks that to “confine this approach to Leschetizsky and some of his most famous pupils would be a gross underestimation of how prevalent it was” (Hamilton 2008: 147). Thalberg also wrote about arpeggiation, saying that “chords that bear the melody in the upper notes should be performed in very close arpeggio [...] and the melodic note should be dwelt upon more than the other notes of the chord” (Thalberg 1853 cited in Hudson 1994: 197).

Hamilton argues that Chopin’s advice to Mikuli that he ought to strike chords simultaneously and avoid unmarked arpeggiation “should be considered in this context, that is, as an injunction to abuse to a student performer, and not as a blanket ban intended to apply to mature artists” (Hamilton 2008: 150). One example that Hamilton points to is the opening chordal passage of the B major Mazurka Op.41, No.3, for which Chopin “sometimes told his students to imitate the sound of guitars […] which certainly implies an arpeggiation that is unmarked in the text” (Hamilton 2008: 150-151). In Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9, No.2, “most romantic pianists on record certainly arpeggiated some, and some almost all, of the chords” (Hamilton 2008: 150-151). However, just because it is commonly done on record, does not mean that Chopin would have

40 approved in each instance of its use. The use of arpeggiation on record is explored further in Chapter 3.

Summary

One of the issues raised in the literature includes the credibility of performing at a slower speed than marked in the score, and how this may change in relation to the type of piano used. Chopin’s tempo markings always seem too fast, but never too slow, as mentioned by Higgins (1973) in relation to the Nocturnes Op.15 No.3, and Opus 27 No.2, and the Etudes Op.10 No.3 and 6. This issue will also be discussed in the analysis of recordings of the selected Etudes.

It remains a mystery whether or not Chopin used tempo fluctuation noticeably in the accompaniment when playing his pieces. Scholars, such as Rink (1997) and Szulc (1986), suggest that tempo fluctuation in the accompaniment may be appropriate under certain circumstances. The accounts of Chopin playing his Mazurkas (Chorley 1848 cited in Rowland 1994: 210) have been pointed to as evidence that Chopin used lengthening of beats as a form of rubato (Hallé cited in Beale 2007: 31). However, this could be a genre specific technique, and may not apply to every piece that Chopin composed.

We can be sure that Chopin used rubato in the melody, and this was modelled on the Italian opera singers of the day (Hudson 1994: 215). This could mean that the main type of rubato used by Chopin had to do with the displacement of the melody and accompaniment, as would be the case with added ornamentation or improvisation, lengthening or shortening of notes within beats, and use of hand displacement or arpeggiation of chords. The issue is in knowing how much of any particular technique a pianist can use before it sounds excessive. It is the precept of this thesis that a detailed comparative examination of performances through recordings across different genres of Chopin’s music can illuminate this issue.

2.4. The Pianistic Tradition of Chopin Performance

In this section, I will show how each pianist selected for study is considered part of the Chopin tradition, either by pedagogical lineage or are Polish and have performed many of Chopin’s works. Explaining how these pianists are connected to Chopin, or why their Chopin playing is considered exemplary, confirms that it is worthwhile studying their playing in order to gain an understanding of appropriate places to use rubato. Of all the pianists who could have been chosen, the ones selected may be considered the closest to interpreting Chopin’s works in the style that Chopin may have played them.

41 The pedagogical connections between the early twentieth century pianists selected for study follows.

Pedagogical Trees

Mikuli’s Students

Karol Mikuli (1819-1897) was a Polish pianist, composer, conductor and teacher, and notably one of Chopin’s piano students from 1841-1847. His circle included Alfred de Musset, George Sand and Franz Liszt, who became a lifelong friend. After 1887 he opened a piano school, which he ran with his wife, S. Kluczenko. Among his students were Raoul Koczalski, Alexander Michalowski, and Maurice Rosenthal. Mikuli’s playing was never recorded but recordings of his compositions and the playing of these three students are available. All three demonstrated an …ability to execute filigree detail with the utmost delicacy, and yet all three also occasionally show curious clumsiness in the turning of phrases. It can be argued that other Chopin pupils- such as Mathias and Descombes – produced pupils of a

42 greater elegance, which one might think have been more in sympathy with Chopin’s own style (Vicat 1990: 3).

However, Vicat argues that “this view discounts the Polish temperament – and Rosenthal, Koczalski and Michalowski were all Poles. It is therefore quite probable that these three do indeed represent the true Chopin tradition, particularly Koczalski and Michalowski” (Vicat 1990: 3).

Chopin had a high regard for Mikuli as student and he was able to take into account the directions and remarks of the composer himself (Morawski 2010: np). Mikuli’s Chopin edition (Leipzig, 1879) long enjoyed wide circulation. Mikuli “devoted his life to the teaching and editing of Chopin’s works in accordance with the way Chopin himself played and taught” (Vicat 1990: 1). Mikuli had his students “develop a deep admiration for Chopin and inspired them to love the music of the Polish genius. He also taught them how his works should be interpreted” (Dybowski 1998c: 9).

In his autobiography, Rosenthal reveals about Mikuli, “I was finally able to hear him…revere him! […] I was dazzled by Mikuli’s consummate performance. I had never imagined that such a round legatissimo was possible” (Mitchell 2006: 25). Rosenthal also describes Mikuli’s dynamic level when playing the piano, saying that the “roundness and elegance of his passages were admirable. He refrained from any forte and fortissimo” (Mitchell 2006: 87). Some brief biographical information about Mikuli’s students follows in order to explain both how they are related to Mikuli and how they are part of the Chopin tradition.

Raoul Koczalski (1884-1948)

Raoul Koczalski, a Polish pianist and composer, was a child prodigy and had given nearly 1000 performances by the age of 12 (Methuen-Campbell 2010: np). He was born to a family of opera music lovers, and as a child he familiarised himself with the entire repertoire of the Grand Theatre in Warsaw (Dybowski 1998b). Koczalski also had great admiration for Chopin, revealing that My love and admiration for my great compatriot have remained unchanged […] I was the first to […] put together four consecutive evenings including exclusively Chopin’s pieces. Reviewers and audiences alike hailed my Chopin evenings as a brave undertaking and heaped praise on them (Koczalski 1936 cited in Dybowski 1999b: 6-7).

43 Koczalski’s only significant teacher was Karol Mikuli, with whom he underwent intensive instruction for four summers from 1892 in Lwów (Methuen-Campbell 2010: np). Methuen- Campbell notes that Fortunately, the legacy of Koczalski’s recordings of Chopin is very extensive. He left discs of the four ballades, the twenty-seven etudes, the Préludes Op.28, the Concerto in F minor, six of the nocturnes, then of the waltzes and several other pieces […] These discs are of the greatest significance […] Koczalski’s tuition by Mikuli was unique in that he specifically passed on to the young man all that he could recollect of Chopin’s teaching (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 195).

Koczalski is the author of a book on Chopin and his music, which is available in a French edition, titled Frédéric Chopin: Conseils d'interprétation (1998). This book contains some valuable advice on performing Chopin’s music, including comments on specific pieces I have studied in this thesis. Eigeldinger notes that amongst Chopin’s “numerous disciples-by-proxy, Koczalski undoubtedly appears to be the one to have preserved this living tradition most purely” (Eigeldinger 1986: 97). However, Koczalski was unable to pass on this tradition through teaching. He taught, “firstly at Poznan and latterly Warsaw. This did not last long, however, for he died in Warsaw on 24 November 1948. Thus did a tradition pass into history” (Vicat 1990, pp.5-6).

Koczalski is “often credited with being the last true survivor of the Chopin tradition of playing” (Vicat 1990: 3). From 1892, for “four consecutive summers, Koczalski was subjected to Mikuli’s rigorous discipline in Lwow; “it was no trifle; each lesson lasted two full hours, and these were daily lessons; I was never permitted to work alone” (Vogel in Eigeldinger 1986: 97). The “elderly master took special care over the child’s education, seeing him to some extent as heir to the Chopin tradition” (Eigeldinger 1986: 97). Koczalski remembers that Mikuli’s teaching was …strictly based on Chopin’s method […] Nothing was neglected: posture at the piano, fingertips, use of the pedal, legato playing, staccato, portato, octave passages, fiorituras, phrase structure, the singing tone of the musical line, dynamic contrasts, rhythm, and above all the care for authenticity with which Chopin’s works must be approached. Here there is no camouflage, no cheap rubato and no languishing or useless contortions (Vogel cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 97).

Koczalski’s comment that there should be no “cheap rubato” or “useless contortions” in the performance of Chopin’s music will be seen in the light of his own recordings in Chapter 3. The pieces performed by Koczalski to be studied in Chapter 3 are the Berceuse Op.57, Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 Nos.2 and 6, Impromptus Op.29, Op.36, and Op.66, Préludes Op.28 Nos.3, 6, 7, 15 and 19, and the Waltzes Op.18, Op.34 No.2, Op.64 Nos.1 and 2.

44 Aleksander Michalowski (1851-1938)

Aleksander Michalowski, a Polish pianist and composer, studied piano at the Leipzig Conservatory from 1867-1869 under Theodor Coccius and Ignaz Moscheles and at that time had a vast repertoire including many works by Chopin (National Library 2008: np). For a few months in 1869, he took up lessons under Karol Tausig in Berlin. Michalowski only consulted Mikuli in 1871-72 when he was already a trained pianist and a virtuoso (Dybowski 1998c: 14). In Weimar, in 1878, he mastered his playing under Franz Liszt (National Library 2008: np).

From 1919 Michalowski taught at The Fryderyk Chopin Music School of The Warsaw Music Society, and he often performed in Warsaw, starting Chopin recitals as a tribute to the composer's death (National Library 2008: np). Michalowski was better known as a teacher than as a concert artist, and he “taught amongst others, Wanda Landowska and Heinrich Neuhaus at the Warsaw Institute of Music” (Eigeldinger 1986: 94). Michalowski’s transcriptions include the Chopin Waltz in D flat major, No 1, Op. 64 and the Chopin Impromptu in A flat major, Op. 29 (National Library 2008: np).

Michalowski knew Princess Marcelina Czartoryska during her last years, and from these he wrote an “important article containing indications which felicitously complement those of Mikuli’s Preface. Fragmentary indications of the training that Princess Marcelina Czartoryska received are communicated through Kleczynski and Michalowski” (Eigeldinger 1986: 5). In this article, ‘How Did Chopin Play?’ in Muzyka, IX/7-9 (1932), Michalowski writes that Chopin …could not bear too loud a sound on the piano, and called it ‘a dog barking’. But according to Mikuli it does not follow that we have to avoid stronger graduations and accents when interpreting Chopin nowadays. We should take into account that piano manufacture has undergone an extraordinarily important evolution. Formerly on these small, delicate instruments, forte could indeed sound positively disagreeably. Today’s forte, however, has a round sonority and a remarkable ‘substance’. (Michalowksi cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 26).

Unfortunately, Micha!owski’s recordings are rather frustrating because they are either poor in sound quality, or were made when he was very old (Naxos 2010). It is “notable that Michalowski more closely resembles Koczalski than does Rosenthal, who became something of a ‘thundering virtuoso’, at least in his earlier years” (Vicat 1990: 3). In the following chapter, similarities and differences between these pianists will be examined in some detail. Michalowski’s recordings of the Berceuse Op.57 can be compared with both Koczalski and Rosenthal’s recordings of the same piece, while Michalowski’s recording of the Mazurka Op.63 No.3 can be compared with Rosenthal’s. Michalowski’s interpretation of the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 will also be examined.

45 Moriz Rosenthal (1862-1946)

Moriz Rosenthal was Polish pianist who began piano studies at the age of eight. In 1872 Rosenthal became a pupil of Mikuli (Evans 2010b: np). In 1875 he moved to Vienna to study with Rafael Joseffy, a Liszt pupil, whom Rosenthal considered a far better instructor than Mikuli. Rosenthal had extraordinary technical skills and specialised in works by Chopin and Liszt (National Library Poland 2008: np). Many of Rosenthal’s contemporaries admired him, including Mark Hambourg, who urged his daughter Michal, to attend every Rosenthal concert that she could in order to “properly learn Chopin” (Mitchell 2006: 2). Ignaz Friedman, when preparing the editions of Chopin’s piano music for Breitkopf and Hartel and Universal “consulted with Rosenthal in preference to […] Aleksander Michalowski” (Mitchell 2006: 2).

Rosenthal recalls, “Mikuli’s lessons took place twice a week and continued for almost two years” (Mitchell 2006: 26). Rosenthal relates that Mikuli gave him an awareness of pianistic technique, which “did not mean a mere passion for show or speed. He opened my eyes to the beautiful balance of notes in a scale; to the perfection of clean, clear, orderly playing” (Mitchell 2006: 26). Rosenthal says that Chopin …invented new passages […] and he played them in the most refined, finished style […] he used the velvet-like, delicate legatissimo, which secrets his pupil, Mikuli, my teacher […] imparted to his pupils (Mitchell 2006: 75).

Allan Evans has mentioned Rosenthal’s use of rubato in the Waltz Op.64 No.2, saying that the “middle section is arrhythmic, his suspension of pulse resembling the description of Chopin’s rubato playing – legato flowing within a rhythmic freedom alluding to a metric regularity” (Evans 2009: 7). Rosenthal approach to rubato in this and other works, including the Berceuse Op.57, Etude Op.10 No.5, Mazurkas Op.24 No.4, and Op.63 No.3, Préludes Op.28 Nos.3, 6, and 7, will be examined in Chapter 3.

Descombes’ Students

While Mikuli influenced the Polish pianists, Mathias and Descombes influenced the pianists in Paris. Emile Descombes (1863-1897) was “perhaps more of a Chopin disciple than an actual student, whose own students at the Conservatoire later included Alfred Cortot, Edouard Risler, Victor Staub, and Joseph Morpain” (Timbrell 1992: 21). He taught at the Paris Conservatoire and his pedagogical works include Etude journaliére des gammes et arpéges, (1902) and Petite méthode élémentaire de piano (no date).

46 Alfred Cortot (1877-1962)

Alfred Cortot was a pre-eminent French pianist, teacher and conductor. During his childhood the family moved to Paris and he joined the Paris Conservatoire at the age of nine where he studied piano first with Emile Descombes (1829–1912) and, from the age of fifteen, with Louis Diémer (1843–1919) (Naxos 2010). Cortot's own repertory was centred on Chopin, Schumann, and Debussy (Nichols 2010). As a pianist, he was remarkable for his “his Chopin was prized very highly and continues, even in the comparatively primitive recordings available, to dazzle pianists by its lyrical delicacy and nobility” (Dybowski 1998a: 18). Cortot looked up to Paderewski as the “ideal performer. The Polish Pianist captured Cortot’s imagination with his romantic style of interpretation […] the deep tone and the genuinely royal gesture in developing musical narration” (Dybowski 1998a: 19).

Around 1920 Cortot founded the Ecole Normale de Musique and taught there until 1961; his most famous students included Magda Tagliaferro and Yvonne Lefébure (Naxos 2010b: np). Cortot’s playing and teaching differed from most of his French contemporaries by a …much greater use of the arms and shoulders, a non-percussive and often flat- fingered approach to melody playing […] his variety of touch and unique combination of eloquence and elegance have often been compared with Chopin’s own style of playing (Timbrell 1992: 45).

Tagliaferro relates that Cortot didn’t care for the technique of his teacher, Diemer […] Diemer and the Marmontels had firmly established the notion of fast, superarticulated playing; light, transparent sounds produced with minimal wrist and arm motion […] Cortot’s conceptions involved much more arm, and also more legato (Timbrell 1992: 81).

Timbrell’s book, French Pianism contains more reflections by his students on Cortot’s teaching. Cortot’s pedagogical works and writings include, Rational principles of pianoforte technique (1930), Alfred Cortot's studies in musical interpretation / set down by Jeanne Thieffry (1937), and La musique française de piano (3 volumes) (1948). The book, Alfred Cortot's studies in musical interpretation, contains Cortot’s ideas on musical interpretation in music of different genres by different composers. This includes ideas about rubato, in Chopin’s Préludes. In this book he mentions the use of ritardando, ritenuto, accelerando and lengthening. For example, he advises that the impression to be conveyed in the sixth prelude is …what we experience when something we would retain eludes our grasp and flies away from us. In this case the rubato consists in giving the essential notes of the melody, the most sorrowful ones, their full expressive value (Cortot 1937: 46).

47 In Chapter 3, I compare Cortot’s recordings of the Préludes Op.28 Nos.3, 6, 7, 15 and 19 with his comments on rubato or interpretation in relation to those pieces. I will also be analysing Cortot’s use of tempo and rubato in the Berceuse Op.57, the Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 Nos.2, 6, and 9, the Impromptus Op.29, Op.36, and Op.66, and the Waltzes Op.64 Nos.1 and 2.

Mathias’ Students

Georges Mathias was also one of Chopin’s students, and taught pianists such as Raoul Pugno and Isidor Philipp. Mathias had “agile fingers, transparent clarity, and unexaggerated expression – all hallmarks of good Chopin playing” (Timbrell 1992: 21). Mathias was …a student of Kalkbrenner, so it is difficult to ascertain to what degree his teaching really reflected Chopin’s […] it is possible that Mathias did not quite grasp the core of Chopin’s approach, in which the mechanics of playing were not divorced from interpretative considerations (Timbrell 1992: 21).

Whether or not they passed on Chopin’s teaching, Mathias’s students, and their students, exerted a strong influence in France (Timbrell 1992). Mathias’ pedagogical works and writings include Etudes speciales de style et de mécanisme, Op.28 (1862) and “Preface” in Isidor Philipp, Exercises quotidiens tirés des oeuvres de Chopin (1897). Below is some brief biographical information on Pugno, showing how he is connected pedagogically to Mathias and how he is considered part of the Chopin tradition.

Raoul Pugno (1852-1914)

Raoul Pugno was a French pianist, teacher and composer. From 1866-1869 he was a student at the Conservatoire where he studied piano with Georges Mathias (Bourligueaux 2010). Pugno excelled in playing the music of Chopin, and was noted for his lightness of touch and for his extremely flexible technique (Bourligueaux 2010). Pianist Wanda Landowska wrote that “nothing could be more opposed to a full substantial touch like mine – at the piano as well as at the harpsichord – than the jeu perlé of Raoul Pugno” (Moore 1989: np). Pugno’s pedagogical works and writings include L”art de travailler le piano (1908), and Les Leçons écrites de Raoul Pugno: Schumann (1911). He also edited Chopin’s music including the Ballades, Impromptus, Etudes, Mazurkas, and Waltzes.

Pugno’s rhythm in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 has been discussed earlier by other scholars, particularly his choice of tempo. Pugno ‘takes an excessively slow tempo (M.M. Quaver = 52), which was reputedly passed on to him by Mathias” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 196). Peres Da Costa’s book Off the Record: Performing Practices in Romantic Piano Playing (2012),

48 describes how some early twentieth century pianists use tempo and rubato in nineteenth century music. In his book, he discusses some of Pugno’s use of rubato in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, particularly in relation to tempo modification, comparing it to Pugno’s written advice about it. The details will be discussed further in the next chapter in comparison to the tempo and rubato of other pianists. The comparison of recordings of the Berceuse, Impromptu Op.29 and the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, and will reveal in which ways Pugno is similar or different to other early twentieth century pianists in his choice of tempo and use of rubato.

The Polish Tradition – Leschetizsky or Michalowski’s Students

Besides Mikuli’s students, Koczalski, Michalowski and Rosenthal, there are other Polish pianists who are considered to be part of the Chopin tradition. This tradition is implied by the inclusion of Paderewski, Friedman, Turczynski, Smidowicz, and Lukasiewicz, in the CD series called The Great Polish Chopin Tradition by Selene Music. Smidowicz was a pupil of Michalowski, while the other pianists above were Leschetizsky’s students. Leschetizsky, … originally a pupil of Czerny[…]acquired his fascination with the possibilities of varying tone colour from listening in the 1840’s to Julius Schulhoff (1825-1898), a pianist from Chopin’s circle in Paris […] Schulhoff had made the constant production of a beautiful sound the chief goal of his labours, no doubt inspired by Chopin’s own example. Mathias (1826-1910) told his own student Isidor Philipp that for his master, “beauty of tone was the immediate object of study” (Hamilton 2008: 152).

Paderewski's performance style was perhaps the closest to Leschetizky's own in its focus on melodic projection and copious use of arpeggiation and rubato (Hamilton 2010: np).

Ignaz Friedman (1882-1948)

Ignaz Friedman’s earlier piano lessons were with Flora Grzywi"ska in Kraków. In 1901 he began a four-year period of study in Vienna with Leschetizky; he also attended masterclasses given by Busoni (Evans 2010: np). Friedman possessed a formidable technique, which even Horowitz acknowledged as superior to his own (Evans 2010: np). The composer-critic Joseph Marx described Friedman’s technique, Weightlessly, his hands glide on the keys, his fingers move only as much as necessary […] Nevertheless, everything remains so clear, as though a light veil covered the playing and removed the “brilliance” (Evans 2009: 166).

He played the Chopin Mazurkas with the same kind of rhythmic nuance that, by all accounts, characterized Chopin’s own playing of these pieces (Evans 2010: np). Aleksander Michalowski said,

49 “When it comes to Chopin’s etudes Friedman has no equal”. Michalowski also thought that Friedman’s interpretations of Chopin’s mazurkas reached an unreachable level of excellence. Although the pianist would now and then depart slightly from the composer’s scores, he rendered the nature of the Polish dances in a manner, which is nothing less than perfect (Dybowski 1999a: 18).

In Friedman’s interpretation of Chopin’s Mazurkas, …there was a special lilt, a slight rhythmic inflection, which seemed both original and wholly authentic. Seemingly spontaneous these piquant rhythms were actually carefully considered. In his teaching of the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, for instance, he would advise a student to “hesitate and accent the third beat (Knight 1999: 10).

Friedman’s Polish heritage may have given him an innate sympathy with Chopin’s music, and his childhood exposure to Polish folk music and dance rhythms may have emboldened him to “play with the freedom which seems so elusive to modern pianists who seem almost inevitably to adhere strictly to the printed page” (Knight 1999: 10).

Friedman practiced the Etude in G sharp minor Op.25 No.6 “for four years before he played it in concert for the first time. His rendering of the piece was truly amazing” (Dybowski 1999a: 17). His recordings include much Chopin, music by Liszt, Beethoven and Mendelssohn, among other composers (Evans 2010). He was the editor of works by Chopin (12 volumes), which were released by the Publishing Houses of Breitkopf & Härtel and Universal Edition (National Library Poland 2008). Although Leschetizsky was Friedman’s main teacher, “Rosenthal’s artistry deeply influenced Friedman, who esteemed his elder colleague, soliciting his advice when preparing an edition of Chopin” (Evans 2009: 7).

In his book The Four Ballades (1992), Samson discusses Friedman’s use of rubato in Chopin’s third Ballade in A flat major, contrasting it to other pianists such as Cortot, and Rachmaninoff. Samson unfavourably describes Friedman’s tempo Theme II as “such a speed that the beauties of the left-hand countermelody are totally lost” (Samson 1992: 41). Samson notes that these early recordings …bring us close to nineteenth-century traditions in their fluid tempos, their rubato and their frequent disrespect for Chopin’s markings. It is hard to know how close to Chopin’s original conception they may be, but it seems likely that they bear the imprint rather of a late nineteenth century aesthetic (Samson 1992: 41).

The analyses of Friedman’s recordings in the following chapters will reveal other aspects in which Friedman is individual in his use of tempo and rubato in Chopin’s music. The pieces performed by Friedman that will be analysed are the Berceuse Op.57, Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 Nos. 6, and 9, Impromptu Op.36, Mazurkas Op.24 No.4, Op.63 No.3, and Op.68 No.2, Préludes Op.28 Nos.15 and 19, Waltzes Op.18, Op.34 No.2, and Op.64 No.1.

50 Franciszek Lukasiewicz (1890-1950)

Lukasiewicz’s education in piano took place at the Lemberg Music Institute under Vilém Kurz (National Library Poland 2008: np). Around 1908 he continued piano studies in Vienna, where he became a pupil of Theodor Leschetizky, and then student at the Viennese Music Academy of Leopold Godowsky (National Library Poland 2008: np). In 1920 Lukasiewicz moved to Poznan, where he headed the piano department at the State Academy and School of Music until 1922, and at Wielkopolska School of Music until 1926. In 1927 he became the head of music section at the Polish Radio in Poznan and held this position until 1939 (National Library Poland 2008: np).

Lukasiewicz’s wide repertoire ranged from Bach, through all Chopin works, to contemporary composers. A dissertation on “Chopin’s Etudes” written in 1925 by Lukasiewicz, was referred to by Dybowski (2000). On 11 and 18 May 1945, he gave two Chopin recitals, playing a selection of etudes, mazurkas, nocturnes, the Ballade in G minor, the Scherzo in B minor, the Fantasy in F minor, the Barcarolle in F sharp major, and the Sonata in B flat minor. After these recitals a Poznan critic wrote, “This rich and diverse programme was […] performed by the artist with an unparalleled mastery of the technique and interpretation […] He is one of the greatest pianists […] one of the most praiseworthy propagators of Chopin’s music” (Dybowski 2000: 26). Dybowski describes Lukasiewicz’s Chopin playing as captured on record, as having …brisk rhythm […] perfect coordination of rhythm and dynamics, extensive scale of expression […] always sublime and presented in a form disclosing the beauty of a whole composition; conscious creation of the Polish style of the interpretation of Chopin’s music (Dybowski 2000: 26).

These comments by Dybowski, especially in relation to Lukasiewicz’s “brisk rhythm” and his “coordination of rhythm and dynamics” will be analysed in the Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 No.9, Impromptu Op.66, Nocturne Op.15 No.2, and Waltz Op.18.

Ignacy Jan Paderewski (1860-1941)

Paderewski took lessons with Piotr Sowi"ski, but in most essentials he was self-taught, and he quickly gained a reputation as a gifted pianist and outstanding improviser (Samson 2010: np). The breakthrough in Paderewski's early development was a visit to Vienna, where he took lessons from Leschetizky (Samson 2010: np). In 1937 he commenced editing Chopin's ‘Complete Works’ with Józef Turczy"ski and Ludwik Bronarski (National Library Poland 2008: np). Cortot admired Paderewski’s playing, saying that Paderewski

51 …gave us the certainty that the most secure and best way of serving the masters is by offering them absolute sincerity […] the dead notes in a score may be animated only if we devote our life to them […] his interpretation of Chopin’s music […] is already legendary (Cortot 1929 cited in Dybowski 1999d: 10).

According to Wladyslaw Zelenski (1899), Paderewski became the “interpreter of Polish thought […] by rendering Chopin’s music in a manner that no one can equal” (Dybowski 1999d: 9). The individual characteristics of his playing in relation to tempo and rubato are revealed in Chapter 3.

Paderewski wrote about tempo and rubato in an essay that was first published in Henry T. Finck’s Success in Music and How it is Won (1909). Paderewski asserts that Chopin played from his heart. His playing was not national; it was emotional. To be emotional in musical interpretation, yet obedient to the initial tempo and true to the metronome, means about as much as being sentimental in engineering. Mechanical execution and emotion are incompatible (Paderewski 1909: 461).

This passage by Paderewski suggests that staying true to the metronome will result in a mechanical execution that is contrary to Chopin’s style of playing, which was emotional. However, Paderewski also warns that Tempo rubato then becomes an indispensable assistant, but with it, unfortunately, appears also the danger of exaggeration. Real knowledge of different styles, a cultural musical taste, and a well-balanced sense of vivid rhythm should guard the interpreter against any abuse. Excess of freedom is often more pernicious than the severity of the law (Paderewski 1909: 461)

The study of Paderewski’s playing in Chapter 3 shows the extent of rubato that Paderewski uses, and he is unlikely to consider his own use of rubato to be exaggerated. Peres Da Costa notes that Paderewski’s advice is “sage […] but can we appreciate now what he or other musicians of his era considered tasteful and well balanced?” (Peres Da Costa 2012: 284). Peres Da Costa affirms that Paderewski’s recordings made between 1911 and 1930 reveal that he used tempo modification both more frequently than indicated by the composer’s notation and much more than might be extrapolated by his own advice. According to current canons of good taste, his tempo modifications often seem erratic and exaggerated, giving the impression that his playing was somewhat uncontrolled. However, close scrutiny reveals the pattern in these modifications: they were not simply aberrations or moments of extreme fancy. Paderewski’s tempo modifications […] Often […] consist of no more than the lengthening of or a lingering over a single note or moment in a phrase. At other times, they consist of a hastening or slackening of the tempo as a means of emphasising the climax of a phrase or to mark its close. At yet other moments, the subtle but noticeable modification of the tempo of an entire passage is used to emphasise its expressive effect (Peres Da Costa 2012: 285).

52 Peres Da Costa observes, “in the playing of some pianists – for example, Pugno and Paderewski – localized lengthenings sound fairly exaggerated by present-day standards” (Peres Da Costa 2012: 297-298). These remarks will be examined more closely in Chapter 3 with reference to the Berceuse Op.57, Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 Nos.2, and 9, Impromptus Op.29, Op.36, and Op.66, Waltzes Op.18 and Op.64 No.2.

Józef !midowicz (1888-1962)

Józef #midowicz began to learn music with his father, who was Mikuli's pupil. He went to Warsaw, where he entered Aleksander Michalowski's piano class at the Warsaw Music Institute (National Library Poland 2008: np). In 1910 he took part in the International Rubinstein Competition in St. Petersburg. He “did not win a prize but came to the notice of the musical community with his excellent interpretation of Chopin pieces” (Dybowski 1999: 9). In 1918 #midowicz accepted the position of ‘Professor of Piano Department’ at the Fryderyk Chopin School of Music in Warsaw. After the war he performed Chopin recitals, and was the head of the piano department at The Higher State School of Music (National Library Poland 2008). Like his master, Aleksander Micha!owski, he devoted his life to be a servant to music. His repertoire included all Chopin's works and he was one of the few virtuosi who performed the Chopin studies reworked by Godowsky (National Library Poland 2008).

Smidowicz made his Warsaw debut in 1909, when he gave a performance playing the Liszt Concerto in E flat major with the Philharmonic Orchestra, and solo pieces, inter alia the Chopin Barcarolle. After the performance, a critic wrote, “the very young artist boasts a perfectly accomplished technique […] wonderful strike and noble phrasing” (National Library Poland 2008). Dybowski describes his playing as having “classical order, moderation and logic […] his keyboard manner was so imaginative and easy that listeners thought he was improvising” (Dybowski 1999: 10). The analyses of Smidowicz’s recordings of the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 and Waltz Op.34 No.2 reveal his approach to balance of freedom and logic in his use of tempo and rubato.

Józef Turczy"ski (1884-1953)

Józef Turczy"ski was a Polish pianist and teacher. He studied with his father and then at the St Petersburg Conservatory under Aneta Esipoff and in Vienna under Busoni. In 1910 he made his début in Vienna, and a year later won first prize at the international piano competition in St Petersburg (Ka"ski 2010: np). During the following years he made numerous successful concert appearances in Russia, Poland and Western Europe, and from 1914 to 1919 was a professor at

53 the Kiev Conservatory. From 1920 until 1939 he gave piano classes at the Warsaw Conservatory while pursuing an international concert career (Ka"ski 2010: np). From 1933, he also taught at the Institute of Piano Playing, which he also founded. An outstanding teacher, his pupils included Maryla Jones, Witold Ma!cu$y"ski, Stanis!aw Szpinalski and Henryk Sztompka (Ka"ski 2010: np).

A high point in his artistic life was the meeting with Ignacy Jan Paderewski in Morges, when he presented his Sonata in E flat minor (National Library Poland 2008). Paderewski was enchanted by his talent and the brilliant interpretation of the piece and gave him a few lessons. In 1937, in cooperation with Paderewski and Ludwik Bronarski, he began working on editing Chopin's complete works (National Library Poland 2008: np).

His repertoire included all Chopin works, which he sometimes performed in cycles of recitals, such as in 1946, when he performed all works by Chopin in Zurich (Dybowski 1999: 20). Ka"ski’s biography of Turczynski reveals that Turczynski had an enormous repertory, was particularly renowned for his playing of Chopin, and was a member of the jury of the first three Warsaw Chopin competitions. Turczynski’s playing was characterized by a “flawless technique, discriminating taste and, especially in his early years, dazzling virtuosity” (Ka"ski 2010: np). Surviving reviews are full of praise of Turczynski’s Chopin interpretation, particularly in relation to his technique and tone. Piotr Rytel, who was one of Michalowski’s students, wrote, “Turczysnki is familiar with the secrets of Chopin’s music interpretation. In his interpretation the music is pure of form, deepened by the immortal beauty of the Polish master of the tone” (Dybowski 1999: 23). Turczynski’s recordings of the Impromptus Op.29, and Op.66, Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Nocturne Op.15 No.2, and Waltz Op.64 No. 2 will be analysed in Chapter 3.

Modern Pianists on Period Instruments

As previously mentioned, study of these recordings affords the opportunity to compare the use of tempo and rubato by early twentieth century pianists with the approach of modern pianists who may also be considered part of the Chopin tradition due to their vast and outstanding performances of Chopin’s music. The modern pianists selected for study perform on one particular Pleyel or one particular Erard piano. The Pleyel instrument was built in 1848 at the Royal Fortepiano Factory in Paris. The Fryderyk Chopin Institute purchased it in 2005 from the collection of Chris Maene. Its original, historical substance is preserved virtually intact, with the original hammers and soundboard. It has 82 keys [C1-a4] and an English-type, non-repetition mechanism.

54 The Erard instrument was built in Paris in 1849 and is technically identical to instruments familiar to Chopin. Its metal frame comprises a hitch block and six braces. It is the predecessor of the cast-iron piano frame used today. The keyboard covers 7 % octaves, as in modern concert grands. The original, historical substance of the instrument is preserved, with the exception of the elements routinely changed with use. The instrument was restored using identical elements, made from the same raw materials and technology, as used in the mid nineteenth century.

Nikolai Demidenko (born 1955)

Demidenko is Russian born and trained, and is renowned for his authoritative performances of the Russian concerto repertoire. He has special affinity with the works of Chopin and travels frequently to Poland, most recently to Warsaw to perform at the Chopin and His Europe Festival.

Demidenko has also played Bach, Mozart, and Scarlatti with a degree of rubato that cuts against the grain of studied performance practice, as he feels that it is an essential ingredient of that music. There are reviews that assert that some of Demidenko’s rubato in Chopin’s music is unnecessary. Joan Chissell’s review of his performance of Chopin’s Concerto No.1 in E minor describes his use of rubato as obtrusive, “militating against the music’s natural vitality and joie de vivre […] I could have done without one or two untoward ritenutos” (Chissell 1993: np). Tony Haywood reviews Demidenko’s 1992 recordings of the Polonaises and other short works on musicweb-international.com. Haywood notes that in Demidenko’s performance, “a tiny masterpiece like the delectable Berceuse is slightly disfigured by not maintaining the ostinato pulse that Chopin obviously intended, Demidenko indulging in unnecessary rubato from one “variation’ to the next” (Haywood nd: np).

By comparing Demidenko’s recording of the Berceuse Op.57 with that of the early twentieth century pianists, we can observe whether Demidenko’s rubato is “obtrusive” or “unnecessary” compared with the early twentieth century pianists. Demidenko performs on a Pleyel piano in the analysed recording. The reason I chose to analyse this recording is that Koczalski also performs the Berceuse on a Pleyel Piano so the two pianists’ use of tempo and rubato can be compared.

Marek Drewnowski (born 1946)

Drewnowski, a Polish pianist, recorded Chopin music and piano concertos in chamber form, which he brought back to the concert stage. He received high critical acclaim for his recordings

55 of Chopin's renowned Piano Concertos for Beloved Entertaiment Group (Dinemec) in New York and for his recordings with Exton (Octavia records) in Tokyo (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012c: np).

Drewnowski founded and manages the Hofmann and I.J. Paderewski Festivals in Nalecow, and the Chopin Soloists Quintet and Chopin Soloists Orchestra. He acted the role of Chopin in the movie, “The Chopin's Concert” by Krzysztof Zanussi and co-produced the film, “The Fascination of Frederick” by Izabela Cywinska. Drewnowski is a professor at the Lodz Academy of Music in Poland and gives master classes all over the world (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012c: np). There are not many reviews available on his playing, but there is a brief description on India’s National online newspaper: http://www.hindu.com/fr/2010/12/03/stories/2010120350990300.htm.

In 2010, the 200th birth anniversary of Chopin, Drewnowski performed a solo piano recital in Chennai, India. The author notes that there was an “intimate atmosphere […] the music sounded as authentic and captivating as it must have done when Chopin himself had played his pieces in a 19th-century Parisian salon!” (Ramakrishnan 2010). Drewnowski …rendered a small set of original Chopin themes (three waltzes, a polonaise, a mazurka, and a nocturne), all of them deeply soaked in the nostalgic sentiment so characteristic of the exiled Polish composer's national and musical vision. The entire performance was subtle and serene, and the immortal Opus 64 No. 2 (waltz) added a sparkling touch (Ramakrishnan 2010).

Drewnowski performs on an Erard piano in the recordings of the Waltzes Op.18, Op.34 No.2, Op.64 Nos.1 and 2.

Kevin Kenner (born 1963)

At the International Chopin Piano Competition in Warsaw in 1980, American pianist Kevin Kenner was awarded 10th prize and the special jury prize for the most promising pianist, and 10 years later he returned to win the competition (Dybowski 2012: np). He has made several recordings of Chopin’s works, such as the 24 Préludes, complete Scherzos, Nocturne in D flat major Op. 27 No. 2 and Waltz in E minor, Op. posth. (Dybowski 2012: np). The Chopin Society in the UK have included extracts of reviews of Kenner’s playing on their website. Kenner has …been praised as "one of the finest American pianists to come along in years" (Howard Reich, Chicago Tribune), "...fulfilling a criterion which one only knows from great Chopinists such as Rubinstein, Benedetti-Michelangeli and Dinu Lipatti" (Winfried Wild, Schwaebische Zeitung, Germany). Adrian Jack of London's Independent describes one of Kenner's recitals as "...the best performance I have ever heard in the concert hall of all four of Chopin's Ballades". Conductor

56 Stanislaw Skrowaczewski […] claimed Kenner's Chopin interpretations to be the most sensitive and beautiful he remembered (The Chopin Society 2012: np).

This somewhat tantalising testimonial can be considered more closely in relation to tempo and rubato in Chopin playing in Chapter 3.

Lawrence Budmen reviewed Kenner’s playing at the evening of “Chopin Reflections” presented by Festival Miami and the Chopin Foundation in 2009. Budmen relates that Kenner “took the Fantaisie-Impromptu at daredevil speed but imbued the central section with romantic ardor and passion” (Budman 2009: np). In chapter 3, Kenner’s speed can be compared with that of the early twentieth century pianists.

Bryce Morrison reviews Kenner’s recording, “Chopin – Resonances” (2010) saying that The performances by this American but European-based multi-prize-winning pianist are of unwavering mastery and musicianship, with towering but never forced strength and a rubato and nuance both personal and telling. He is exceptionally glittering and stylish in Chopin’s Fantasie-Impromptu (Morrison 2010: np)

Kenner’s website includes a discography, other reviews of his playing, and selections of recordings: http://www.kevinkenner.com/

There are reviews of Kenner’s recordings of the Impromptus on Kenner’s website. One reviewer, Colin Clarke, remarks, “Pleyel’s action seems to suit the fluid Fantasy-Impromptu” (Clarke 2012: np), while the other reviewer, Gary Lemco, observes that Kenner …enjoys exploring the stylistic permutations in Chopin, and this strong recital taped in Warsaw (17-19 March 2009) demonstrates the power and flexibility of Chopin’s own instrument […] The soft delicacy of timbre that infuses the […] second of the impromptus, the F-sharp Major, Op. 36, more than suggest a combination of poetry and power accessible to the temperamental Polish nationalist (Lemco 2012: np).

Kenner performs on a Pleyel piano in the analysed recordings of the Impromptus Op.29, Op.36 and Op.66. Koczalski also performs on a Pleyel in his recording of the Impromptu Op.66.

Janusz Olejnikzak (born 1952)

Olejniczak is a leading Polish pianist and prizewinner of two international piano competitions: the Fryderyk Chopin competition in Warsaw [Sixth Prize, 1970] and the Alfredo Casella competition in Warsaw [Fourth Prize, 1972]. In the years 1967-1969 he trained under the

57 renowned Chopin player Ryszard Bakst and Zbigniew Drzewiecki. Olejniczak performs on an Erard in the analysed recording of the Waltz Op.34 No.2 and the Mazurka Op.68 No.2.

Tatiana Shebanova (1953-2011)

Tatiana Shebanova was a Russian pianist and a professor at the Music Academy in Bydgoszcz (Dybowski 2007: 34). She graduated with a gold medal from the Moscow Conservatory, after studying with Victor Merzhanov and for the next 10 years, she collaborated with Merzhanov as assistant lecturer (Dybowski 2007: 33). Shebanova was the winner of international competitions in Prague (1969 – Grand Prix), Geneva (1976 – Grand Prix and two special awards) and Brussels (1990 – Grand Prix and three special awards).

During the 10th International Fryderyk Chopin Piano Competition in Warsaw in 1980 she received Second Prize and the special prizes for the best performances of a polonaise and a concerto (Dybowski 2007: 33). For Polskie Radio and DUX she has recorded Chopin’s complete solo works (Dybowski 2007: 33). Gavin Dixon gives an online review of Shebanova’s recordings of Chopin’s complete solo works (2009), noting that the Etude Op.25 No.9 is ‘played with greater delicacy than many versions on record’. In addition, …throughout the set, both rubato and pedalling are ever-present but never excessive […] The end of a phrase is briefly held here, a climax anticipated there, but always with reference to a clearly perceptible underlying tempo (Dixon 2010: np).

Shebanova performs on an Erard piano in the analysed recordings of the Etudes Op.10 No.5, and Op.25 Nos.2, 6, and 9. The frequency and extent of her rubato can be compared to that of the early twentieth century pianists in Chapter 3.

Wojciech Switala (born 1967)

Switala is a Polish pianist, who graduated from the class of Professor Josef Stompel at the Karol Szymanowski Academy of music in Katowice. In the Twelfth Fryderyk Chopin International Piano Competition in Warsaw (1990) he received the prize for the best performance of a polonaise (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2007: np).

Switala has said in an inteview with Zaremba that can be viewed online on the Chopin Society of Atlanta’s website, that the Pleyel “does not differ from the modern instrument that much. It does require a different touch and sensitivity, but if you make an effort […] it will take you back in time to the 19th century” (Switala 2012: np). Switala also affirms that when

58 …you play some of Chopin’s Préludes on a historical instrument […] you do not have to look for certain color because it is already there […] Chopin […] with his sublime sound and with his fragile physique, would not have been happy sitting at a Bösendorfer (Switala 2012: np).

On his online blog, Australian classical musician, Michael Moran, describes a concert that Switala gave in August 2012. Switala “played the Chopin Nocturne in E major, Op. 62. No.2. […] on the Pleyel with a great deal of nuanced rubato and subtle inflections of mood” (Moran 2012: np). This comment describing Switala’s nuanced rubato can be considered in relation to the analyses of the Préludes in Chapter 3. Switala performs on a Pleyel piano in the analysed recordings of the Préludes Op.28 Nos.3, 6, 7, 15, and 19.

Dang Thai Son (born 1958)

Vietnamese pianist Dang Thai Son was awarded the First Prize and Gold Medal in the Tenth International Chopin Piano Competition in Warsaw in 1980 (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012a: np). He pursued his training at the Moscow State Conservatory under renowned pedagogues, Vladimir Natanson and Dmitri Bashkirov (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012a: np). One of the reviewers praises Dang Thai Son as the “consummate Chopin interpreter, fully attuned to the music’s heart and soul, a master of multitude of notes and dynamic shifts. His way with the bel canto aspect was flawless” (Liang 2010: np). Thai Son’s “bel canto” aspect of playing can be studied with reference to tempo and rubato in his recording of the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 on an Erard piano.

Dina Yoffe (born 1952)

Yoffe started her musical education at E. Darsin’s Special School of Music and continued at Central Music School in Moscow (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012b: np). She graduated from the Tchaikovsky Conservatory of Music in Moscow, under the tutelage of Professor Vera Gornostayeva, one of the most important proponents of the Heinrich Neuhaus school (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012b: np). Yoffe gave piano recitals of all Fryderyk Chopin works in Tokyo, Osaka, and Yokohama (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012b: np). Among her record releases are Chopin’s 24 Préludes, the Fantasy in F minor and 19 Waltzes (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012b: np). She is currently Professor at the Anton Rubinstein International Academy in Germany (Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012b: np).

59 Extracts of reviews of Yoffe’s playing can be viewed on her website. One reviewer says, “her playing flowed beautifully, and avoided even the slightest hint of sentimentality. Hers was a strongly felt authentic Chopin’” (Bar-Ami 2012: np). This review of Yoffe’s “flowing” and “authentic” playing is discussed in relation to her recording of the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 on the Pleyel piano.

60 CHAPTER 3 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RECORDINGS

In Chapter 3 I compare the use of tempo and rubato in recordings by the pianists discussed in Chapter 2. Below is the methodology, followed by the analysis and discussion of each piece in alphabetical order of genre.

Methodology

In this thesis, the selection of recordings allows for comparison between pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras, as well as a range and balance of genres within Chopin’s music. I have chosen to compare smaller works because it allows for a greater variety of works to be analysed. All the works chosen have been recorded by at least three performers, with at least two from the early twentieth century to allow for comparison within the early twentieth century. Where possible, at least one modern pianist has been included. Only the Mazurkas chosen did not have any recordings by modern pianists on period instruments playing the same piece as an early twentieth century pianist. However, I considered it essential for this study to include the Mazurkas because it is a genre that is associated with the use of rubato, including in the accompaniment.

I have included more recordings of certain pieces such as the Berceuse and the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, and less on others, such as the Mazurkas. One reason is that a greater number of early twentieth century pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition have recorded the Berceuse and Nocturne Op.15 No.2, but there are less available recordings of the Mazurkas by the same pianists. Aspects of tradition can be examined more in the Berceuse and the Nocturne from this slightly larger sample of recordings, while similarities and individual uses of rubato can still be discussed in pieces with a smaller sample of recordings. Another reason for the varied number of recordings for each piece is that I chose to compare a small number of pianists across several genres, rather than focusing on a few pieces and comparing a large number of pianists. This provides enough comparison between pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras while also allowing for comparison of rubato techniques across different genres, and for more focus on individual pianists.

The works I have chosen for study are the Berceuse Op.57, the Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 No.2, Op.25 No.6, and Op.25 No.9, the Impromptus Op.29, Op.36, and Op.66, the Mazurkas Op.24 No.4, Op.63 No.3, and Op.68 No.2, the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, the Préludes Op.28 No.3, No.6, No.7, No.15, and No.19, and the Waltzes Op.18, Op.34 No.2, Op.64 No.1, and Op.64 No.2.

61

The Berceuse is included because a relatively large number of pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition have recorded it. The Berceuse is known for its repetitive accompaniment figure and harmonies, and the variations of melodic figures in the right hand. A few of the Etudes are studied for contrast with the slower works. Since the Etudes include metronome markings, the pianists’ tempi can be discussed in relation to the score’s tempo markings. The Impromptus are studied because they contain sections that vary in character. Within each Impromptu is a contrasting sostenuto section, in which the pianists’ change of tempo and use of rubato can be compared to the outer sections. Like the Berceuse, the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 has been recorded by a relatively large number of early twentieth century pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition, including Michalowski, who did not record many Chopin works. As with the Impromptus, the pianists can be compared in how they change tempi and their use of rubato in the contrasting middle section of the Nocturne. The Mazurkas and Waltzes are dances that are characteristic to Chopin, and are known to be performed with flexibility in the timing of the left hand accompaniments. In the Mazurkas, Chopin “seems to have used a special type of tempo alteration. Its effect was apparently so remarkable […] a special type of rhythmic robbery” (Hudson 1994: 183). A few of the Préludes are chosen because they are short, contrasting works that have been recorded by Koczalski and Cortot, and some by Rosenthal and Friedman.

In this chapter, metronome or tempo markings in the score are noted in order to check whether any pianists play at a faster or slower speed than the given marking, and also to show the range of tempi chosen by pianists in relation to tempo markings. I show the metronome speed used by the pianists in the opening four bars and in each section in a chart, which allows for comparison between pianists and between the different sections, to discover similarities and differences between the pianists. The metronome speed is measured using the software Sonic Visualiser. I first measure duration by tapping the computer keyboard at certain points in the music, including the entry point of the piano, the start of the first bar, the end of the fourth bar, and the end of the piece. If I want to include measurements of the individual sections, I also tap at the start of each section. Average tempi are calculated by dividing 60 by the average duration of the beat, and rounding up or down to the nearest two decimal places. Average figures of each measurement are shown in the lowest row of the table.

Other scholars have also used the software Sonic Visualiser to measure durations of notes and the time between the notes using this tapping technique. For example, Alan Dodson measures the extent of hand displacement and arpeggiation in a recording of Chopin’s Prelude Op.28 No.6 in his journal article, “Expressive Asynchrony in a Recording of Chopin's Prelude No. 6 in

62 B Minor by Vladimir de Pachmann”1 by measuring the duration between the onset of the two hands or the highest and lowest notes where the techniques are used. I have not measured the extent of the hand displacement and arpeggiation in each occurrence of it because my study is based on audible, rather than inaudible but measurable, occurrences of rubato.

In pieces where there are different tempo markings for each section, I have measured each section’s duration and average tempo by each pianist. This explains why the pieces that have different sections have more rows in the graph than those where the tempo is meant to be consistent throughout the piece. The reason for including the average tempi of the first four bars, as well as the entire piece, is to show the speed that the performer may have intended to start at, but perhaps was not able to keep up with, or to show fluctuations in tempo between the beginning of the piece and the rest of it.

Comparative graphs will show the average tempi of the first four bars and for the entire piece by each performer so that the reader has a visual representation to refer to in the discussions. I also note whether any differences are audible when listening to the recordings. If any pianists play at a tempo that is far outside the average tempo it could ne indicative of a different school of playing by a certain pianist or group of pianists.

In this chapter I also measure the frequency and extent of rubato used by the pianists, including lengthening of notes or rests, shortening of notes or rests, accelerando, ritardando, hand displacement, and arpeggiation. These forms of rubato are the ones that have been identified when listening to the recordings and are also related to issues raised in the literature on tempo and rubato in Chopin’s music.

Lengthening includes delay, for example, when a pianist lengthens the last beat of a bar to delay the next bar. Lengthening refers to one or two beats in the bar, whereas ritardando refers to at least half a bar. The lengthening may occur in one hand and not the other. Peres Da Costa calls this metrical rubato, which is a term he “coined to describe the old bel canto type of tempo rubato commonly described as the rhythmic alteration of melody notes while essentially preserving the metrical regularity of the accompaniment” (Peres Da Costa 2012: 189). Ritardando also includes ritenuto, which is a more sudden form of slowing down than ritardando. In the same way, shortening of notes refers to shortening of one or two beats, and could refer to either notes or rests, whereas accelerando lasts for at least half a bar in order to

1 Dodson, A. 2002, “Expressive Asynchrony in a Recording of Chopin's Prelude No. 6 in B Minor by Vladimir de Pachmann”, Society For Music Theory, Vol.33 No.1, pp.59-64.

63 distinguish it as shortening on a larger scale. Use of glissandos, where the pianist may add notes, is categorised under shortening of notes. Ritardando and accelerando fall under the category of tempo modification according to Peres Da Costa, who asserts that “tempo modification - also referred to as tempo rubato, or rubato - is used in fairly subtle ways to enhance the ebb and flow of a musical phrase” (Peres Da Costa 2012: 251). Hand displacement is called dislocation by Peres Da Costa, and he defines it as a “momentary separation between the left and right hands [...] The usual method is to delay a melody note in the right hand, placing it directly after the corresponding accompaniment note in the left hand” (2012: 45). Arpeggiation is defined as “the separation of notes that should, when their vertical alignment in the musical text is interpreted literally, be synchronised” (Peres Da Costa 2012: 45).

The frequency and extent of each type of rubato is not measured but only noted through listening because I would like to compare only what is audible to the trained ear. I present the data in comparative tables that detail the bars in which the pianists use different types of rubato and a graph summarises the quantity of rubato used, allowing for easier comparison between the pianists. The tables and graphs do not portray the quality (extent) of the rubato, only that the instance of rubato can be heard in those bars when listening to the recording. Sometimes a performer will use the same rubato technique twice in the same bar, such as lengthening two different beats in the same bar. This is not portrayed in the comparative tables, but is accounted for in the graphs. The Appendix includes tables that show common bars and individual bars for pianists to use each type of rubato, and the specific beat on which the rubato is used, if applicable.

When discussing the quality (extent) of the rubato used by the pianists, I will use terms such as “tighter/looser”, “slower/quicker”, and “subtle/noticeable”. Below is a table, which explains what these terms mean. The actual extent of the rubato is described using subjective terms, but comparison is still possible, as there are noticeable differences in the quality of the rubato, and listening to the recordings will confirm or clarify my descriptions. For example, I may describe that one pianist uses ritardando in a noticeable way, while another pianist does so subtly in the same bar, or that one pianist arpeggiates a chord slowly, while another pianist does so more quickly.

I have included the symbols XS, S, M and L in the tables of common and individual bars for each type of rubato used so that the reader may refer to them if necessary, when reading the descriptions of the quality of rubato used by pianists. In general, when a pianist lengthens a pulse to a medium extent (noticeably), it is lengthened to about 150% of its written value, while a pulse lengthened to a large extent (very noticeably) is lengthened to at least twice its written

64 value. Also, if a pulse, note or rest is shortened to a large extent, it has become less than half its written value. However, this is only noted by listening.

Type of rubato/ Very Small Small Extent (S) Medium Extent Large Extent (L) Quality (Extent) Extent (XS) (M) Lengthening Very subtle Subtle Noticeable Very noticeable Shortening Very subtle Subtle Noticeable Very noticeable Ritardando Very subtle Subtle Noticeable Very noticeable Accelerando Very subtle Subtle Noticeable Very noticeable Hand Very tight Tight Loose Very Loose Displacement Arpeggiation Very quick Quick Slow Very Slow

The recording comparisons will be supported by musical examples from reliable editions, including the New Critical Edition by Peters, edited by Rink, Samson and Eigeldinger, and other Urtext Editions. The CD recordings of the pieces are included so that the reader can verify my statements. Written permission to use these recordings was obtained or requested.

Analysis and Discussion of Recordings

3.1. Berceuse

The first piece I will analyse is Chopin’s Berceuse, which has been recorded by pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras, who are all considered part of the Chopin tradition. In his book, Frederic Chopin: Conseils d'interpretation, Koczalski notes that the Berceuse is ...the most beautiful lullaby that was imagined for the piano […] The composer reaches – and with relatively restrained means – a power of expression, which profoundly moves the listener. We think we can see the regular balance of the cradle and hear the soft voice of the mother who sings with an infinite tenderness to put her child to sleep (Koczalski 1998: 80)2.

Koczalski’s interpretative comments can be seen in the light of his use of tempo and rubato in his 1948 recording of the Berceuse. Koczalski’s recording3 is compared to recordings by

2 C’est la plus belle berceuse qui fut imaginée pour le piano […] Le compositeur parvient ici – et avec des moyens relativement restraints – à une puissance d’expression qui émeut profondé – berceau et entendre la douce voix de la mere, qui chante avec une tendresse infinie pour endormir son enfant. 3 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VII 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 65 Michalowski (1929)4, Rosenthal (1912)5, Cortot (1920)6, Pugno (1903)7, Friedman (1928)8, Paderewski (1912)9, and Demidenko (2008)10. Koczalski, Michalowski, and Rosenthal are Mikuli’s students. Cortot and Pugno are French pianists and students of Descombes and Mathias respectively. Friedman and Paderewski are considered part of the Polish Chopin tradition and are Leschetizsky’s students, while modern pianist Demidenko performs the Berceuse on the Pleyel piano.

First, the use of tempo will be discussed. Interpretative issues to consider in the Berceuse include what tempo would be considered a suitable portrayal of the Andante tempo marking, since there is no metronome marking, and whether tempo fluctuation is inevitable and acceptable. This will shed light on Higgins’ comment that Chopin “understood the specific terms of lento and andante as representing faster tempi than are generally taken today” (Higgins 1973: 114). This will allow any similarities or differences between pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras to emerge.

4 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Mikuli 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 5 Moriz Rosenthal: Chopin/Strauss 1988, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 6 Alfred Cortot Victor Recordings of 1919-1926 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 7 Raoul Pugno: His Complete Published Piano Solos 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 8 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Ignaz Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Philips, New York. 9 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Paderewski 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 10 Chopin: Nikolai Demidenko [Pleyel 1848] 2009, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 66 Tempo

Comparative Graph

The following graph allows comparison between the pianists within each section measured. I consider the tempo of bars 1-4 as well as the entire piece to show any differences in starting and overall tempo and to show how common it may be to fluctuate in tempo. This may reveal how much difference there needs to be in order for the fluctuation to be audible or change the character of the music. I have not split the Berceuse into different sections because the tempo as marked in the score does not change. The numbers on the vertical axis indicate the number of dotted crotchets in one minute (Dotted Crotchet = MM). The faster tempi are generally placed at the front so that longer columns do not block shorter columns.

There is a wide range of tempi used in the Berceuse. Friedman has the fastest overall tempo (Dotted Crotchet = MM43) and Demidenko has the slowest overall tempo (Dotted Crotchet = MM31). When listening to Demidenko and Friedman comparatively, there is a noticeable difference in their choice of tempo, showing that a difference of MM12 is significant enough to change the perceived character of the Berceuse, yet both performances are convincing at their chosen tempi, showing that the Berceuse can be performed at a tempo ranging from around Dotted Crotchet = MM30-42 while still portraying the Andante expressive marking. Rosenblum

67 suggests that a “difference of one or two metronome stips is insignificant; but a change of three of more is significant, since that degree of tempo change is obvious to the listener and may alter the character of a movement” (1991: 331).

Friedman’s interpretation sounds brisk and animated, while Demidenko’s interpretation sounds languid and has more melancholy character. The other pianists have overall tempi ranging from around Dotted Crotchet = MM33-42, with Michalowski and Pugno playing in a similar overall tempo to Friedman, and Cortot playing in a similar overall tempo to Demidenko. These differences and similarities in overall tempi show that there is no evidence of tradition in relation to tempo within pedagogical lines, nationalities, or eras. Although Koczalski, Michalowski and Rosenthal are students of Mikuli, Michalowski has a faster average tempo than Koczalski and Rosenthal. Paderewski, who was not Mikuli’s student, is closer to Koczalski and Rosenthal in overall tempo than Michalowski.

The French pianists, Pugno and Cortot differ in their choice of tempo more than the difference between Friedman, the fastest Polish pianist, and Koczalski, the slowest Polish pianist. Pugno’s tempo is audibly faster and steadier than Cortot’s tempo because Cortot uses more lengthening of beats and ritardando than Pugno, which affects his overall tempo.

There is not a noticeable difference between the overall tempi of the modern pianist, Demidenko, and a few of the early twentieth century pianists. Demidenko plays at a slower overall tempo than all the early twentieth century pianists, but his overall tempo is close to Cortot’s, and when listening comparatively, the difference is not audible or significant.

The starting tempi of the pianists in bars 1-4 are more varied than the overall tempi, but as with overall tempi, the starting tempi show no indication of tradition within pedagogical lines, nationalities or eras. Most of the pianists have a slower starting tempo than overall tempo, but the difference is usually small. Only Friedman has a faster starting tempo than overall tempo. Friedman slows down a little from his fast paced beginning, and the rest of the performance does not sound as rushed. Otherwise, each pianist keeps quite a consistent tempo throughout the piece. Although the pianists may be flexible in their tempo when using ritardando or accelerando, these changes last no more than four bars at a time. Michalowksi’s tempo slightly speeds up as he progresses into the piece, but it does not sound rushed. In every recording there is a difference between starting and overall tempi, showing that tempo fluctuation is common amongst the pianists, whether audible or not.

68 Rubato

A discussion of the pianists’ use of rubato follows. The Berceuse is known for its repetitive accompaniment figure and harmonies, and the variations of melodic figures in the right hand. Since a relatively large number of pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition have recorded the Berceuse, the analysis will reveal whether there are similarities between pianists of the same pedagogical line, nationality or era, and any differences between them. The following analysis will show the variety, frequency and extent of the rubato techniques by the pianists, and possible reasons for its use will be discussed with reference to the score.

The recordings by the pianists are only a snapshot of their playing. It must be acknowledged that the pianists may not play the same way each time, whether in other live or recorded performances.

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in quantity of rubato used amongst the pianists, especially between Koczalski and Friedman. Michalowski uses about half as much rubato as either Koczalski or Rosenthal, and is closer to Cortot in the quantity of rubato used. This contradicts the view that “Michalowski more closely resembles Koczalski than does Rosenthal” (Vicat 1990: 3). Judging

69 by the overall quantity of rubato, Koczalski and Rosenthal more closely resemble each other than Michalowski.

Demidenko uses about as much rubato as Cortot. This is intriguing because Demidenko was criticised for his “unnecessary rubato from one ‘variation’ to the next’” (Haywood nd: np) in a 1992 recording of the Berceuse. Since this recording of the Berceuse by Demidenko was made in 2008, Demidenko has either changed his style of rubato or the early twentieth century pianists, Cortot, Paderewski, Rosenthal, Koczalski and Michalowski, who use rubato more frequently than Demidenko in this Berceuse, also use rubato unnecessarily according to Haywood.

There are more significant quantitative differences between the three Polish pianists who use the most rubato, and the French pianists. The Polish pianists, Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski use the most rubato overall, a large portion of which is hand displacement. The French pianists, Cortot and Pugno use less rubato, and much less hand displacement than Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski. Friedman is the exception amongst the Polish pianists in that he uses comparatively little rubato. In terms of the overall quantity of rubato, Friedman is closer to Pugno than to any other Polish pianist, although they differ in the ratio of the types of rubato they use.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Hand Displacement 2. Lengthening 3. Arpeggiation 4. Accelerando 5. Ritardando

1. Hand Displacement

All eight pianists use hand displacement, but there are large differences in quantity between them. The quantity of hand displacement used by each pianist generally indicates his overall quantity of rubato. For example, Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski use the most rubato and this is largely hand displacement. There may be indications of tradition within nationalities and eras in the area of hand displacement because the French pianists, Cortot and Pugno, and the modern pianist, Demidenko, use much less hand displacement than most of the Polish pianists. Friedman only displaces the hands twice but he is the exception.

70

Hand displacement is mainly used on the first or fourth quaver pulses, which are the strong and medium beats of the bar. Occasionally, Koczalski Rosenthal and Paderewski displace the hands on the third or fifth quaver pulse, and more rarely, on the second quaver pulse. Hand displacement usually occurs at the start, end, high point or low point of a phrase. Most of the time the pianists use hand displacement tightly so that the rhythm is not significantly affected. Friedman’s hand displacement is harder to detect because of his faster speed, and infrequent use of it, but Demidenko’s hand displacement is more easily heard because of his slower speed and the hands usually play further apart than other pianists.

Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski are more similar to each other in their style of hand displacement than to the other Polish pianists, Michalowski or Friedman, because they occasionally use hand displacement on two or more consecutive quaver pulses. The French pianists only displace the hands in places in common with the Polish pianists, but they do so rarely, which may show difference in tradition between the French pianists, and a few of the Polish pianists in the use of hand displacement.

Sometimes the hand displacement comes at the start of a phrase, such as in bars 3, 45, 47, 49, and 55; less so at the end of a phrase, such as in bars 47, 51, 55 and 67, or high point of a phrase, such as in bars 3, 7, 31 and 66. Many times, especially when there is only one pianist displacing the hands on a certain quaver pulse, there is no obvious reason for the hand displacement, other than for a general melodic rubato effect.

There are several instances where at least four of the pianists displace their hands on the same quaver pulse. Six pianists use hand displacement in bar 3, and four pianists use hand displacement in bars 4, 5, 47 and 49. Each of these bars reveals both subtle and noticeable differences between pianists of the same nationality or pedagogical line.

M, R, Pu, C, F, Pa R, Pa Bars 1- 3: K

In bar 3, Michalowski, Rosenthal, Pugno, Cortot, Friedman and Paderewski displace the hands on the first quaver pulse, highlighting the start of the right hand melody. Rosenthal and

71 Paderewski also displace the hands on the fourth quaver pulse and they do so similarly. Notably, Koczalski does not displace the hands on the first quaver pulse, making him the exception amongst the early twentieth century pianists. However, Koczalski displaces the hands in a pronounced way on the fifth quaver pulse, emphasising the highest note of the phrase, which none of the other pianists do. Friedman, Pugno and Rosenthal’s hand displacement on the first quaver pulse in bar 3 is less noticeable than Cortot and Paderewski’s hand displacement in the same place. Michalowski starts the right hand note on the second quaver pulse instead of the first, making it different to the others. Judging by the extent of the pianists’ hand displacements in bar 3, there is no indication of tradition within pedagogical lines or nationalities, as Pugno’s hand displacement is less noticeable than Cortot’s, and Rosenthal’s hand displacement is less noticeable than Michalowski’s.

Paderewski displaces the hands in a few of the same places as Mikuli’s students. Sometimes there are similarities in the quality of hand displacement between Paderewski and Koczalski or Rosenthal, but not with Michalowski. In bar 51, Michalowski and Paderewski displace the hands on the first quaver pulse. Michalowski’s hand displacement is looser than Paderewski’s hand displacement, which is very subtle especially since the bass note is quiet. In bar 64, Rosenthal and Paderewski displace the hands on the first quaver pulse to the same extent. Their style of hand displacement is similar in bars 64-65 because they use hand displacement on consecutive quaver pulses and have a similar tempo. In bar 67, Koczalski displaces the hands on the first quaver pulse and Paderewski displaces the hands on the third quaver pulse.

R, Pa K Pa Bars 63-67:

Paderewski, Polish, but not Mikuli’s student, has some similarities with Koczalski and Rosenthal in his style of hand displacement. However, the other Polish pianist, Friedman has a different style of hand displacement, which is to rarely use it, making his interpretation more similar to Michalowski’s than to the other Polish pianists. Combined with his faster tempo, Friedman’s rare use of hand displacement creates a more straightforward effect than the interpretations of Koczalski, Rosenthal or Paderewski.

72 A notable trait of a few of the Polish pianists is to use hand displacement on consecutive quaver pulses. For example, Paderewski uses hand displacement on more than two quaver pulses in bars 4-5.

Bars 4-5: Pa Pa

Koczalski and Rosenthal use hand displacement in a more similar way than Koczalski and Michalowski or Rosenthal and Michalowski. Rosenthal and Koczalski use hand displacement on more than two quaver pulses in the same bar, and these bars can be two or three in a row. They do this in different places; for Rosenthal this is in bars 7-9 and 11, and for Koczalski it is in bars 57-58.

R R Bars 7-9:

Bars 55-57: Pu K

Pugno uses hand displacement twice in bar 47 on quaver pulses 3 and 4, but very subtly. Pugno also uses hand displacement twice in bar 55.

73 Bar 47: Pu

Demidenko uses hand displacement in bars that are in common with Koczalski, as in bars 15 and 31, or with Rosenthal and Paderewski, in bar 45. This may be because Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski use hand displacement in so many places, so Demidenko was bound to have places in common with them.

Koczalski, Rosenthal, Paderewski and Demidenko occasionally use hand displacement in a way that affects the rhythm by lengthening the beat to make room for it. For example, Koczalski’s hand displacement on the first quaver pulse of bar 23, Rosenthal’s hand displacement on the first quaver pulse of bar 43, Paderewski’s hand displacement on the first quaver pulse of bars 3 and 7, and Demidenko’s hand displacement on the first quaver pulse of bar 15 and 27. These occur in individual places, highlighting the individuality of each pianist. These individual characteristics are discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.

2. Lengthening

Michalowski, Paderewski, and Friedman use lengthening a few times but for Cortot, Friedman, and Demidenko, lengthening is the main type of rubato used. There is no evidence of tradition within pedagogical lines, nationalities or eras in relation to both quantity and quality of lengthening used, although there are some individual characteristics. Mikuli’s students, Koczalski, Rosenthal and Michalowski vary in the quantity they use. Rosenthal uses at least twice as much lengthening as the other Polish pianists, so he may be the exception amongst the Polish pianists, but there is not a big difference. There is greater difference between the French pianists as Cortot uses lengthening sixteen times, and Pugno uses none. The pianists usually subtly lengthen the left hand accompaniment, and sometimes right hand notes.

The main places for lengthening include bars with ornaments, high points of a phrase, strong or medium beats, starts of new melodic patterns, and melodic leaps. Lengthening affects the accompaniment more when there are trills or ornaments in the right hand, such as in bar 44. Koczalski lengthens the fourth quaver pulse and Rosenthal lengthens the fifth and sixth quaver

74 pulses in bar 44 to accommodate the trill. Demidenko also lengthens the pulses in bar 44 to accommodate the trill, but I have labelled it as a ritardando because it affects the whole bar.

There is no indication of tradition between pianists of the same pedagogical line or nationality in relation to the extent of the lengthening in common bars, as there are similarities between pianists of different nationalities, pedagogical lines, and eras. There is more similarity between Rosenthal and Paderewski in terms of the extent of the lengthening used than there is between Rosenthal and the other Mikuli students. There are sometimes individual differences in the quality of lengthening in common bars between pianists of the same nationality, such as between Cortot and Pugno, and also similarities between pianists of different nationalities or eras. An example of this is in bar 45, where seven pianists lengthen the first quaver pulse to differing extents. Six pianists lengthen the bass note but they do not lengthen the first right hand demisemiquaver to a noticeable extent.

K, M, R, C, F, Bar 45: Pa, De

Although Rosenthal and Demidenko lengthen the bass note more than Paderewski, Rosenthal and Paderewski sound more similar to each other than to Demidenko because they play at around the same speed, and they don’t noticeably lengthen the first right hand note in the bar like Demidenko does. Also, Koczalski is more similar to Cortot than the other Polish pianists, as Koczalski and Cortot lengthen the bass note subtly, but Michalowski, Friedman, Rosenthal, Paderewski and Demidenko lengthen more noticeably.

There is only one bar in which there is a similarity between Mikuli’s students, Koczalski, Michalowski and Rosenthal. Koczalski, Rosenthal, Cortot and Friedman lengthen the first quaver pulse in bar 35, but Cortot and Friedman do so more noticeably than Rosenthal or Koczalski. Koczalski and Rosenthal lengthen the first quaver pulse subtly and it is mainly heard in the right hand, while Cortot and Friedman lengthen notes in both hands on the first quaver pulse. Michalowski does not lengthen the first quaver pulse, but Koczalski and Rosenthal do so very subtly. Friedman is the exception amongst the Polish pianists because he lengthens the first quaver pulse more noticeably than the other Polish pianists. There are no similarities between the French pianists, Cortot and Pugno, as Pugno does not use any lengthening in this bar.

75 Bar 35: K, R, C, F

3. Arpeggiation

The two French pianists use much less arpeggiation than the Polish pianists. The one time that Pugno uses arpeggiation, it is hardly noticeable. Friedman does not use any arpeggiation but he may be the exception amongst the Polish pianists. Demidenko does not use any arpeggiation either. There is no evidence of tradition within pedagogical lines, as Michalowski is most like Paderewski than Koczalski or Rosenthal in his arpeggiation. He has a few places in common with Paderewski, as well as a few individual bars, but unlike Paderewski, he usually arpeggiates quickly.

The pianists usually arpeggiate notes in different bars, and when they arpeggiate in the same bar, it is on a different quaver pulse. Like hand displacement, arpeggiation is mainly used on the first or fourth quaver pulses. Occasionally, Michalowski, Rosenthal and Paderewski arpeggiate on the second, third or fifth quaver pulse. Arpeggiation occurs at the start, end, or high point of a phrase.

Only Polish pianists arpeggiate in common bars, but there are differences between them in terms of where they choose to arpeggiate and the speed of arpeggiation. Sometimes when pianists arpeggiate notes in the same bar they do so on a different quaver pulse. Although Michalowski arpeggiates in a few of the same places as Koczalski and Paderewski, his arpeggiation is quicker. For example, in bar 12, Michalowski and Paderewski arpeggiate right hand notes on the sixth quaver pulse, which is one of the high points of the phrase. Michalowski and Paderewski also arpeggiate right hand notes on the first quaver pulse in bar 7 and on the fifth quaver pulse in bar 14. Each time, Paderewski arpeggiates more slowly than Michalowski. In bar 39, Koczalski and Michalowski arpeggiate right hand notes on the first quaver pulse, which is the end of a phrase, but Koczalski arpeggiates slower than Michalowski.

76 Bar 12: M, Pa

Bar 39: K, M

4. Accelerando

There is only a small quantitative difference between pianists who use accelerando. All of Mikuli’s students use accelerando, but Michalowski uses it more than either Koczalski or Rosenthal, again showing that Koczalski and Rosenthal are more similar than Koczalski and Michalowski in this Berceuse. Demidenko uses accelerando just as often as Rosenthal, and to a similar extent, but in different places. However, Demidenko’s one case of accelerando in bar 34 is in common with Michalowski, and to a smaller extent. This shows that his rubato in this piece is more conservative and infrequent than the early twentieth century pianists’, even though he has been criticised for “indulging in unnecessary rubato” (Haywood nd: np). Demidenko uses accelerando the least, which could be seen as evidence of a difference in tradition between modern and early twentieth century pianists.

Accelerando is usually used during the ascending melodies of the right hand, and sometimes corresponds with a crescendo marking. It creates more contrast between right hand melodic patterns and makes short rhythmic values more brilliant. There are similarities in effect between pianists of different pedagogical lines or nationalities, and differences between pianists of the same pedagogical line or nationality. Cortot sometimes gradually slows down to reach the former tempo after an accelerando, while the other pianists slow down immediately after the accelerando.

The pianists tend to speed up when there are faster note values or double thirds in the right hand. For example, in bars 20-22 the right hand has demisemiquavers, and in bars 25-26 the right hand has semiquaver triplets in double thirds. In these bars, there are similarities in how 77 accelerando is used, between pianists of different pedagogical lines or nationalities, and also differences between pianists of the same pedagogical line or nationality. Demidenko does not use accelerando to the same degree as the early twentieth century pianists.

Bars 20-22:

Five pianists use accelerando in bars 20-22 and in bar 26. In each case, there are similarities between pianists of different nationalities and pedagogical lines. In bars 20-22, Koczalski, Rosenthal, Pugno, Cortot and Friedman play faster than the preceding and following bars. Koczalski, Cortot and Friedman play almost twice as fast in bars 20-22, and the effect is sudden rather than gradual. As soon as the pianists reach bar 23 they slow down considerably. Rosenthal and Pugno don’t speed up as much as Koczalski, Cortot and Friedman, but they speed up suddenly.

Bars 23-27:

Koczalski, Michalowski, Pugno and Cortot speed up immediately from bars 25-26. By bar 27, the pianists return to their former tempo. Cortot slows down at the end of bar 26, but the other

78 pianists only slow down when they reach bar 27. Friedman also speeds up in bars 25-26, but only subtly from his already fast tempo. Friedman lengthens the first note of bar 27, but bar 27 is not much slower than bar 26.

5. Ritardando

Cortot uses ritardando the most but Pugno does not use ritardando, so the biggest difference in quantity is between the two French pianists. Ritardando is mainly used in common bars and only at the end of a phrase. There are some similarities between pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and era but no consistent similarities between Mikuli’s students, between the Polish pianists, or between the French pianists in how they use ritardando. There are similarities between pianists of different nationalities and eras though.

Michalowski and Cortot use ritardando in three of the same bars. Koczalski has bars in common with Cortot and Demidenko. In bar 44, four of the pianists use ritardando. Michalowksi and Cortot play bar 44 about twice as slowly as in bar 45. Friedman and Demidenko do not slow down as much as Michalowski or Cortot, but they slow down to a similar extent to each other.

Bars 44-45:

There are more similarities between Michalowski and Cortot than between Michalowski and Paderewski in bar 18. Michalowski and Cortot slow down immediately and very noticeably when they reach bar 18. They slow down even more toward the end of the bar, but Cortot does so more. Paderewski only starts his ritardando halfway through bar 18 and does not slow down as much as Michalowski or Cortot. Only in bar 62 are Koczalski and Rosenthal similar in the way they use ritardando. In bar 62, Koczalski and Rosenthal slow down noticeably and to a

79 similar extent whereas Cortot slows down only in the second half of bar 62, and to a lesser degree. However, the other Mikuli student, Michalowski and the other French pianist, Pugno do not use ritardando at all in bar 62. Again, this shows another difference between Koczalski and Michalowski, who are thought to be of the same tradition and have a similar playing style.

Bar 18:

Bar 62:

Summary

There is a large difference in quantity of rubato used amongst the pianists, especially between Koczalski and Friedman. Although Koczalski, Michalowski and Rosenthal were students of Mikuli, Michalowski uses rubato about half as many times as Koczalski or Rosenthal, which contrasts with the notion that Koczalski and Michalowski have a more similar playing style than Koczalski and Rosenthal. Demidenko uses about as much rubato as Cortot, showing that Demidenko’s rubato, whether it is still considered obtrusive or not, is not as abundant as Cortot’s.

There are significant quantitative differences between different nationalities, which may show traces of tradition. Polish pianists, Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski use the most rubato overall, a large portion of which is hand displacement, while the French pianists, Cortot and Pugno use less rubato, and much less hand displacement. Friedman is the exception amongst the Polish pianists as he uses little rubato, and only displaces the hands twice. In terms of the overall quantity of rubato, Friedman is closer to Pugno than to any other Polish pianist.

80 Those who play at a faster tempo use less rubato. Pugno and Friedman have the fastest tempi out of the eight pianists, and also use the least rubato. However, Demidenko does not use as much rubato as Koczalski or Michalowski, even though he plays at a slightly slower tempo. Therefore, although there is the tendency to use less rubato at a faster speed, it does not mean that those who play at a slower tempo use more rubato.

Hand displacements are mainly used on the first or fourth quaver pulses, and usually occur at the start, end, high point or low point of a phrase. In common bars, the pianists sometimes displace the hands on different pulses from each other, showing that there are a variety of places where it may be acceptable to use hand displacement. However, the pianists usually use hand displacement in a way in which the right hand comes very soon after the left hand so that the rhythm is not affected much.

Koczalski, Rosenthal, Paderewski and Demidenko occasionally use hand displacement more noticeably and these occur in different places, highlighting the individuality of each pianist. Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski are more similar to each other in their style of hand displacement than to Michalowski or Friedman because they use hand displacement on consecutive quaver pulses. The French pianists displace the hands in places in common with the Polish pianists, but do so rarely, which may show difference in tradition in the use of hand displacement between the French pianists, and a few of the Polish pianists.

Lengthening is used mainly on the first quaver pulse of the bars and is usually subtle. The pianists usually lengthen the accompaniment when the right hand notes are lengthened. This seems to contradict the advice Chopin would give, Rhythm and measure […] are wholly and generally not to be touched. The left hand should be as a Kapellmeister; not for a moment should it waver or hesitate. It is a clock; with the right hand do what you like and are able (Szulc 1986: 109 cited in Skowron 2004: 15).

This analysis shows that eminent early twentieth century pianists, including Mikuli’s students, use lengthening in the accompaniment. Considering this, it is understandable that the pianist, Emanuel Ax asserts, “I don’t believe Chopin or Mozart wanted every note of the left hand to be an exact mathematical measurement” (Siepmann 1995: 256).

There is no indication of tradition within pedagogical lines, nationalities or eras in relation to both frequency and extent of lengthening used, although individual characteristics can be noted. There is more similarity between Rosenthal and Paderewski in terms of the extent of the lengthening used than there is between Rosenthal and the other Mikuli students. There are

81 sometimes individual differences in the extent of lengthening between pianists of the same nationality. There are also similarities between pianists of different nationalities or eras. For example, Cortot lengthens notes to a greater degree than the other pianists, which is an individual characteristic of his playing, rather than evidence of tradition.

The pianists usually arpeggiate notes in different places but it occurs at the start, end, or high point of a phrase. Like hand displacement, arpeggiation is mainly used on the first or fourth quaver pulses. The French pianists use less arpeggiation than the Polish pianists. Demidenko does not use any arpeggiation either, and this could be seen as evidence of a tradition within eras. There is no evidence of tradition within pedagogical lines in the area of arpeggiation. Michalowski is most like Paderewski than the other Mikuli students, Koczalski or Rosenthal in the way that he arpeggiates notes, but unlike Paderewski, he mainly arpeggiates quickly.

Accelerando is usually used noticeably during the ascending melodies of the right hand, and sometimes corresponds with a crescendo marking. It creates contrast between right hand melodic patterns and makes short rhythmic values more brilliant. Demidenko uses accelerando the least in both quantity and quality, so there may be traces of tradition within the eras in the way accelerando is used in Chopin’s music. Cortot sometimes gradually slows down after an accelerando, while other pianists slow down immediately.

Ritardando is always used at the end of a phrase and it is sometimes used very noticeably. This confirms Methuen-Campbell’s earlier observation that the “whole tempo shifts into a faster or slower speed for a particular episode […] in various bars of the Berceuse” (1992: 194) in the recordings by Koczalski, Rosenthal and Pugno. It is not just the students of Chopin’s pupils who use ritardando in this Berceuse, but also other pianists of the Polish tradition such as Paderewski and Friedman, making a stronger case for the noticeable use of these rubato techniques in Chopin’s Berceuse than written historical documents would suggest. The following analyses of pieces from different genres will examine how the selected master Chopinists use ritardando and other rubato techniques in the works under study.

82 3.2. Etudes

The Etudes Op.10 (1829-1833) and Op.25 (1837) include metronome markings in addition to expressive markings on the score. In the Op.10 Etudes, the differences in metronome rates between the autographs and first editions are tiny. According to Higgins, one can accept the metronome markings on the autographs or the first editions and “know he is close to Chopin’s ideas of tempo in these pieces” (1973: 110). However, Methuen-Campbell notes that Chopin’s metronome markings have to be “viewed within the context of the lighter-actioned pianos he had in mind when writing; many of the tempi prescribed are on the fast side” (1992: 191). The following analyses of Etudes Op.10 No.5, and the Etudes Op.25 Nos.2, 6, and 9, all of which are fast Etudes, will reveal starting tempi and overall tempi achieved by pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition, and how much of a deviation from the metronome marking is audible and significant.

It is expected that pianists would use rubato more sparingly in these faster pieces, and that the types of rubato that do not change the speed of the piece will be used more abundantly. I will look at how frequently and noticeably each rubato technique is used in each piece, and the apparent reasons for its use.

The use of ritardando by Koczalski in the Etudes has been discussed briefly in the literature. Higgins says that Chopin’s music sometimes demands the “gentle slackening at the end of many of the poetic lines defined by the master’s slurs” (1981: 41) and Methuen-Campbell reveals that Koczalski’s “readings of the more rapid etudes feature frequent ritardandos at phrase endings” (1992: 196). The analyses of the Etudes Op.10 No.5, and Etudes Op.25 Nos.2 and 6 will confirm whether Koczalski uses ritardando any more frequently or noticeably than the other pianists.

Etude Op.10 No.5

The first etude that I will analyse is the Etude Op.10 No.5. Koczalski calls this Etude a …bedazzlement of brilliant pianistic technique. The touch is full of spirit but its gay air removes nothing of its character of elegant distinction. The charm of the conception, the energy of the rhythm, the caressing melody make this etude one of the most appreciated compositions by Chopin (Koczalski 1998: 131)11.

11 C’est un éblouissement de brillante technique pianistique. Le jeu est plein d’entrain, mais son air de gaieté ne lui ôte rien de son cachet d’élégante distinction. Le charme de la conception, l’énergie du rythme, la caressante mélodie font de cette étude une des compositions les plus appréciacées de Chopin. 83 The recordings are by Koczalski (before 1948)12, Rosenthal (1931)13, Cortot (1933)14, Friedman (1928)15, Lukasiewicz (1948)16 and Shebanova (2007)17. Koczalski, Rosenthal and Cortot are students of Chopin’s students, and Friedman is part of the Polish Chopin tradition. Shebanova is a modern pianist who performs on the Erard. Tempo

The metronome marking on the score of Etude Op.10 No.5, according to the Paderewski edition (1949), is Crotchet = MM116. The tempo marking is Vivace.

Comparative Graph

Friedman has the fastest overall and starting tempi, while Lukasiewicz’s performance has the slowest overall and starting tempi. The difference between Lukasiewicz’s starting tempo of

12 Raoul Koczalski Plays Chopin 1970, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 13 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Rosenthal 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 14 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Alfred Cortot Vol.1 1999, CD-ROM, Phillips Classics, London. 15 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 16 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Lucasiewicz 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 17 Chopin: Tatiana Shebanova 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 84 Crotchet = MM103 and Cortot’s starting tempo of Crotchet = MM130 is very noticeable when listening. Even the difference between Rosenthal’s starting tempo of Crotchet = MM117 and Lukasiewicz’s starting tempo is quite audible. This difference of about MM14 changes the character of the beginning. Lukasiewicz’s slower tempo gives the performance a more leisurely character than the others, and does not achieve the Vivace expressive marking as well as the other pianists, who each start at a minimum of Crotchet = MM117, which is very close to the metronome marking of Crotchet = MM116. While Methuen-Campbell (1992) affirms that Chopin’s metronome markings can be adapted to suit the modern piano by replacing speed with clarity of texture, Lukasiewicz’s performance does not sound any clearer in texture than the other performances, which have faster tempi. The other pianists achieve clarity of texture even though their overall tempo is close to the metronome marking.

There is more disparity in tempo between the selected pianists from the Polish tradition than between the other pianists. Cortot has a similar overall average tempo to Polish pianists Koczalski and Rosenthal, indicating that pianists of different nationalities have a similar choice of tempo in the Etude Op.10 No.5. Also, Shebanova’s overall tempo is close to the overall tempo of Koczalski, Rosenthal and Cortot, revealing consistency between the modern pianist’s tempo and the early twentieth century pianists’ tempo. The tempo of these four pianists is also close to the score’s metronome marking, showing that it is possible to successfully keep close to the metronome marking of the Etude Op.10 No.5 on a modern piano. I concur with Higgins’ (1973) advice that modern pianists should follow metronome markings as closely as possible, especially for the Opus 10 Etudes.

As with the overall tempi, the tempi of the first four bars show more variance between pianists of the same nationality than between pianists of a different nationality. For example, Koczalski has the fastest beginning tempo, and Lukasiewicz has the slowest beginning tempo, playing at about 80% of Koczalski’s speed. There is also variance between pianists of the same pedagogical line. Rosenthal starts slower than Koczalski, and they both have a closer tempo to Friedman than to each other. Shebanova’s starting tempo is close to the starting tempo of Koczalski and Friedman, again showing that there is consistency between the modern pianist’s tempo and the early twentieth century pianists’ tempo.

All of the performers have a considerably faster starting tempo than their overall tempo, which indicates that more slowing down tends to be used than accelerando, or that the pianists intended to play at a certain tempo but did not keep it up for the entire piece. However, compared to the other pianists, Friedman’s starting tempo is the closest to his overall tempo, which is the closest match to the score’s metronome marking. All the pianists except

85 Lukasiewicz start faster than the metronome marking; perhaps to portray the brillante expression marking that is above the first bar.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a considerable difference in quantity of rubato used amongst the pianists in this piece. Arpeggiation is the main form of rubato for four of the pianists, indicating that tempo modification via lengthening, shortening, ritardando and accelerando are less popular forms of rubato in this Etude. Most of the early twentieth century pianists use rubato more often than Shebanova. The exception is Koczalski, who does not use any arpeggiation, but still uses lengthening sparingly like the other pianists. If none of the early twentieth century pianists had used arpeggiation, only Friedman could be said to use more rubato than Shebanova. This could be evidence of a tradition within the early twentieth century to use more arpeggiation than is indicated in the score in the Etude Op.10 No.5. There are considerable differences in the quantity of rubato used between the Polish pianists. Friedman uses the most variety of rubato. Mikuli’s students, Koczalski and Rosenthal use different forms of rubato from one another, and Rosenthal uses rubato nine instances more than Koczalski, showing that in this piece there is no similarity in ratio of rubato within pedagogical lines. Further discussion of each rubato technique follows.

86 Common ways rubato is used

1. Arpeggiation 2. Lengthening 3. Ritardando 4. Hand Displacement

1. Arpeggiation

Mikuli wrote that in chords and double notes, Chopin “demanded that the notes be struck strictly simultaneously; breaking was allowed only where the composer himself had specified” (Mikuli in Eigeldinger 1986: 41). Although Mikuli was one of Rosenthal’s piano teachers, Rosenthal still uses arpeggiation where it is not marked. Only Koczalski, who also studied with Mikuli, and Shebanova, the modern pianist, follow Mikuli’s advice in not using any arpeggiation.

Rosenthal uses arpeggiation the most frequently closely followed by Friedman, while Cortot and Lukasiewicz use arpeggiation at about half the frequency of Rosenthal. The main places for arpeggiation are at the start of a phrase or slur, including when there are accents on the arpeggiated chords. Less often it is used at the high point or end of a phrase. When arpeggiation is used due to large hand stretches, the pianists arpeggiate very quickly. Lukasiewicz mainly uses arpeggiation at the start of the piece, and Friedman uses it in the middle and end of the piece. These individual places are discussed in the next chapter.

Cortot always arpeggiates a chord in common places with another pianist in Op.10 No.5. Unlike the Berceuse, where Cortot and Pugno use arpeggiation less frequently than the Polish pianists, in the Etude Op.10 No.5, Cortot uses arpeggiation as frequently as Lukasiewicz, and more often than Koczalski, who uses none, which indicates that the choice to arpeggiate in a piece is individual to each pianist.

There are also similarities between pianists of different nationalities and pedagogical lines in the speed of their arpeggiation, as Cortot, Rosenthal and Friedman arpeggiate similarly in their common places. Lukasiewicz usually arpeggiates more slowly, but he is the exception amongst the pianists. This may be due to his slower tempo, which could show a link between overall tempo and speed of arpeggiation.

87 In bar 48, four pianists arpeggiate the chord on the first quaver pulse, which is at the high point of the left hand phrase. Rosenthal, Cortot and Friedman arpeggiate quickly, while Lukasiewicz’s arpeggiation is slower, which gives a gentler effect.

Bar 48:

R, C, F, L

However, Lukasiewicz and Rosenthal arpeggiate very quickly on the second crotchet pulses in bars 41 and 43, at the start of the left hand phrases marked poco marcato, which does emphasise the starts of these phrases somewhat. With a similar effect, Rosenthal and Friedman quickly arpeggiate the left hand notes that fall on the second crotchet beat in bar 72, emphasising the first note of the left hand slurs.

Bars 41-43:

R, L R, L Bars 71-72:

R, F

Rosenthal, Friedman and Cortot arpeggiate the last chords of bars 75 and 76 very quickly, probably because the chords span a tenth and need to be arpeggiated in order to sound, even though there is no arpeggiation marked in the score.

88 Bars 75-76:

R, C, F R, C, F Rosenthal and Friedman quickly arpeggiate the left hand on the first beat in bar 64, which is at the end of a phrase. This emphasis is justified because the arpeggiated chord also comes at the climax of a crescendo.

Bars 62-64:

R, F

Rosenthal and Friedman’s arpeggiation of the chords on the first crotchet pulse in bar 66 seems to be in response to the expressive markings in the previous bar, or a way to mark the change of the right hand rhythm from semiquavers to a crotchet. On the third quaver pulse in bar 66, Rosenthal arpeggiates very quickly, and Cortot plays the D flat in the right hand first, then the F and B flat in the right hand together after the D flat, which makes the chord only half arpeggiated. Their arpeggiation creates a gentler effect than block chords, as the score marks delicatissimo and smorzando in bar 65.

Bars 65-66: R, C R, F

These licences with arpeggiation that the pianists take are in line with Fritz’s reasoning, “Anticipation is likely the most satisfactory performance for the many chords that are rolled”

89 (1981: 46). The recordings by early twentieth century pianists is further evidence that Chopin and his contemporaries used arpeggiation of chords even when it was not marked in the music in order to create melodic rubato.

2. Lengthening

Koczalski, Cortot, Friedman and Shebanova use lengthening in this etude up to three instances each. For Koczalski and Shebanova lengthening is the main form of rubato that they use since they do not use arpeggiation. Lengthening occurs mainly at the starts of phrases or a new pattern, or before the start of a phrase. There are more individual places than common places, highlighting the individuality of the pianists. Shebanova only uses lengthening to delay the next bar, while the other pianists mostly use it on the first beat.

There are only two common bars for lengthening since it is scarcely used. In bar 16, Cortot and Shebanova lengthen the fourth quaver pulse to delay bar 17, which is the start of a new right hand phrase, showing a similarity between pianists of different eras.

Bars 16-17: C, Sh

In bar 41, Koczalski and Friedman subtly lengthen the first beat, which delays and accentuates the start of the left hand phrase. This same bar Lukasiewicz and Rosenthal arpeggiate very quickly on the second crotchet pulse, revealing how four Polish pianists mark the left hand phrase using different forms of rubato.

Bar 41: K, F

90 In Op.10 No.5, lengthening is used sparingly to delay a new phrase or to emphasise the start of a phrase, which is somewhat different to the Berceuse, where lengthening is used more often and in more varied places, including the start of new melodic patterns or leaps. The difference in tempo may account for this.

3. Ritardando

Cortot uses the most ritardando, while Koczalski and Rosenthal use none. This is contrary to Methuen-Campbell’s generalisation that Koczalski’s “readings of the more rapid etudes feature frequent ritardandos at phrase endings” (Methuen-Campbell 1992: 196). However, it is common for other pianists to use ritardando at the end of a phrase, before the start of a new section in this Etude. Ritardando affects the accompaniment of right hand semiquavers each time it is used.

Friedman is quite individual in the way he uses ritardando. For example, in bars 47-48, Friedman, Cortot, Lukasiewicz and Shebanova use ritardandi just before the return of the first theme. Friedman’s slowing is more sudden, and he gradually eases back into the original tempo, while Cortot, Lukasiewicz and Shebanova return to the original tempo immediately after the slowest point.

Bars 47-48:

Koczalski recommends that In the 57th, 58th, 59th and 60th measures one will make a ritenuto, it is like a hesitation; the effect of it is ravishing and original. And the right hand will accentuate lightly the following notes: b flat, b flat, a flat, a flat, g flat, d flat, a flat, g flat, d flat. This passage will thus gain in elegance (Koczalski 1998: 131)18.

18 Dans les 57e, 58e, 59e et 60e mesures on fera un ritenuto, c’est comme une hésitation; l’effet en est ravissant et original. À la main droite on accentuera légèrement les notes suivantes: si bémol, si bémol, la bémol, la bémol, sol bémol, ré bémol, la bémol, sol bémol, ré bémol. Ce passage gagnera ainsi en élégance. 91 Bars 57-60:

Koczalski himself does not audibly slow down in bars 57-60, but he does noticeably lengthen the first quaver pulse in bar 57, which may be the effect he was referring to. While none for the pianists audibly slow down in bars 57-60, in bar 56, Koczalski, Friedman and Shebanova use ritardandi before the start of this new theme. However, Friedman’s ritardando is more of a ritenuto, with a startling pause before entering bar 57, while Koczalski and Shebanova’s ritardando is subtler. The way Friedman uses ritardando in these bars highlights his individuality, and is not typical of how the other Polish pianists use ritardando.

Bars 55-57:

4. Hand Displacement

Only Koczalski, Friedman and Lukasiewicz use hand displacement once or twice in this Etude. For Koczalski, this is much less often than in the Berceuse, where he uses hand displacement fifty-seven times. This is due to the shorter length and faster tempo of the Etude, as well as there being fewer opportunities for the technique to be used. Koczalski and Lukasiewicz use hand displacement noticeably in bar 41 on the first quaver pulse; the right hand sounds like the main melody on the first beat, but then the melody shifts to the left hand on the second crotchet beat.

92 Bar 41: K, L

Summary

As expected, rubato is used sparingly, with the most common form used being arpeggiation, which is not a type of tempo modification. Pianists of the same pedagogical line have different ways of using rubato in Op.10 No.5. Rosenthal uses arpeggiation where it is not marked, which is contrary to Mikuli’s advice, while Koczalski uses no arpeggiation. Perhaps this is because Rosenthal thought that Rafael Joseffy, a Liszt pupil, was a better instructor than Mikuli. Friedman uses arpeggiation about as many times as Rosenthal. Friedman admired Rosenthal’s Chopin scholarship, as he “consulted with Rosenthal in preference to such renowned Warsaw- based Chopin scholars as the pianist Aleksander Michalowski” (Mitchell 2006: 2). Cortot’s use of rubato in general is similar to Lukasiewicz, as both do not use lengthening, shortening, or accelerando, but they do use ritardando and arpeggiation. However, their performances still sound rather different because of Cortot’s faster tempo and apparently wider range of dynamics.

Koczalski and Rosenthal use different forms of rubato in that Koczalski is more conservative, only lengthening a few notes, but Rosenthal uses arpeggiation in abundance. While Friedman and Lukasiewicz were both Leschetizsky’s students, they have very different interpretations of the Etude Op.10 No.5. Friedman uses a wider variety of rubato techniques, while Lukasiewicz mainly uses arpeggiation. Bars 48 and 67 are the only places where both Friedman and Lukasiewicz use arpeggiation, and considering the differences in their tempo and use of rubato, this similarity makes a strong case for the use of arpeggiation in these places, in agreement with the literature advocating the use of arpeggiation. Friedman uses rubato in surprising ways, which are not typical of other Polish pianists, and are elaborated in Chapter 4.

93 Etude Op.25 No.2

The second etude that I will analyse and discuss is the Etude Op.25 No.2 in recordings by Koczalski (before 1948)19, Cortot (1933)20, Paderewski (1912)21 and Shebanova (2007)22.

Koczalski writes that Chopin himself named this etude “the portrait made in music of the soul of Mademoiselle Marie” (he refers here to Maria Wodzinska, to whom Chopin was engaged in Dresden). He would without doubt depict in this composition the delicate elegance and the concerned tenderness of his fiancée (Koczalski 1998: 104)23.

Koczalski also writes, “One will endeavour to imitate the playing of the composer” (1998: 104)24. His interpretation of this etude may reveal what he meant by it in relation to tempo and rubato. Unlike the Etude Op.10 No.5, this Etude has continuous single notes in both hands, which takes away the opportunity for arpeggiation, and Op.25 No.2 also includes an anacrusis. However, the two Etudes both have a simple duple meter, with the right hand playing triplets throughout, and the music for both Etudes can be divided into even phrases.

19 Raoul Koczalski Plays Chopin 1970, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 20 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Alfred Cortot Vol.1 1999, CD-ROM, Phillips Classics, London. 21 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Paderewski 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 22 Chopin: Tatiana Shebanova 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 23 Chopin lui-même nonmait cette éetude <> (il s’agit ici de Maria Wodszinska, à laquelle Chopin se fiança à Dresde). Il voulait sans doute dépeindre dans cette composition l’élégance delicate et la tendresse inquiéte de sa fiancée. 24 On s’efforcera don d’imiter le jeu du compositeur. 94 Tempo

The metronome marking on the score of Etude Op.25 No.2, according to the Wiener Urtext Edition is Minim = MM112. The tempo marking is Presto.

Comparative Graph

Koczalski and Cortot stay close to the score’s metronome marking of Minim= MM112, although they start faster. All of the performers have a considerably faster beginning tempo than overall tempo, just as in the Etude Op.10 No.5, showing that there is a tendency to start faster than the overall tempo in the faster pieces, and that the overall tempo is usually slower than the metronome marking, even if the starting tempo may exceed the metronome marking. Koczalski’s overall tempo is the closest match to the score’s metronome marking, but is still only 90% of the metronome marking. The difference of Minim = MM10 between Paderewski and Shebanova is audible but subtle. However, the difference of Minim = MM17 between Koczalski and Paderewski is more noticeable, with Paderewski’s performance sounding more relaxed, but still achieving the Presto character at this slower tempo.

95 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

The pianists are very similar in the quantity and ratio of the rubato they use, even though they come from different pedagogical lines and eras. All the performers use minimal rubato, but notably, they each use lengthening, ritardando and hand displacement, as in the Etude Op.10 No.5.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Ritardando 3. Hand Displacement

1. Lengthening

All four pianists use lengthening sparingly and have common places to lengthen, the main places being before a large melodic leap, or to emphasise the upbeat. This shows that lengthening notes before a melodic leap is common across genres of Chopin’s music, since lengthening of this type is also used in the Berceuse. The quality of lengthening differs for each pianist, but most of the time the note is lengthened to at least twice its value. In their book, The

96 Rhythmic Structure of Music (1960), Cooper and Meyer mention that “usually, the anacrusis is lengthened” in Chopin’s Prelude Op.28 No.19 since at the beginning of the piece, the anacrusis “sails up from the B-flat to the G with a sense of continuous movement […] One might call this anacrusis a lyrical one, or, perhaps, a contemplative one” (1960: 126).

Prelude Op.28 No.19 – Bars 1-3:

The selected pianists apply the contemplative character to the anacrusis in other Chopin pieces, including the Etudes. Cortot and Paderewski lengthen the anacrusis in the Etude Op.25 No.2 greatly, to at least three times its written value. This reflects the advice that Cortot gives on the interpretation of the anacrusis in Chopin’s music in his book Alfred Cortot's Studies In Musical Interpretation (1937). Cortot says to remember the “general character of the anacrusis in Chopin’s music […] Chopin employs it in the sense of holding back, as if he were bashful or hesitated to begin” (Cortot 1937: 47). This idea is further examined in the Prelude Op.28 No.7, the piece that Cortot was discussing when he wrote this comment, and in the Prelude Op.28 No.19.

Etude Op.25 No.2 – Bar 1:

In contrast to Cortot and Paderewski, Koczalski and Shebanova do not lengthen the anacrusis to even twice the written value, yet it does not sound like they rush into their performance. Paderewski’s lengthening is the most extreme, lasting at least four times the written value, and seems overdone compared to Cortot’s already hesitant start.

Also, all four pianists lengthen the first note of bar 66, which is marked with an accent and precedes a large leap in the right hand. Cortot lengthens the note the most, making it almost

97 three times longer than its written value. Koczalski and Paderewski lengthen the note to twice its written value, and Shebanova lengthens the note more subtly. Koczalski, Cortot and Paderewski also lengthen the first right hand note in bar 67 but to a lesser extent than in bar 66. As in bar 66, there is a relatively large interval between the first and second quavers in bar 67.

K, C, Pa, Sh K, C, Pa Bars 66-68:

2. Ritardando

There are similarities in quantity of ritardandi between pianists of different nationality and era. Koczalski and Cortot use it three times each, and Paderewski and Shebanova use it twice. Just as in the Etude Op.10 No.5, Koczalski does not use ritardando any more frequently than other early twentieth century pianists. As in the previously analysed pieces, ritardando is used at the end of a phrase. However, in this Etude it is also used at the height of a phrase. For example, all four pianists use ritardando in bar 57, on the notes marked with a mezzo staccato. The pianists slow down halfway through bar 57 and return to the previous tempo in bar 58. Their ritardando helps them to play the melody notes more expressively and to achieve a clearer mezzo staccato effect.

Bars 57-58:

Cortot slows down more a lot more noticeably than Koczalski and Shebanova near the end of the piece. Cortot uses ritardando more noticeably than Koczalski at the end of bar 65, approaching the tonic chord and accented right hand note in bar 66. Koczalski and Shebanova start slowing down halfway through bar 67 but Cortot starts slowing down from the beginning of bar 67, as he starts with a lengthened first beat.

98 Cortot’s very noticeable ritardando at the end of the piece may sound exaggerated compared to the other pianists’ more subtle slowing down, but since this is a common place to use ritardando, it may be more acceptable to slow down to this extent, especially since Cortot uses ritardando infrequently like the other pianists. The reason for the ritardando may be to highlight the diminuendo marking in bar 66, which leads to a pianissimo in bar 68, and the termination of the perpetual quavers and crotchets in the hands. Unlike the Etude Op.10 No.5, which ends fortissimo, this Etude ends quietly. The forte dynamic makes a ritardando at the end of the Etude Op.10 No.5 inappropriate.

3. Hand Displacement

As in the Etude Op.10 No.5, the pianists use hand displacement sparingly, and there are similarities in the looseness of the hand displacement between Koczalski and Paderewski, and modern pianist Shebanova. For example, Koczalski, Paderewski, and Shebanova displace the hands on the first note of bar 66, which is marked with an accent and could be seen as the first or last note of a four bar phrase. Koczalski, Paderewski and Shebanova each play the left hand before the right hand loosely. Koczalski wrote that the “placement together of the triplets of crotchets in the right hand and the black notes of the left is extremely interesting. The two hands must be independent of each other” (Koczalski 1998: 104)25. Koczalski’s hand displacement in this bar may be a way of portraying this independence. This is similar to how hand displacement occurs in bar 41 of the Etude Op.10 No.5, where it is also used noticeably at the start of a phrase, with an interval of at least an octave between the first and second right hand notes in the bar.

K, Pa, Sh Bar 66:

25 La superposition des triolets de croches à la main droite et de noires à la gauche est extrêmement intéressante. Les deux mains doivent être indépendantes l’une de l’autre. 99 Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bar 41:

Summary

The pianists use rubato sparingly and the two most common techniques are lengthening and ritardando. The main places for lengthening are before a large melodic leap, or to emphasise the upbeat, and usually the note is lengthened to twice its written value. This is slightly different to the circumstances for lengthening in the Etude Op.10 No.5, where the lengthened notes accentuate the starts of phrases or delay the next phrase. However, the pianists do use ritardando at the height or end of a phrase in the Etude Op.25 No.2, which is a type of lengthening on a larger scale. Hand displacement is used on accented notes or at the start or high point in a phrase or pattern, and notably where there is at least an octave between the displaced melody note and the following one, as in the Etude Op.10 No.5.

Etude Op.25 No.6

Unlike the Etude Op.25 No.2, the Etude Op.25 No.6 includes a change to a distantly related key and a significantly different texture for its middle section, bars 27-34. This change may invoke the use of more rubato techniques to highlight this change. Koczalski describes this Etude as …among the most difficult compositions of Chopin. The thirds of the right hand are heard throughout the entire piece. Their sound is gentle just as a light breeze. In the bass interesting harmonies present themselves and with admirable melodic garlands. Overall the impression that is characterised well in G sharp minor is completely melancholic: that of the landscape of autumn. This etude has the goal of obtaining a regular execution of the thirds and suppleness of the hand (Koczalski 1998: 129)26.

26 Cette étude compte parmi les plus difficiles compositions de Chopin. Les tierces à la main droite se font entendre dans tout le cours du morceau; leur son est doux, ainsi qu’une légère brise. Dans la basse se présentent d’intéressentes de l’ensemble, que caratérise bien la tonalité en sol dièse minuer, est tout à fait mélancholique: celle d’un paysage d’automne. Cette étude a pour but d’obtenir une exécution régulière des tierces et d’assouplir la main. 100 The recordings studied are by Koczalski (1928)27, Cortot (1933)28, Friedman (1924)29 and Shebanova (2007)30.

Tempo

The metronome marking on the score of Etude Op.25 No.6, according to the Wiener Urtext Edition (1973) edited by Paul Badura-Skoda, is Minim = MM69. The tempo marking is Allegro for the first 61 bars. The average tempo of bars 1-61 was calculated rather than the entire piece (bars 1-63) because in bars 62-63 the tempo marking changes to Lento.

Comparative Graph

Each of the pianists stay close to the score’s metronome marking in their overall tempo, with Koczalski’s overall tempo being the closest match. The early twentieth century pianists use a variety of tempi for the first four bars, with the greatest difference being between Cortot and Koczalski. This difference of Minim = MM11 is easily audible and is significant as Koczalski’s slower tempo makes his performance sound more leisurely, with less of a forward movement in the left hand melody. Cortot has the fastest beginning tempo, closely followed by Shebanova.

27 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Vol. VI 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 28 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Alfred Cortot Vol.1 1999, CD-ROM, Phillips Classics, London. 29 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 30 Chopin: Tatiana Shebanova 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

101 When listening to the start of Cortot and Shebanova’s performances, the difference of Minim = MM3 is not audible or significant. Cortot and Shebanova have a considerably faster starting tempo than overall tempo, and Koczalski and Friedman’s overall tempo is faster than their starting tempo, which is surprising because both Koczalski and Friedman use lengthening of notes and ritardando in their performances. They must play certain bars undetectably faster throughout the piece.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There are differences in quantity of rubato used between the early twentieth century pianists, and also between the Polish pianists, Koczalski and Friedman. Koczalski uses the most rubato, and at least twice as many times as Friedman, which is in contrast to the Etude Op.10 No.5 and the Etude Op.25 No.2, where Koczalski uses rubato as sparingly or less than the other pianists. Shebanova uses the least quantity and variety of rubato, although the early twentieth century pianists only use the other forms of rubato once or twice. All four pianists use lengthening and ritardando in this Etude.

102 Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Ritardando 3. Hand Displacement

1. Lengthening

Friedman and Cortot lengthen the same quantity of notes, which shows similarity between pianists of different nationalities in the frequency of lengthening used. However, Shebanova’s lengthening is mainly used as a breath between phrases, rather than as a way to emphasise certain notes. This is different to the early twentieth century pianists, who tend to use ritardando instead of lengthening at the end of the phrases.

The early twentieth pianists have common places to lengthen, usually at the end of the right or left hand phrases or at the start of a phrase or contrasting left hand melody. Friedman and Cortot mainly lengthen the starts of phrases, while Koczalski sometimes lengthens notes more randomly, or at the end of a phrase. As expected, the pianists use rubato to mark the change in texture and key in bar 27. In bar 27, Koczalski, Cortot and Friedman lengthen the first quaver pulse, which highlights the start of the new section and a change in right hand pattern but Koczalski lengthens more than Cortot or Friedman. Koczalski’s lengthening is more noticeable, not only because the first right hand note of the bar is lengthened, but also because it is combined with hand displacement, showing the cumulative emphasising effect of combining rubato techniques. Although each pianist creates a slightly different effect with their lengthening, they all effectively separate the new section from the previous section and in Friedman’s case, achieve the leggierissimo marking.

Bar 27: K, C, F

In bars 10 and 22, where the left hand has descending triads, Koczalski lengthens the left hand chord on the third quaver pulse noticeably. This sounds expressively effective, as it provides

103 shape in the descending chordal melody. In bar 22, Shebanova subtly lengthens the chord on the eighth quaver pulse, delaying the next bar. This works well because it allows a little more time for Shebanova to build up the dynamic level to the forte marked in bar 23.

Bar 22: K Sh

In bar 42, Koczalski and Cortot lengthen the left hand chord on the first quaver pulse, but Koczalski lengthens more than Cortot. This highlights the climax of the crescendo and emphasises the last note of the right hand phrase. This demonstrates Koczalski’s advice that the “play of the two hands must be very linked: mostly it must be very regular in the right hand so that the left will make the melody sing. Such are the indispensable conditions for the execution of this etude” (Koczalski 1998: 129)31.

Bars 41-42: K, C

As subtly as in bar 22, Shebanova lengthens the chord on the eighth quaver pulse in bar 42, delaying the next bar.

2. Ritardando

Koczalski and Cortot use ritardando only at the end of a phrase, although Koczalski usually slows down to a greater degree than other pianists. Perhaps Methuen-Campbell was referring to this Etude when mentioning that Koczalski’s “readings of the more rapid etudes feature

31 Le jeu des deux mains sera très lié; de plus il devra être très régulier à la main droite, tandis que la gauche fera chanter la mélodie. Telles sont les conditions indispensables à la bonne execution de cette étude. 104 frequent ritardandos at phrase endings” (1992: 196). However, in bar 34, Cortot slows down more than Koczalski, but it does not sound overdone as it helps to highlight the diminuendi marked in the score.

Bar 34:

Three pianists of different nationalities, pedagogical lines and eras slow down in bar 26 but with different effects. Cortot’s ritardando in bar 26 is very subtle and is audibly slower only on the last three quavers of the bar. Shebanova’s noticeable ritardando helps her to ease into the leggierissimo section, and she couples her slowing down with a diminuendo, even though there is no diminuendo marked in the score in bar 26. Koczalski’s ritardando is a little more noticeable than Shebanova’s, but he does not make a diminuendo.

Bar 26:

Koczalski and Shebanova also use ritardando subtly in bar 18, where a diminuendo is marked. Slight slowing down helps them to ease into the return of the theme in bar 19.

Bar 18:

105 3. Hand Displacement

Koczalski, Cortot and Friedman use hand displacement sparingly and mostly in different places. Cortot uses hand displacement more often and to a greater extent than the others, yet he is still sparing in its use, which indicates that hand displacement is best used sparingly and for a special effect in this Etude. Cortot’s individual use of hand displacement will be discussed in Chapter 4. Both Koczalski and Cortot use hand displacement noticeably on the first notes in bar 49, which is the end of a section. Although both play the right hand loosely after the left, it is effective because they both use hand displacement infrequently, making this phrase ending sound more special.

Bar 49: K, C

Summary

Shebanova uses the least rubato in variety and quantity, in contrast with the early twentieth century pianists. Koczalski uses more rubato in the Etude Op.25 No.6 than in the Etudes Op.10 No.5 and the Etude Op.25 No.2, and his rubato in this Etude mainly consists of lengthening and ritardando, which could be the reason Methuen-Campbell notes that Koczalski’s “readings of the more rapid etudes feature frequent ritardandos at phrase endings” (1992: 196). Although Koczalski uses ritardando and lengthening more frequently and sometimes to a greater extent than the other pianists, none of it sounds overdone, perhaps because he uses a mixture of noticeable and more subtle ritardandi, and it is always at the end of a phrase, in common places with other pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras.

Friedman and Cortot mainly lengthen the starts of phrases, while Koczalski’s more random selection of notes lengthened makes his performance unique. The apparent reason for Koczalski’s lengthening is to add variety to the phrase of descending chords. The different effects created by the pianists in their common places to lengthen show a variety of ways to use lengthening effectively at key points in the music. Shebanova’s subtle lengthening in individual

106 places differentiates her and the early twentieth century pianists, who normally use ritardando instead of lengthening at the end of the phrases.

There is a small difference between pianists in the quantity of hand displacement used. Cortot uses hand displacement more often and when he uses it, he separates the hands to a greater extent than Koczalski or Friedman, which shows Cortot’s individuality. However, Cortot still uses hand displacement infrequently, indicating that hand displacement is more effective when it is used sparingly in the Etudes.

Etude Op.25 No.9

The recordings are by Cortot (1933)32, Friedman (1928)33, Paderewski (1917)34, Lukasiewicz (1948)35, and Shebanova (2007)36. Although there are no recordings by Koczalski of this Etude available, Koczalski has commented on the character of the piece, saying that this “short composition in G flat major has a caressing gracefulness. The melody is sparkling, the harmony the most varied and completely original” (Koczalski 1998: 77)37. Koczalski also recommends, as the score indicates, that “One will join the first three notes of each beat while the fourth will be executed portamento” (Koczalski 1998: 77)38.

The interpretative issues in this piece include the range of tempi that would portray the expressive marking of Allegro Assai, while achieving the recommended articulation, and how close this is to the metronome speed of MM112. The analysis also reveals the most suitable places in the piece to use rubato, since it is used sparingly, and how effective the more individual uses of rubato are, particularly arpeggiation and ritardando.

32 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Alfred Cortot Vol.1 1999, CD-ROM, Phillips Classics, London. 33 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 34 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Paderewski 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 35 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Lucasiewicz 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 36 Chopin: Tatiana Shebanova 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 37 Cette courte composition en sol bémol majeur est d’une grâce caressante. La mélodie en est pétillante, l’harmonie des plus variées et tout à fait originale. 38 On liera les trios premières notes de chaque temps, tandis que la quatrième sera exécutée portamento. 107 Tempo

There are a variety of tempi used by the Polish pianists, with the biggest difference being between Friedman and Paderewski. Friedman’s has the fastest overall tempo and is closest to the score’s metronome marking of Crotchet = MM112. Paderewski’s performance has the slowest overall tempo. Friedman definitely achieves the Allegro Assai character at an overall tempo of Crotchet = MM112, and the music sounds like it presses forward most of the time, but Paderewski’s performance at an overall tempo of Crotchet = MM88 is audibly slower although the difference of MM24 definitely makes Paderewski’s performance sound more relaxed. Paderewski’s relatively slow overall tempo is also influenced by his very noticeable use of ritardando in a few places. Unlike in the Etude Op.10 No.5, Lukasiewicz’s overall tempo in the Etude Op.25 No.9 is not the slowest out of the selected pianists, but his starting tempo of Crotchet = MM93 is still audibly slower than Paderewski’s starting tempo of Crotchet = MM103, and his overall tempo is slower than the other three pianists besides Paderewski. This recording reveals Lukasiewicz’s individual characteristic to play at noticeably slower than average tempi in the Etudes.

Comparative Graph

Cortot has the fastest beginning tempo, followed by Shebanova. Cortot and Shebanova are also close in their overall tempi, showing a similarity between pianists of different eras in relation to tempo. However, their contrasting approaches use of rubato, especially ritardando make their

108 performances sound individual. Friedman and Lukasiewicz have a slightly slower average tempo for the first four bars than for the entire piece. Therefore, it is not necessarily typical of early twentieth century pianists to start fast and slow down later in a Chopin Etude.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

As in the other three Etudes analysed, most of the pianists use rubato sparingly. The Polish pianists use rubato at least seven times, but Cortot uses it twice. Shebanova and Cortot only use lengthening and ritardando, while the Polish pianists also use arpeggiation and hand displacement. There is not much opportunity for rubato in this piece, but looking at the common ways it is used shows where rubato could be used effectively. Since Paderewski uses rubato more frequently than the other pianists in this Etude, his individual rubato choices will be discussed further in the next chapter.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Arpeggiation 3. Ritardando

109 1. Lengthening

All five pianists use lengthening at least once. The main places for lengthening are at starts or high points of phrases or before a new phrase and always in response to dynamic or articulation markings in the score. Paderewski and Friedman use lengthening most frequently, while Shebanova and Cortot only lengthen in individual places. The Polish pianists sometimes have common places to lengthen, although they lengthen to differing degrees. For example, Friedman and Lukasiewicz both lengthen the first beat of the piece, but Friedman lengthens the first right hand semiquaver more than Lukasiewicz, who achieves the lengthening by playing the left hand before the right hand on the first beat. Although they produce different effects, both ways are effective in emphasising the first note.

Bar 1: F, L

The Polish pianists also lengthen notes to a greater extent than Cortot and Shebanova in the individual bars, showing similarities amongst Polish pianists in relation to the quality of their lengthening of notes. For example, in bar 33, Shebanova and Friedman lengthen different parts of the bar. Shebanova’s lengthening on the first quaver pulse is much shorter than Friedman’s lengthening on the second and third quaver pulses, which sounds startling, yet works well because it is a one off use at the climax of the piece.

Bar 33: Sh F

In bar 51, the Polish pianists, Friedman, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz, ignore the staccato marking on the last chord of the piece by lengthening the note, but Cortot and Shebanova observe the staccato. Cortot and Shebanova’s observation of the staccato helps to maintain the lively character of the piece through to the very end, while Friedman, Paderewski and

110 Lukasiewicz’s endings sound more gentle and lyrical. In addition, Friedman adds another tonic chord in the last bar and arpeggiates it. Paderewski also adds a lower G flat on the second crotchet pulse of the last bar, but does not include another chord as Friedman does. Lukasiewicz simply lengthens the quaver to a dotted crotchet value.

Bars 50- 51: F adds tonic note Pa adds a tonic note in bass

Koczalski suggests the use of lengthening in this Etude, saying that before bar 11, one “makes a very short pause, hardly noticeable, but however with a surprising effect” (Koczalski 1998: 77)39. Koczalski’s comment implies that a surprising effect can be appropriate in an etude such as this, which “benefits from being played with lightness and suppleness” (Koczalski 1998: 77)40. Only Paderewski uses lengthening subtly in bar 10, on the third quaver pulse, which heightens the effect of the crescendo marking. Paderewski’s lengthening here is a little surprising, but less so than his other individual instances of lengthening, which are discussed in the next chapter.

Pa Bars 9-11:

39 Avant la 11e on fera une pause très courte, à peine sensible, mais pourtant d’un effet surprenant. 40 Cette étude gagne à être jouée avec légerèté et souplesse. 111 2. Arpeggiation

Only Polish pianists use arpeggiation, with Paderewski using the most. As in the Etude Op.10 No.5, the main places to arpeggiate are on strong beats, the climax of the piece or the high point of a slur. The speed of arpeggiation differs for each pianist, with right hand notes being arpeggiated more slowly than left hand notes. Paderewski uses arpeggiation only in the right hand, but the other Polish pianists use arpeggiation at least once in the left hand.

The Polish pianists have common places to arpeggiate. For example, in bar 33, Friedman plays the first two right hand semiquavers as one arpeggio on the first beat. In the same bar, Lukasiewicz arpeggiates the notes that fall on the second quaver pulse. Both Friedman and Lukasiewicz’s arpeggiation are noticeable and are combined with lengthening in the same place, showing that more than one rubato technique can be effectively used in one place. The fortissimo dynamic marking and appassionato expressive marking that signal the climax of the piece mostly likely prompt these choices of rubato.

Bar 33: F L

In addition, Friedman and Paderewski have two common places to arpeggiate. In bar 50, they arpeggiate similarly for the right hand notes on the fourth quaver pulse. Friedman and Paderewski also arpeggiate the last chord in bar 51 but Friedman adds another chord an octave higher, and Paderewski adds a lower note. Also, Paderewski arpeggiates more quickly, as Friedman has more notes to arpeggiate in his added chord. Although their endings are individual and do not follow the score markings, their freedom to use arpeggiation and add notes suits the light-hearted character of the music and indicates common practice at the time. Koczalski did not mention the use of arpeggiation in this etude, but states that “the measures which finish the etude, must be played rhythmically with care” (Koczalski 1998: 77)41.

41 Enfin les mesures qui terminent l’étude doivent être rythmées avec soin. 112 Bars 50-51: F, Pa

Paderewski and Friedman were Leschetizsky’s students, but Hamilton suggests that Bree’s advice regarding arpeggiation need not be restricted to Leschetizsky and his pupils. Bree asserts that arpeggiation is “suitable where a softer expression needs to be brought out” (Bree 1903: 59 cited in Hamilton 2008: 145). This analysis has shown that arpeggiation is suitable in an even greater variety of places. The pianissimo marked in bar 50, and the use of rests in the right hand may be a clue for the use of rubato to further portray the independence of the last phrase at the close of the piece.

3. Ritardando

All five pianists use ritardando or ritenuto at the end of a phrase or at the climax of the piece. Friedman, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz use ritardando to a greater extent than Shebanova, both in individual and common bars. Paderewski and Shebanova use ritardando in bars 8 and 16, at the end of phrases, but Paderewski slows down more noticeably than Shebanova, who only slows down subtly. Paderewski’s greater extent of slowing has a more surprising effect, but this could be appropriate, as implied by Koczalski’s comments on this piece.

In bar 32, Lukasiewicz slows down more than Shebanova approaching the climax of the piece. Friedman uses ritardando more surprisingly in bar 33, and Lukasiewicz does something similar but not to the same degree. This is similar to Friedman’s sudden ritenutos in the Etude Op.10 No.5. Although surprising, it is still effective because it is only used once in such a surprising way, and the music is quickly brought back to tempo after the event. Koczalski advises the use of ritenuto in the bars leading up to bar 33, recommending that from “the 29th measure, one will play crescendo and ritenuto until the 33rd measure where the dynamic intensity attains its culminating point” (Koczalski 1998: 77)42.

42 À partir de la 29e on jouera crescendo et ritenuto jusqu’à la 33e mesure, où l’intensité dynamique atteint son point culminant 113 Bars 31-33:

In response to the ritenuto marking in bar 36, Cortot and Paderewski slow down very noticeably. In their performances, the music comes to a near halt, which could sound overdone to a listener not accustomed to hearing the rubato of the early twentieth century pianists. Cortot may have taken the idea of a relatively large ritenuto from Paderewski since Cortot recorded his performance of the Etude Op.25 No.9 later (1934) than Paderewski (1917) and Cortot looked up to Paderewski as the “ideal performer. The Polish Pianist captured Cortot’s imagination with his romantic style of interpretation” (Dybowski 1998a: 19). Whether or not Paderewski influenced Cortot in this respect, both pianists use ritenuto to a larger extent than modern audiences would be used to hearing.

Cortot and Lukasiewicz use a subtle ritardando in bars 23-24, which leads to the forte dynamic sign in bar 25 and the left hand octaves, where the “first motive begins again […] but now with more strength” (Koczalski 1998: 77)43. In the same place, Shebanova slows down more noticeably, but it still sounds in character and not overdone, since Shebanova only uses ritardando in three other places and more subtly than here.

Bars 23-25:

43 Le premier motif reprend à la 25e mesure, mais à present plus fort. 114 Summary

Friedman, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz, considered to be of the Polish Chopin tradition, use similar rubato techniques in the Etude Op.25 No.9. However, most of the techniques are used in places or in ways that are individual to each pianist, whether it be lengthening, arpeggiation or ritardando. As in the other Etudes, the main places for lengthening notes are at starts or high points of phrases, or before a new phrase. There is a strong case for the use of lengthening at the start, climax and end of the piece, since each of the pianists use lengthening in at least one of these places, despite using lengthening sparingly. The Polish pianists ignore the staccato marking on the last chord of the piece, which changes the character of the piece at the end, from lively to lyrical or whimsical. Either interpretation works well in the selected recordings.

The main places to arpeggiate are on strong beats, the climax of the piece or the high point of a slur. Only Polish pianists use arpeggiation, which could be an indication of their tendency to arpeggiate notes in this Etude. However, the speed of arpeggiation differs for each pianist, and shows their individuality more than the tradition they are associated with. As in the other Etudes, the pianists use ritardando at the end of a phrase or at the climax of the piece. The early twentieth century pianists use ritardando in more extreme ways than Shebanova, and in individual places, but the surprising uses of it are more effective. Only early twentieth century Polish pianists use hand displacement, and this may be typical but not consistent, as Friedman does not use it.

3.3. Impromptus

Artur Bielecki from the Frederic Chopin Institute has described the Impromptus, on the Institute’s website, as captivating, “with their airiness and poetical mood, their unparalleled subtlety and the "delicacy of the line" with which these "musical landscapes" are drawn” (Bielecki 2013a: np). Bielecki notes that Chopin …drew on the tradition of the impromptu as an autonomous work. His four impromptus are generally marked by cheerful expression (major keys dominate), devoid of dramatic features. They are of similar construction: a tripartite reprise form (A B A and coda), with the outer sections dominated by a sustained, heightened motion with a meandering melody stretched across very broad arches, whilst the middle section usually features a lyrical song in much slower motion. So it is the "reverse pattern" to the convention of the nocturne, to which the Chopin impromptu is in some way akin (Bielecki 2013a: np).

Three of the Impromptus are studied for comparison. Although the Impromptus are part of one genre, they are each different in character and content. Also, within each Impromptu is a

115 contrasting sostenuto section, in which the pianists’ audible change of tempo and use of rubato can be compared to the other sections. As these are longer pieces than the Etudes and more varied in mood than the Berceuse, there is more opportunity for rubato and comparison between contrasting sections. Common ways and places to use rubato between pianists, even from different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras, will be examined with reference to musicological literature.

Impromptu Op.29

The Impromptu in A flat major, Op. 29 is “has thoroughly étudal and lacily delicate figuration in its outer sections and a tuneful melody, of nocturne-like expression, in the middle section” (Bielecki 2013: np). Koczalski affirms that The musical inspirations of Chopin were, for the most part melancholic, sad and tragic, but however, when it pleased him to be amiable, tender and caressing, as in some nocturnes, in certain of his waltzes and in the Impromptu in A flat major, then he sang of tenderness, gossamer lucidity, sunlight gaiety, everything that charms and gladdens us, with the same art that he put into drawing from the depths of his heart those plaintive, begging, or resigned tones of his most dramatic melodies (Koczalski 1998: 158)44.

Koczalski further describes that the Impromptu in A flat major “awakens in us the idea of a clear morning bathed in sunlight; a fresh stream murmurs gently, everything in nature breathes peace: a light breeze agitates from time to time the trees and bends the yellowing ears (of corn)” (1998: 158)45. The recordings analysed are by Koczalski (1948)46, Pugno (1903)47, Cortot (1922)48, Turczynski (1950)49, and Kenner (2008)50. This allows for comparison between pianists of the Polish tradition, one of whom is a Mikuli student, between two French pianists and one modern pianist. I will compare the differences in choice of tempo between the pianists, and their effectiveness, and then discuss the common ways of using rubato in this piece.

44 Les inspirations musicales de Chopin ont été, pour la plupart, mélancholiques, tristes et tragiques, et cependant quand il lui a plu d’être aimable, tender et caressant, comme dans quelques nocturnes, dans certaines de ses valses et dans l’Impromptu en la bémol majeur, alors il a chanté la tendresse, la vaporeuse limpidité, la gaieté ensoleillé, tout ce qui nous charme et nous réjouit, avec le même art qu’il a mis à tirer du plus profond de son coeur les accents plaintifs, suppliants ou résignés de ses plus dramatiques mélodies. 45 L’Impromptu en la bémol majeur éveille en nous l’idée d’un clair matin baigné de soleil; un frais ruisseau murmure doucement, tout dans la nature respire la paix; une brise légère agite de temps à autre les feuilles des arbes et courbe des épis jaunissant. 46 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 47 Raoul Pugno: His Complete Published Piano Solos 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 48 Alfred Cortot Victor Recordings of 1919-1926 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 49 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Turczynski 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 50 Chopin: Kevin Kenner 2008, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

116 Tempo

Comparative Graph

There is no metronome marking on the score of the Impromptu Op.29, but the tempo marking is Allegro assai quasi Presto. Koczalski advises that the “first part must be executed in the gentlest manner possible, legato and piano, with a great suppleness of the wrist” (Koczalski 1998: 158)51. All the pianists have a faster starting tempo than overall tempo, with the biggest gap being in Cortot’s playing. This is most likely due to the pianists’ use of ritardando and slower tempi in the sostenuto section. Koczalski recommends a change of tempo in the middle section, which …begins at the 35th bar. The movement will then be a little slower – sostenuto; I recommend playing the melody with sonority and using tempo rubato in the passages where ornamentation is found, so that it doesn’t slide too quickly (Koczalski 1998: 158)52.

51 La premiére partie devra être exeécutée le plus tendrement possible, legato et piano, avec une grande souplesse du poignet. 52 La trio commence à la 35e mesure. Le mouvement sera alors un peu plus lent – sostenuto; je recommande de jouer la mélodie avec ampleur et d’employer le tempo rubato danes les passages où se trouvent des ornamentations, afin que celles-ci ne glissent pas trop vite. 117 Koczalski describes this middle trio section as a “broad cantilena in F minor, which rings out calmly and majestically, ornamented with gracious arabesques” (1998: 158)53. After this trio section, the “first part is repeated again, and the impromptu ends with a light breath” (Koczalski 1998: 158)54. With reference to the tempo, Koczalski says that the “first part is repeated at the 83rd bar; you will play it as at the beginning” (1998: 158)55.

Cortot and Pugno have faster beginning and overall average tempi than the Polish pianists, Koczalski and Turczynski. This difference can be clearly heard when comparing starting tempi. Cortot starts significantly faster than the other pianists, but his overall tempo drops lower than Pugno’s. The difference between Pugno and Cortot’s starting tempo is Crotchet = MM7, and this is audible, though the difference is small.

Kenner’s starting and overall tempi are somewhere in the middle compared with the early twentieth century pianists. The difference between Pugno and Kenner’s starting tempo is Crotchet = MM4, but this is hardly audible. However, Turczynski’s starting tempo of Crotchet = MM68 is audibly much slower than Cortot’s starting tempo of Crotchet = MM94.82, and this difference of Crotchet = MM27 changes the character of the piece. Cortot’s beginning sounds livelier, while Turczynski does not achieve the tempo marking of Allegro assai quasi Presto as effectively as Cortot.

Rosenblum lists general conditions for slower tempi in her book, Performance Practices in Classic Piano Music: Their Principles and Applications, including …rapid harmonic rhythm, full or contrapuntal texture, short slurs over notes of short rhythmic value, quick changes in articulation, syncopation, conflict between binary and ternary rhythmic patterns, unexpected changes of thematic material, or other stylistic intricacies (Rosenblum 1991: 311).

These features “slow the tempo of a piece to allow the details to be played and perceived” (Rosenblum 1991: 311).

53 La trio est une large cantiléne en fa mineur qui retenit calme et majestueuse, ornée de gracieuses arabesques, 54 puis la premiére partie reprend à nouveau, et l’impromptu s’achève en un soufflé léger. 55 La premiére partie reprend à la 83e mesure;on la jouera comme au début. 118 Although Rosenblum’s book is a reference to music of the classic era , it seems to apply here as well. The Impromptu Op.29 contains rapid harmonic rhythm, syncopation, quick changes in articulation, and ornamentation in the right hand, so despite Turczynski’s leisurely tempo, his performance still sounds musical and detailed. This is in line with Rosenblum’s assertion that The end result should be a tempo that allows the piece to be fully played and heard with all its musical details, that allows the phrases to move and the connections and relationships to be perceived, all with a perspective that brings out the sense of the whole (Rosenblum 1991: 312).

Turczynski’s convincing performance at his relatively slow tempo shows that an overall tempo of about Crotchet = MM65 can be acceptable, as long as the details in the music are portrayed clearly and the phrases have ebb and flow.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

The graph shows certain similarities and differences between the pianists. Each pianist uses lengthening, hand displacement, arpeggiation, and ritardando but to slightly differing ratios and quantities. There is no indication of tradition in relation to overall quantity of rubato used between pianists of the same nationality or era since Koczalski uses rubato almost as much as Pugno does. However, a greater portion of Koczalski’s rubato is lengthening, while Pugno uses more hand displacement. This may be due to Koczalski’s slower tempo, in which lengthening

119 could be used more subtly than at a faster tempo. Although Kenner uses rubato the least frequently, there is more similarity in overall quantity of rubato between Turczynski and Kenner than between Turczynski and Cortot. However, the four early twentieth century pianists each use more hand displacement and arpeggiation than Kenner, indicating that the early twentieth century pianists tend to use more asynchronisation in this piece.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Hand Displacement 2. Arpeggiation 3. Lengthening 4. Ritardando 5. Accelerando

1. Hand Displacement

There is a large difference in quantity of hand displacement used between the early twentieth century pianists, and also between pianists of the same nationality. Turczynski uses hand displacement much less than Koczalski, and Cortot uses hand displacement much less than Pugno, which indicates that individuality is stronger than the influence of tradition in the frequency of hand displacement, although the fact that the pianists use hand displacement in similar places or circumstances points to certain approaches that they adhere to. Hand displacement almost always occurs on the first or third crotchet pulse of the bar and is quite evenly divided between being at the start, middle or end of the phrase. It is used mostly where the right hand melody is marked sostenuto, showing that pianists will use hand displacement more often when there is a lyrical melody.

Koczalski often displaces the hands in common with Pugno, and Cortot sometimes displaces the hands in common with Turczynski or Koczalski. From bars 35-48, Koczalski and Pugno play the left hand before the right almost every time the hands are to be played together, probably because the melody is now marked sostenuto. At least two pianists displace the hands loosely and similarly on the third crotchet pulse in bars 35 (Pugno and Turczynski), 37 (Pugno and Koczalski) and 43 (Koczalski, Pugno and Kenner). The reason for their hand displacement in these places is not obvious, and may be purely for variety, butperhaps it contributes to the crescendo and long sostenuto melodic line. In bar 35, the third crotchet pulse is where the harmony is established.

120 Bars 35-38: Pu, T Pu, K

There are sometimes small differences between pianists of the same nationality in the quality of their hand displacement, showing more individuality than commonality. While Pugno has a few places in common with Cortot to displace the hands, including the third crotchet pulse of bars 38, 39, 46, and 48, he displaces the hands more loosely than Cortot in each of these places. In bars 38, 46 and 48, displacing the hands helps to emphasise the right hand notes at the starts of the phrases.

Pu, C Bars 38-39:

Bars 46-48: Pu, C

Kenner uses minimal hand displacement and only in places in common with another pianist, but this similarity between Kenner and the early twentieth century pianists gives clues for suitable places for the use of hand displacement. One example is on the third crotchet pulse in bar 72. Cortot displaces the hands noticeably, while Kenner displaces the hands subtly but they both effectively emphasise the right hand melody at the height of the phrase, and bring out the accent sign marked on top of the note, as well as the con forza marking.

121 Bar 72: C, Ke

2. Arpeggiation

There is a large difference in quantity of arpeggiation used between the pianists, with Cortot using it at least twice as frequently as any other pianist. Cortot’s individual uses of arpeggiation are discussed in the next chapter. The other pianists, Turczynski, Koczalski, Pugno, and Kenner use arpeggiation in similar quantities. Arpeggiation usually occurs on the first or third crotchet pulse, or an accented chord. Koczalski, Cortot, Turczynski and Kenner arpeggiate in bars 62, 63, and 64, probably due to the left hand stretches. Turczynski arpeggiates the left hand chords more slowly than the other three pianists, but unlike them he does not arpeggiate the left hand chord on the first quaver pulse of bar 63. Although Turczynski’s arpeggiation in bars 62 and 63 are slower than the other pianists’ arpeggiation in the same bars, it does not sound too slow because arpeggiation still draws attention to the top notes of the arpeggiated chords, which are played in a steady beat.

Bars 62-63:

K, C, T, Ke The French pianists arpeggiate in common bars, though usually Pugno arpeggiates more quickly than Cortot, such as on the fourth crotchet pulse in bars 30 and 112. Pugno’s arpeggiation is quick and effective in emphasising the accent, but Cortot’s slower arpeggiation also works well for the same reason, and it further emphasises the break in single notes at those points.

122 Bar 30 (identical to bar 112):

C, Pu

Pianists of different nationalities arpeggiate in common places to a similar extent. Cortot shares one place in common with Turczynski in bar 37, and Koczalski shares one place in common with Pugno in bar 72. In bar 37, Cortot and Turczynski arpeggiate the left hand chord in the third quaver pulse slowly and similarly. This arpeggiation is effective because it comes at the climax of the phrase and the crescendo marking.

Bars 35-37:

C, T

In bar 72, Koczalski and Pugno arpeggiate the left hand chord on the third quaver pulse noticeably and similarly. This left hand chord is the high point of the phrase. It also helps to reinforce the accent and con forza marked on the third crotchet pulse in bar 72.

Bar 72:

K, Pu

Kenner does not use arpeggiation anywhere other than for the left hand stretches in bars 62, 63, and 64, which indicates a difference between Kenner and the early twentieth century pianists, since the early twentieth century pianists use arpeggiation at least once in another bar.

123 3. Lengthening

The French pianists use lengthening a little less often than the Polish pianists. Kenner uses a similar quantity of lengthening to Koczalski and Turcyzynski, and shares most places in common with them. Pianists of different nationalities and eras have common places to lengthen. For example, in bar 67, Cortot, Pugno and Kenner lengthen the first crotchet pulse, noticeably and similarly, which emphasises the mordent and accent marked on the first right hand note of the bar. Koczalski and Kenner lengthen the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 66 very subtly, at the start of the right hand phrase.

Bars 66-67: K, Pu, Ke K, Ke

The pianists usually lengthen notes when there is either an accent on the first note of the bar or a decrescendo starting on the first beat, such as in bars 59 and 74. In bar 59 Cortot and Pugno lengthen the first crotchet pulse noticeably, while Koczalski’s lengthening is subtle.

Bar 59: K, C, Pu

In bar 74, Koczalski, Turczynski and Pugno lengthen the first crotchet pulse very noticeably to accommodate the appoggiatura in the right hand, and at the same time this emphasises the accented chord.

124 K, T, Pu Bars 74-75: T

In bar 75, Turczynski lengthens the first crotchet pulse very subtly. This may be to accommodate the trill in the right hand, but since Kenner and Pugno do not lengthen this pulse, Koczalski and Cortot’s lengthening may have also been used to emphasise the accent marked underneath the first right hand note in bar 75. Dunn relates that we “often find that the slight delay incidental to the execution of an ornament suggests the correct rubato delivery. In particular: a highly ornamented note often points out to us the climax, or slowest phase of the rubato” (Dunn 1971: 21). Although there is no documentary evidence that Chopin lingered over passages that had more notes, Dunn’s recommendation is followed by Koczalski and Cortot in this Impromptu.

Sometimes pianists lengthen notes at the end of a phrase, such as on the first crotchet pulse in bar 119, where Koczalski, Turczynski and Cortot noticeably lengthen the first crotchet pulse, and Kenner lengthens subtly. The pianists may have chosen to lengthen this pulse because of the arpeggiation required in both hands. Their lengthening in bar 119 helps to effectively round out the pianissimo phrase so that it does not end so abruptly as Pugno’s. The arpeggiated chord is also followed by a rest, which implies that a breath should be taken before resuming the next phrase. In this context, Roll’s advice that Chopin’s “dramatic use of rests is another vital feature of his rhythm” (Siepmann 1995: 257), makes sense.

Bars 118-119: K, T, C, Ke

125 4. Ritardando

Pianists of different nationalities and eras have common places to use ritardando sparingly and always at the end of a phrase. The most popular places to use ritardando are in bars 18 and 100, which contains the same notes as bar 18. In bar 100, Cortot and Kenner slow down noticeably, showing that there is agreement amongst pianists of different eras that a noticeable ritardando is possible at the end of a phrase that precedes the return of the starting theme. Also, in bar 18, Cortot and Kenner slow down to a greater extent than Koczalski and Pugno, but it still sounds effective because none of the pianists use any ritardando before this occasion, and this ritardando is not only the end of a phrase, but before the starting theme returns.

Bar 100:

In bar 45, Cortot slows down to a greater extent than the other pianists to accommodate the right hand ornamentation. Cortot’s noticeable ritardando at the end of bar 45 allows for a more poignant rendition of the small notes than the other pianists achieve, as Cortot also lengthens the highest small note (C). The slur marking under these notes in bar 45 could point to use of rubato to highlight their importance.

Bar 45:

There are differences in quality of ritardando between pianists of different nationalities, but no consistent differences that would group pianists of the same nationality into one tradition. For example, Koczalski and Cortot slow down to in response to the sotto voce marking in bars 116 and 120. In bar 116, Koczalski and Cortot slow down subtly while Turczynski slows down very subtly, but in bar 120, Koczalski and Cortot slow down noticeably. Cortot’s noticeable slowing

126 in bar 120 is effective as it creates more contrast between the sotto voce phrase and the previous phrase. It also contrasts his subtler slowing in bar 116. This slowing in relation to softer dynamics is reminiscent of Cortot’s very noticeable ritardando at the end of the Etude Op.25 No.6, where there was a diminuendo marked, showing that ritardando combined with diminuendo or softer dynamics is common amongst the early twentieth century pianists across different genres of Chopin’s music.

Bars 119-120:

Further support for the use of ritardando at the end of the piece comes from Koczalski’s recommendation that from the “119th bar until the end it will be good to slow down more and more; I advise also that you do not sustain the last chords too long” (1998: 159)56.

The pianists use of ritardando in this Impromptu for phrase endings and supporting contrasting dynamics show that Czerny was right in saying that in Chopin’s music, many passages “will not produce their intended effect unless they are played with a certain gradual slackening” (Czerny 1839: 189 cited in Paetsch 2009: 159). This also confirms Peres Da Costa’s statement that “metrical rubato, and various forms of rhythmic alteration as well as tempo modification, were indispensable performing practices in piano playing around the turn of the twentieth century” (2012: 309).

5. Accelerando

Only Pugno and Kenner use accelerando and it is not typical of the early twentieth century pianists. Since the other pianists do not use accelerando, the possible reasons for Pugno and Kenner’s use of it, especially in their common places, will be explored. In common with Pugno, Kenner uses accelerando in bars 62-64 and 77-79, although Kenner’s speeding up is not as long in duration as Pugno’s. Pugno starts his accelerando in bar 59 instead of bar 62 and bar 74

56 À partir de la 119e mesure jusqu’à la fin il sera bon de ralentir de plus en plus; je conseille aussi de ne pas soutenir trop longuement les derniers accords. 127 instead of bar 77. In bars 59-64 there is a rise in dynamic level in both the score and the recording, and the left hand changes from longer slurs to two note slurs.

Bars 59-63:

In bars 74-79, the volume is also increasing and the left hand slurs are briefly reduced to two beats each. The use of accelerando highlights the change in left hand slur patterns and support the rise in dynamic level.

Bars 74-79:

Pugno and Kenner’s use of accelerando in this piece shows that this type of rubato “can be used to hurry on the progress of the music towards material of special significance” (Methuen- Campbell1992: 194), and it can be effective in supporting rising dynamic levels or highlighting changes in articulation.

Summary

Each pianist uses lengthening, hand displacement, arpeggiation, and ritardando. There is no indication of tradition in relation to overall quantity of rubato used between pianists of the same nationality or era, as Koczalski uses rubato almost as much as Pugno does. Although Kenner uses rubato the least number of times, he uses it only a few times less than Turczynski.

There is a large difference in quantity of hand displacement and of arpeggiation between pianists of the same nationality, which shows individuality amongst the pianists. However,

128 pianists of different nationalities and eras often displace the hands similarly in common places, which also shows agreement on suitable places to use hand displacement in the Impromptu Op.29. Hand displacement and arpeggiation in the Impromptu Op.29 is mostly used in the middle section of the piece on the first and third crotchet pulses of the bar which suggests that asynchronisation is considered more acceptable amongst the pianists, where the note values are longer and when the mood is more lyrical.

Pianists of different nationalities and eras have places in common to lengthen notes and sometimes do so to similar extents, and they usually lengthen notes to a greater extent in the common bars than in the individual bars, which could show the pianists think it is more acceptable to lengthen noticeably in certain places, such as when there are ornaments or accents marked on the note to be lengthened. The pianists usually lengthen the first crotchet pulse but there are more instances of pianists lengthening other beats in the individual bars.

There is a small difference in quantity of ritardando used between the pianists, as it is a technique that is used sparingly in this piece. Pianists of different nationalities sometimes slow down similarly in common places, usually at the end of a phrase, especially when it precedes the return of the starting theme. It is also used as a way of contrasting phrases, such as those marked sotto voce, and Cortot and Koczalski effectively follow Koczalski’s advice for slowing down at the end.

Only Pugno and Kenner use accelerando, showing that although it is not a typical rubato technique amongst the early twentieth century pianists in this piece, their common places to use it reveal that accelerando may be effective for highlighting changes in articulation, supporting a rising dynamic level, and as Methuen Campbell notes, “to hurry on the progress of the music” (1992: 194).

Impromptu Op.36

Bielecki describes the Impromptu Op.36 as the “most mysterious piece […] its narrative somewhat capricious and surprising” (2013: np). This Impromptu is distinct from Chopin’s other Impromptus because it …begins, not in lively motion, but contrarily with a quasi-nocturnal, slow-moving theme. Secondly, the middle section (in the key of D major) is marked by a wholly unexpected and gradually heightening heroic tone. Thirdly, the heroic episode breaks off quite suddenly, and by means of an extraordinary modulation-perhaps the "oddest" in the whole of Chopin-the composer returns to the main theme (Bielecki 2013: np).

129 The recordings analysed are by Koczalski (1938)57, Cortot (1925)58, Friedman (1936)59, and Kenner (2008)60. In a similar manner to the Impromptu Op.29, this allows for comparison between pianists of the Polish tradition, one of whom is a Mikuli student, between one French pianist and one modern pianist. I will compare the differences in choice of tempo between the pianists, and their effectiveness, and then discuss the common ways and possible reasons for using rubato in this piece.

Tempo

Comparative Graph

There is no metronome marking on the score of the Impromptu Op.36, but the tempo marking is Andantino. Although Kenner’s performance has the slowest overall tempo, the music flows well at his chosen tempo and it does not sound like he goes too slow anywhere in the piece, showing that this piece can be played with an overall tempo of at least Crotchet = MM82 and still sound convincing. This confirms Rosenblum’s idea that what “matters is that the chosen tempo not violate the spirit of a piece as best the performer can discern it, not only from the music itself but also from any related information left by the composer” (1991: 328).

57 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 58 Alfred Cortot Victor Recordings of 1919-1926 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 59 Great Pianists of the twentieth Century: Ignaz Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Philips, New York. 60 Chopin: Kevin Kenner 2008, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 130 Each of the pianists have a faster starting tempo than overall tempo, which is mainly due to the use of ritardando and lengthening, as will be discussed later. Cortot’s individuality is seen in his comparatively fast starting tempo. Cortot starts at a relatively fast tempo, but slows down by the time the right hand melody arrives in bar 7. Cortot’s beginning, which is about Crotchet = MM20 faster than Koczalski and Friedman’s starting tempo, sounds rushed compared to the rest of his performance. Cortot starts the piece noticeably faster than Koczalski and Friedman, whose starting tempi are more leisurely, and suit the Andantino marking more.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

In contrast to the Impromptu Op.29, in which the pianists use rubato techniques at least twenty times, and up to fifty times, the pianists use rubato more sparingly and there is more agreement on the quantity of each technique used. Perhaps this is because the left and right hands often play the same note values at the same time in this piece, which is sometimes chordal in texture. They all use lengthening, ritardando, and hand displacement. Koczalski and Cortot’s individual use of arpeggiation is discussed in the next chapter.

131 Common ways rubato is used

1. Hand Displacement 2. Lengthening 3. Ritardando

1. Hand Displacement

These pianists have common places to use hand displacement. They displace the hands subtly and similarly, near or at the ends of phrases. For example, all four pianists play the left hand before the right hand on the second crotchet pulse of bar 14. Koczalski, Cortot and Friedman displace the hands subtly and similarly, while Kenner’s hand displacement is noticeable but does not sound unnatural. Each pianist’s hand displacement suits the lyrical nature of the melody and highlights the key change well.

Bars 14-15: K, C, F, Ke

In addition, Koczalski has places in common with Cortot to use hand displacement in bars 10, 15, 19 and 28 but Cortot’s hand displacement is looser than Koczalski’s on the third crotchet pulse in bars 10 and the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 15. Both interpretations work well even though they are different in effect. Cortot’s loose hand displacement creates the impression of a smaller phrase within the phrase, which sounds fine because the phrase is long enough and he does not use hand displacement in such a noticeable way on any other note in the phrase.

Bar 10: K, C

132 In bar 15, Koczalski’s very subtle and Cortot’s subtle hand displacements are effective because they emphasise the melody note that signifies a key change (B sharp).

Bar 15: K, C

Koczalski and Friedman displace the hands on the second crotchet pulse of bar 23, with Friedman’s hand displacement being slightly more noticeable than Koczalski’s very subtle hand displacement. This comes at a similar place to bar 10, but instead of the hand displacement being on the first D sharp in the phrase, it is used on the last D sharp. As in bar 10, its use in bar 23 creates the impression of a smaller phrase, which doesn’t sound out of place since the phrase is long enough and the hand displacement is done subtly by both pianists.

Bar 23: K, F

Kenner has places in common with early twentieth century pianists to use hand displacement in bars 13 and 68. In bar 13, Kenner and Friedman displace the hands on the second crotchet pulse, which is the start of the right hand phrase, but Friedman displaces the hands loosely while Kenner displaces the hands very tightly. Friedman’s looser hand displacement is balanced by tighter hand displacement in most other places that he uses the technique so it does not sound overdone. In this bar, it is effective in highlighting the first note of the right hand phrase.

Bar 13: F, Ke

133 In bar 68, which is similar to bar 14, Kenner and Koczalski displace the hands very subtly on the first and second crotchet pulses, the high point of the phrase, and includes a key change. This very subtle hand displacement helps to bring out the higher melody notes, and the small gentle separation of the melody from the accompaniment suits the gentle and lyrical character of this section.

K, Ke Bar 68:

The ways that the selected pianists use hand displacement in this piece may be a close rendering of Chopin’s way of using hand displacement, where the “hand responsible for the accompaniment would keep strict time, while the other hand, singing the melody, would free the essence of the musical thought from all rhythmic fetters” (Mikuli 1880: 3 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 49).

2. Lengthening

The pianists use lengthening quite sparingly. Koczalski lengthens twice and only in bars in common with other pianists, whereas the other pianists use the technique, but these individual lengthenings tend to be subtler than in common bars. The pianists have common places to lengthen, but at times the effect will be slightly different and this portrays each pianist’s individuality. However, the ways in which the pianists use lengthening in the Impromptu Op.36 are sometimes in similar circumstances to other places in this piece where a different type of rubato technique is used, and other pieces in which lengthening is used, even across different genres of Chopin’s music.

Popular places for lengthening include the start, end or high point of a phrase, or a key change, with the first crotchet pulse being the most popular pulse to lengthen. For example, all four pianists lengthen the first left hand octave in bar 1 noticeably, except that Cortot lengthens a little less than the other pianists and Kenner also lengthens the second crotchet pulse. This has the suitable effect of easing into the piece; especially since the first note in the left hand melody is more than an octave lower than the second note. Although Kenner also lengthens the second

134 note, it still sounds appropriate because after this he assumes the tempo he plays the rest of the phrase at.

Bar 1: C Ke

The pianists’ lengthening of the first note of the piece is similar to how Friedman and Lukasiewicz lengthen the first notes in the Etude Op.25 No.9, showing that lengthening the first notes of the piece, even when it is not an anacrusis, is used across different genres and starting tempi. In the Impromptu Op.36, it may have been more popular to lengthen the first note also because of the leap of more than an octave between the first crotchet pulse and the second crotchet pulse, while the Etude Op.25 No.9 does not have a large leap at the beginning.

Cortot and Kenner lengthen the first crotchet pulse in bar 25 and the third crotchet pulse in bar 26. In both bars they do so similarly, but their lengthening in bar 25 is more noticeable than in bar 26. The more noticeable lengthening in bar 25 could be due to the first crotchet pulse being the start of a right hand phrase, and the end of a left hand phrase where the left hand plays a relatively low bass note before commencing the next phrase on the second crotchet pulse. The only reason to lengthen the third crotchet pulse in bar 26 is that it is the largest leap in the right hand in that phrase. While lengthening before a melodic leap is used in the Berceuse and Etude Op.25 No.2, lengthening the note after a melodic leap is less common.

Bars 25-26: C, Ke

In bar 73, Friedman lengthens the first crotchet pulse noticeably while Kenner lengthens subtly. As on the first crotchet pulse in bar 25, this allows the pianists to end the left hand phrase

135 gracefully on the relatively low bass note. It also helps to highlight the new key and the highest right hand note (C sharp) near the start of the phrase.

Bar 73: F, Ke

Highlighting a key change using rubato is also used earlier in the piece, except through hand displacement in bar 15, which was shown earlier. These are examples in which lengthening can help achieve the “natural punctuation, and the charming hesitations that marked Chopin’s own playing […] beyond the scope of the metronome” (Higgins 1973: 116).

3. Ritardando

Koczalski uses ritardando about twice as frequently as the other pianists. However, when listening to his recording, this does not sound too frequent, as each case of Koczalski’s ritardando is at least twenty bars apart, and it is a mixture of subtle and noticeable ritardando. As in the Berceuse and the Etudes, in every selected pianist’s performance, the ritardando affects melody and accompaniment, which shows that Mikuli’s advice that “the hand responsible for the accompaniment would keep strict time” (Mikuli 1880: 3 in Eigeldinger 1986: 49) does not necessarily apply in this piece or the pieces previously discussed. Similar to the Impromptu Op.29, the pianists use ritardando only at the end of phrases, which are sometimes at the end of sections, usually with small differences in the extent of the ritardando. For example, in bar 72, all four pianists use ritardando. Koczalski and Kenner slow down noticeably, while Cortot and Friedman slow down subtly. For each pianist it helps them ease into the new section, which has a change of key and a relatively low left hand note. Since they all pick up the tempo quickly in bar 73, and this is the last returning statement of the first theme, their slowing down does not sound exaggerated.

136 Bars 72-73:

Other common places for pianists of different nationalities or eras to lengthen are in bars 38 and 108, where Kenner slows down more than Koczalski. In bar 38, Koczalski slows down subtlety, while Kenner slows down noticeably. As in bar 72, this bar comes before a key change and a contrasting melody. In addition, the short phrase at the end of bar 37 is repeated in bar 38 with a fermata, so it sounds natural to slow down here, even for Kenner, whose ritardando is more noticeable than Koczalski’s.

Bars 37-38:

Summary

There is more agreement on the overall frequency of rubato to use in this piece, as four pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras use similar quantities of rubato. They each vary in the ratios of types of rubato used, and in the places they use rubato, which also indicates their individuality. However, the common places for the pianists to use hand displacement, lengthening and ritardando reveal where it may be effective to use a particular technique in this piece. Hand displacement and lengthening are usually used at the end, high point or start of a phrase, and mark key changes and melodic leaps. Each pianist uses these techniques noticeably at least once, and balances their noticeable rubato with subtler use in other places. Contrary to Mikuli’s advice, ritardando affects the melody and the accompaniment, but the pianists’ choice of the place and extent always sounds natural because they use it to finish a section of the music, either at the end of the piece, or before launching into the next section, which often has a key change or the return of the first theme.

137 Impromptu Op.66

The Fantasy-impromptu in C sharp minor, Op. 66 “wins over the listener with its very showy virtuosity, and its external pianistic lustre is equally as important as the calm, lyrical song in the middle section” (Bielecki 2013: np). Koczalski affirms, “Niecks with reason calls this composition “the favourite of pianists”. Although reasonably difficult technically, it is, just the same, one of the most famous works of the master” (1998: 145)61. Koczalski further describes that The melancholic character of the first theme contrasts strangely with the charming cantilena of the second, whose melody, sustained by an accompaniment of triplets, rings out softly, like a fervent prayer. Then the first theme is repeated, and the conclusion is formed by the reprise of the motive of the cantilena in the bass, which an agitated movement of semiquavers in the right hand accompanies (Koczalski 1998: 145)62.

I have measured the tempi of the first and the middle section to compare differences of chosen tempi between the sections. The contrast in tempo and character of the middle and outer sections result in different rubato techniques used in each section, so these differences will be looked at.

The recordings analysed are by Koczalski (1948)63, Cortot (1933)64, Turczynski (1950)65, Lukasiewicz (1948)66 and Kenner (2008)67. This allows for comparison between Cortot and pianists considered part of the Polish Chopin tradition, including Mikuli’s student, Koczalski, who plays on a Pleyel. The modern pianist, Kenner, who also plays on a Pleyel, is included for further comparison.

61 Niecks appelle avec raison cette composition <>. Bien que d’une technique passablement difficile, elle n’en est pas moins une des oeuvres les plus connues du maître. 62 Les caractère mélancholique du premier theme contraste éstrangement avec la charmante cantilène du deuxième, don’t la mélodie, soutenue par un accompagnement de triolets, retenit doucement, comme une fervente prière. Puis le premier theme se répète, et la fin est formèe par la reprise du motif de la cantilène à la basse, qu’accompagne un mouvement agité de doubles croches à la main droite. 63 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VII 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 64 Chopin: Preludes, Impromptus, Barcarolle, Berceuse: Alfred Cortot 1988, CD-ROM, EMI Records, London 65 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Turczynski 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 66 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Lucasiewicz 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 67 Chopin: Kevin Kenner 2008, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

138 Tempo

Comparative Graph

There is no metronome marking on the score of the Impromptu Op.66 but the tempo marking is Allegro Agitato. Koczalski notes that this means that the …tempo will be very fast; the semiquavers, which, of course, will be very clear, must be as legato as possible; you will obtain in this way a sonority not at all confused, but of an original beauty, indispensable, in my opinion, to the correct interpretation of this work (Koczalski 1998: 145)68.

Più lento is marked at the start of the middle section (Bars 41-82). Turczynski and Lukasiewicz omit bars 71-82. In their case, the average tempo of the Più Lento section is calculated from bars 41-70.

68 Le mouvement sera trés rapide; les doubles croches qui, bien entendu, seront très claires, doivent être le plus liées possible; on obtiendra ainsi une sonorité non pas confuse, maisd’une originale beauté, indispensable, à mon avis, à la juste interpretation de cette oeuvre. 139 Each pianist plays bars 41-82 (Più Lento) more slowly than the rest of the piece. Koczalski gives advice for this middle section, saying that the “second theme in D flat major will have to be played sotto voce; you will play it delicately and with fullness” (1998: 145)69. When comparing the Più Lento section with the following section (Bars 83-138), it can be seen that Koczalski, Cortot and Kenner play at almost half the speed in the middle section, while Turczynski and Lukasiewicz play at about Crotchet = MM23 slower in the middle section. All these differences are significant and audible, showing that when Chopin wrote Più Lento in bar 41, he probably meant a very noticeable change in tempo, even up to half speed in this Impromptu.

Except for Kenner, the pianists’ starting tempi are faster than bars 83-138 (return of the A section). This is probably unintentional, but shows that all pianists fluctuate a little in their tempo when they play the returning section in this Impromptu. Koczalski does stay very close to his starting speed though when he plays the return of the first theme. This lines up with his own advice that The reprise of the first part (83rd bar), the tempo indicated is presto; it is without any doubt an error, for the tempo of the reprise must be the same as that given for the first part. It is probable that at the beginning it is presto which ought to have been written in place of allegro agitato (Koczalski 1998: 145)70.

A possible reason for the slight difference in tempo between starting tempi and the tempo for the last A section is that the first four bars of the piece only contains a held octave, and a single line of accompaniment, while the return of the theme in bar 83 includes both hands, which is a change in texture. Kenner’s comparatively slow tempo in all sections is a possible reason that he is the exception amongst the pianists in this regard.

Budmen, in a review of Kenner’s playing in 2009, relates that Kenner ‘”took the Fantaisie- Impromptu at daredevil speed but imbued the central section with romantic ardour and passion” (2009: np). However, compared to the early twentieth century pianists, Kenner’s chosen tempo on this recording is slower. Although Kenner has the slowest tempo for each section, he still achieves the Allegro agitato character of the outer sections, and his Più Lento section still flows expressively, showing that a tempo of about Crotchet = MM63 for the outer sections and Crotchet = MM32, which is almost half speed, for the middle section can be expressively effective.

69 Le deuxième theme en ré bémol majeur devra être joué sotto voce; on le prendra délicatement et avec ampleur. 70 À la reprise de la première partie (83e mesure), le mouvement indiqué est le presto; c’est sans nul doute une erreur, car le tempo de la reprise doit être le même que celui donné pour la première partie. Il est probable qu’au début c’est presto qui aurait dû être écrit à la place de allegro agitato. 140 Cortot has the fastest tempo for each section, but the difference in tempo between Cortot and the Polish pianists is only noticeable at the beginning. Cortot’s comparatively fast starting tempo reduces the clarity of the left hand notes, although this could have been his intention. All the pianists stay within MM6 of the average tempo between the pianists.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference between Koczalski and Turczynski in the quantity of rubato used, even though both are part of the Polish Chopin tradition, but Lukasiewicz, Cortot and Kenner use similar quantities, despite being from different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras. All the pianists use lengthening, ritardando, hand displacement and arpeggiation, but are individual in the ratios in which they use the techniques. For most of the pianists, hand displacement is a large portion of their rubato. Koczalski uses the most rubato, due to his abundant use of hand displacement.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Hand Displacement 2. Ritardando 3. Lengthening 4. Arpeggiation

141 1. Hand Displacement

There is a large difference in quantity of hand displacement between the pianists, especially between Koczalski and Turczynski. Koczalski uses hand displacement at least twice as many times as the other pianists and often displaces the hands in a part of the bar that is not in common with another pianist. Koczalski’s individuality in his hand displacement in this piece is discussed in the next chapter. Except for two individual places by Cortot (Bar 3) and Turczynski (Bar 91), the pianists only use hand displacement during the lyrical middle section, which is similar to the Impromptu Op.29, where Koczalski and Pugno use hand displacement more often in the more lyrical sostenuto section.

The pianists usually use hand displacement on a strong beat, an accented note, or at the start, high point, or end of a phrase and less commonly, at the low point of a phrase. For example, in bar 46, Cortot, Lukasiewicz and Kenner displace the hands on the third crotchet pulse, which is the start of a right hand phrase and there is an accent marked in the right hand. Cortot’s hand displacement is noticeable, while Lukasiewicz and Kenner’s hand displacements are subtle, but each pianist’s use of hand displacement in this bar is effective in highlighting the accent on the right hand B flat.

C, L, Ke Bar 46:

In bar 73, Koczalski, Cortot and Kenner displace the hands on the first crotchet pulse, where there is an accent in the right hand, which is quite common. Koczalski does so the most noticeably, and adds a right hand note to the melody. Koczalski’s way of displacing the hands in bar 73 is unique, but suits the carefree nature of the melody in this section.

Bar 73: K, C, Ke

142

There are also similarities between pianists in the quality of their hand displacement in common bars. In bar 61, Koczalski, Turczynski and Lukasiewicz displace the hands very tightly on the first crotchet pulse in bar 61, which is an accented note at the end of the phrase, and is almost identical to bar 73. This means that all pianists use hand displacement in a similar circumstance, just in slightly differing degrees.

Bar 61: K, T, L

In bar 53, Koczalski and Cortot displace the hands on the first crotchet pulse tightly, emphasising the highest crotchet in the phrase, and the start of the descending pattern of left hand triplets.

Bar 53: K, C

On the third crotchet pulse in bar 78, which is identical to bar 46, Koczalski and Cortot displace the hands. As in bar 46, their subtle hand displacement effectively brings out the accented right hand note.

K, C Bar 78:

143 Cortot and Lukasiewicz also displace the hands subtly on the third crotchet pulse in bar 54. Bar 54 is identical to bars 46 and 78, so Cortot and Lukasiewicz’s hand displacement have the same effect as in these bars. This reveals Cortot’s tendency to use the same rubato technique in identical places in the music.

Bar 54: K, C

Koczalski has common places to displace the hands with Lukasiewicz and always on the first crotchet pulse. In bar 48, Koczalski displaces the hands more loosely than Lukasiewicz, but in bar 49, Lukasiewicz displaces the hands more loosely than Koczalski. This shows that it can be effective to use hand displacement in consecutive bars, and the hand displacement can be varied in extent to avoid monotony.

Bars 48-49: K, L K, L

Koczalski says, “I recommend the use of tempo rubato at the 60th and at the 72nd bars” (1998: 145)71. These bars are similar and include fast note values in the right hand melody on the fourth crotchet pulse. Koczalski does not specify what type of rubato to use, but in bar 60, Koczalski displaces the hands subtly on the first crotchet pulse, which is the end of the right hand phrase, and all five pianists displace the hands very loosely on the third crotchet pulse. In bar 72, Koczalski similarly displaces the hands subtly on the first crotchet pulse, and Kenner displaces the hands very loosely on the third crotchet pulse. By displacing the hands so loosely, the relatively high-pitched right hand note marked with an accent is emphasised further. Since Koczalski does not use any other form of rubato in these bars, he was most likely recommending the use of hand displacement when he advises the use of tempo rubato. However, Turczynski uses a subtle ritardando in bar 60 and Kenner uses a subtle ritardando in

71 Je recommande d’employer le tempo rubato à la 60e et à la 72ce mesure. 144 bar 72, probably to play the faster right hand notes more expressively and to linger on this climactic part of the melody.

Bars 59-60:

Bars 71-72:

Although Koczalski uses hand displacement more frequently than the other pianists, it does not sound out of place because he usually uses it tightly in circumstances that are common to other pianists, and only occasionally displaces the hands noticeably at the high point of a phrase, as discussed in Chapter 4.

2. Ritardando

All five pianists use ritardando. Although Koczalski and Kenner use ritardando more often than the other pianists, at no point does it sound overused, since it is usually used subtly. Each of the pianists use ritardando noticeably, twice at maximum. Individual bars for ritardando portray the individuality of the pianists, although the ritardando in the individual bars is usually subtle. Similar to the other pieces previously analysed, the most common way to use ritardando in the Impromptu Op.66 is the end of phrases or of sections. For example, Koczalski, Turczynski, Lukasiewicz and Kenner slow down subtly in bar 40, which is the end of the first section.

145 Bars 39-40:

Also, Cortot and Kenner slow down very noticeably in bar 82, the end of the middle section.

Bars 80-82:

Occasionally ritardando is used to emphasise a right hand motif. In bar 62 the pianists slow down to emphasise the right hand triplet motif. Each pianist slows down noticeably during the second half of the bar. Kenner also slows down individually in bar 74, where the right hand triplets appear again, showing that repeated use of a rubato technique could be acceptable in a similar place. Kenner’s ritardando in bar 74 sounds effective because these triplets only occur twice in the piece.

Bar 62:

Koczalski recommends the use of ritardando at the end of the piece. He advises that …from the 129th bar, when the rapid tempo has ceased, I recommend that the melody in the left hand be played with a lot of spirit, and that you slow down constantly up to the conclusion. The two last chords will be very calm and very light (Koczalski 1998: 146)72.

72 À partir de la 129e mesure, quand le mouvement rapide a cessé, je recommande de bien enlever la mélodie à la main gauche et de ralentir constamment jusqu’à la fin. Les deux dermiers accords seront très calmes et très legers. 146 Bars 129-138:

However none of the pianists including Koczalski use it noticeably except from bar 135, where rallentando is already marked in the score. Koczalski probably meant a very subtle ritardando starting from bar 129, which is inaudible in his recording.

3. Lengthening

Kenner uses lengthening most frequently, but this amounts to only ten instances in total in a piece that is 138 bars in length, which shows that lengthening is a technique that pianists use quite sparingly in this Impromptu. There are common places for pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras to lengthen, but they sometimes lengthen to different extents in the same places, showing their individuality.

Lengthening is usually used at the start of a phrase or section and occasionally used to make room for faster rhythmic values in the right hand. For example, all five pianists lengthen the first crotchet pulse in bar 3 to differing degrees, with Turczynski lengthening noticeably while the other four pianists lengthen very subtly or subtly. This helps to ease into the start of the left hand accompaniment pattern. Turczynski’s noticeable lengthening does not sound excessive because he quickly resumes a fast tempo after the lengthening of the first crotchet pulse. 147 Bars 1-3: K, C, L, T, Ke

Another popular place to lengthen is on the first crochet pulse in bar 41, which is the start of the Più Lento section. Cortot, Turczynski and Kenner lengthen noticeably, showing that there can be similarities in place and quality of lengthening between pianists of different nationalities and eras. In a similar way to bar 3, this helps the pianists to ease into the new section, with its new key and contrasting mood. Soon after, in bar 43, where the right hand sostenuto melody of the middle section begins, Turczynski, Lukasiewicz and Kenner lengthen the first crotchet pulse subtly. Their lengthening is effective because the first left hand note in bar 43 is over an octave lower than the second left hand note, so the lengthening gives the pianists time to play this interval expressively.

Bars 41-43: C, T, Ke

4. Arpeggiation

Arpeggiation is used much less frequently than hand displacement since there are fewer opportunities for this technique. Although Cortot uses arpeggiation more than the others, it is at most four instances more. All the pianists arpeggiate the chord in bar 138, which is the end of the piece. This is interesting because only the chord in bar 137 is marked with an arpeggiation sign. Technically, the last chord can be played as a block chord, but the pianists’ slow arpeggiations are appropriate for the gentle ending of the piece, and this could be the only reason that the pianists choose to arpeggiate.

148 Bars 137-138: K, C, L, T, Ke

Bars 35 and 113 are identical, and Cortot arpeggiates the two left hand chords perhaps to emphasise them more in the fortissimo dynamic level. Turczynski also arpeggiates in bars 35 and 113 but only for the second left hand chord, and his arpeggiation is a little slower than Cortot’s.

Bar 35:

C C, T

This use of arpeggiation to emphasise louder dynamics is similar to how the pianists use arpeggiation in the Etude Op.10 No.5, where the score indicates poco marcato, and in the Impromptu Op.29, where the score states con forza.

Summary

There are typical places for pianists to use different types of rubato. Ritardando is usually used at the end of a phrase or to emphasise a melodic motif such as a triplet that does not often occur, while lengthening tends to be done at the start of a phrase. Hand displacement is used in a greater variety of places than ritardando and lengthening, including accented notes, or at the start, high point, or end of a phrase. This is partly due to Koczalski’s abundant use of hand displacement. There are not many opportunities for arpeggiation, but interestingly, all five of the pianists use it on the last chord, even though only the second last chord is marked with an arpeggiation sign. While this instance of arpeggiation makes the chord sound gentler, Cortot and Turczynski’s arpeggiation of the fortissimo chord in bar 35 reveal that arpeggiation can also add emphasis to accented chords, similar to its use in the Etude Op.10 No.5 and the Impromptu Op.29.

149

As well as the common places and ways to use rubato in the Impromptu Op.66, there are notable individual features of each pianist’s use of rubato, such as Koczalski’s abundant use of hand displacement, Lukasiewicz’s use of accelerando, and Cortot and Turczynski’s individual bars for arpeggiation, which are discussed in more detail in Chapter 4. Differences in the extent of rubato used by the pianists in common places further highlight the pianists’ individuality.

3.4. Mazurkas

Methuen-Campbell affirms that Chopin’s mazurkas “cannot be played successfully if the pianist adheres strictly to exact note values, and it is in these works that pianists who studied with pupils of Chopin demonstrate some of their most convincing idiomatic playing on disc” (1992: 194). Carl Schachter also states that the national, “folkloric element is extremely important. This is particularly obvious in the mazurkas, of course, where there’s the necessity sometimes of lengthening certain beats, of playing with agogic accents” (Siepmann 1995: 255). One of the elusive features of the mazurkas for non-Polish players, is the “sheer variety of types […] in the mazurkas the accentuation will often change from bar to bar. And just to deal with those in a way that doesn’t sound choppy is a major difficulty” (Siepmann 1995: 255). Hudson affirms that the Mazurkas “show far more variety than the Waltz in their accompaniment patterns […] the second beat is not the only place where rhythmic exaggeration can be applied” (1994: 187).

According to Allan Evans, Ignaz Friedman may have interpreted the Mazurkas in an ideal way. In his biography, Ignaz Friedman: Romantic Master Pianist, Evans remarks that Friedman shapes the mazurkas by shifting accents and extending the second or third beats, at times compacting two measures into five-beat subphrases, offering the most convincing approximation of how Chopin might have performed them (Evans 2009: 7).

Friedman “understood the authenticity and origins of these works better than any documented pianist and had the courage to deploy the official triple meter within a mirage of two beats” (Evans 2009: 7). The main reason for Friedman’s understanding of the rhythm in Chopin’s mazurkas is his childhood experience of dancing mazurkas in villages. This experience “deeply affected his art and being” (Evans 2009: 7). One of his students, Arthur Denereaz, said that Friedman was a “master of rubato, particularly when applied to the Chopin Mazurkas” (Evans 2009: 307). The following analyses of the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Op.63 No.3, and Op.68 No.2 will reveal how Friedman and other pianists of the Polish tradition, including one of Mikuli’s students, Rosenthal, use rubato, especially lengthening, in the Mazurkas. The modern pianist,

150 Olejniczak, recorded the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 on an Erard, so his recording will also be discussed in comparison to Friedman and Smidowicz’s recordings.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4

The first Mazurka I will discuss is Op.24 No.4, with reference to the recordings by Rosenthal (1929)73, Friedman (1930)74 and Turczynski (rec. date unknown)75. This allows for comparison between Friedman, and Rosenthal, who was Mikuli’s student, and Turczynski, another pianist considered to be part of the Polish Chopin tradition. Referring to this Mazurka, Koczalski writes that “from the melodic point of view this is one of the most charming: it distinguishes itself by the harmonic finesse particular to Chopin and which abounds in his last works” (1998: 143)76. Koczalski also describes the mood of each section: The start is agitated and passionate, the secondary part elegant and gracious and the phrase in unison (in b flat minor) bear the character proper to national polonaise music. The trio is original: a melody of four measures is repeated eight times successively, alternating major and minor (Koczalski 1998: 143)77.

Koczalski also gives advice on how to convey the contrasts in each section, saying that the “first theme will be played (including between the 5th and 21st measures) with a certain agitation: the secondary part will be executed scherzando and the sotto voce (of the 53rd and the 61st measure will be interpreted legato and piano” (1998: 143)78.

73 Moriz Rosenthal: Chopin/Strauss 1988, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 74 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Ignaz Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Philips, New York. 75 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Turczynski 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 76 Au point de vue mélodique c’est une des plus charmantes; elle se distinguee par des finesses harmoniques particuliéres à Chopin, et don’t abondent ses dermiès oeuvres. 77 Le début est agité et passionné, la partie secondaire élégante et gracieuse, et la phrase à l’unisson (en si bémol mineur porte le caractére proper à la musique nationale polonaise. Le trio est originale: une mélodie de quatre mesures se répète par huit fois successivement, alternant an majeur et en mineur. 78 On jouera le premier theme (compris entre les 5e et 21e mesures) avec une certaine agitation; la partie secondaire sera exécutée scherzando, et le sotto voce (de la 53e à la 61e mesure) sera interprété legato et piano. 151 Tempo

The metronome marking is Crotchet = MM132 and the tempo marking is Moderato. Koczalski notes that the Moderato “indication reminds us that it is not necessary to take a too rapid speed as one could be carried away to make in the passages where passion makes itself felt more deeply; one must mark them more by an execution more vibrant and not by an acceleration of speed” (2008: 143).

Comparative Graph

All the pianists start at a slower tempo than their overall tempo, which is possibly because the left hand accompaniment and the right hand melody do not arrive until bar 5. The Polish pianists have a wide range of starting and overall tempi. Friedman’s beginning tempo comes closest to the metronome marking on the score, but his overall tempo of Crotchet = MM156 is faster than the metronome marking, and significantly faster than Rosenthal’s more moderate overall tempo of Crotchet = MM122. This difference of Crotchet = MM34 causes Friedman’s performance to sound faster than Moderato, and sometimes the faster right hand notes lose clarity at his chosen speed. Rosenthal and Turczynski have similar beginning tempi, but Rosenthal’s overall tempo is faster than Turczynski’s relatively slow overall tempo of Crotchet = MM105.

152 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in the quantity of rubato used between Rosenthal and Friedman. All three of the pianists use lengthening, ritardando and hand displacement, but there are differences in the ratios. One noticeable difference is that a large proportion of Turczynski’s rubato is lengthening, which contributes to his relatively slow tempo. Another difference is that only Rosenthal uses arpeggiation and he uses at least twice as much hand displacement as the other two pianists. Friedman’s comparatively sparse use of rubato could be due to his faster tempo. Despite the differences, the performances are equally convincing, although Rosenthal’s performance sounds the most interesting because of the variety of rubato that he uses.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Hand Displacement 3. Ritardando

153 1. Lengthening

Due to Turczynski’s abundant use of lengthening, lengthening is used in individual bars more than in the common bars. Turczynski’s individual lengthening is discussed in more detail in the next chapter. Lengthening is usually used where there is a staccato or accent marked in the right hand, or at the end of a slur where there is a quaver rest following. Occasionally the lengthened note is the high point of a phrase. The first and second crotchet pulses are the most commonly lengthened, which shows that it is not always just the first or just the second pulse in the bar that can be lengthened in this Mazurka.

Sometimes the pianists lengthen different parts of the same bar, such as in bars 8, 72 and 100. Friedman tends to lengthen the second crotchet pulse of the bar while Turczynski lengthens the first crotchet pulse more often, and Rosenthal lengthens the first and second crotchet pulses in quite equal amounts. In bar 8, Friedman noticeably lengthens the second crotchet pulse and Rosenthal noticeably lengthens the third crotchet pulse. Friedman’s lengthening adds buoyancy to the melody as it places more space between the staccato note and the accented note, while Rosenthal’s lengthening is combined with arpeggiation of the left hand chord and emphasises the accented note more.

F Bar 8: R

In bar 72, Turczynski subtly lengthens the first crotchet pulse and Rosenthal subtly lengthens the second crotchet pulse. Although Turczynski’s lengthening is on the staccato note, it has a different effect from Friedman’s lengthening of staccato notes because Turczynski has a slower tempo. Turczynski’s lengthening has the effect of rounding out the end of the phrase. Rosenthal’s lengthening of the second crotchet pulse emphasises the accented note more, and also gives him time to prepare for the pianissimo dynamic level of bar 73.

154 Bars 72-73: T R

In bar 100, Turczynski noticeably lengthens the first crotchet pulse and Friedman noticeably lengthens the second crotchet pulse. Turczynski’s lengthening emphasises the accented notes on the first crotchet pulse while Friedman’s lengthening adds buoyancy to the melody, with the same effect as in bar 8.

T F Bar 100:

All three pianists lengthen the second crotchet pulse in bar 6, where there is a staccato marked on the right hand note, followed by an accented note. They each lengthen noticeably, giving the music a more dance like character.

Bar 6: R, F, T

Several times, Rosenthal and Turczynski lengthen in common places and most of the time, they do so in similar ways, but there are also differences between them, which shows their individuality. For example, in bar 56, Rosenthal turns the group of two quavers into a dotted quaver and semiquaver while Turczynski lengthens both quavers evenly.

155 Bars 55-56: R, T

2. Hand Displacement

Hand displacement occurs mostly on the first crotchet pulse. As with lengthening, popular places to use hand displacement are where there are staccatos or accents in the right hand. Rosenthal uses hand displacement over twice as often as Friedman or Turczynski, and there are a few common places to use hand displacement, sometimes to a similar extent. On the first crotchet pulse in bar 5, Rosenthal and Friedman’s subtle hand displacement helps to separate the right hand melody from the entry of the left hand accompaniment.

R, F Bar 5:

Rosenthal and Turczynski’s subtle hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse in bar 83, which could be seen as either the start or the end of the right hand phrase, allows the pianists to shape the right hand melody without the left hand bass note masking the right hand note.

Bars 81-83: R, T

In bar 142, Friedman plays the right hand before the left hand while Turczynski plays the left hand before the right hand. Both ways effectively add emphasis to the accented right hand note.

156

Bar 142: F, T

3. Ritardando

Turczynski and Rosenthal use ritardando in equal quantities, while Friedman uses it less than half as frequently. Although Turczynski and Rosenthal use ritardando often compared to Friedman, their slowing down highlights the climax of phrases, or prepares for the entry of another phrase, and sometimes creates more contrast between phrases. They also use a combination of subtle and noticeable ritardandi so it does not sound like the technique is overused. All three pianists use ritardando in bars 4, 52, 74, and 121-122, but sometimes to differing extents. For example, in bar 4, Rosenthal slows down noticeably, while Friedman and Turczynski slow down subtly, in preparation for the entry of the left hand accompaniment and right hand melody.

Bars 4-5:

Less often, ritardando is used when the dynamics in the score are softer, such as in bar 74. In bar 74, where the melody is marked pianissimo and dolcissimo, Turczynski slows down noticeably, while Rosenthal and Friedman slow down subtly. Their ritardandi create even more contrast between the phrases. This is suitable, since according to Koczalski, “One will force oneself to make the contrasts of the trio stand out” (1998: 143)79.

79 On s’efforcera de bien faire ressortir les contrastes du trio. 157 Bars 73-74:

Koczalski observes that the …piece finishes with a melody tinged with sadness that makes itself heard more and more gently until it expires completely, and the mazurka completes without a final chord and without having to repeat the rhythm of the opening (Koczalski 1998: 143)80.

Koczalski has made some recommendations for the use of ritardando at the end, saying that the “ending must be slower and very light” (Koczalski 1998: 143)81, which is implied by the score marking smorzando in bar 144, and the also rallentando in bar 140. Following Koczalski’s advice, Rosenthal and Friedman use a subtle ritenuto in bar 145 in response to the smorzando while Turczynski begins slowing down noticeably in bar 142, and by bar 145 his ritenuto is very noticeable.

Bars 140-146:

Summary

There is a large difference between the quantity of rubato used between Rosenthal, who uses the most, and Friedman, who uses the least. All three pianists use lengthening, ritardando and hand displacement, which are features that are most commonly used in the Mazurkas, but there are differences in the ratios. Turczynski uses more lengthening, but Rosenthal uses more hand displacement. Rosenthal is the only pianist to use arpeggiation and he uses it abundantly. This is discussed further in the next chapter. Another difference between the pianists is that Friedman

80 Le morceau finit par une mélodie empreinte de tristesse qui se fait entendre de plus en plus doucement jusqu’à ce qu’elle s’éteigne complétement, et la mazurka s’achève sans accord final et sans avoir repris le rhythme du début. 81 La fin doit être plus lente et trés légère. 158 and Rosenthal shorten notes, but in different bars and on different parts of the bar, and Turczynski does not shorten notes. Friedman shortens only the first crotchet pulse, while Rosenthal shortens the third crotchet pulse, making their use of shortening different in effect. Only Turczynski and Rosenthal use accelerando in different bars but both use it in response to a rising dynamic level.

There are sometimes similarities in the circumstances in which the rubato is used. Lengthening and hand displacement usually occur where there is a staccato or accent sign marked on the right hand note. The pianists usually use ritardando at the high point or the end of a phrase or section, but it also helps to create more contrast between the softer and louder phrases. A combination of subtle and noticeable ritardandi ensures that this technique does not sound overused. It is especially effective to use ritardando in this piece because there are frequent changes of dynamics and mood between phrases.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3

The second Mazurka that I will analyse is Op.63 No.3. The selected recordings are by Michalowski (1933)82, Rosenthal (1931)83 and Friedman (1930)84. This allows for comparison between two of Mikuli’s students and Friedman, who is often regarded as the ideal interpreter of the Mazurkas. Amongst the pianists selected for study, there are no other recordings available of the Mazurka Op.63 No.3.

82 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Mikuli 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 83 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Rosenthal 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 84 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Ignaz Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Philips, New York. 159 Tempo

Comparative Graph

There is no metronome marking on the score of Mazurka Op.63 No.3 but the tempo marking is Allegretto. All three pianists start at a faster tempo than their overall tempo, but the difference is inaudible, showing that a difference of Crotchet = MM7 or less in this piece is insignificant. Rosenthal has the fastest tempi, and Friedman has the slowest tempi, but comparing their recordings, this difference is barely noticeable because of their use of rubato techniques such as lengthening and ritardando, which makes the overall tempo unsteady. Rosenthal and Michalowski’s similar choices of tempo may reflect their shared pedagogical lineage, but it may also be due to Friedman’s individuality. Each pianist chooses a tempo that portrays the Allegretto marking well, showing that an overall tempo of about Crotchet = MM105-124 can effectively convey the character of the piece.

160 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

The Rosenthal and Friedman use similar quantities of rubato but in differing ratios. Michalowski uses rubato more often than the other two pianists, mainly due to his abundant arpeggiation. Rosenthal uses less hand displacement but more lengthening than the others. A large proportion of Friedman’s use of rubato is hand displacement, but for the other pianists, hand displacement makes up less than half the total quantity of rubato used. However, hand displacement and arpeggiation combined are more frequently used than the combined total of other rubato techniques for all the pianists.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Hand Displacement 2. Arpeggiation 3. Lengthening 4. Ritardando 5. Accelerando

161 1. Hand Displacement

Rosenthal uses hand displacement half as many times as the other two pianists. Since hand displacement is the most abundantly used type of rubato, this is a substantial difference. Most hand displacement in the common bars occurs at the start of a slur or phrase and sometimes at the high point or end of the phrase. It is also more common to displace the hands on the second crotchet pulse than the first.

Michalowski displaces the hands in some of the same areas as both Rosenthal and Friedman. Rosenthal and Friedman tend to displace the hands in different places, although all three pianists displace the hands in bar 1, 3 5, 13 and 48. In these common bars, the pianists often displace the hands subtly, but sometimes have small differences. For example, in bars 1, 3, and 5, the pianists displace the hands subtly on the second crotchet pulse, which is the end of each right hand slur but Michalowski also quickly arpeggiates the left hand in bars 3 and 5. Michalowski’s arpeggiation suits the lyrical and gentle character of the music.

M, R, F Bars 2-5:

M M

Also, in bar 48, Michalowski and Friedman displace the hands on the second crotchet pulse, but Friedman plays the right hand before the left hand, in contrast to the usual left hand before right hand. This may be to draw attention to the end of the phrase and section.

Bar 48: M, F

Another bar in which Friedman plays the right hand before the left hand is in bar 76, the final bar, on the second crotchet pulse. This gives the end of the phrase and piece a gentler ending compared to Rosenthal’s or Michalowski’s, even though the score indicates forte. Friedman’s

162 interpretation of this Mazurka is quite gentle and tender in character, so it suits the end of his performance, even if he doesn’t follow all the score’s markings.

Bars 75-76: F

The pianists usually displace the hands subtly, but there are a few bars in which a pianist displaces the hands noticeably. One example is on the second crotchet pulse in bar 65, where Michalowski’s hand displacement is noticeably much looser than Friedman’s. Michalowski also uses arpeggiation in the left hand, further drawing attention to the start of the phrase.

Bar 65: M, F

M

The pianists use hand displacement mainly to bring out the lyrical nature of this Mazurka, with Friedman being quite individual in his use, since he also plays the right hand before the left hand in a couple of places, rather than the usual left hand before right hand.

2. Arpeggiation

In terms of quantity of arpeggiation there is more similarity between Rosenthal and Friedman than between Rosenthal and Michalowski, which indicates more difference between two pianists from the same pedagogical line than a different pedagogical line. There are many more individual bars for arpeggiation than common bars, and sometimes the pianists arpeggiate at slightly different speeds, highlighting their individuality. However, the pianists are similar in other aspects. For example, the chords on the second crotchet pulse are the most commonly arpeggiated. There are two bars in which Michalowski arpeggiates the same chords as

163 Rosenthal and Friedman. In bar 53, Michalowski arpeggiates the chord on the second crotchet pulse slowly while Rosenthal arpeggiates the same chord quickly. This is at the start of a right hand slur, which is the same circumstance in which hand displacement is often used in this piece. Michalowski’s slower arpeggiation creates a gentler effect, while Rosenthal’s quick arpeggiation leads to a greater projection of the right hand note.

Bar 53 and Bars 61-62:

M, F M, R

In bar 62, Friedman arpeggiates the chord on the first crotchet pulse slowly while Michalowski arpeggiates it quickly. This chord is the last left hand chord in the descending bass pattern before a rest. Friedman and Michalowski’s arpeggiation on this chord highlights its importance as the climax of the phrase.

3. Lengthening

The main difference between the pianists is in the quantity of the lengthening, with Rosenthal using it many more times than Michalowski or Friedman, which accounts for many more individual bars for lengthening than common bars. Friedman is the only pianist to lengthen a beat where the right hand note has a staccato sign, and this is discussed further in the next chapter. One similarity between the pianists is that they all lengthen at the start, end or high point of a slur, and they all lengthen the anacrusis very noticeably. In the anacrusis, Michalowski and Rosenthal turn the group of two quavers into a dotted quaver and semiquaver, while Friedman lengthens the quavers more evenly.

Anacrusis and Bar 1: M, R

164 Rosenthal and Friedman lengthen different beats in bar 1. Friedman noticeably lengthens the strong beat, which is at the end of a slur, while Rosenthal subtly lengthens the second beat, which is the start of the next slur and creates more of a breath between the first and second right hand slurs. This shows that there can be a variety of choices for lengthening in this Mazurka, each with its own effect.

4. Ritardando

All three pianists use ritardando, with Friedman using the most, and Rosenthal the least. They have common bars to use it but to differing extents, such as Friedman’s earlier start to the ritardando in bar 63. Friedman starts slowing down from bar 61, while the Rosenthal and Michalowski start slowing down from bar 63 as they speed up in bars 61-62 and possibly also because in bar 62 there is a pause sign.

F M, R Bars 61-64:

At bars 31-32 and 48 ritardando occurs at the end of a section. In bars 31-32, Friedman slows down noticeably while the other two pianists slow down subtly. In bar 48 Michalowski and Friedman slow down similarly and noticeably. Perhaps more pianists slow down noticeably in bar 48 because of the tenuto marking.

Bars 31-32 and Bar 48:

165 5. Accelerando

Accelerando is used a few times, mainly by Michalowski, but Rosenthal shares one place in common with him. In bars 70-73, which is near the end of the piece, Michalowski and Rosenthal use accelerando noticeably to heighten the effect of the ascending pitch and crescendo. In contrast, Friedman slows down in the same area. It is notable that all three pianists change the tempo in bars 70-73, which contain rising sequences in the right hand and a crescendo marking. This shows that it can be suitable to use either method of tempo modification here, depending on the effect that the performer wants to achieve.

Bars 70-73:

Summary

The Rosenthal and Friedman use similar quantities of rubato, while Michalowski uses rubato about 25% more often, showing that there can be more similarity between pianists from different pedagogical lines than between pianists of the same pedagogical line. The pianists have differing ratios of the types of rubato, with Rosenthal using less hand displacement but more lengthening than the others. A large proportion of Friedman’s use of rubato is hand displacement, but for the other pianists, hand displacement makes up less than half their rubato.

There are similarities between the pianists in how they use lengthening, hand displacement, arpeggiation, and ritardando. One similar feature is that the pianists all lengthen at the start, end or high point of a slur. Another is that hand displacement is usually tight and there are many common bars to use it. In addition, arpeggiation in individual bars is usually quick, with few exceptions, and the chords on the second crotchet pulse are the most commonly arpeggiated.

There is more similarity between Rosenthal and Friedman than between Rosenthal and Michalowski in the quantity of arpeggiation they use, which indicates another difference between the pianists of the same pedagogical line. There is also a big difference between the

166 pianists in the quantity of lengthening, even between pianists of the same pedagogical line. Rosenthal uses it many more times than Michalowksi or Friedman. One unique feature of Rosenthal’s lengthening is his transformation of a few groups of two quavers into dotted quaver and semiquaver, which is a motif that occurs mostly in the middle section (bars 33-48). Michalowski does this only in the anacrusis. Also, Friedman is the only pianist to lengthen a beat where the right hand note has a staccato sign.

As with most cases of ritardando in the previously analysed pieces, ritardando is usually used at the end of the phrase, but Friedman uses ritardando in other places too, such as the start of the phrase. Accelerando is used a few times, mainly by Michalowski. Unlike the other two pianists, Friedman slows down in bars 70-73, but all three pianists change the tempo in the same place, indicating more than one option for tempo modification in these bars.

Mazurka Op.68 No.2

The selected recordings are by Friedman (1930)85, Smidowicz (1948)86, and Olejniczak (2010)87, which allows for comparison between Friedman and Smidowicz, another pianist of the Polish Chopin tradition, and the modern pianist, Olejniczak. Studying the tempo choices made by the pianists will reveal what Higgins might have meant when he said, “Chopin’s tempi, especially his Lentos, were definitely faster than what we expect today and the differences between his and today’s performances cannot be shrugged off by the knowledge that his piano was lighter in timbre” (1981: 41).

Tempo

The metronome marking on the score of the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 is Crotchet = MM116. The tempo marking is Lento, and bars 29-36 are marked poco più mosso.

Each pianist takes all the repeats. The largest difference can be seen in bars 29-36, where Friedman plays much faster than the other two pianists. Here he plays at Crotchet = MM183, which is MM = 80 faster than his starting tempo. This seems contrary to the marking poco più mosso and makes his performance of this section sound rushed. Smidowicz and Olejniczak play only about Crotchet = MM3 faster in bars 29-36 than their beginning tempo, which sounds more

85 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Ignaz Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Philips, New York. 86 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Smidowicz 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 87 Chopin: Janusz Olejniczak [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

167 appropriate to the tempo marking in my view. Smidowicz comes closest to the score’s metronome marking in bars 29-36, but none of the pianists start at the recommended metronome speed, perhaps because they felt that Crotchet = MM116 was too fast for a piece marked Lento.

Comparative Graph

The modern pianist Olejniczak is even slower than the early twentieth century pianists in his beginning, overall and poco Più mosso average tempo. This confirms Higgins’ concern that we may not be playing Chopin’s Lento as fast as Chopin may have intended. It is not technically difficult for a pianist to play the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 at Crotchet = MM116. The choice made by the pianists to play slower than the metronome speed by at least Crotchet = MM11 was clearly for expressive reasons. Although Olejniczak chooses a slower tempo than the others, the piece sounds convincing to me at his chosen tempo, which suggests that an overall tempo of about Crotchet = MM75 can be acceptable, even in this piece with a metronome marking of Crotchet = MM116, since the tempo marking is Lento.

168 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

The most obvious way that the pianists differ is in the overall quantity of their rubato. Smidowicz uses more of each type of rubato than the other two pianists, with the biggest difference in quantity being in the greater frequency of lengthening Smidowicz uses. Compared to the Mazurkas Op.24 No.4 and Op.63 No.3, Friedman uses rubato less frequently in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, mainly since he does not use hand displacement in this one. This could be because the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 has a bolder and less lyrical character than the other two mazurkas. Each pianist uses at least three different types of rubato, including lengthening, ritardando and arpeggiation, but arpeggiation is sparse.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Ritardando 3. Arpeggiation

169 1. Lengthening

Smidowicz uses lengthening the most, and Friedman uses it least, only in common places with other pianists. The pianists usually lengthen the crotchet pulse to about one and a half times its written length. In the common bars the pianists lengthen the first crotchet beat of the bar, only where the opening melody occurs. The pianists lengthen noticeably and similarly, except Friedman lengthens the first note in both hands on the first crotchet pulse more subtly in bars 1, 9, 45, and 57 than Smidowicz and Olejniczak. Olejniczak’s slower tempo makes his lengthening more noticeable.

Bar 1 (Bars 1, 9, 45, and 57 are identical): F, S, O

Differences between Smidowicz and Olejniczak’s use of lengthening are apparent in the individual bars. In the individual bars Olejniczak lengthens the third crotchet pulse of the bar to accommodate trills or to emphasise the accented third crotchet, while Smidowicz lengthens the first crotchet pulse in a bar in several consecutive bars at a time, but more subtly than Olejniczak’s lengthening. Smidowicz’s regular lengthening of the first crotchet pulse is the reason that he lengthens more than the other pianists, who lengthen at most once every few bars.

2. Ritardando

All three pianists use ritardando, with Smidowicz using it twice as frequently as Friedman, who uses it the least. Although Smidowicz uses a greater quantity of ritardando than Friedman or Olejniczak, Olejniczak’s ritardandos are usually to a greater extent than Friedman or Smidowicz’s ritardandos due to his comparatively slow tempo and tendency to prolong the ritardando over more than a couple of bars. This is one main difference between Olejniczak and the early twentieth century pianists in their use of rubato.

In bars 8, 36, and 63-64, the pianists slow down at the end of a phrase, but in bar 32, Smidowicz and Olejniczak slow down at a pianissimo dynamic marking. This is similar to how the pianists

170 use ritardando in the Impromptu Op.29 and the Mazurka Op.24 No.4 to create more contrast between phrases of different dynamic levels. Olejniczak starts slowing down earlier than Smidowicz, in bars 31 and 35, so his ritardando becomes more noticeable than Smidowicz’s by bars 32 and 36.

Bars 31-32:

Bars 35-36:

This shows that the use of ritardando as a method of helping to contrast phrases of different dynamic levels is common across different genres of Chopin’s music, including Impromptus and Mazurkas.

3. Arpeggiation

The three pianists are similar in their use of arpeggiation, as they each use it a couple of times, and mostly in similar circumstances. For example, arpeggiation is used at the start of a section, such as on the first crotchet pulse in 37, or on an accented third crotchet pulse, such as in bars 17 and 18. The pianists arpeggiate quickly, except in bar 37 where Smidowicz arpeggiates more slowly than Friedman does.

171 Bars 17-18 and Bar 37: O O F, S

Smidowicz arpeggiates the chord in the first beat of bar 43, which creates contrast with the same melody that occurs a few bars before. In bar 43, Smidowicz’s arpeggiation slows down the melody, which is appropriate because the score indicates poco a poco riten in bar 42.

Bars 42-43: S

Hand Displacement

Each pianist is different in quantity and quality of the hand displacement they use in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2. It is a common trait amongst the pianists to use hand displacement subtly either all the time or most of the time when it is used frequently, as shown in this Mazurka and previously in the Impromptu Op.36. Although Smidowicz uses hand displacement relatively frequently in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, it is mostly subtle, while Olejniczak’s one instance of hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse in bar 21 is more noticeable.

O Bar 21:

172 One aspect in common between Smidowicz and Olejniczak is that they only use hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse whenever they use it, showing that hand displacement tends to be used on stronger beats of the bar, as in the Berceuse.

Summary

There is a large difference in the quantity of rubato, particularly between Smidowicz and the other two pianists, which is mostly due to his regular lengthening of the first crotchet pulse in consecutive bars. However, Olejniczak’s lengthening of the third crotchet pulse to accommodate trills or to emphasise the accented crotchet is more noticeable, especially with his slower tempo. Koczalski, Turczynski and Pugno also use lengthening to accommodate ornaments in the Impromptu Op.29, showing that lengthening beats containing more notes is common amongst the pianists and in different genres of Chopin’s music. The pianists have several common bars to lengthen, and Friedman only uses lengthening in these bars, but usually more subtly than the others. As with lengthening, Smidowicz uses a greater frequency of ritardando than Friedman or Olejniczak. However, Olejniczak’s ritardandos are usually to a greater extent due to his slow tempo and using ritardando for two or more bars. This shows that when pianists use a particular rubato technique more often, it is sometimes to a lesser extent.

The pianists use arpeggiation twice each, mostly in similar circumstances, but Olejniczak’s arpeggiation on the accented third crotchet pulses is individual to him in this piece. However, use of arpeggiation on accented notes is not unique to Olejniczak, as early twentieth century pianists, Koczalski and Cortot also use arpeggiation on accented notes in the Impromptus Op.29 and Op.66. Smidowicz uses hand displacement relatively frequently and subtly, but Olejniczak’s hand displacement is more noticeable, again showing the tendency for the pianists to use a rubato technique more noticeably if it is not frequently used.

173 3.5. Nocturne Op.15 No.2

Koczalski describes this composition as having the “infinite sweetness of an intoxicating summer night. Although this nocturne must be decorated with ravishing ornamentation, the first theme retains a gracious simplicity” (Koczalski 1998: 154)88. The Nocturne Op.15 No.2 has been recorded by a relatively large number of early twentieth century pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition. The recordings analysed are by Michalowski (1933)89, Pugno (1903)90, Turczynski (1950)91, Lukasiewicz (1948)92, Yoffe (2009)93, and Thai Son (2009)94. Michalowksi and Pugno are pedagogically linked to Chopin, while Turcyznski and Lukasiewicz are considered to be part of the Polish Chopin tradition. Yoffe and Thai Son are modern pianists who have recorded on period instruments and are respected for their vast and outstanding performances of Chopin’s music. Yoffe, who has been praised for her “strongly felt authentic Chopin” (Bar-Ami 2012: np), performs on the Pleyel, and Thai Son, who has been described as a “consummate Chopin interpreter, fully attuned to the music’s heart and soul” (Liang 2010: np), performs on the Erard. Pugno’s use of tempo and rubato in this Nocturne has been discussed by other scholars such as Eigeldinger and Peres Da Costa. However, in this analysis of tempo and rubato, Pugno will be compared to other pianists of the Chopin tradition.

In addition, the pianists can be compared in how they change tempi and their use of rubato in the contrasting middle section, as with the Impromptus. Koczalski affirms that the trio moves us like a lament pierced by the very touching accents of a restrained passion, which at first explodes then suddenly is silenced. Then the first theme is repeated, and the nocturne ends with passages of a ravishing originality in the right hand, and a horn signal in the bass (Koczalski 1998: 154)95.

Koczalski has made other comments on the trio section, including that it will “begin sotto voce” and that Mikuli recommended the use, in this passage, of a light rubato […] in playing this passage the virtuoso should imagine himself to be a person so weak, that he could

88 Cette composition a la douceur infinie d’une enivrante nuit d’été. Bien que ce nocturne soit pare de ravissantes ornamentations, le premier theme conserve une gracieuse simplicité. 89 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Mikuli 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 90 Raoul Pugno: His Complete Published Piano Solos 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 91 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Turczynski 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 92 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Lucasiewicz 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 93 Chopin: Dina Yoffe [Pleyel 1848] 2009, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 94 Chopin: Dang Thai Son [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 95 Le trio nous émeut ainsiqu’une plainte où percent les accents si touchants d’une passion contenue, qui d’abord se déchaîne puis se tait brusquement. 174 scarcely support himself - staggering, worried and hesitant in his step (Koczalski 1998: 154)96.

Tempo

The metronome marking on the score of the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 is Crotchet = MM40 and the tempo marking is Larghetto. All the pianists start at a slower speed than the metronome marking, although for Lukasiewicz and Turczynski, it is only about Crotchet = MM4 slower.

Comparative Graph

There is a noticeable difference between Pugno’s beginning tempo and the beginning tempo of the other pianists. Pugno asserted that In spite of the metronome marking [Crotchet = 40], I think this Nocturne is generally played too fast. The tradition was passed on to me by my teacher Georges Mathias who himself studied it with Chopin, and it seemed to me that the metronome marking would correspond better at 4/8 than to the 2/4 time indicated. I

96 Mikuli recommanda d’employer, dans ce passage, un léger rubato; il me disait qu’en jouant, ce passage le virtuose devrait se figurer un homme si faible, pouvant à peine se soutenir; à la demarche chancelante, inquiète et hésitante. 175 played it at 52 to the quaver, respecting the change in the second section [Doppio movimento, bar 25ff]. Otherwise, at a different tempo, this Nocturne loses all its character of enveloping intimacy (Mathias/Pugno, C: 66 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 79).

Eigeldinger questions Pugno’s claim, saying that The reliability of this passage appears to me debatable in spite of the ‘tradition’ Pugno could rightly claim. Even more questionable than the liberties taken with the original metronome marking is his postulation of a 4/8 time signature. In addition to the pendular movement of the bass, which precludes such treatment, one recalls Chopin’s reported advice ‘[not to] play by too short phrases; that is to say, do not keep continually suspending the movement and lowering the tone on too short members of the [musical] thought’ (see Kleczynski extract on pp.43-4, above - which is precisely what a 4/8 conception would cause, as indeed can be heard from Pugno’s recording of op. 15/2 (Eigeldinger 1986: 152).

The other pianist who can claim to be pedagogically linked to Chopin is Michalowski, and his starting tempo is Crotchet = MM31.8, which is about Crotchet = MM11 faster than Pugno. This difference is very noticeable when comparing the two pianists and Pugno’s tempo seems excessively slow, as mentioned by Eigeldinger. Although Michalowski is still about Crotchet = MM9 below the recommended metronome marking, his performance still sounds flowing at his chosen tempo. Other than Pugno’s unique choice of beginning tempo, the pianists of different pedagogical lines and eras start at similar speeds, ranging from Crotchet = MM31-36. Therefore, starting at a minimum of Crotchet = MM31 seems acceptable as a tempo for the outer sections of this Nocturne.

Another individual characteristic of Pugno is that his average tempo for bars 25-48 (Doppio movimento) is noticeably faster than the other pianists’ tempo for the same section. Although there is a large difference between Pugno and the other pianists in beginning tempo and for the tempo of bars 25-48, all pianists including Pugno have a similar tempo for the entire piece, and come close to the metronome marking of Crotchet = MM40.

Most of the pianists also come close to doubling their speed in bars 25-48. Pugno’s extreme choice of tempo for the first 24 bars, combined with his relatively fast speed in bars 25-48, results in quadrupling of the tempo in bars 25-48, which is contrary to the instruction doppio movimento. Lukasiewicz and Yoffe speed up noticeably but they are relatively far from doubling their speed in bars 25-48, compared to Michalowski and Thai Son, who more than double their starting speed.

The choice of tempo in bars 25-48 is not as similar between the pianists, but some similarities in tempo for bars 25-48 are still evident. For example, Thai Son has a similar tempo to Turczynski

176 and Yoffe has a similar tempo to Lukasiewicz. Michalowski’s tempo in these bars is faster than all the pianists, except Pugno, but he is only slightly faster than Thai Son.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in the quantity of rubato used between the pianists. Pugno uses the most rubato, mainly due to his abundant use of hand displacement. For most of the pianists, hand displacement is the main form of rubato. Each pianist employs at least five different types of rubato, including hand displacement, arpeggiation, lengthening, shortening and ritardando, but only Yoffe, Thai Son, and Pugno use accelerando. The chart also appears to show significant differences between the use of rubato between modern and early twentieth century pianists. The modern pianists use less hand displacement and arpeggiation than the early twentieth century pianists, except for Turczynski, who uses less rubato than all the other selected pianists, including Lukasiewicz, who is also considered to be part of the Polish Chopin tradition.

177 Common ways rubato is used

1. Hand Displacement 2. Lengthening 3. Arpeggiation 4. Shortening 5. Ritardando 6. Accelerando

1. Hand Displacement

The largest difference between the pianists is the quantity of hand displacement. Pugno and Michalowski use the most hand displacement, while Thai Son and Yoffe use less hand displacement than almost all the early twentieth century pianists. There is also a large difference in quantity of hand displacement between the Polish pianists, since Michalowski uses a large quantity of hand displacement compared to Turczynski.

The pianists have common places to displace the hands, but Pugno and Michalowski also have many individual places to use hand displacement, even within common bars because they use it abundantly. Sometimes hand displacement is used on the first note of a group of right hand tuplets. For example, Pugno, Michalowski, Turczynski, Lucaseiwicz, and Thai Son displace the hands subtly on the first beat of bar 13, which is the start of a mezzo staccato quintuplet in the right hand.

Pu, M, T, L, Th Bar 13:

However, the pianists usually displace the hands subtly at the start, end or high point of a slur. In bars 4, 6, and 25, Michalowski, Pugno, Lukasiewicz and Yoffe displace the hands on the first quaver pulse. In bars 4 and 6 this is on the last repeated note in the right hand phrase, and in bar 25 it is the start of the contrasting section. Their hand displacement in bars 4 and 6 sounds

178 appropriate as it is a way of keeping the accompaniment steadier while the melody has a bit more leeway with the rhythm, which is missing with the pitch, since they are repeated notes.

Bars 3-6: M, Pu, L, Y

The hand displacement on the first quaver pulse in bar 25 also sounds suitable since it signals the start of the new section.

M, Pu, T, L Bar 25:

Michalowski, Pugno, Lukasiewicz, Thai Son and Yoffe displace the hands on demisemiquavers that come at the end of the bar at least once. For example, in bar 15, Yoffe and Thai Son displace the hands on the demisemiquavers at the end of the bar. Lukasiewicz does the same in bar 55, which is almost identical to bar 15, and Turczynski does the same in bar 56, which is almost a repeat of bar 55. This shows that hand displacement on very short note values at the end of the bar is not just a technique used by early twentieth century pianists, but also by two modern pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition. However, hand displacement on very short notes has not been used in previously analysed pieces.

Y, Th L Bar 15 and Bars 55-56: T

179 2. Lengthening

The pianists use similar quantities of lengthening to each other and more often in the outer sections of the piece than in the middle section. The pianists share common places to lengthen, and mostly to a similar extent, with quaver pulses usually lengthened to twice and occasionally three times the written value, showing that lengthening of certain quaver pulses in this Nocturne is not only common amongst pianists of the Chopin tradition, but that the left hand accompaniment can be made uneven in rhythm to suit the expressive qualities of the right hand melody. Dunn’s advice that “we must read between the lines for possibilities of rubato when Chopin suddenly or gradually adds to the number of his embellishments” (1971: 23) is relevant in this Nocturne.

All six pianists lengthen the anacrusis but Michalowksi, Turczynski and Pugno lengthen more than the other three pianists. Two of the main circumstances to lengthen are at short rests and the first note of a right hand tuplet. For example, in bar 12, Michalowski, Turczynski, Lukasiewicz, Yoffe and Thai Son lengthen the second quaver pulse of the bar very noticeably. The five pianists make the pulse at least twice the written length, and this allows the right hand melody to breathe between slurs.

M, T, L, Y, Th Bar 12:

Sometimes the pianists lengthen the start of a phrase, or delay the start of a phrase by lengthening the end of the previous phrase, which is often the case when there are faster note values in the right hand at the end of a bar. In bar 8, Michalowski, Pugno and Turczynski lengthen the fourth quaver pulse to about one and a half times its written length. In bar 10, Michalowski and Lukasiewicz lengthen the fourth quaver pulse to about twice its written length, and also lengthen the second last right hand note in the bar. Lukasiewicz does this more noticeably, while Michalowski plays the right hand notes slower and more evenly than Lukasiewicz. Thai Son also lengthens the fourth quaver pulse in bar 10 but does so to a lesser extent and he keeps all the right hand notes of the tuplet even.

180 M, L Bars 8-10:

Peres Da Costa notes that Pugno does not always follow his own advice about tempo modification in this Nocturne, as “there is a precipitation of tempo through the four semiquavers at the beginning of bar 5 and a compensatory slowing toward the end […] despite his warning that, throughout the piece, one must “never curtail […] the fourth quaver in any bars” (2012: 279). Pugno’s tempo modification in bar 5 is hardly audible compared to other areas of the piece. There are other bars in which Pugno lengthens a quaver pulse very noticeably, such as in bar 11, where he lengthens the fourth quaver pulse, which may be because he is ‘”quite specific about the manner of playing the right hand grace notes” (Peres Da Costa 2012: 280). The modern pianist, Yoffe, also lengthens the fourth quaver pulse in bar 11 in quite a similar way to Pugno. In both cases the lengthening of the fourth quaver pulse allows the pianists to highlight bar 11’s change of melodic motif in the last right hand slur.

There are individual places for the pianists to lengthen in common bars. For example, Turczynski makes the first quaver pulse in bar 54 about twice its regular length, and the third quaver pulse in bar 56 almost three times its regular length, giving him more time on the fast right hand notes. These may be instances in which Chopin “compensates for a loss of speed by giving the player more notes to perform, thus making it “worth his while”, as it were, to linger over the retarded episode” (Dunn 1971: 23). Koczalski confirms this view, saying that in this Nocturne, the “ornamentation must be executed very lightly and not too quickly” (1998: 154)97.

T Bars 54-56: M, T T

97 Les ornamentations doivent être executes très légèrement et pas trop vite. 181 The only time the lengthening is subtle is when Yoffe and Thai Son lengthen the first beat of bar 25, apparently to ease into the faster speed at the start of the new section. The early twentieth century pianists do not lengthen any beats in bar 25, but start at the new tempo immediately. Instead of lengthening, the early twentieth century pianists use hand displacement, which may show a difference between early twentieth century and modern pianists in the type of rubato they use at the start of a new section.

Y, Th Bar 25:

Peres Da Costa mentions Pugno’s “elongation of trills […] by a significant amount and well beyond what might be expected today such as in bars 7 and 15” (2012: 281).

Pu, T Bar 7 and Bar 15:

Both Pugno and Turczynski lengthen the third quaver pulse in bars 7 and 15, which are almost identical, to accommodate the right hand trill, and in both cases Pugno’s lengthening is to a slightly greater extent than Turczynski’s lengthening, which makes the quaver pulse about twice its written length. Lengthening to accommodate ornaments is a common practice, as Koczalski, Turczynski and Pugno also use lengthening to accommodate an appoggiatura in the Impromptu Op.29.

182 3. Arpeggiation

There is a noticeable difference in the quantity of arpeggiation used between the modern pianists and the early twentieth century pianists, as the modern pianists only use arpeggiation once each in bar 57, where there is a left hand stretch. In bar 57, Turczynski, Lukasiewicz, Yoffe and Thai Son arpeggiate slowly on the second quaver pulse while Michalowski arpeggiates quickly. Although it is unlikely to be an issued for these players, a possible reason for this arpeggiation is the large left hand stretch. Also, the pianists’ arpeggiation comes at the climax of the right hand phrase. Michalowski’s very slow arpeggiation is particularly effective in adding gentle emphasis to the height of the phrase.

Bar 57:

T, L, M, Y, Th

The pianists use a combination of slow and quick arpeggiation, and sometimes differ slightly to each other in their common places to arpeggiation. For example, Lukasiewicz arpeggiates slowly, while Michalowski and Pugno arpeggiate quickly on the second quaver pulse in bar 14, which is also at the high point of the right hand slur. This helps to emphasise the accented right hand note that is part of a phrase marked con forza. These subtleties in arpeggiation speed show the differences that concern master Chopin pianists.

Bar 14:

M, Pu, L

Arpeggiation is also used in the Impromptus Op.29 and Op.66 in response to con forza markings, showing that arpeggiation at louder points are common amongst the pianists considered part of the Chopin tradition, and that arpeggiation has broader applications than

183 “where a softer expression needs to be brought out” (Bree 1903: 59 cited in Hamilton 2008: 145).

Other common places for arpeggiation are the low point, end or start of a slur. In bar 6, Michalowski, Pugno and Lukasiewicz arpeggiate the chord on the fourth quaver pulse, which is at the melodic low point of the right hand slur. In this same bar they arpeggiate the second quaver pulse, which is at the high point of the right hand slur, showing that arpeggiation is used by early twentieth century pianists quite freely and can be used twice in the same bar or phrase.

Bar 6:

M, Pu, L

Pugno has other common places to arpeggiate with the Polish pianists, such as with Michalowski on the second quaver pulse of bar 8 and the fourth quaver pulse in bar 15. In bar 8, the arpeggiation coincides with a small diminuendo sign in the right hand. Pugno also has places in common with Lukasiewicz to arpeggiate chords quickly, including the left hand on the third quaver pulse in bar 13. As in bar 8, the arpeggiation coincides with a small diminuendo or accent sign in the right hand.

Bars 8-9:

M, Pu Bar 13:

L, Pu

184 4. Shortening

The pianists’ shortening of notes achieve a short accelerando effect, which allows them to take time earlier or later in the phrase. Usually the shortened pulses are halved in length. The five pianists who use shortening use it in fairly equal quantities and occasionally shorten in the same place as another pianist of different nationality or era. For example, in bar 13, Turczynski and Thai Son shorten the second crotchet pulse to half its written length. When listening closely to their accompaniment, the left hand sounds uneven in rhythm, but overall the phrase flows well in the right hand, which is the main focus. Therefore, the shortening is not obvious on the first listening.

Bar 13: T, Th

Also, in bar 20, Michalowski and Yoffe shorten the third quaver pulse to about half the written length, but Yoffe shortens less than Michalowski. Their shortening has the effect of pressing on toward the next phrase, which is connected to the previous phrase via the tied A in the right hand.

M, Y Bars 20-21:

Pugno shortens the third quaver pulse of bar 14 to about half the written length, while Turczynski shortens more subtly. Peres Da Costa describes Pugno’s shortening in bar 14, doubling the tempo “without restitution” (2012: 281). Pugno’s shortening is disconcerting, and Turczynski’s is less so because it is to a lesser extent, but their shortening could be an indication of increasing passion in accordance with the con forza marking.

185 Bar 14: Pu, T

In bar 53, Yoffe and Michalowski shorten different parts of the bar. Yoffe shortens the first quaver pulse of bar 53 to about half its written length, and Michalowski shortens the fourth quaver pulse in bar 53 to less than half the written length. Yoffe’s shortening leads to an emphasis on the right hand F double sharp on the second quaver pulse, while Michalowski’s shortening creates forward movement into the following con forza phrase.

Bars 53-54: Y M

5. Ritardando

Five of these pianists use ritardando in fairly equal quantities. In common bars, the pianists use ritardando very noticeably, especially in bars 44-48. There is a molto rallentando marked in bar 47, but Lukasiewicz, Turczynski and Yoffe slow down from bar 44. This ritardando may have been prompted by any one or a combination of the diminuendo marking in bar 44, the start of the repeating D natural and C right hand motif in bar 43, or the left hand breaking up from a note on every quaver pulse into arpeggiated chords separated by rests. Koczalski observes that it “is at the 40th bar that the nocturne is the most dramatic, then, from there, the playing must become continually softer until the sound is extinguished completely” (1998: 154)98.

98 C’est dans la 40e mesure que le nocturne est le plus dramatique, puis à partit de là le jeu doit devenir toujours plus doux jusqu’à ce que le son s’éteigne complétement. 186 Bars 43-48:

Koczalski does not mention slowing down in combination with the descrescendo marked in bar 42 or the diminuendo marked in bar 44, but in Turczynski and Yoffe’s recordings, the ritardando sounds natural. In comparison, Lukasiewicz seems to slow down too much too soon.

Pianists of different eras also have a common place to use ritardando in bar 8, where Lukasiewicz and Thai Son slow down noticeably. These two bars precede the return of the melody heard at the beginning. The two pianists’ slow down gradually, with most of the slowing down occurring in bar 8, so that the ritardando does not sound overdone.

Bars 7-8:

187 6. Accelerando

The Polish pianists do not use any accelerando, but the others use it twice, usually where there is a crescendo marking. Lasting a few bars, the accelerando in common bars is very noticeable. Thai Son speeds up more gradually than Pugno. The accelerandi are in the same places as the bars for shortening, and have the same effect of pressing on toward the next phrase but to a greater degree. In bars 20-24 Pugno, Yoffe and Thai Son use accelerando, even though there is a ritenuto marked in bar 20.

Bars 20-24:

In bars 54-56 Pugno and Thai Son use accelerando to create a build up of intensity as indicated by the repeating rhythmic motif of dotted semiquaver/demisemiquaver.

Bars 54-56:

188 Summary

Each pianist uses hand displacement, arpeggiation, lengthening, shortening and ritardando, but only Pugno, Yoffe and Thai Son use accelerando, usually very noticeably over at least three bars where there is a crescendo marking. There are large differences between the pianists in overall quantity of rubato, and the quantities of hand displacement and arpeggiation used. Michalowski and Pugno use the most rubato due to their abundant hand displacement. Although hand displacement is the most abundantly used form of rubato, all the pianists usually use it subtly. Pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras displace the hands in common places, usually at the high point, start or end of a slur, and sometimes on the first note of a group of right hand tuplets. The modern pianists use less hand displacement and arpeggiation than the early twentieth century pianists, but Turczynski uses less hand displacement than all the other pianists and only two more instances of arpeggiation than the modern pianists, making him the exception amongst the early twentieth century pianists.

Pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras use similar quantities of lengthening, mostly in the outer sections of the piece, and quaver pulses are usually lengthened to at least twice the written value, especially when the right hand has a trill or a group of shorter notes. The pianists use ritardando in fairly equal quantities, and usually at the end of a phrase. Usually whenever shortening is used, the quaver pulse is halved. Michalowski, Pugno, Turczynski, Yoffe and Thai Son shorten the quaver pulses to half the length at least once, and occasionally in the same place as another pianist of different nationality or era. Two of these places are marked con forza, which indicates that shortening is used in this piece to indicate increase in passion.

3.6. Preludes

A few of the Preludes have been chosen for analysis and discussion because they are short, contrasting works that have been recorded by Koczalski and Cortot, and some by Rosenthal and Friedman. This gives an opportunity to compare the use of tempo and rubato by two of Mikuli’s students, and another pianist of the Polish Chopin tradition. Koczalski describes Chopin’s Preludes as …among the most brilliant creations of the composer. This work is of a prodigiously inspired richness and each one of the preludes appears to us as a faithful description of the state of the composer’s soul. Every other composer except Chopin would have developed these traits of inspiration to give them a more grandiose scope; but he is contented only to trace out sketches, but pouring into them lavishly with full hands real treasures of beauty. The whole scale of human emotions is found united here; the impressions of the most profound sadness

189 alternate with the most exuberant gaiety. Turn by turn tragic or joyful, tender or passionate, the whole moves us to the depths of the soul (Koczalski 1998: 165)99.

Cortot has also written about the Preludes, commenting on aspects of rubato, including lengthening, accelerando and ritardando, in his book Alfred Cortot's Studies In Musical Interpretation (1937). Cortot describes the Preludes like “a kind of Song Without Words” (1937: 43) and asserts that like “all the works of Chopin, the preludes demand of the interpreter a great respect for rhythm, a clear conception of the general plan” (1937: 43). Cortot warns that One trap that pianists are tempted to fall into is exaggeration. The preludes are sufficiently rich and vocal in emotion, musically speaking. The interpreter should not seek to enhance this by forcing the expression. One has to urge moderation upon him, so that he may avoid that distortion of the theme resulting from an excess of exaltation (Cortot 1937: 43).

Koczalski and Cortot have recorded all twenty-four of the Op.28 Preludes, so their comments on rubato and interpretation in the Preludes can be seen in the light of the recordings. I will discuss Preludes Op.28 Nos.3, 6, 7, 15 and 19, because a range of Chopin pianists who are pedagogically connected to Chopin have recorded them.

Prelude Op.28 No.3

Cortot wrote that this is a “happy prelude, and the pedal should not detract from its lightness” (1937: 46). Koczalski notes that this “sketch is graceful, charming and cheerful. The melody is of a spring-like freshness, and the accompaniment recalls for us the gentle murmur of a brook” (1998: 167)100. Koczalski advises, You will force yourself to execute the passages in the left hand as tenderly as possible and very legato, and you will make a crescendo and diminuendo in each bar. The melody will be light and caressing (Koczalski 1998: 167)101.

The recordings are by Koczalski (1939)102, Rosenthal (1935)103, Cortot (1934)104 and Switala (2007)105.

99 Les préludes comptent parmi les créations les plus géniales de Chopin. Cette oeuvre est d’une richesse d’inspiration prodigieuse et chacun des préludes nous apparaît comme une fidèle description de l’état d’âme du compositeur. Tout autre que Chopin aurait développé de tells traits de génie pour leur donner une envergure plus grandiose; quant à lui, il se contente de tracer seulement des esquisses, mais en leur prodiguant à pleines mains de vrais trésors de beauté. Toute la gamme des sentiments humains s’y trouve réunie; les impression de la plus profonde tristesse y alternant avec la plus débordante gaiteté. Tour à tour tragiques ou joyeux, tenders ou passionnés, l’ensemble nous émeut jusqu’au plus profond de l’âme. 100 Cette esquisse est gracieuse, charmante et gaie. La mélodie est d’une fraîcheur printanière, et l’accompagnement nous rappelled le doux murmure d’un ruisseau. 101 On s’efforcera d’exécuter les passages à la main gauche le plus tendrement possible et très lies, et on fera dans chque mesure un crescendo et un diminuendo. La mélodie sera légère et caressante. 102 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 103 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Rosenthal 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 190 Tempo

There is no metronome marking but the tempo marking is Vivace. The four pianists have similar overall and starting tempi. Koczalski has the fastest overall tempo and Rosenthal has the slowest, but Rosenthal doesn’t sound considerably slower than Koczalski, which shows that a difference of Crotchet = MM12 in tempo is subtle in this piece, and an overall tempo of Crotchet = MM62-74 can work well. Koczalski is closer to Cortot than to Rosenthal in both starting and overall tempo, showing more similarity between pianists of different pedagogical lines and nationality. All the pianists have a faster tempo for the first four bars than for the entire piece, but this difference is not audible, and is probably due to the pianists’ use of lengthening and ritardando throughout the piece.

Comparative Graph

104 Chopin: Preludes, Impromptus, Barcarolle, Berceuse: Alfred Cortot 1988, CD-ROM, EMI Records, London. 105 Chopin: Wojciech Switala 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopin, Warsaw. 191 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

Cortot did not comment on rubato in this Prelude, only suggesting that it is meant to be happy and light in character. The pianists do not use much rubato, using only a few of each type, including ritardando, hand displacement and arpeggiation. Rosenthal uses the most rubato, using at least three times as much as Switala and Cortot. The most common way that rubato is employed is asynchronisation, with all the pianists presenting both hand displacement and arpeggiation, primarily at the starts of phrases. Koczalski and Rosenthal are the only pianists to use lengthening, and this difference in number of appearances is the main difference in rubato between the pianists.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Hand Displacement 2. Arpeggiation 3. Lengthening 4. Ritardando

192 1. Hand Displacement

Although Rosenthal uses the most hand displacement, it is only a few instances more than the other pianists. The pianists only use hand displacement subtly at the starts of phrases, and no more than six times in total in this short piece. Due to the fast speed it requires careful listening to hear hand displacement. Pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras use hand displacement similarly, showing that hand displacement in a faster Chopin piece can work well if used subtly and occasionally. One common place is on the first crotchet pulse in bar 20, where Cortot and Rosenthal subtly displace the hands at the start of the phrase. This is logical because it helps to separate the melody from the accompaniment. There are arpeggiation signs marked in a few places throughout the piece, such as in bars 10 and 18, which show that Chopin wanted melodic rubato to be used in this piece.

Bars 18-20: C, R

2. Arpeggiation

Koczalski uses arpeggiation three times and Cortot uses it once, while Rosenthal and Switala use none. The pianists are similar in their use of arpeggiation, as there is little difference in quantity, and the arpeggiation is always quick. Koczalski and Cortot also share one common place to arpeggiate, at the end of a phrase, namely the last right hand note of the melody. Bree’s treatise of the Leschetizky method advises that arpeggiation is “suitable where a softer expression needs to be brought out. Here the right hand arpeggiates” (Bree cited in Hamilton 2008: 145). In this case, Koczalski and Cortot follow Leschetizsky’s advice by arpeggiating the right hand chord in bar 26. This right hand chord is the end of the phrase and includes the last note of the right hand melody. This is the only place where the pianists use asynchronisation at the end of a phrase rather than the beginning. The arpeggiation is quick, projecting the top note in the right hand.

193 Bars 25-26: K, C

3. Lengthening

Only Rosenthal and Koczalski use lengthening in a few instances each. Lengthening is used only on the fourth crotchet pulse and delays the last note of a phrase. Rosenthal and Koczalski noticeably lengthen semiquavers in the right hand melody, such as in bars 23 and 25, but they keep the left hand flowing continuously. The left hand accompaniment barely changes tempo or rhythm, which is similar to Mikuli’s description of Chopin’s playing, where the “hand responsible for the accompaniment would keep strict time” (Mikuli cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 49).

Bars 23-26: K, R

4. Ritardando

The four pianists use ritardando sparingly, only at the end of a phrase. As with other types of rubato, the pianists are similar in the quantity they use, and sometimes have places in common to slow down, where they do so to a similar extent. Koczalski and Rosenthal use ritardando twice, while Cortot and Switala use it once. Rosenthal and Koczalski slow down subtly in bar 25 at the end of the right hand melody.

194 Bar 25:

K, R Koczalski and Cortot keep the semiquavers fast to their conclusion, while Rosenthal and Switala hold back the speed on the last few semiquavers in bar 31, which also sounds quite effective.

Bars 31-33: R, Sw

Summary

The pianists use rubato sparingly due to the fast and continuous semiquavers in the left hand, and the short duration of the piece. Each type of rubato is used subtly a few times. Hand displacement and arpeggiation have the effect of projecting the melody in the right hand, while lengthening and ritardando delay the next bar or the end of the piece.

Prelude Op.28 No.6

Koczalski affirms, “this piece was performed by Lefébure-Wély at the funeral of Chopin at the Madeleine, on October 30, 1849” (1998: 168)106. He describes this Prelude as “formed of an admirably beautiful cantilena, whose melody is one of the most profound and the most impressive in the whole lyrical repertoire” (1998: 168)107. In addition, the “monotonous accompaniment reminds us of the Étude Op.25 No.7” (1998: 168)108. Cortot describes this

106 Comme je l’ai dit plus haut, ce morceau fut exécuté par Lefébure-Wély lors des obsèques de Chopin à la Madeleine, le 30 octobre 1849. 107 Ce prélude est formé d’une cantilène admirablement belle, dont la mélodie est une des plus profondes et des plus impressionnantes de toute la littérature lyrique. 108 L’accompagnement monotone nous rappelled l’Étude Op.25 No.7. 195 Prelude as “meditative, melancholy […] what we experience when something we would retain eludes our grasp and flies away from us” (1937: 46).

While Koczalski does not give specific advice on rubato, he recommends “playing this prelude sotto voce […] You must bring out the melody, which, however, will remain mysteriously veiled and must not ring out too much” (1998: 169)109. Furthermore, in “performing the accompaniment in the right hand, you will be careful to accentuate the crotchets placed on the 1st, 2nd and 3rd beats” (1998: 169)110, and it “will be good to play the end as lightly as possible” (1998: 169)111. Cortot mentions lengthening, accelerando, and ritardando in this Prelude, which will be discussed.

The recordings are by Koczalski (1939)112, Rosenthal (1935)113, Cortot (1934)114 and Switala (2007)115.

109 Je recommande de jouer ce prélude sotto voce […] Il faudra bien faire ressortir la mélodie, qui, toutefois, restera mystérieusement voilée et ne doit pas retenir trop fort. 110 En exécutant l’accompagnement à la main droite, on aura soin d’accentuer les croches placeées aux 1er, 2e et 3e temps. 111 Il sera bon de jouer la fin aussi légèrement que possible. 112 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 113 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Rosenthal 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 114 Chopin: Preludes, Impromptus, Barcarolle, Berceuse: Alfred Cortot 1988, CD-ROM, EMI Records, London 115 Chopin: Wojciech Switala 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopin, Warsaw.

196 Tempo

Comparative Graph

There is no metronome marking but the tempo marking is Lento Assai. Although Rosenthal and Koczalski are Mikuli’s students, Koczalski plays at the fastest starting and overall tempo and Rosenthal plays at the slowest starting and overall tempo. Rosenthal’s performance tends to drag at Crotchet = MM37 but Koczalski’s performance at Crotchet = MM52 may be on the fast side, considering that the tempo marking is Lento Assai. However, it should be kept in mind that Chopin’s Lentos are faster than what we would expect today. Cortot’s starting tempo is about Crotchet = MM7 faster at the beginning than for the entire piece but this is not audible, due to his use of lengthening and ritardando throughout the piece. Cortot and Switala’s overall tempi are similar and they stay close to Crotchet = MM44, which is the average of the overall tempi, avoiding the extreme of perhaps going too fast, like Koczalski, or too slow, like Rosenthal.

197 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in the quantity of rubato, mainly due to the differing quantities of hand displacement, which is why Rosenthal uses the most rubato and Switala uses the least. All four pianists use lengthening and ritardando, showing that these two rubato techniques are essential to the effective performance of the Prelude Op.28 No.6, while shortening, arpeggiation and hand displacement are optional.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Hand Displacement 3. Ritardando

198 1. Lengthening

Cortot advises that in the Prelude Op.28 No.6, “the rubato consists in giving the essential notes of the melody, the most sorrowful ones, their full expressive value”. Cortot also asserts that the “theme requires a slight dash in its ascending portion, and some abandon in its descending melody” (1937: 46). Cortot’s comments about rubato are applied in his recording. The accelerando in the ascending semiquavers in the left hand melody is very subtle, and I’ve measured and noted this as a lengthening of the first semiquaver rather than an accelerando because of the very short duration of the speeding up (less than one bar), and the lengthening is more noticeable than the accelerando in each case.

All four pianists use lengthening, with Cortot and Rosenthal using the most and Switala using the least, half the number of times as Cortot. Although the pianists differ in the quantity of their lengthening, they usually lengthen to a similar extent. Koczalski lengthens in most of the same bars as Rosenthal and Cortot, except that Rosenthal also lengthens in bars 19 and 20, and Cortot also lengthens the second quaver pulse in bars 17 and 21, which are mostly the same. The first note of each group of four semiquavers in the left hand at the start of phrases is the most common place to lengthen, and gives the effect of a little accelerando as described by Cortot.

Bar 17:

C Bars 19-21:

R, C, Sw All the pianists lengthen the first quaver pulse in bar 9 and the fifth quaver pulse in bar 15. In both bars the pianists lengthen subtly, with the first semiquaver in the left hand being noticeably longer than the other left hand semiquavers, which is a very common technique. However, overall tempo remains fairly consistent, which shows that this Prelude may be one in which

199 Chopin “was very strict in his adherence not only to the length of the bar, but also to the beat” (Rowland 1994: 211).

Bar 9 and Bar 15: K, R, C, Sw K, R, C, Sw

The same applies to other common bars, as each pianist lengthens subtly. On the fifth quaver pulse in bar 7 Koczalski lengthens the first right hand semiquaver more than Rosenthal, who keeps the semiquavers more even.

K, R Bar 7:

2. Hand Displacement

Three out of four pianists use hand displacement, with a large difference in quantity between Mikuli’s students. Koczalski uses hand displacement about half the number of times as Rosenthal, who uses the most. In contrast, Cortot uses hand displacement only three times and Switala does not use hand displacement at all.

Hand displacement is usually present at the start or high point of the left hand phrases or slurs, and less commonly at the end of the slur, the start of a group of semiquavers or near the high point of a phrase. For example, on the first quaver pulse in bar 13, both Cortot and Rosenthal displace the hands noticeably. For Cortot, this enhances the forte dynamic level, but Rosenthal does not combine his hand displacement with a rise in dynamics.

200 Bar 13: R, C

Sometimes the hand displacement is neither at the start, high point or end of slur, especially with Rosenthal’s individual hand displacement, which is sometimes noticeable, as on the fifth quaver pulse in bar 19, the same place where lengthening is frequently used by the pianists.

Bar 19: R

Koczalski displaces the hands on the first quaver pulse in bars 6 and 15, and in both bars, his hand displacement is noticeable and similar to Rosenthal’s individual hand displacement in 19.

Bars 5-6:

Bars 14-15:

201 Occasionally there are small differences in the extent of hand displacement in common bars. In bar 11, on the first quaver pulse, Koczalski and Rosenthal displace the hands noticeably, while Cortot displaces the hands very subtly. Each pianist plays the left hand before the right hand, showing that sometimes the pianists will play the melody before the accompaniment when they displace the hands, and it still has the effect of emphasising the melody more.

Bar 11:

3. Ritardando

Ritardando or ritenuto is only used a few times by each pianist. There are common places to use ritardando, such as in bars 8 and 24, with small differences in the extent. All the pianists choose to make a ritardando in bar 8 at the end of the phrase, preparing for the return of the first melody in bar 9. Rosenthal and Cortot slow down noticeably, while Switala slows down subtly, and Koczalski slows down very subtly. Since the pianists use ritardando sparingly in quantity, Cortot and Rosenthal’s noticeable cases of ritardando do not sound exaggerated.

Bar 8:

Cortot and Switala use ritardando in bar 24, where the left hand melody approaches its final note, but Koczalski keeps in time until the end. This is a place where Cortot and other pianists have applied Cortot’s advice that the “theme requires […] some abandon in its descending melody” (1937: 46). Rosenthal’s ritardando is hardly audible in bar 24 compared to Cortot and Switala’s, mainly because Rosenthal is already at a relatively slow tempo, showing that at a slower speed, a more subtle ritardando is required to avoid excess.

202 Bars 24-26:

Summary

In comparing the performances before 1962 (Koczalski, Rosenthal and Cortot), and Switala’s modern interpretation, there is an obvious difference in the way the pianists use rubato, with more lengthening of notes and more use of asynchronisation in the pre-1962 recordings, although there are similarities between different eras. Switala does not lengthen as frequently as Koczalski, Rosenthal or Cortot, but he lengthens in common places with them or under similar circumstances, showing similarities across pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras. Switala also includes a ritardando in bars 8 and 24 like the older pianists. Switala does not use hand displacement or arpeggiation, but Cortot also does not use arpeggiation and Cortot’s few instances of hand displacement are subtle. Cortot follows his own advice about using a little accelerando in the left hand semiquavers (which I have labelled as lengthening the first semiquaver). The other three pianists have done this in a similar manner to Cortot, showing that lengthening the start of the left hand phrases in this Prelude is a universal trait amongst pianists who are considered part of the Chopin tradition.

Prelude Op.28 No.7

Koczalski affirms that the “character of this composition, of 16 bars, is of an incomparable grace. It is pastoral, gossamer-like and gentle” (1998: 169)116. According to Koczalski, this prelude “must be played piano, with much gentleness and clear rhythm” (1998: 169)117. Cortot mentions the use of lengthening in the Prelude Op.28 No.7, saying, As in the gentler mazurkas, it is necessary to sustain the third beat slightly. Remember also the general character of the anacrusis in Chopin’s music […] Chopin employs it in the sense of holding back, as if he were bashful or hesitated to begin (Cortot 1937: 47).

116 Le caractère de cette composition en seize mesures est d’une grâce incomparable. Elle est champêtre, vaporeuse et douce. 117 En général ce prélude devra être joué piano, avec beaucoup de douceur et de rythme. 203 Koczalski confirms, It is interesting to note how the music of Chopin is tinged with national sentiment; in effect, if you changed the beat of this prelude by accenting the third beat, you would make of it a true mazurka (Koczalski 1998: 169)118.

The use of lengthening and other rubato techniques will be examined in the recordings by Koczalski (1939)119, Rosenthal (1935)120, Cortot (1934)121 and Switala (2007)122.

Tempo

There is no metronome marking, but the tempo marking is Andantino. Koczalski plays a much faster tempo than Rosenthal in the Prelude Op.28 No.6 and the same occurs in this Prelude. The difference in tempo between the two fastest pianists and the two slowest pianists is audible and significant. Rosenthal’s overall tempo of Crotchet = MM56 sounds much more leisurely than Koczalski’s more flowing and lively overall tempo of Crotchet = MM81, showing that playing at Crotchet = MM25 faster makes the music sound more optimistic. All the pianists have a faster average tempo for the first four bars than for the entire piece due to the use of ritardando, as each pianist uses it at the end of the piece.

118 El est intéressant de remarquer combien la musique de Chopin est empreinte du sentiment national; en effet, si l’on changeait la mesure de ce prélude tout en accentuant le troisième temps, on ferait ressortir une véritable mazurka. 119 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 120 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Rosenthal 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 121 Chopin: Preludes, Impromptus, Barcarolle, Berceuse: Alfred Cortot 1988, CD-ROM, EMI Records, London. 122 Chopin: Wojciech Switala 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopin, Warsaw.

204 Comparative Graph

Rubato

Comparative Graph

205 Overall Quantity

There is much variety in how the four pianists use rubato in this short piece. As well as in tempo, Mikuli’s students, Koczalski and Rosenthal differ in the type and ratio of rubato used, so that their performances sound very different. Cortot follows his own advice about lengthening the anacrusis and the third beats of every second bar that is the start of the phrase, whereas the other pianists do not. Koczalski even shortens the beats that Cortot advises lengthening, although both agree that this Prelude is like a Mazurka. Both Cortot and Koczalski’s performances flow well in different ways, with Cortot’s phrases being quicker toward the end of the phrase, while Koczalski’s phrases start faster and tend to end slower. This difference can be heard by comparing their interpretation of the repeated notes at the ends of phrases in the recordings. Cortot plays the repeated notes noticeably faster than Koczalski.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Hand Displacement 2. Ritardando 3. Lengthening 4. Arpeggiation

1. Hand Displacement

Only Koczalski and Rosenthal use hand displacement subtly and similarly. Koczalski uses hand displacement in the same places as Rosenthal, but Rosenthal also uses hand displacement in a few individual places. They both usually use hand displacement on the first beat of the bar, where the left hand plays a low bass note as at the first crotchet pulse in bars 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13 which each start with the dotted rhythm in the right hand.

K, R Bars 3-7:

206 2. Ritardando

All the pianists use ritardando only at the end of a phrase once or twice. For Switala, it is the only type of rubato he uses. Although the pianists are similar in the places they use ritardando, they sometimes slow down to differing extents. In bars 15-16, which are at the end of the piece, Rosenthal, Cortot and Switala slow down noticeably but Koczalski slows down subtly. Koczalski’s choice of a more subtle ritardando may be due to his faster overall tempo. Koczalski’s ritardando in bars 11-12 is also subtler than Rosenthal’s ritardando in these bars.

Bars 11-12 and Bars 15-16:

3. Lengthening

The pianists have different approaches to lengthening in this Prelude. Each pianist lengthens the anacrusis, but Cortot’s lengthening is the most noticeable of all, giving the first phrase a “sense of holding back” (Cortot 1937: 47). The other three pianists lengthen the anacrusis subtly.

Bars 1-2:

Switala subtly lengthens the first beat of bars 1, 9, 11 and 15, which each contain the dotted rhythm, while Cortot lengthens the third beat of bars 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14 subtly. Both interpretations sound logical because the pianists lengthen in a consistent and subtle manner throughout the piece. Cortot’s lengthening of the third beat is in accord with his own advice.

207 4. Arpeggiation

Koczalski and Kenner do not use arpeggiation in this Prelude. Koczalski advises …striking the chords in both hands with unanimity of accord. Nothing could be more disagreeable to the ear, more opposed to the intentions of the composer than to arpeggiate these chords (Koczalski 1998: 169)123.

Koczalski does not specify where it would be inappropriate to arpeggiate, but Cortot slowly arpeggiates the chord on the first crotchet pulse of bar 8, which is the middle of the piece.

Bar 8: C

In bar 12, Rosenthal very slowly arpeggiates the chord that falls on the first crotchet pulse, the climax of the piece. Fritz notes, “Chopin’s pencil indications […] specify the roll starting from its bottom note on the beat” (1981: 46). In this way, the “delay of the final note creates a rubato in the top melodic line, and the starting note gains prominence” (Fritz 1981: 46). This is the case with Rosenthal’s arpeggiation in bar 12. Arpeggiation is also used at the climax of the piece in the Etudes Op.10 No.5, by Rosenthal and Friedman, and Op.25 No.9, by Friedman and Lukasiewicz. This shows that arpeggiation can be used in a similar circumstance across different genres of Chopin’s music.

Bars 11-12: R

123 Je conseille de frapper les accords aux deux mains avec beaucoup d’ensemble. Rien ne serait plus désagréable à l’oreille, plus opposé aux intentions du compositeur que d’arpéger ces accords. 208 Summary

The four pianists are quite different in their use of rubato in Prelude Op.28 No.7, especially in relation to lengthening and shortening. Cortot follows his own advice about lengthening the third beats at the start of each phrase, giving each phrase a hesitant start, while Koczalski does the opposite, giving each phrase more of the “driving force” (Cortot 1937: 47) that Cortot suggests is more in the style of composers other than Chopin. Even though both Rosenthal and Cortot use arpeggiation, Cortot uses it once in the middle of the piece, while Rosenthal uses it a few more instances in various places throughout the piece, including the climax. This may be in opposition to Koczalski’s advice not to arpeggiate chords in this piece. There are similarities between Koczalski and Rosenthal, who use hand displacement in some of the same places as each other and to a similar extent. Also, all the pianists use ritardando once or twice, at the end of a phrase, but Koczalski does so more subtly than the other pianists, perhaps to keep his performance flowing at his faster tempo.

Prelude Op.28 No.15

The D flat major Prelude is “the most loved and the most played, and many anecdotes are attached to it” (Koczalski 1998: 174)124. Koczalski relates, It is called the Raindrop Prelude […] during Chopin’s and George Sand’s stay at Majorca; the master had preferred to remain alone in the old cloister where they were staying, while his friend undertook an excursion. During her absence, a violent storm broke out, and the rain began to fall in torrents; it was then that the imagination of Chopin pictured to him his friend in danger, and it was under this agonising impression that he composed the piece (Koczalski 1998: 174)125.

Koczalski says, “Niecks, in his excellent biography of Chopin vouches for this (Friedrich Niecks, Friedrich Chopin als Mensch und als Musiker, Leipzig, Leuckart, 1890, vol. 2, p. 48). Whatever the case, this prelude is a marvellous composition, full of poetry, such as you rarely meet in all the lyrical literature” (Koczalski 1998: 174-5)126.

124 Ce prélude est le plus connu, le plus aimé et le plus joué, et maintes anecdotes y sont rattachées. 125 On le nomme Prélude des gouttes de pluie à cause de l’épisode suivant. C’était durant le séjour de Chopin et de George Sand à Majorque; le maître avait préféré rester seul dans le vieux cloître où ils demeuraient, tandis que son amie entreprenait une excursion. Pendant son absence, un violent orage éclata, et la pluie se mit à tomber à torrents; c’est alors que la vive imagination de Chopin lui représenta son amie en danger, et c’est sous cette anglouissante impression qu’il composa ce morceau. 126 Niecks, dans son excellente biographie de Chopin, nous l’atteste (Friedrich Niecks, Friedrich Chopin als Mensch und als Musiker, Leipzig, Leuckart, 1890, vol. 2, p. 48). Quoi qu’il en soit, ce prélude est une merveilleuse composition, peine de poésie, comme on en rencontre peu dans toute la littérature lyrique. 209 This Prelude has the most internal contrast of all the Preludes, including a change of key in bar 28 to C sharp minor for the middle section. Cortot asserts that it is “absolutely necessary to establish a difference in expression and tone colour between the key of D flat and that of C sharp minor” (1937: 48). Although Cortot does not mention the use of rubato in this Prelude, he asserts that the first “passage in D flat, without expressing joy, should have a more tender aspect, more like a cradle song” (1937: 48). Koczalski notes that the …first motive has a certain analogy with the Nocturne Op.27 No.2. Both of them are written in D flat major. Both begin with F – D flat and move to A flat, and both are of an indescribable beauty (Koczalski 1998: 175)127.

After the first section, a “wraith in C sharp minor opens the door, comes towards you, and takes possession of your mind […] the nightmare takes form, and assails you with its menace and horror” (Cortot 1937: 49). Koczalski also describes that the “trio in C sharp minor brings us a powerful increase in contrast, to which succeeds the recapitulation of the first part, this time shorter and more languid” (1998: 175)128. Cortot describes the return to D flat major in bar 76 as the “feeling that we experience when we want to obliterate a painful memory” (1937: 49). Koczalski offers a slightly more positive view that “After a recitative the sounds are lost in sweet harmonies” (1998: 174)129. The use of rubato in these contrasting sections will be compared in recordings by Koczalski (1939)130, Cortot (1934)131, Friedman (1926)132, and Switala (2007)133.

127 Le premier motif a une certaine analogie avec le Nocturne Op.27 No.2. Tous deux sont écrits en ré bémol majeur, tous deux commencent par le fa, ré bémol et vont jusqu’à la bémol, et tous deux sont d’une beauté indescriptible. 128 Le trio en do dièse mineur nous apporte une graduation puissante à laquelle succède la reprise de la première partie, cette fois plus courte et plus alanguie. 129 Après un récitatif les sons se perdent en de douces harmonies. 130 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 131 Chopin: Preludes, Impromptus, Barcarolle, Berceuse: Alfred Cortot 1988, CD-ROM, EMI Records, London. 132 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 133 Chopin: Wojciech Switala 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopin, Warsaw. 210 Tempo

There is no metronome marking on the score but the expressive marking is Sostenuto. Referring to this expressive marking, Koczalski states that “Legato playing is the indispensable condition for a good performance of this prelude” (1998: 174), and that the “whole must have a full and lilting sonority” (1998: 174). There is a noticeable difference in tempo between the early twentieth century pianists and the modern pianist Switala, who has the slowest tempi. Switala’s performance lasts over a minute longer than the others and there is a very noticeable difference. All the pianists have a slower average tempo for the first four bars than for the entire piece, although Cortot and Switala don’t vary much between their beginning and overall tempo.

Comparative Graph

211 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in the quantity and ratios of rubato used due to the abundant use of hand displacement and arpeggiation by Koczalski and Cortot. Koczalski and Cortot also use lengthening and ritardando about double the frequency of Friedman or Switala. Only the early twentieth century pianists use arpeggiation, but Cortot uses it much more frequently.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Arpeggiation 2. Lengthening 3. Hand Displacement 4. Ritardando

1. Arpeggiation

Sometimes Cortot arpeggiates in common with either Koczalski or Friedman, but Cortot also has many individual places to use it. Popular places to arpeggiate are at the start of a phrase or on a strong beat. Most arpeggiation is quick, but Cortot tends to arpeggiate more slowly than the other pianists. For example, in the one common place for the early twentieth century pianists to

212 arpeggiate, on the first crotchet pulse in bar 22, Cortot arpeggiates more slowly than Koczalski and Friedman, who arpeggiate very quickly. However, in other common places, such as on the first crotchet pulse in bars 23 and 62, Koczalski and Cortot both arpeggiate subtly.

Bars 22-23:

K, C K, C, F

In common bars, the pianists sometimes arpeggiate in different parts of the bar. Whenever Friedman arpeggiates, it is in common with either Koczalski or Cortot, usually the start of a phrase or on a strong beat. The exceptions are in bar 13, where Friedman also arpeggiates on the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 13, which emphasises the F natural, and in bar 23, whereas Cortot arpeggiates on the fourth crotchet pulse, at the beginning of a right hand septuplet.

In bars 13, and 22, Cortot and Friedman arpeggiate the chord on the second crotchet pulse, which emphasises the syncopation of the minim on the weak second beat. They both arpeggiate slowly in bar 13 and very quickly in bar 22. The slower arpeggiation in bar 13 could be to further enhance the effect of the brief modulation to A flat minor in bars 11-13.

Bar 13 and Bar 22:

C, F C, F

In bar 9, Cortot and Friedman’s arpeggiation on the fourth crotchet pulse is mostly to project the right hand melody’s F. Again, Cortot’s arpeggiation is slower than Friedman’s in this case. Although Cortot uses more arpeggiation than the other pianists, he probably believed that this was not “forcing the expression” (Cortot 1937: 43), which was the trap that he warned against in his discussion of the Preludes. In Cortot’s recording, the arpeggiation sounds natural, since it

213 is usually used subtly throughout the entire piece, and he chooses to arpeggiate slowly only eight times out of the thirty-seven occasions that he uses the technique.

Bar 9: C, F

Switala does not arpeggiate the chord on the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 9, but he lengthens the right hand F, which gives a similar effect of highlighting this melody note. In contrast, Koczalski does not lengthen the note or arpeggiate the chord on the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 9. Instead, he lowers the dynamic level, which still draws attention to the melody through the contrasting effect. Despite the differences in the use of rubato, the pianists portray the change in harmony in bar 9, showing that they recognise the importance of using some form of rubato or a change of dynamic level to emphasise the key change.

2. Lengthening

Koczalski and Cortot use lengthening about twice as many times as either Friedman or Switala. Most of the time, Koczalski and Cortot lengthen in a common bar, sometimes in a similar place to Friedman and Switala. Most lengthening in common bars is on the first crotchet pulse, occasionally on the third or fourth crotchet pulse, and is quite evenly divided between notes that come at the start, climax and end of phrases. There are also many individual places for the pianists to lengthen, but these are mostly very subtle.

Lengthening tends to be to a greater extent in common places. For example, all four pianists lengthen the first crotchet pulse of the piece to about twice its written value but with different effects. Cortot and Friedman sound similar at the beginning, but Koczalski makes the dotted quaver in the right hand slightly longer, shortening the semiquaver in the same pulse. Switala lengthens in a similar manner to Cortot and Friedman, but his tempo is slower.

214 Bar 1: K, C, F, Sw

In bar 5, the same melody repeats, and three of the pianists, Koczalski, Cortot and Friedman, lengthen the first note of the bar. The pianists lengthen more subtly in bar 5 than in bar 1, which avoids monotony. This mirrors the evidence for Chopin’s spontaneity in performance, especially “a characteristic of Chopin not to execute a musical thought twice in the same manner” (Kleczynski 1879: 63), and as Bellman has significantly noted, that “because of his vocalistic approach to phrasing no two note durations were precisely equal” (Bellman 2004: 26).

The four pianists also lengthen the first crotchet pulse in bars 20 and 23, and the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 79. In bar 20, the first melody returns and all the pianists lengthen the first note in this bar, but more subtly than in bar 1. Friedman and Switala mostly lengthen the first quaver, but Koczalski and Cortot lengthen both quavers in the left hand quite evenly. Either way, the first right hand note in the bar is lengthened, and each way sounds convincing.

Bar 20 and Bar 23: K, C, F, Sw

In bar 23, all the pianists lengthen the fourth beat, most likely to accommodate the group of seven quavers in the right hand. However, Cortot and Friedman do not lengthen the fourth beat of bar 23 as much as Koczalski and Switala, whose lengthening could also be classified as a ritardando before an a tempo in bar 24.

215 Use of lengthening on this fourth crotchet pulse follows Koczalski’s recommendation to “employ a light rubato in the 4th, 23rd and 79th bars, so as not to hurry the performance of the septuplets and the groups of ten notes which are found in the right hand” (2008: 174). In bar 79, all the pianists lengthen the fourth beat in a similar manner as in bar 23, to accommodate the right hand group of ten semiquavers and perhaps realise the smorzando marking. The lengthening of the left hand quavers to play the right hand more expressively in this Prelude is reminiscent of the way Turczynski lengthened the third quaver pulse in bar 54 of the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 to accommodate smaller right hand melody notes.

Bar 79 (Prelude Op.28 No.15): K, C, F, Sw

Bar 54 (Nocturne Op.15 No.2):

T

In bars 10 and 11 the pianists lengthen the first and highest note in the group of descending right hand quavers. This follows Kleczynski’s general instructions on how to shape phrases in Chopin’s music that relate to rhythmic accent. A “long note is stronger, as is also a high note” (Kleczynski 1896: 41-2 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 42).

Bars 10-11: K, C, F, Sw

216 A similar type of lengthening is in bar 17, where Koczalski and Switala subtly lengthen the first right hand quaver.

Bar 17: K, Sw

In bar 27, Koczalski and Cortot subtly lengthen the first beat, highlighting the last note of the melody before the next section begins. This also conforms to Kleczynski’s advice that “notice must be taken of natural accents. For instance, in a bar of two, the first note is strong” (Kleczynski 1896: 41-2 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 42).

Bar 27: K, C

Koczalski and Cortot also similarly lengthen the third beat of bars 36 and 37, emphasising the secondary melody in the middle of the texture.

K, C Bars 36-37:

In bar 41, Cortot and Friedman lengthen notes subtly in different places. Cortot lengthens the quaver in the left hand within the fourth crotchet pulse, which delays bar 42, and emphasises the descending stepwise motion in the left hand phrase. Friedman lengthens the third crotchet pulse, which gives the music more variety, since the first three crotchet pulses of bars 40 and 41 are

217 identical. Again, this reflects the “characteristic of Chopin not to execute a musical thought twice in the same manner” (Kleczynski 1879: 63).

Bars 40-42: F C

In bar 63, Koczalski lengthens the first crotchet pulse while Cortot lengthens the third crotchet pulse. They both lengthen very subtly, but Koczalski highlights the last note of the right hand phrase while Cortot highlights the changing rhythm and pitch of the left hand.

Bars 62- 63: K C

3. Hand Displacement

Koczalski uses hand displacement more than four times as frequently as the other pianists, but it is usually subtly. There are more individual than common places for hand displacement due to Koczalski’s abundant use of it. However, the pianists tend to use hand displacement in similar circumstances, such as the high point or resting point in a phrase or the start of a group of right hand quavers or tuplets. Sometimes the pianists displace the hands in different parts of the bar. For example, in bar 9, Koczalski plays the left hand before the right hand on the first crotchet pulse, while Cortot and Friedman play the left hand before the right hand on the second crotchet pulse. Koczalski noticeably stresses the melodic note on the strong beat, while Cortot and Friedman subtly accentuate the syncopation of the minim on the weak beat.

218 Bar 9: K C, F

Pianists also choose different notes to displace the hands in bar 10. Koczalski and Friedman play the left hand before the right hand on the first crotchet pulse, highlighting the right hand melody’s G flat. Friedman and Switala also displace the hands on the third crotchet pulse in bar 10, but Friedman displaces the hands tightly while Switala displaces the hands loosely. Friedman and Switala’s hand displacement emphasises the resting point in the middle of the right hand phrase.

K, F F, Sw Bars 10-11:

In bar 11, Koczalski and Switala use hand displacement very subtly on different crotchet pulses, bringing out different notes of the phrase. Koczalski displaces the hands on the fourth crotchet pulse, while Switala displaces the hands on the first crotchet pulse, which highlights the change in harmony, and the first note of the group of descending right hand quavers.

In bar 14, which has the same right hand melody as bar 10, but a different left hand harmony, Koczalski and Friedman use hand displacement subtly on the first crotchet pulse, with Koczalski also playing the left hand before the right on the third crotchet pulse. Playing the left hand before the right hand on the first crotchet pulse of bar 14 projects the right hand melody’s G flat as a high point of the phrase. Even though the other pianists did not use hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse of bar 14, they lengthen the G flat, showing that all the pianists recognise the G flat as the high point of the phrase and that it can be highlighted using rubato.

219 Bar 14: K, F K

4. Ritardando

There is only a small difference in quantity of ritardando between the pianists, as each pianist uses it only a few times, and the piece is relatively long compared to Preludes Op.28 Nos.6 and 7. However, ritardando is used more abundantly by Koczalski and Cortot than Friedman or Switala. The pianists have common places to use ritardando at the end of a phrase, and sometimes to a similar extent. For example, in bar 4, Koczalski and Cortot slow down subtly and similarly. This is effective because it comes before the return of the first right hand melody in bar 5. Bar 4 also contains shorter note values during the fourth crotchet pulse, so slowing down allows the pianists to play the shorter note values in the right hand expressively, and follows Koczalski’s recommendation to “employ a light rubato in the 4th, 23rd and 79th bars, so as not to hurry the performance of the septuplets” (Koczalski 1998: 175)134. This is a similar situation to how Cortot also uses ritardando in bar 45 of the Impromptu Op.29 to accommodate faster note values.

Bar 4 (Prelude Op.28 No.15):

Bar 45 (Impromptu Op.29):

134 On emploiera un léger rubato dans les 4e, 23e et 79e mesures, et cela pour ne pas trop précipiter l’exécution des septolets. 220 The comparison of the pianists’ use of ritardando in this Prelude and the ones previously discussed show examples where Czerny’s recommendations for the use of overall slowing down in Chopin’s music can be followed. The passages discussed are probably a few of many passages that “will not produce their intended effect unless they are played with a certain gradual slackening, holding back or retarding of the time” (Czerny 1839: 189 cited in Paetsch 2009: 159).

Summary

The large difference in quantity of rubato used between the pianists may indicate traditions within eras, especially in the use of hand displacement and arpeggiation. However, Koczalski and Cortot may simply be individual in their choice to use relatively large quantities of hand displacement or arpeggiation. Although Friedman uses a similar quantity of rubato to Switala, he may be the exception amongst the early twentieth century pianists. Only the early twentieth century pianists use arpeggiation. Although Cortot uses the most arpeggiation, it is often in common with Koczalski and Friedman, and often done in a similar manner. In addition Cortot’s arpeggiation in the individual bars is subtle, and only a few times, he arpeggiates slowly.

Compared to the difference between the pianists in the quantity of arpeggiation, the pianists use lengthening in relatively similar quantities, but Koczalski and Cortot use it about twice as many times as Friedman or Switala. There are many common places for the pianists to lengthen. Most lengthening is on the first crotchet pulse, and occasionally the third or fourth crotchet pulse. Most lengthening is very subtle, but the lengthening tends to be to a greater extent when in common with other pianists, which shows that lengthening may be more appropriate to a greater extent in certain places, such as on notes that come at the start, climax and end of phrases. Even though the pianists have common places to lengthen there are small differences in the extent of the lengthening, showing the individuality of the pianists. There are also many individual places for the pianists to lengthen, but these are mostly subtle. There is also not a big difference in quantity of ritardando used between the pianists, and the pianists have common places to use ritardando at the end of a phrase, sometimes to a similar extent.

Koczalski differs significantly from the other pianists in the quantity of hand displacement he uses, but most of his hand displacement is subtle, with few exceptions. Guidelines for the use of hand displacement in this piece can be found in the common circumstances that it is used, such as the high point or resting point in a phrase or the start of a group of right hand quavers or tuplets.

221 Differences in the use of rubato for the same purpose is apparent in bar 9, where Cortot and Friedman arpeggiate the fourth quaver pulse, but Switala lengthens the right hand F slightly, which gives a similar effect of highlighting this melody note. Koczalski does not lengthen the note or arpeggiate the chord on the fourth crotchet pulse but lowers the dynamic level, which draws attention to the melody through the contrasting effect. Therefore, despite the differences in the use of rubato, all the pianists realise the change in harmony on the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 9.

Prelude Op.28 No.19

Koczalski describes this Prelude as a delightful depiction, in which are united a charming freshness and an elegant grace. The first note of each triplet marks the melody, whose accents recall Polish music for us very distinctly. Here again we note how Chopin was frequently inspired by the popular melodies of his country (Koczalski 1998: 178)135.

Cortot writes that a “passage from a letter of Chopin might form the motto of the Nineteenth Prelude: The sky is turquoise, the sea lapis lazuli, and the air heavenly […] he is travelling in the realms of the imagination, in reveries of his own creation […] he allows himself to be carried away by airy joy” (1937: 51).

Koczalski mentions that the “two hands must play with a lot of suppleness and with great sweetness” (1998: 178), and the “melody will be filled with feeling, lightness and grace” (1998: 178)136. Koczalski asserts that it “is the legato again, which is the most essential condition for an interpretation of this prelude” (1998: 178)137.

Cortot recommends the use of ritenuto and lengthening in the Prelude Op.28 No.19, advising, Let there be some discreet ritenuti, some suspensions, or rather some emphases on certain particularly sensitive notes, a little insistence at times when a change of mode contributes a new emotional shading to the repetition of a melodic fragment (Cortot 1937: 51).

135 C’est une délicieuse description dans laquelle s’unissent une charmante fraîcheur et une grâce élégante. La première note de chaque triolet marque la mélodie, dont les accents nous rappellent bien distinctement la musique polonaise. Nous constatons encore ici combien Chopin s’est inspiré fréquemment des airs populaires de son pays. 136 Les deux mains doivent jouer avec beaucoup de souplesse et une grande douceur. La mélodie sera remplie de sentiment, de légèreté et de grâce. 137 C’est encore le legato qui est la condition la plus nécessaire à la juste interprétation de ce prélude. 222 The use of lengthening and ritardando or ritenuto will be discussed in relation to the recordings by Koczalski (1939)138, Cortot (1934)139, Friedman (1924)140, and Switala (2007)141.

Tempo

Comparative Graph

There is no metronome marking on the score of the Prelude Op.28 No.19, but the tempo marking is Vivace. The pianists are quite similar in their overall tempi, but Cortot’s beginning tempo is audibly much faster than the other pianists’ beginning tempi, and just as in Op.28 No.15, there is a noticeable difference in choice of tempo between the early twentieth century pianists and Switala. Switala chooses a slower overall tempo than the early twentieth century pianists, even though his starting tempo is faster than Koczalski’s. Koczalski and Friedman

138 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 139 Chopin: Preludes, Impromptus, Barcarolle, Berceuse: Alfred Cortot 1988, CD-ROM, EMI Records, London. 140 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 141 Chopin: Wojciech Switala 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopin, Warsaw.

223 have a slower tempo for the first four bars than for the entire piece, while Cortot and Switala have a faster tempo for the first four bars than for the entire piece. These fluctuations are most likely due to the pianists’ use of ritardando or accelerando in various places throughout the piece.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in the quantity of rubato between the pianists. Switala uses at least three times more rubato than Koczalski, who uses the least rubato. This is in contrast to the Prelude Op.28 No.15, where Switala uses the least rubato, and Koczalski uses the most, showing that pianists who use rubato frequently in one piece may not necessarily use much in another piece, even of the same genre of Chopin’s music. Switala uses more lengthening and ritardando than the others, and uses accelerando a few times. This shows that modern pianists may not necessarily be more conservative than early twentieth century pianists in their use of rubato and can also have places that are quite individual to use certain rubato techniques.

224 Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Hand Displacement 3. Ritardando

1. Lengthening

The largest difference between the pianists in their use of lengthening is in the quantity. Switala uses the most lengthening, over twice as many times as either Cortot or Friedman, and Koczalski uses it only twice, which is understandable due to the continuous quavers throughout the piece. Although Switala lengthens more often than Cortot in individual bars, he usually does so more subtly. One individual place in which Switala effectively uses lengthening is the first crotchet pulse in bar 43. Switala’s subtle lengthening emphasises the high point of the phrase and the dissonance of the left hand’s A natural played at the same time as the right hand G flat. This could be one of the “particularly sensitive notes” (Cortot 1937: 51) that Cortot was referring to, although Cortot himself didn’t lengthen these ones in his recording.

Bars 42-43: Sw

Friedman and Switala lengthen some of the same crotchet pulses, mostly at the high points of phrases. For example, they lengthen the first crotchet pulse subtly in bar 54 and the first crotchet pulse noticeably in bar 62. The slightly larger extent of the lengthening in bar 62 could be due to a lower bass note in the left hand on the first crotchet pulse. Koczalski also lengthens very subtly on the first right hand note in bar 62.

225 Bar 54 and Bar 62: F, Sw

Other common places to lengthen are the anacrusis and the first crotchet pulse in bar 1. Following Cortot’s advice to start hesitantly when there is an anacrusis in Chopin’s music, Cortot, Friedman and Switala lengthen the anacrusis but only Friedman and Switala also lengthen the first crotchet pulse in bar 1, creating even more hesitation to the start of the music. As mentioned earlier, Cooper and Meyer state that “usually, the anacrusis is lengthened in the Prelude Op.28 No.19 since at the beginning of the piece, the anacrusis sails up from the B-flat to the G with a sense of continuous movement” (1960: 126). They elaborate on this idea, saying that the …feeling which arises from it is rather like […] seeing a speeded-up moving picture of a bud gradually opening into a flower. The tension with which we await the appearance of the full-blown flower is rather like the tension with which we await the reversal of movement (to F and E-flat in measure 3 of the Prelude (Cooper and Meyer 1960: 126).

Unlike the other pianists, Koczalski does not use lengthening at the start. This is similar to his lack of lengthening at the start of the Etude Op.25 No.2 and the Prelude Op.28 No.7, which also begin with an anacrusis.

Bars 1-3: C, F, Sw

Sometimes the pianists lengthen different parts of the bars. In bar 21, Cortot subtly lengthens the second crotchet pulse, which accents one of the high notes in the phrase, and emphasises the rise of the right hand melody. This is another place where Cortot may have thought “emphases on certain particularly sensitive notes” (1937: 51) would be appropriate. Friedman subtly lengthens the third crotchet pulse, delaying bar 22.

226

Bars 21-22: C F

2. Hand Displacement

All four pianists use hand displacement subtly or very subtly and there is not a large difference in quantity, although Koczalski uses the most and at least twice as frequently as Cortot or Switala. The relatively large number of individual bars that they displace the hands compared to the common bars shows the individuality of each pianist. However, they always use hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse, and in similar circumstances, such as at the climax of phrases. Examples of these are by Koczalski in bar 16 and Cortot in bar 26. Koczalski’s hand displacement is combined with lengthening of the first notes of both the left and right hand.

K Bars 15-16:

Bars 25-26: C

Koczalski and Friedman both displace the hands subtly in bars 53 and 62. Bar 53 is the low point and start of a phrase. In bar 62, their hand displacement highlights the relatively high pitch of the right hand G in contrast with the low G in the left hand. Friedman and Switala also use lengthening on the first crotchet pulse in bar 62, showing the suitability of using a rubato

227 technique to highlight the high pitch of the right hand in combination with the low pitch in the left hand.

K, F Bar 53 and Bar 62:

3. Ritardando

The pianists differ in their quantity of ritardando and the extent to which they use it in common places. Switala uses ritardando about every eight bars, Cortot uses ritardando every sixteen bars, and Koczalski uses ritardando twice. Although Switala uses ritardando the most frequently, he only slows down very subtly in the individual places, and only in bar 64 does he uses ritardando noticeably. The ritardandi only come at phrase endings, which are usually marked with a diminuendo sign. In bars 15-16, Koczalski’s slows down more than the other two pianists, and Cortot’s ritardando is the most subtle.

Bars 15-16:

Another place where ritardando is used at a phrase ending is in bar 48, where Cortot slows down noticeably, while Switala slows down subtly. Cortot’s noticeable ritardando sounds appropriate because it is combined with the diminuendo lasting 3 bars from bars 46-48, and comes before a change in melody from bar 49 onwards.

228 Bars 47-48:

In bar 64, Cortot and Switala both slow down noticeably. This also sounds like an appropriate place for a noticeable ritardando because it comes during the diminuendo of bars 63-64, just before the concluding melodic phrase and the crescendo starting in bar 65.

Bars 63-64:

The only place where ritardando is used at the climax of a crescendo is in bar 32, where all four of the pianists use ritardando. Koczalski, Friedman and Switala slow down subtly, but Cortot slows down noticeably and combines his ritardando with a diminuendo. Although Cortot does not follow the crescendo dynamic marking to the end of bar 32 like the other pianists do, his diminuendo combined with the ritardando gives these bars an “airy joy” (Cortot 1937: 51) that suits the overall the character of the piece.

Bars 31-32:

229 Summary

The early twentieth century pianists use a similar quantity of rubato, but the ratios of the types of rubato differ. Switala uses rubato more than double the frequency of rubato as the early twentieth century pianists, due to his more frequent lengthening, ritardando, and accelerando. In common bars, the pianists often lengthen and displace the hands to similar extents. Cortot only lengthens in individual places, and usually lengthens to a greater degree than the other pianists. All hand displacement and most lengthening is used on the first crotchet pulse of the bar, showing that the pianists tend to emphasise the strong beat using rubato more than other beats in this Prelude, probably because the strong beats are also at the start of phrases, which are common places to use lengthening and hand displacement.

The pianists use ritardando in differing quantities, but those who use it least use it in common bars. In common bars, there are differences between the pianists in the extent to which they slow down. Switala’s ritardando in the individual bars could be seen as lengthening the last one or two crotchet pulses in the bar, delaying the onset of the next bar, as it is quite subtle.

Three of the pianists emphasise the first notes of bars 54 and 62, where the two hands play a relatively wide interval, but each pianist uses a different form of rubato to achieve this. Koczalski uses hand displacement on the notes, Friedman uses lengthening of the notes and hand displacement, and Switala delays the notes. Cortot is the only pianist to not use any form of rubato in these bars, choosing to emphasise different notes of the phrase (second and third crotchet pulses of bars 51 and 59) instead.

Cortot and Friedman use arpeggiation on the second last chord of the piece, showing the popularity of this technique across different genres of Chopin’s music. In this piece, arpeggiation is only used once because there are only two opportunities to use it. The arpeggiation suits the joyful nature of the music, and is similar to the reason for Friedman and Paderewski’s use of it at the end of the Etude Op.25 No.9, which has a similar mood to the Prelude Op.28 No.19.

3.7. Waltzes

Like the Mazurkas, the Waltzes are characteristic to Chopin. Chopin's waltzes “reproduce no models, instead giving us music that is inimitable, recognisable from the very first bars, full of elegance, charm and brilliance” (Bielecki 2013b:np). The Waltzes “can be defined as typical

230 dance miniatures, and also more expansive waltzes, with the character of dance poems” (Bielecki 2013b:np).

Waltz Op.18

The Waltz Op.18 is “of a profoundly Parisian character […] It shimmers with the gaiety of elegant society” (Tomaszewski 2013:np). There are seven sections, which each have a “different melodic character and dance motion” (Tomaszewski 2013:np).

Section A: Bars 5-20 Section B: Bars 21-68 Section C: Bars 69-84 Section D: Bars 85-116 Section E: Bars 117-132 Section F: Bars 133-164 Section G: Bars 165-307

Sections A, C, E, and F have the option of repeats.

Repeats and omissions in the recordings: - Koczalski: No repeats - Friedman: Repeats bars 5-20 (A), 117-132 (E) - Paderewski: Repeats bars 5-20 (A), 69-84 (C), 133-164 (F); Omits bars 85-116 (D) - Lukasiewicz: Repeats bars 5-20(A), 69-84 (C), 117-132 (E), 133-164 (F) - Drewnowski: Repeats bars 5-20(A), 69-84 (C), 117-132 (E), 133-164 (F)

The analysed recordings are by Koczalski (1948)142, Friedman (1921-1929)143, Paderewski (1928)144, Lukasiewicz (1948)145, and Drewnowski (2010)146. This allows for comparison within the Polish Chopin tradition, including Mikuli’s student, Koczalski, and one modern pianist, Drewnowski. Koczalski performs on a Pleyel piano, and the modern pianist, Drewnowski performs on an Erard piano.

142 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VII 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 143 Ignace Friedman: Early Recordings By the Composer 1993, CD-ROM, The Dolphin Music Group, Newtown. 144 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Paderewski 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 145 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Lucasiewicz 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 146 Chopin: Marek Drewnowski [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

231 Tempo

There is no metronome marking on the score Waltz Op.18. The expressive marking is Vivo. Drewnowski has the fastest overall and beginning tempi, although the duration of his performance is longer because he takes all the repeats. All the performers have slower tempi in the Con Anima section (bars 117-132) than their overall tempo, and audibly slower tempi in the Dolce section (bars 165-188).

Comparative Graph

Friedman has the slowest starting tempo at Dotted Minim = MM60 but the difference is insignificant when comparing this to Koczalski’s starting tempo of Dotted Minim = MM65, showing that a difference of Dotted Minim = MM5 does not make much difference at the start of this piece. However, there is an audible difference when comparing Friedman’s starting tempo with Lukasiewicz’s starting tempo of Dotted Minim = MM75, showing that a difference of Dotted Minim = MM15 is significantly audible. Lukasiewicz’s beginning is more lively and suits the Vivo tempo marking, as is Drewnowski’s tempo of Dotted Minim = MM78, although

232 Friedman’s starting tempo could also pass as Vivo, which indicates that starting at a tempo ranging from Dotted Minim = MM60-78 can still portray the character of the beginning.

The average tempo of the Dolce section amongst the pianists is Dotted Minim = MM59. Paderewski has the slowest tempo in the Dolce section, at Dotted Minim = MM48, even though he has one of the faster beginning tempi. Paderewski’s relatively slow tempo produces an obvious sounding rubato, especially since he lengthens the first beat of each bar in this section. Drewnowski has a faster tempo than Paderewksi in this section, and his style of rubato is similar to Paderewski, with longer first beats of the bar and use of ritardando within phrases. Koczalski’s tempo in the Dolce section is Dotted Minim = MM68, which is Dotted Minim = MM20 faster than Paderewski’s tempo. Although Koczalski lengthens the first beat of some bars in this section, the music flows well because of the faster speed. Lukasiewicz chooses a slightly slower tempo of Dotted Minim = MM64 in the Dolce section, and his Dolce section also flows well. This shows that a tempo of Dotted Minim = MM55-68 is suitable for the Dolce section, while a tempo of Dotted Minim = MM48 is on the slow side, but can still be successfully used as long as the rubato sounds natural, and the lively tempo is regained in the next section, as in Paderewski’s recording.

Rubato

Comparative Graph

233 Overall Quantity

The most common ways that rubato is used in the Waltz Op.18 are lengthening, ritardando or ritenuto, and hand displacement Friedman uses over twice as much rubato as any of the other pianists, due to his abundant lengthening and shortening. However, Friedman uses a relatively mall quantity of ritardando, hand displacement, and arpeggiation. All the pianists are very different in the ratio of the types of rubato they use, but all use lengthening and ritardando, and the early twentieth century pianists use hand displacement and arpeggiation.

Common ways rubato is used 1. Lengthening 2. Hand Displacement 3. Ritardando 4. Arpeggiation 5. Accelerando

1. Lengthening

The main differences between the pianists are in the quantity of their lengthening and the places they choose to lengthen, although they often lengthen in common places. Although Drewnowski uses much less lengthening than most of the early twentieth century pianists, he uses a similar quantity to Lukasiewicz, who seems to be the exception amongst the early twentieth century pianists studied in relation to quantity of lengthening used.

The pianists usually lengthen from one and a half times to twice the length of the written value. The pianists almost always lengthen on the first beat of the bar, which is in contrast to the Mazurkas Op.24 No.4 and Op.63 No.3, where the pianists also tend to lengthen the second crotchet pulse. However, as in the Mazurkas, the common bars for lengthened notes in the Waltz Op.18 tend to be the start, high point or end of a slur. For example, in bar 67, Koczalski, Friedman, Paderewski, and Lukasiewicz lengthen the first crotchet pulse to almost twice its written length. This emphasises the high point of the phrase at the end of a section.

234 Bar 67-68: K, F, Pa, L

Sometimes the Polish pianists lengthen notes to differing extents in common places. On the first crotchet pulse in bar 174, which is the high point of a phrase, Koczalski lengthens more subtly than the other three pianists, and Paderewski lengthens the most noticeably, lengthening the pulse to over twice its written value.

Bar 174:

K, F, Pa, L

Other differences between the pianists can be heard in bar 165, marked dolce and the start of a new section. Instead of lengthening the first crotchet pulse of bar 165, Drewnowski flows relatively quickly through bar 165 and lengthens the first beat of bar 166, which is the high point of the two bar phrase. Koczalski, Friedman and Paderewski also lengthen the first beat of bar 166 to emphasise this high point. Unlike the others, Lukasiewicz does not lengthen in bar 166, but highlights the highest note of the phrase with a dynamic accent. Friedman and Paderewski also lengthen the first crotchet pulse in bar 167, but to a lesser degree than in bar 165.

K, F, Pa Bars 165-167: F, Pa

Occasionally, the pianists lengthen when the right hand has a mordent or an accent, and sometimes for a few consecutive bars, as is the case with Koczalski, Friedman, and Paderewski.

235 For example, Koczalski and Paderewski both noticeably lengthen the first crotchet pulse in bars 58-60 and from bars 66-67, where the first beat is marked with a diminuendo sign.

Bars 58-60: K, Pa

Bars 66-68: K, Pa

All five pianists lengthen noticeably in bar 306 on different crotchet pulses. Drewnowski lengthens the first crotchet pulse, while the other four pianists lengthen the third crotchet pulse, delaying the final chord in bar 307. Both ways effectively highlight the grand fortissimo ending.

Bars 306-307: K, F, Pa, L Dr

Due to his relatively sparse lengthening, Drewnowski has one bar in common each with Koczalski, Paderewski and Friedman in the bars where two pianists lengthen in common, but in each bar he uses it to a similar extent to these early twentieth century pianists. In bar 37, Drewnowski and Friedman lengthen noticeably on the first crotchet pulse, which is at the end of the phrase and marked with a staccato in the right hand. This is similar to Rosenthal, Friedman, and Turczynski’s lengthening of the second crotchet pulse in the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, which is also marked with a staccato in the right hand and overlaps with the next phrase. As in the

236 Mazurka, Drewnowski and Friedman’s lengthening in the Waltz Op.18 gives the music a more dance-like character.

Bars 36-37: F, Dr

Bar 6 (Mazurka Op.24 No.4):

In bar 120, Drewnowski and Paderewski subtly lengthen the first crotchet pulse, which is marked with an accent. Paderewski also uses hand displacement on the lengthened pulse, showing the effective combination of two rubato techniques to highlight the end of the first phrase in the con anima section.

Bars 117-120: Pa, Dr

In a similar way, in bar 69, Drewnowski and Koczalski subtly lengthen the first crotchet pulse, which is also marked with an accent and is the start of a new section. Their lengthening helps them bridge the new section and key.

237 Bars 67-70: K, Dr

2. Hand Displacement

There is a small difference in the quantity of hand displacement amongst most of the pianists, but they all use hand displacement less than half the number of times that Koczalski does. This makes Koczalski the exception amongst the pianists in the quantity of hand displacement used. However, the pianists usually use hand displacement subtly, with some bars in common with Koczalski.

Hand displacement is usually used on the first crotchet pulse and common places include the starts of sections, the high point of phrases, or for an accent in the right hand. For example, Koczalski, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz displace the hands subtly on the first crotchet pulse of bar 117, which is the start of the con anima section.

Bar 117: K, Pa, L

Koczalski and Paderewski have several places in common where they use hand displacement to a similar degree. In bars 16, 40, 48, 79, and 170 Koczalski and Paderewski play the left hand before the right on the first crotchet pulse, mostly very subtly. These are all similar circumstances where there is an accent marked in the right hand. A few examples are shown below.

238 Bars 15-16: K, Pa

Bars 47-48: K, Pa

Bars 78-79: K, Pa

There are only a few small differences in the quality of the hand displacement between the Polish pianists in common places. For example, Koczalski and Paderewski displace the hands on the first crotchet pulse in bar 149, but Koczalski does so subtly while Paderewski does so noticeably.

K, Pa Bar 149:

Koczalski and Friedman have a couple of common places to use hand displacement, in bars 166 and 232. The first crotchet pulse of bar 166 is the climax of the first phrase in the Dolce section (bars 165-188), and playing the left hand before the right further projects the right hand melody.

239 Bar 166: K, F

In bar 232, which is a climactic point that contains a dominant seventh chord followed by rests. Friedman plays the left hand chord before the right hand chord, while Koczalski plays only the lowest note in the left hand first, then the other notes simultaneously.

Bar 232: K, F

3. Ritardando

All the pianists to varying degrees and frequencies use ritardando or ritenuto, mainly at the end of a section or phrase and less often at the start or high point of a phrase. When it is used at the start of a phrase, it is more like a ritenuto rather than a ritardando, and the pianists return to the previous tempo later in the phrase. The pianists often slow down to slightly different extents, but Paderewski’s ritardando is usually more noticeable than the other pianists’ in the common bars. Paderewski also uses ritardando more frequently than the other pianists, though Koczalski and Drewnowski come closest in quantity. Friedman and Lukasiewicz use relatively little ritardando. This shows differences in the use of ritardando between Polish pianists, and also similarities between pianists of different eras in relation to quantity.

Although there are individual places for the pianists to use ritardando or ritenuto, there are also common places, indicating that the pianists have a similar sense of where it may be effective to use rubato. Bars 26-28, 34-36, 58-60, 66-68 and 210-212 have similar melodies. Koczalski and Paderewski use ritenuto in these five places, which come at the end of the phrase.

240 Bars 26-28:

Friedman is the only pianist not to use ritardando or ritenuto in any of these areas in an obvious way, although he does lengthen the first beats of bars 35 and 67, which could be interpreted as a small ritenuto in these bars.

Bars 35-36:

Bars 66-68:

Koczalski, Paderewski and Drewnowski use ritardando in bars 131-132 to highlight the end of the section. In a similar manner, Paderewski and Drewnowski slow down in bars 163-164, which is also the end of a section. In each case, Paderewski’s ritardando is noticeable, while the other pianists’ ritardandi are subtle.

Bars 131-132 and Bars 163-164:

241 In bar 237, the melody comes to a halt because of the rest in bar 238. Koczalski and Paderewski anticipate this with a ritardando, but Paderewski’s slowing down is to a greater extent.

Bars 237-238:

Lukasiewicz and Drewnowski use ritardando in bars 300-303, where a smorzando is marked. Koczalski and Friedman achieve the smorzando mainly with a diminuendo, but Friedman slows down subtly as well. Paderewski does not change his dynamics or speed at bar 300, which is unusual because he uses ritardando the most frequently and usually more noticeably than the other pianists.

Bars 300-303:

Although Paderewski uses the most ritardando in frequency and extent, it doesn’t sound overused to me because he uses it in similar places in the music, and only in places where it may be justified, such as the end of a section, or to highlight the end of a phrase.

4. Arpeggiation

As with ritardando, Paderewski uses arpeggiation the most frequently and usually arpeggiates more slowly than the other pianists. Popular places for arpeggiation are high point slurs, the end of a phrase, or chords marked with accents. Arpeggiation is always used on the first crotchet pulse of the bar. In common bars the pianists sometimes arpeggiate to slightly differing extents. Paderewski and Friedman arpeggiate the chord on the first crotchet pulse in bar 152, which is marked with an accent, but Friedman’s arpeggiation is quicker than Paderewski’s.

242 Bar 152: Pa, F

Lukasiewicz, Paderewski, and Drewnowski all arpeggiate the chord on the first crotchet pulse in bar 232 quickly. As discussed earlier, Koczalski and Friedman emphasise the same chord using hand displacement, which shows that all the selected pianists think it is suitable to use rubato at this point.

Bar 232: L, Pa, Dr

Paderewski and Lukasiewicz arpeggiate the chord in bar 303, emphasising the end of the repeated right hand motif, and in this bar, Paderewski arpeggiates quickly while Lukasiewicz arpeggiates slowly. Paderewski’s quick arpeggiation is suited to his faster tempo in these bars, while Lukasiewicz’s slow arpeggiation comes after his noticeable ritardando in bars 300-303, giving the chord in bar 303 a more gentle character, which is appropriate for the smorzando marked in bar 300.

Bars 300-303:

243 5. Accelerando

Four pianists use accelerando a few times or less. There is one common place for the pianists to use accelerando. Koczalski, Paderewski and Drewnowski accelerate toward bar 258, but Drewnowski speeds up a little more than the other two pianists. Their speeding up creates an exciting avalanche effect, as the right hand melody is composed of descending notes, leading up to the fortissimo chord in bar 259.

Bars 256- 259:

Summary

There is a large difference in the quantity and ratios of types of rubato the pianists use, with Friedman using rubato over twice as many times as any of the other pianists due to his use of lengthening and shortening. Koczalski uses the most hand displacement, and Paderewski uses the most arpeggiation, while the other pianists use relatively little of each. The pianists can be divided into two groups based on the quantity of their ritardando, with Koczalski, Paderewski and Drewnowski using similar amounts, and Lukasiewicz and Friedman using much less.

Although there is a great difference in quantity of lengthening between the pianists, they often choose common places to lengthen and the quality of the pianist’s lengthening is quite similar. The pianists usually lengthen from one and a half times to twice the written length of the note, and almost always lengthen on the first crotchet pulse. This is different to the pianists’ tendency to lengthen other crotchet pulses in the Mazurkas Op.24 No.4 and Op.63 No.3.

The pianists also use hand displacement similarly, usually on the first crotchet pulse. When using ritardando or ritenuto, the pianists often slow down to a slightly different extent in the common bars. Paderewski’s ritardandi and arpeggiation are usually more noticeable.

There are certain places in the music where it is more popular to use a particular type of rubato. For example, hand displacement is often used at the start of sections, the high point of phrases, or when there is an accent in the right hand, while ritardando or ritenuto is mainly used at the

244 end of a section or phrase, and less often at the start or high point of a phrase. The pianists’ methods of highlighting parts of phrases or certain notes are different, but they sometimes recognise the same areas as important places to highlight, for example the climaxes or ends of phrases.

Waltz Op.34 No.2

The Waltz Op.34 No.2 is a contrasting piece to the Waltz Op.18. In A minor rather than E flat major, it starts Lento rather than Vivo. Koczalski writes that Stephen Heller told how Chopin called this waltz his “favourite” […] its profound melancholy is a faithful picture of the state of the master’s soul […] This waltz resembles moreover a melancholic description: it is one of the most beautiful and most poetic (Koczalski 1998: 110-111)147.

The recordings analysed are by Koczalski (1928)148, Cortot (1935)149, Friedman (1926)150, Smidowicz (1948)151, Drewnowski (2010)152, and Olejniczak (2010)153. This allows for comparison between pianists of the Polish Chopin tradition, Cortot, and the two modern pianists Drewnowski and Olejniczak. Drewnowski and Olejniczak perform on the same Erard piano.

Tempo

There is no metronome marking on the score of the Waltz Op.34 No.2, but the tempo marking is Lento. As with the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, studying the tempo choices made by the pianists will shed light on Higgins’s comment that “Chopin’s tempi, especially his Lentos, were definitely faster than what we expect today” (1981: 41).

147 Stephen Heller a raconté un jour à Niecks que Chopin appelait cette valse sa <> […] car sa profonde mélancolie est le tableau fidèle de l’état d’âme du maître […] Cette valse ressenble plutôt à une description mélancolique; elle est des plus belles et des plus poétiques parmi toutes celles que Chopin a créées. 148 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VI 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 149 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Backhaus and Cortot 1998, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 150 Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Ignaz Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Philips, New York. 151 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Smidowicz 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 152 Chopin: Marek Drewnowski [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 153 Chopin: Janusz Olejniczak [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

245 Comparative Graph

Koczalski’s performance has the fastest beginning and overall tempo, but Smidowicz comes close to Koczalski’s beginning tempo and Cortot comes close to Koczalski’s overall tempo. As in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, the modern pianist Olejniczak is slower than most of the early twentieth century pianists in his beginning and overall tempi in the Waltz Op.34 No.2. The other modern pianist, Drewnowski, also has a slower overall and starting tempo than most of the early twentieth century pianists. The exception amongst the early twentieth century pianists is Friedman, who has the slowest overall tempo and omits bars 84-151. Again, this confirms Higgins’ concern that modern pianists may not be playing Chopin’s Lento as fast as Chopin may have intended. It is not technically difficult to play the Waltz Op.34 No.2 at Crotchet = MM52 or slower. Koczalski and Cortot’s tempo choices in the Waltz Op.34 No.2 sound livelier than modern audiences or pianists may expect in a Lento tempo marking, especially in comparison to Olejniczak’s more leisurely overall tempo, which is about Crotchet = MM20 slower than Koczalski’s overall tempo. To me, Koczalski’s performance occasionally sounds rushed, which suggests that a tempo range of Crotchet = MM32-52 could be acceptable, but performing at the upper range may risk the music sounding rushed. However, this could be conditioning because the piece is generally played more slowly.

246 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in quantity of rubato used between the pianists, with Koczalski and Cortot using the most, and over twice as many times as Friedman and Drewnowski. For all the pianists, lengthening is a large portion of the rubato used. Pianists of different pedagogical lines, eras and nationalities have similar quantities of rubato. For example, Cortot and Koczalski, Smidowicz and Olejniczak, and Friedman and Drewnowski use similar quantities. Drewnowski and Friedman also have similar proportions of the different types of rubato. The modern pianists use significantly varying quantities of rubato, with Olejniczak using rubato about twice as many times as Drewnowski, and this is mainly due to their differing quantities of lengthening.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Hand Displacement 3. Ritardando

247 1. Lengthening

The largest difference between the pianists is in the quantity of their lengthening. Koczalski is closer to Cortot in quantity of lengthening than to Friedman, showing more similarity between pianists of different nationalities than of the same nationality. Drewnowski is closer to Friedman in the quantity of lengthening than to Olejniczak, showing more similarity between pianists of different eras than the same era. The pianists also differ in places to lengthen, whether it is on a different crotchet pulse in the same bar or a different bar. Koczalski, Cortot, Smidowicz, and Olejniczak usually lengthen the first crotchet pulses of the bar. Cortot occasionally lengthens the second or third crotchet pulses. This is different to the Waltz Op.18, where the pianists almost always lengthen the first crotchet pulse. There are a greater a variety of places for lengthening notes, including places where there are ornaments in the left hand, the start, high point of end of phrase, or the start of a pattern within a sequence.

In the common bars, Koczalski, Cortot and Olejniczak often lengthen the same notes, sometimes in consecutive bars, such as bars 29-33. This may be to accentuate the dotted rhythm and sequence in the right hand, and perhaps to highlight the subtle change in the left hand rhythm, where the first note of the bar is a dotted minim rather than a crotchet.

Bars 27-31: K, C, O

Koczalski and Cortot also lengthen the first crotchet pulse subtly or very subtly in consecutive bars, from bars 121-129. This helps to convey the sostenuto character of the section, and give the music a more dance-like feel.

Bars 121-128:

248 Drewnowski and Olejniczak lengthen some of the same notes as each other, particularly on the second crotchet pulses, such as every second bar from bars 42-50 and bars 106-118. In some of these bars, Cortot lengthens notes as well, but on the first crotchet pulse. Drewnowski and Olejniczak’s subtle lengthening of the second crotchet pulse in bars 42, 44,46, 48, and 50 creates a breath between the end of the right hand slur and the start of the next, while Cortot’s very subtle lengthening of the first crotchet pulse in every bar from bars 40-51 accommodates the right hand trills and accentuates the starts of right hand slurs.

Dr, O Bars 42-46:

C Smidowicz lengthens the first crotchet pulse in bar 69 very noticeably, whereas Koczalski, Cortot and Olejniczak lengthen more subtly. Smidowicz’s makes the first crotchet pulse at least twice the written length, and this may be justified by bar 69 being the start of a new section, with a key change to A minor, from A major. Koczalski noted the significance of this key change, saying that from the “69th until the 85th this cantilena returns but this time it is no longer in the major but in the minor. […] This abrupt change of tonality gives this melody a quite particular charm. The return in A minor will be executed with a muted sonority” (1998: 110-111)154.

K, S, C, O Bar 69:

During left hand melodies, Friedman lengthens the first note of each group of left hand quavers, which is usually on the third beat of the bar. An example of this is in bars 1, 2, and 3, where

154 À partir de la 69e jusqu’à la 85e revient cette cantilène, mais cette fois elle n’est plus en la majeur mais en la mineur. Ce brusque changement de tonalité prête à cette mélodie un charme tout particulier. La reprise en la mineur sera exécutée avec une sonorité assourdie. 249 Friedman’s subtle lengthening of one quaver results in a shortening of the next quaver so that the bar as a whole is not lengthened.

Bars 1-3: F

Friedman’s lengthening in these bars is an example of the melodic rubato that Mikuli described, where the “hand responsible for the accompaniment would keep strict time, while the other hand, singing the melody, would free the essence of the musical thought from all rhythmic fetters” (Mikuli 1880: 3 in Eigeldinger 1986: 49).

2. Hand Displacement

Koczalski uses hand displacement the most frequently so that although the pianists have common bars to displace the hands, this is often only in common with Koczalski. Like the other pianists, Koczalski usually uses hand displacement on the first crotchet pulses, and occasionally on the second or third crotchet pulses. As with most cases of hand displacement in every other genre analysed, the main places to use hand displacement are at the start, high point or end of a slur. Smidowicz often displaces the hands more loosely than the other pianists. For example, five pianists use hand displacement on the first crotchet pulses in bars 17, 85, and 121, which come at the start of contrasting melodies. In bar 17, Koczalski, Cortot, Friedman, and Olejniczak displace the hands tightly or very tightly while Smidowicz displaces the hands very loosely.

Bars 14-17: K, C, F, S O

In bar 85, Koczalski, Cortot, Drewnowski, and Olejniczak displace the hands tightly or very tightly, while Smidowicz displaces the hands very loosely.

250 Bars 82-85: K, C, S, Dr, O

In bar 121, where the music changes key from A minor to A major, Olejniczak displaces the hands tightly on the first beat, while Koczalski, Cortot and Drewnowski displace the hands loosely, and Smidowicz displaces the hands very loosely. This helps to emphasise the key change.

Bar 121:

K, C, S, Dr, O

3. Ritardando

As in most of the pieces, the pianists usually use ritardando at the end of a phrase or of a section. Smidowicz, Olejniczak and Friedman usually slow down more than Cortot or Koczalski in the common bars, which may be due to Smidowicz, Olejniczak and Friedman’s choice of a relatively slow tempo. For example, all six of the pianists use ritardando in bars 8, 16, 36, and 203, which supports Higgin’s advice that Chopin’s music sometimes demands the “gentle slackening at the end of many of the poetic lines defined by the master’s slurs” (1981: 41). In bars 7-8, which comes before the repeat of the left hand melody, the pianists slow subtly, but Koczalski slows down more subtly than the others due to his faster tempo.

Bars 7-8:

251 In bars 15-16, which precede a new melody, Friedman, Smidowicz and Drewnowski slow down noticeably while Koczalski, Cortot and Olejniczak slow down subtly. Koczalski noted that the “first part which goes to the 17th measure will be executed with sentiment it seems like a sigh and a complaint” (2008: 110), which indicates that the sixteenth bar is the end of a phrase and one small section, which Koczalski and the other pianists have emphasised with a ritardando.

Bars 14-17: K, C, F, S, Dr, O

In bars 35-36, which also precedes a new melody, Olejniczak and Smidowicz slow down noticeably while the other four pianists slow down subtly. Koczalski has also noted the new section of this Waltz beginning in bar 37, saying that the “accessory phrase in C major (from the 37th to the 53rd measure) assumes a fresher expression” (1998: 110)155.

Bars 34-37: K, C, F, S, Dr, O

Koczalski recommends that the “ending will be gentle like the beginning, and moreover it will be good to execute it by slowing down” (1998: 111)156. The six pianists each slow down at the end of the piece. Bars 203-204 are almost identical to bars 15-16, where the pianists also slow down.

155 La phrase accessoire en do majeur (de la 37e à la 53e mesure) revêt une expression plus fraîche, et la belle cantilène (comprise entre les 53e et 69e mesures) sera ample et chantante. 156 La fin sera douce comme le commencement, et de plus il sera bon de l’exécuter en ralentissant. 252 Bars 202-204:

4. Arpeggiation

Smidowicz and Cortot use arpeggiation in individual bars, but Smidowicz uses it over twice as many times as Cortot. This is discussed further in Chapter 4.

Summary

As in the Waltz Op.18, which has a contrasting character to the Waltz Op.34 No.2, the main types of rubato the pianists use are lengthening, hand displacement and ritardando, with all pianists using lengthening as their primary form of rubato, except that in this Waltz, the pianists sometimes lengthen other parts of the bar, not just the first crotchet pulse. Friedman and Drewnowski use much less lengthening than the other pianists, showing that amongst the Polish and the modern pianists, there are different approaches to the use of lengthening.

The pianists choose different places to lengthen, but there are similarities between some of the pianists in terms of common places, circumstances and the extent to which they lengthen, as lengthening is usually done subtly. Friedman’s lengthening of the left hand quavers in the melody shows a possible use of melodic rubato, while the other pianists use lengthening as a way to breathe between phrases, accommodate trills, or emphasise a dotted rhythm more. Koczalski uses much more quantity of hand displacement and usually displaces the hands more loosely than the other pianists. However, the other pianists often have places in common with Koczalski to use hand displacement, most commonly at the start of contrasting melodies.

Cortot is unique in that he uses the most lengthening, and ritardando, and is the only pianist to use arpeggiation, though he usually arpeggiates quickly at the start of a phrase. Although Friedman and Drewnowski are of different eras, there is similarity between the quantities and ratios of the types of rubato. This shows that Friedman is individual in a few aspects of his playing; he also shares similarities with other pianists. These similarities reveal ways of using rubato that are common amongst the pianists, despite individuality.

253 Waltz Op.64 No.1

The Waltz Op.64 No.1 in D flat major is popularly known as the “Minute Waltz”. Koczalski notes, Niecks told a charming anecdote: George Sand possessed a little dog, who had the habit of turning round and round to try to seize its tail. One evening when it was thus occupied, Georges Sand said to Chopin, “if I had your talent, I would compose a piano piece for my little dog!” Chopin immediately sat at the piano and improvised this ravishing waltz in D flat major, thus it was given the name, Waltz of the little dog (Koczalski 1998: 134)157.

The recordings analysed are by Koczalski (1928)158, Cortot (1935)159, Friedman (1921-1929)160, and Drewnowski (2010)161, which allows some comparison between pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras. It may also reveal what Koczalski meant in his saying that the “execution of this waltz demands that which is indispensable in the interpretation of Chopin’s works: delicacy, rhythm and legato” (1998: 134)162.

Tempo

There is no metronome marking on the score Waltz Op.64 No.1 but the tempo marking is Molto Vivace. All the pianists repeat bars 21-36. Friedman has the fastest beginning tempo at Crotchet = MM117, while Koczalski has the slowest beginning tempo at Crotchet = MM93. The modern pianist Drewnowski almost matches Koczalski’s tempo beginning and overall tempi, and Cortot’s overall tempo is quite close to Friedman’s. The difference of Crotchet = MM24 is significant when comparing Koczalski and Friedman’s recordings. Koczalski and Drewnowski’s slower starting tempi still sound lively and suited to the Molto Vivace marking, although Friedman’s much faster starting tempi makes his beginning sound more exciting. The recordings demonstrate that a starting tempo ranging from Crotchet = MM93-117 is appropriate for this piece.

157 Au sujet de cette valse, Niecks raconte une charmante anecdote: George Sand possédait un petit chien, qui avait l’habitude de tourner en rond pour chercher à saisir sa queue. Un soir qu’il était ainsi occupé, George Sand dit à Chopin: <> Chopin s’assit aussitôt au piano et improvisa cette ravissante valse en ré bémol majeur, à laquelle fut donné le nom de Valse du petit chien. 158 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VI 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 159 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Backhaus and Cortot 1998, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 160 Ignace Friedman: Early Recordings By the Composer 1993, CD-ROM, The Dolphin Music Group, Newtown. 161 Chopin: Marek Drewnowski [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw. 162 L’exécution de cette valse exige ce qui est indispensable à l’interprétation des oeuvres de Chopin: délicatesse, rythme et legato. 254 Comparative Graph

Like the Impromptus, this Waltz has a contrasting middle sostenuto section. Koczalski notes that the “first part just as the secondary phrase resemble each other by their incessant movement. On the other hand, the trio brings us a lament full of poetry, supported by a waltz accompaniment with good rhythm” (1998: 134)163. Each of the pianists plays audibly slower in this trio section (bars 37-68) than their beginning tempo. This accounts for each pianist having a faster beginning tempo than overall tempo.

Rubato

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in the quantity of rubato used between Koczalski and Friedman, and this is mainly due to Koczalski’s relatively abundant use of hand displacement. The pianists use similar quantities of lengthening, and most of the pianists use similar quantities of ritardando, hand displacement and arpeggiation. Friedman uses more arpeggiation than the other pianists.

163 La première partie ainsi que la phrase secondaire se ressemblent par leur mouvement incessant. Par contre, le trio nous apporte une cantilène pleine de poésie, soutenue par un accompagnement de valse bien rythmé. 255 Comparative Graph

Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Ritardando 3. Hand Displacement 4. Arpeggiation

1. Lengthening

As in the Waltzes Op.18 and Op.34 No.2, the most common form of rubato is lengthening, mainly on the first crotchet pulse of the bar. All pianists use lengthening in similar quantities. They have more common places to lengthen than individual places, and even in the individual places, the lengthening is subtle. The pianists also use lengthening subtly in the common bars and lengthen the same crotchet pulse as each other. This shows more similarity than difference between the pianists in terms of lengthening, even though the pianists are of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras. The main places for lengthening are just before the high point of a phrase, or to emphasise the high point of the phrase.

Sometimes the pianists lengthen the third crotchet pulse, delaying the next bar. For example, in bars 10 and 18, the four pianists lengthen the third crotchet pulse by delaying the first crotchet

256 pulse in bars 11, and 19. This gives the music time to breathe between phrases, and allows the pianists to end the phrases marked diminuendo more gracefully.

Bars 9-11: K, C, F, Dr

Bars 17-19:

Bars 9-11 are similar to bars 17-19, sharing the same right hand melody and most of the same left hand accompaniment. The pianists lengthen the first beat of bars 11, 17, and 19, which accentuates the dotted rhythm in the right hand and the high point of each phrase.

2. Ritardando

The pianists use ritardando mostly in similar quantities. Friedman is the exception amongst the pianists because he does not use ritardando as many times as the others. Most cases of ritardando are subtle, lasting only a bar or two at the end of a phrase. In bars 51-52 all four pianists use ritardando to a similar extent, corresponding with the diminuendo marking at the end of a phrase.

Bars 50-52: K, C, F, Dr

Drewnowski’s ritardandi are either similar to or to a greater extent than the ritardandi of the other pianists, while Cortot’s ritardandi are either similar to or subtler than the ritardandi of the

257 other pianists. The reason for this may be Cortot’s faster overall tempo and Drewnowski’s slower overall tempo. For example, three pianists slow down in bars 35-36, which is the end of a section, and in bars 120-121, which is the end of the piece. In both cases, Cortot slows down less than the other pianists.

Bars 35-36:

Bars 120-124:

Even though Drewnowski’s ritardandi are to a greater extent than the other pianists, they are used to an expressive effect on only a few occasions so that overall, a lively tempo and Molto Vivace character is maintained. This follows Higgins’ advice that “phrase endings, natural punctuation, and the charming hesitations that marked Chopin’s own playing – all should be sensibly accepted as beyond the scope of the metronome” (1973: 116).

3. Hand Displacement

Hand displacement is always subtle or very subtle on the first crotchet pulse, and is usually used at the start or high point of a phrase. There are a few common bars but many more individual bars because of Koczalski’s abundant use of it, especially during the trio section, which Koczalski recommends to “be well sustained, expressive, rhythmic and of a sonority full and soft” (1998: 134)164. Koczalski uses hand displacement in common with Cortot in bars 40 and 48. In bar 40, Koczalski and Cortot’s hand displacement highlights the high point and end of the right hand phrase. It is a similar situation in bar 48, which contains the same melody but different left hand harmony.

164 Le trio sera bien soutenu, expressif, rythmé et d’une sonorité ample et douce. 258

Bars 39-40: K, C

Bars 47-48:

In bar 43, Koczalski and Drewnowski displace the hands in the middle of the phrase, probably to highlight the E flat on the first crotchet pulse, a melodic change from the two F’s on the first crotchet pulses in bars 41 and 42.

Bars 41-43: K, Dr

4. Arpeggiation

Koczalski and Cortot arpeggiate the left hand chord on the second crotchet pulse in bar 121. Koczalski arpeggiates slowly, in combination with a noticeable ritardando, giving the ending a more gentle character. Cortot arpeggiates quickly and does not slow down as much as Koczalski does, which keeps the Molto vivace character to the end. Friedman adds notes to the right and left hands on the first crotchet pulse in bar 121, and arpeggiates the left hand notes very quickly, giving his ending to the piece a more brilliant finish.

259 Bars 120-124:

F adds chord

K, C Friedman adds notes to an arpeggiated chord at the end of this Waltz, similar to his interpretation of the ending of the Etude Op.25 No.9, where he also added an arpeggiated chord to the right hand. As in the Etude Op.25 No.9, Friedman’s addition of an arpeggiated chord at the end suits the carefree nature of the music. Unlike the Etude Op.25 No.9, which is marked pianissimo at the end, the Waltz Op.64 No.1 is marked forte, showing that additional arepeggiation could be used at any dynamic level and is not restricted to places “where a softer expression needs to be brought out” (Bree 1903: 59 cited in Hamilton 2008: 145). However, Friedman’s arpeggiation does have a softening effect on the ending.

Summary

Friedman uses more arpeggiation, adding notes in some cases, while Koczalski uses more hand displacement than the other pianists. The four pianists are similar in the quantity and quality of lengthening, and have more common places to lengthen than individual places. The pianists each use ritardando several times, except for Friedman who uses it once. Drewnowski tends to slow down to a greater extent and Cortot slows down less than the others. There are a few individual bars for ritardando, but Koczalski’s ritardando is very subtle in these bars while Drewnowski’s ritardando in bar 64 is more noticeable. From what we know about Chopin interpretation from the sources, each performance is in the acceptable range of quantity and quality of rubato techniques used. Although Drewnowki’s ritardandi are to a slightly greater extent than the other pianists, they are used no more frequently than Cortot, and he follows Czerny’s recommendations for the use of slowing down in Chopin’s music to produce the “intended effect” (Czerny 1839: 189 cited in Paetsch 2009: 159), which is creating breathing space between phrases and ending each phrase gracefully.

260 Waltz Op.64 No.2

The Waltz Op.64 No.2 has three contrasting sections, Tempo Giusto (A), Più Mosso (B), and Più Lento (C) in the order AB CB AB. Koczalski asserts, This waltz as well as that in A minor op 34 no 2 are the saddest, while at the same time they are the two most elegant ones the master composed. The first part is of a ravishing grace, yet the melody exhales an inexpressible melancholy; the secondary part offers us gossamer passages, and the trio contains a broad cantilena of a rare beauty. The secondary part is repeated at the end of the first part as well as after the trio, and the waltz ends with an incomparable lightness (Koczalski 1998: 160)165.

The choices of tempo for each section and differing uses of rubato between the sections will be discussed in the recordings by Koczalski (1928)166, Rosenthal (1930)167, Cortot (1925)168, Paderewski (1917)169, Turczynski (1950)170, and Drewnowski (2010)171. The selection of recordings provides comparison between two of Mikuli’s students, two more pianists of the Polish Chopin tradition, a French pianist, and a modern pianist.

165 Cette valse ainsi que celle en la mineur op.34 no 2 sont les deux plus tristes, en même temps qu’elles sont les deux plus élégantes que le maître ait composées. La première partie est d’une grâce ravissante, et pourtant la mélodie exhale une indicible mélancholie; la partie accessoire nous offer de vaporeux passages, et le trio contient une large cantilène d’une rare beauté. La partie accessoire reprend à la suite de la première partie, ainsi qu’après le trio, et la valse se termine avec une elegance incomparable. 166 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VI 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 167 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Rosenthal 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 168 Alfred Cortot Victor Recordings of 1919-1926 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. 169 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Paderewski 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 170 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Turczynski 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. 171 Chopin: Marek Drewnowski [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

261 Tempo

Comparative Graph

There is no metronome marking on the score of the Waltz Op.64 No.2 but the first tempo marking is Tempo giusto. Cortot’s performance has the fastest overall tempo, as well as the fastest tempo for the first 32 bars (Tempo Giusto), and for bars 33-64 (Più Mosso), although Koczalski comes close to Cortot’s Tempo Giusto tempo.

Rosenthal has the slowest tempo for each section of the piece, but he is similar in tempo to at least one other pianist in each section. His Tempo Giusto section is played at Crotchet = MM43, which is close to Turczynski and Drewnowski’s tempo of Crotchet – MM46. However, there is an audible difference between Rosenthal’s Tempo Giusto and Koczalski’s Tempo Giusto of Crotchet = MM53, which is Crotchet = MM10 faster than Rosenthal. This shows that pianists of the same pedagogical line, nationality and era can be more contrasting to each other in tempo than to other pianists of a different pedagogical line, nationality or era. Cortot and Koczalski’s

262 tempo of Crotchet = MM53-55 in this section gives the music a livelier character, while Rosenthal, Turczynski, and Drewnowski’s slower tempi of Crotchet – MM43-46 gives the music a more relaxed impression. The term Tempo Guisto does not give an indication of speed and the tempo chosen by each pianist sounds acceptable to me. Therefore, although a difference of Crotchet = MM10 is significantly audible, a range of Crotchet = MM43-53 can be acceptable.

In bars 33-64 (Più Mosso), all the pianists except Cortot play at a similar tempo. There is an audible difference in tempo between Cortot’s tempo of Crotchet = MM102 and the tempo of the other pianists, ranging from Crotchet MM69-77. Cortot’s choice of a much faster tempo makes his performance of the Più Mosso section sound more virtuosic than the others, but not less convincing. Rosenthal’s relatively slow tempo of Crotchet = MM69 does not sound too slow to me, which may indicate that a wide tempo range of Crotchet = MM69-102 can be effective in this section, although most of the pianists fall within Crotchet = MM69-77.

Rosenthal’s tempo of Crotchet = MM44 in bars 65-96 (Più Lento) is audibly slower than Paderewski and Turczynski’s tempo of Crotchet = MM51-52, but not audibly slower than Koczalski’s tempo of Crotchet = MM49. Although the performances of this section are slightly different in their tempo choices, they are each expressive in their own way, which shows that a tempo range of Crotchet = MM44-52 can work in the Più Lento section of this Waltz.

Rosenthal, Turczynski, Paderewski and Drewnowski have slightly faster average tempi (Crotchet = MM1-5 faster) in the Più Lento section than in the Tempo Giusto section, which shows that the pianists may not necessarily play slower than the Tempo Giusto section in the Più Lento section. The pianists may have interpreted Più Lento to mean slower than the Più Mosso section that preceded it.

263 Rubato

Comparative Graph

Overall Quantity

There is a large difference in quantity of rubato, especially in the quantity of asynchronisation. Koczalski, Paderewski and Rosenthal use the most hand displacement or arpeggiation, and the most rubato. The pianists are similar in their quantity of lengthening and ritardando, although Drewnowski uses less of each than the other pianists. Mikuli’s students, Rosenthal and Koczalski, use similar quantities of hand displacement to each other, and more often than the other Polish pianists, Paderewski and Turczynski. They also use similar ratios of types of rubato, which has not been a common occurrence in the other pieces.

Common ways rubato is used

1. Lengthening 2. Hand Displacement 3. Ritardando 4. Arpeggiation

264 1. Lengthening

As in the previously discussed Waltzes, the most common way that rubato is used is lengthening, with each pianist using it in abundance, mostly subtly during motifs that recur throughout the piece. The pianists use lengthening in similar quantities, although Turczynski and Drewnowski use lengthening several instances less than the other pianists.

Unlike the other three Waltzes analysed, lengthening in the Waltz Op.64 No.2 is quite common on the second crotchet pulse, as well as the first. Usually the first crotchet pulse is lengthened for the start of a new section, and the second crotchet pulse is lengthened in the middle of a phrase, where there is a rest in the right hand melody. For example, all six pianists lengthen the second crotchet pulse in bars 3, 7, 19, 23, 131, 135, and 151; five pianists lengthen the second crotchet pulse in bars 4, 8, 20, 132, and 147; four pianists lengthen the second crotchet pulse in bars 24, 136, 148, and 152. In each of these bars there is a semiquaver rest in the right hand, which is subtly or very subtly lengthened and creates more buoyancy in the melody.

Bars 3-4: K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr K, R, Pa, T, Dr

Bars 7-8: K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr K, R, Pa, T, Dr

The lengthening of the second crotchet pulse in these bars of the Waltz has a similar effect to the lengthening of the second crotchet pulse in the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, where all three pianists lengthen the second crotchet pulse in bar 6. In both the Waltz Op.64 No.2 and the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, the lengthening gives the music a more dance-like character. This suggests that “there’s the necessity sometimes of lengthening certain beats, of playing with agogic accents” (Siepmann 1995: 255), not only in the Mazurkas, but also in this Waltz.

265 Bar 6 (Mazurka Op.24 No.4):

In the common bars, there are only a few places where the pianists lengthen noticeably, and these occur on the first crotchet pulses of the bar only, such as the start of the Più Mosso sections. For example, in bar 33, Koczalski, Rosenthal and Turczynski lengthen the first crotchet pulse noticeably, making it at least twice the length of the other pulses in the bar. However, in the repeat of the Più Mosso section in bar 97, Koczalski and Rosenthal lengthen the first crotchet pulse subtly while Turczynski lengthen noticeably. This shows that on repeats of melodies, the pianists sometimes use lengthening to slightly different extents, which echoes the “characteristic of Chopin not to execute a musical thought twice in the same manner” (Kleczynski 1879: 63).

K, R, T Bars 97-98:

Koczalski usually lengthens the starts of new sections, the first beat of a phrase, or the climax of a phrase. For example, in bar 155, Koczalski noticeably lengthens the left hand bass note on the first crotchet pulse, presumably to emphasise the high point of the right hand phrase.

Bars 154-155: K

The exception is bar 141, where the first crotchet pulse is in the middle of a phrase. Koczalski lengthens the first crotchet pulse of bar 141 to highlight the chromatic passing note.

266 K Bars 140-143:

2. Hand Displacement

The pianists use hand displacement in widely differing quantities. Paderewski uses hand displacement about triple the number of times as Turczynski and Cortot, but still less than Koczalski and Rosenthal. Despite the differences in quantity, the pianists have common places to use hand displacement, usually subtly. Most of the bars in which Rosenthal uses hand displacement are in common with Koczalski, and most of the places where Paderewski uses hand displacement are in common with Koczalski, Rosenthal or Cortot.

Koczalski and Rosenthal usually use hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse of the bar, and sometimes on the third crotchet pulse. Koczalski and Rosenthal’s hand displacements are most abundant in the Tempo Giusto sections, and the Più Lento section, but occasional hand displacement can also be heard in the Più Mosso sections. When hand displacement is used in the Più Mosso sections, the pianists combine it with slowing or lengthening in the same place. For example, Rosenthal lengthens the first crotchet pulse of bar 165 noticeably, while also displacing the hands loosely in the same place. This shows that pianists tend to use more frequent and noticeable hand displacement in sections or places with slower tempo, as in the Impromptu Op.66, in which Koczalski also uses hand displacement abundantly and uses more hand displacement in the slower lyrical middle section of the piece than the faster outer sections.

Hand displacement is usually used at the beginning of a phrase, and less often at the end of the phrase. Hand displacement is rarely used in the middle of a phrase. When Koczalski uses hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse, the right hand note is usually the start or the highest note of the phrase. The exceptions are in bars 32, 146, 150, 160 and 192, where the right hand note on the first crotchet pulse is at the end of a phrase.

267 Bar 145-146: K

All six pianists use hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse in bar 129 to differing extents. In this bar, Koczalski, Rosenthal and Cortot displace the hands tightly. Drewnowski’s hand displacement is very tight, and Paderewski and Turczynski’s hand displacement is loose. In each case the hand displacement emphasises the start of the right hand phrase and section.

Bars 129-133: K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr

Only Koczalski, Rosenthal, Cortot and Paderewksi use hand displacement on the third crotchet pulse. Usually the pianists use hand displacement on the third crotchet pulse in an individual bar or in an individual place in a common bar. This is in contrast to the use of hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse, where the pianists have more in common with each other. For example, Koczalski uses hand displacement on the third crotchet pulse in bars 73, 81, and 86, which are all at the start of a right hand phrase, and Rosenthal uses hand displacement on the third crotchet pulse in bars 9, 29, 37, 139, 153, and 155, which come at the end of a phrase.

Bars 73-74 and bars 9-10: K R

There is more similarity between pianists of different pedagogical lines than the same pedagogical line in the extent they use hand displacement. Although Koczalski and Rosenthal

268 have more places in common with each other to use hand displacement than the other pianists do, Rosenthal’s hand displacement is usually more similar to Paderewski and Turczynski’s hand displacement than to Koczalski’s hand displacement in the common bars, since Koczalski and Rosenthal sometimes differ in the extent that they use it in their common places. For example, in bars 11, 27, 33, 153, 155, and, 157, Koczalski displaces the hands loosely, while Rosenthal displaces the hands very tightly. Also, Koczalski and Paderewski are the only pianists to occasionally use hand displacement loosely. Further examples of small differences in quality of hand displacement between the pianists in the common bars are included in the Appendix.

3. Ritardando

Ritardando is used by most of the pianists, usually at the end of a section or phrase. Cortot uses ritardando more often than the other pianists, but to the same extent the Polish pianists in the common bars. Paderewski usually uses it to a greater extent than the other pianists in the common bars. The ritardando is usually subtle, but each pianist slows down noticeably at least once. An example is in bars 31-32, where Rosenthal, Cortot, Paderewski, and Turczyznski slow down noticeably, and Paderewski slows down very noticeably at the end of the first Tempo Giusto section.

Bars 30-32:

It is the same situation in bars 159-160, where all the pianists, except Drewnowski slow down noticeably, but Paderewski slows down very noticeably. Paderewski also slows down very noticeably in bars 80 and 96, and to a greater extent than Koczalski and Turczynski, who slow down to a small extent. Bar 80 comes halfway through the Più lento section and is approaching the end of a phrase. Koczalski recommends “using tempo rubato in the 72nd, 80th and 84th bars” (1998: 160)172, but he does not specify what type of rubato to use. It is likely that he implies ritardando, since Paderewski uses it in bar 80, and it is a common technique to use at the end of the phrase. Koczalski uses hand displacement very subtly on the first crotchet pulse, so he could have also meant this.

172 Je recommande d’employer le tempo rubato dans les 72e, 80e et 84e mesures. 269 Bars 79-80:

In bar 84, there are eight notes in the right hand played against the three crotchets in the left hand, so Koczalski encouraged freedom of timing in this bar.

Bars 84-85:

In bars 92-96 there is already a poco ritenuto marked, so it is acceptable to slow down considering the long right hand phrase and the lack of left hand accompaniment in bars 94-96, which gives the right hand more freedom.

Bars 92-96:

However, if Chopin “hated […] exaggerated ritardandi’ (Niecks 1902: 341 cited in Hudson 1994: 177), then Paderewski’s ritardandi, although sounding acceptable to me, might have been exaggerated according to Chopin.

Four pianists have places to use ritardando that are individual to them and the occurrence is usually subtle. However, Rosenthal’s ritardando in bars 13-14 and in bars 141-143 (identical to bars 13-15) is more obvious and is used at the high point of a phrase, rather than the usual end of the phrase.

R 270 Bars 140-143:

This augments the effect of the crescendo and the rising right hand melody, which sounds acceptable to me, but Chopin might not have approved of such a noticeable ritardando if he really did hate “all lingering” (Niecks 1902: 341 cited in Hudson 1994: 177).

4. Arpeggiation

Paderewski uses arpeggiation twenty five times, Rosenthal uses it only once in bar 79, and Turczynski uses none, showing a large difference in quantity of arpeggiation between pianists of the same nationality. Although Koczalski uses arpeggiation less frequently than Cortot, Koczalski’s arpeggiation is usually slower than Cortot’s, and they arpeggiate mostly in different places. Arpeggiation usually occurs on the first crotchet pulse, either the start or the high point of a phrase. The exception is in bars 31 and 159 where Koczalski, Paderewski and Cortot arpeggiate the dominant chord on the third crotchet pulse.

Bar 31 and Bar 159: K, Pa, C K, Pa, C

Paderewski has several places in common with Koczalski or Cortot to arpeggiate. Whenever Paderewski and Koczalski arpeggiate in the same bar, Koczalski’s arpeggiation is usually slower than Paderewski’s, such as in bars 27, 29, 155 and 157, where they both arpeggiate the two note chords in the right hand that come at the climax of the crescendo and phrase. Bars 27 and 29 have the same notes as bars 155 and 157, showing that both Koczalski and Paderewski arpeggiate the same way in returning sections.

271 Bars 28-29: K, Pa

Paderewski and Cortot also use arpeggiation on the same right hand notes in returning Tempo Giusto sections, such as on the first crotchet pulse in bars 9, 21, 25, 133, 137, 149, and 153. In each case, Paderewski’s arpeggiation is slower than Cortot’s. Bars 9, 25, 137 and 153 contain the same notes, and bars 21, 133, and 149 contain the same notes, again showing that the pianists arpeggiate the same way in returning sections.

Bars 8-9: C, Pa

Bar 20-21: C, Pa

Summary

Most of the differences in the use of rubato between the pianists are in the quantity of hand displacement or arpeggiation. Koczalski and Rosenthal use similar ratios of rubato, which may indicate evidence of a pedagogical tradition. However, they sometimes differ in the places they displace the hands on the third crotchet pulse, and in the extent that they use it in places in common. Rosenthal’s hand displacement is usually more similar to Paderewski and Turczynski’s hand displacement than to Koczalski’s hand displacement in the common bars. Also, Koczalski and Rosenthal have several individual places to use hand displacement. Hand displacement is most frequent and noticeable in the Tempo Giusto and Più Lento sections rather than in the Più Mosso sections, showing that the pianists tend to use hand displacement more

272 extensively during slower and more lyrical sections of a piece. Hand displacement is also sometimes combined with lengthening to further emphasise certain melody notes, which usually come at the start of the right hand phrase.

Although Turczynski and Paderewski are both considered to be from the Polish Chopin tradition, Paderewski uses arpeggiation and hand displacement much more frequently than Turczynski. Both Paderewski’s and Cortot’s arpeggiation occurs in recurring places in the music, which contributes to the relatively large quantity. They share some of those places in common despite being from a different pedagogical line and nationality.

The pianists use lengthening in similar quantities and have common places to lengthen, particularly on the second crotchet pulse where there is a rest in the right hand in order to give buoyancy to the melody, as in the Mazurka Op.24 No.4. The Polish pianists use ritardando in almost equal quantities, but Paderewski usually uses it to a greater extent than the other pianists in the bars in common for rubato use. Drewnowski uses ritardando less and more subtly than the other pianists, which may be an indication of a modern tradition. Rosenthal’s ritardandi in bars 13-14 and bars 141-143 are more obvious. His ritardandi are used at the high point of a phrase rather than the usual end of the phrase and highlight his individuality.

The comparison of the pianists’ use of tempo and rubato in Chapter 3 has revealed both similarities and differences between pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras across different genres of Chopin’s music. Rubato is often used to highlight dynamic, expressive or articulation markings, the start, high point or end of a phrase or section, or to emphasise harmonic events in the music. However, the pianists sometimes differ on the extent of the rubato used or the specific places to use it. Chapter 4 will reveal more individual ways that the early twentieth century pianists use tempo and rubato.

273 CHAPTER 4 TEMPO AND RUBATO: INDIVIDUAL FEATURES OF PIANISTS

In Chapter 4, I will discuss the unique features of rubato usage by individual pianists from the early twentieth century. The purpose is to reveal different styles of playing and also differences between pianists of the same pedagogical lineage, nationality or era. In addition I discuss the circumstances in which rubato is used and the apparent reasons for the use of rubato in each instance. I also discuss the more unique ways rubato is used.

4.1. Cortot

The data examined shows that Cortot usually has a faster than average or close to average overall tempo, such as in the Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 Nos. 2, 6, and 9, the Impromptus Op.29 and Op.36, and the Preludes Op.28 Nos.3, 6, 7, and 19. This difference is most audible in the Etudes, and the Impromptus Op.29 and Op.36. Cortot’s Più Mosso section in the Waltz Op.64 No.2 is also much faster than the other pianists’ performance of that section. Cortot’s main form of rubato varies with each piece, but like the other pianists, lengthening and ritardando are his main forms of rubato in the Waltzes Op.34 No.2, Op.64 No.1 and Op.64 No.2.

Cortot uses rubato very sparingly and less frequently than the other pianists in the Etudes Op.10 No.5 and Op.25 No.9, and the Prelude Op.28 No.7. In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Cortot only uses ritardando, lengthening and arpeggiation, which is similar to Lukasiewicz, but their recordings still sound quite different because Lukasiewicz plays at a slower tempo. In the Prelude Op.28 No.7, Cortot uses rubato more sparingly than Koczalski and Rosenthal because he does not use hand displacement or arpeggiation. In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Cortot uses less rubato than Rosenthal, Koczalski and Paderewski, also mainly due to Koczalski and Rosenthal using more hand displacement than Cortot, and Paderewski using more arpeggiation. However, Cortot uses a similar quantity of rubato to other pianists in the Prelude Op.28 No.19, and the Waltzes Op.64 No.1.

Cortot often differs from other pianists in the ratio of types of rubato that he uses in each piece, even when he is similar in the quantity of rubato. For example, in the Berceuse, Cortot uses a similar quantity of rubato to Michalowski, but he uses more lengthening than any of the other early twentieth century pianists. In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Cortot uses a similar quantity of rubato to Koczalski, but Cortot uses more arpeggiation and less hand displacement than Koczalski. In the Prelude Op.28 No.19, Cortot uses a similar quantity of rubato to Friedman, but uses more ritardando and less hand displacement than Friedman. However, in the Etude Op.25

274 No.2, Cortot is more similar to the others in the ratio and quantity of rubato that he uses. This is probably because there is less opportunity for rubato in this piece compared to the Berceuse and Preludes.

Lengthening

Cortot lengthens notes in places that are individual to him, but the extent to which he lengthens differs according to the piece. In the Berceuse, Cortot sometimes lengthens noticeably, such as in bar 5 on the fifth quaver pulse and in bar 38 on the fifth quaver pulse, which are both the end of the left hand phrase and expressively emphasise the G flat melody note in the right hand.

Berceuse – Bar 5 and Bar 38:

Cortot also has individual ways to lengthen pitches in bars that are commonly lengthened. For example, Cortot’s overall speed approaching and within bar 27 is slower than Michalowski. Another difference is that Cortot arpeggiates the right hand chord and slows down markedly before playing the first beat of bar 27, which causes his lengthening to be more noticeable. The modern pianist, Michael Roll notes that Chopin’s “dramatic use of rests is another vital feature of his rhythm, a source of great power” (Siepmann 1995: 257). Cortot’s lengthening and slowing in bar 27 is a way of accentuating the rests marked in between the two note slurs in the right hand, as he takes more time on the rests.

275 Berceuse - Bar 27:

Also, in bar 31, Cortot arpeggiates the notes of the acciaccatura, and then speeds up toward the end of the bar, which makes his bar 31 sound very different from the other pianists.

Berceuse - Bar 31:

Although Cortot lengthens more noticeably and frequently than the Polish pianists in the Berceuse, in the Etude Op.25 No.9, the Polish pianists lengthen notes to a greater extent than Cortot in the individual bars, which indicates the way Cortot adapts his style of rubato to the genre or tempo. In the Etude Op.25 No.9, Cortot’s lengthening in individual bars is in response to a dynamic marking in the score, which has been a common trait amongst all the pianists studied. For example, Cortot lengthens the first beat in bar 41 to prepare for a new phrase and leggierissimo marking.

Etude Op.25 No.9 - Bar 41:

276 In the Impromptu Op.29, Cortot uses lengthening twice very subtly, at the end of a phrase, on the first notes in bars 31 and 33. This allows the music to breathe between the phrases; in bar 33, it also helps emphasise the accent and change of dynamic level from piano to forte.

Impromptu Op.29 - Bars 31-33:

In the Impromptu Op.36, Cortot noticeably lengthens the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 68, where he emphasises the triplets in the right hand and sounds like a small ritenuto at the end of a phrase.

Impromptu Op.36 – Bars 67- 68:

Cortot also lengthens notes on the fourth crotchet pulse in bars 13 and 14, where he turns the group of two quavers into a dotted quaver and semiquaver. This keeps the accompaniment steady while the rhythm of the melody changes, making this an example of melodic rubato.

Impromptu Op.36 - Bars 13-14:

However, Cortot does not exclusively use melodic rubato in this piece. In bar 53, he delays bar 54, which is the climax of the phrase and crescendo, affecting both the melody and accompaniment.

277 Impromptu Op.36 - Bars 52-54:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, lengthening is used in individual way; it is usually very subtle on the first beat. In bars 7 and 22, lengthening the first crotchet pulse is the result of Cortot’s arpeggiation of the first chord in the bar, and emphasises the right hand melody’s E flat.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bar 7:

In bar 13, Cortot lengthens the first crotchet pulse and takes extra time to arpeggiate the chord on the second crotchet pulse. In bar 24, the first melody returns, and he lengthens the first crotchet pulse, remaining consistent with what he did in bars 1, 5 and 20. In bars 40 and 56, Cortot lengthens the first crotchet pulse, which highlights the change in texture to left hand octaves, and the climax of the crescendo. In bar 83, Cortot lengthens the first beat to shape the phrase, bringing out the higher pitched F. One place where Cortot lengthens noticeably is the last beat in bar 57, where he delays near the end of the climactic left hand melody.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bar 57:

278 In the Prelude Op.28 No.19, Cortot uses lengthening the same number of times as Friedman, but only once out of the seven times it is in a common place with Friedman. The other times, Cortot uses lengthening individually to a greater degree than the other pianists do, particularly in bars 51, 59, and 60. Cortot’s lengthening of the second and third crotchet pulses of bars 51 and 59, and the first crotchet pulse of bar 60, could also be categorised as short ritenuti. These may be bars in which Cortot advised “a little insistence at times when a change of mode contributes a new emotional shading to the repetition of a melodic fragment” (1937: 51).

Prelude Op.28 No.19 – Bar 51 and Bars 59-60:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Cortot has several individual bars to use lengthening. He usually lengthens either the first or the second crotchet pulse. Cortot uses lengthening noticeably on the second crotchet pulse in bars 129 and 133, which are at the start of a phrase.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 129-133:

Although this affects the melody, the lengthening is done specifically on the left hand chords, showing that in Chopin’s dance pieces, Mikuli’s advice that the “hand responsible for the accompaniment would keep strict time” (Mikuli 1880: 3 in Eigeldinger 1986: 49) is not so applicable.

Occasionally, Cortot differs significantly from other pianists in the quantity of lengthening that he uses. In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, he uses lengthening one hundred and seventeen times, which is thirty instances more than Koczalski, who uses it eighty seven times. Due to the high frequency of their lengthening in this waltz, Koczalski and Cortot have small sections where they lengthen in consecutive bars or at regular intervals, as discussed earlier. The fact that these

279 two pianists who are pedagogically connected to Chopin, including one who is Mikuli’s student, use lengthening in the accompaniment so freely in the waltzes, suggests that Mikuli’s idea of “strict time” could be less strict than modern pianists perceive it to be or that he was probably referring to genres other than the waltz or mazurka. Mikuli’s statement that the metronome never left Chopin’s piano implies but does not necessarily mean that Chopin used the metronome to ensure that the accompaniment falls directly on each beat.

Ritardando

As with lengthening, Cortot has individual bars to use ritardando, but usually in circumstances that are common to all the pianists across different pieces. In the Berceuse, Cortot slows down very noticeably and gradually in bar 34, with much of the ritardando occurring at the end of the bar. This prepares for the change of melodic pattern in the right hand in bar 35 and ends the phrase in bar 34 gently, which is in character with the Berceuse.

Berceuse – Bars 34-35:

In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Cortot uses ritardando noticeably and individually in bars 71-72, where the left hand has a more cantabile melody than in bars 69-70.

Etude Op.10 No.5 - Bars 69-72:

In the Etude Op.25 No.6, Cortot uses ritardando subtly and individually in bar 38 at the end of a phrase, which is a common circumstance in which to slow down across different genres of Chopin’s music.

280 Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bar 38:

Although Cortot does not use rubato much in the Etude Op.25 No.9, Cortot slows down significantly in response to the ritenuto marking in bar 36, to a larger extent than that of the other pianists. While the music almost comes to a halt, his sudden return to the original tempo in bar 37 suits the playful nature of the Etude, and shows that a “surprising effect” (Koczalski 1998: 77)173 can be suitable in this etude.

Etude Op.25 No.9 – Bars 36-37:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.6, Cortot uses ritardando in bar 2, the end of the first phrase, unlike the other pianists, who first slow down in bar 8. However, Cortot slows down more subtly in bar 2 than in bar 8, probably because bar 8 is a more suitable place to slow down noticeably than the end of the first phrase.

Prelude Op.28 No.6 - Bars 1-2:

173 À peine sensible, mais pourtant d’un effet surprenant. 281 In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Cortot uses ritardando subtly in bar 23, where there is a septuplet in the right hand. This is a similar circumstance to bar 10 in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, where Michalowski and Lukasiewicz lengthen the fourth quaver pulse to about twice its written length in order to accommodate the faster right hand note values, which shows that across different genres of Chopin’s music, it is common amongst the pianists to lengthen accompaniment notes in order to play the melody more expressively, especially at the end of a phrase.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 - Bar 23:

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bar 10:

Cortot uses ritardando noticeably in bar 70, mainly at the end of the bar, which prepares for the forte dynamic level and key change from C sharp minor to F sharp minor in bar 71.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 69-71:

In the Waltzes, Cortot is subtle in his use of ritardando in the individual bars, and notably, these are always at the end of a phrase. For example, in the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Cortot has one

282 individual bar to use ritardando, very subtly in bar 123, and in the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Cortot uses subtle ritardandi in bars 83 and 88.

Waltz Op.34 No.2 – Bars 121-124:

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 82-83:

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 87-88:

Shortening and Accelerando

In the Berceuse, although Cortot uses accelerando twice in individual places, the effect and circumstances in which Cortot uses accelerando are similar to Michalowski’s playing. Cortot uses accelerando for both rising and falling melodic patterns. In bars 31-32 Cortot gradually increases the speed and by bar 34 he returns to the former tempo. In these bars the right hand melody is descending in semiquaver triplets, and the accelerando gives the music the effect of an avalanche, which is similar to the effect created by Koczalski, Paderewski and Drewnowski with their accelerando during bars 254-259 in the Waltz Op.18.

283 Berceuse - Bars 31-33:

In bar 53, where the right hand melodic pattern is ascending in semiquaver triplets, Cortot plays faster than in bars 52 and 54, showing that accelerando can also be effective for notes rising in pitch.

Berceuse - Bars 53-54:

Hand Displacement

In the Berceuse, Prelude Op.28 No.19 and the Waltzes, Cortot has more similarities with the other pianists than individual features in his use of hand displacement. In the Berceuse, Cortot uses hand displacement much less than most of the other early twentieth century pianists, except for Friedman, and only uses it in places in common. In the Prelude Op.28 No.19, Cortot’s three instances of hand displacement are only done in individual bars, but they are subtle.

Cortot’s individual uses of hand displacement are found in the Etudes and the Impromptus, and the Prelude Op.28 No.15. A unique feature in Cortot’s performance of the Etude Op.25 No.2 is his individual hand displacement on the sixth quaver pulse in bar 65. This highlights the D flat in the right hand, which is a high point in the right hand triplet and reaching the end of the phrase. Cortot’s hand displacement in this individual place is the most obvious out of all the instances of hand displacement in this Etude. This is indicative of his individuality.

284 Etude Op.25 No.2 – Bar 65:

In bars 62 and 63 of the Etude Op.25 No.6, Cortot plays the bass notes of each chord first and follows the rest of the blocked chord. Cortot’s interpretation of the last cadence sounds like an echo of the previous cadence in bars 61-63, since he also plays more quietly in the last cadence than the indicated forte.

Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bars 61-63:

In the Impromptu Op.29, Cortot has less individual places to use hand displacement than Pugno or Koczalski, but his hand displacements are usually looser, such as on the first crotchet pulse of bars 59 and bar 71. In bar 59, this emphasises the accented right hand note, and in bar 71 it helps portray the dolcissimo character of the phrase, and highlight the relatively large interval between the right and left hand notes.

Impromptu Op.29 – Bar 59 and Bars 70-71:

In the Impromptu Op.66, Cortot displaces the hands loosely on the first pulse in bar 3, where the right hand enters with the quavers. In bar 3, this brings out the sforzando marking and emphasises the change in texture.

285 Impromptu Op.66 – Bars 1-3:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Cortot uses hand displacement less frequently than Koczalski, but on the third crotchet pulse in bar 71 and the first crotchet pulse in bar 72, Cortot subtly plays the left hand before the right hand creating the impression of smaller phrases within the longer phrase, since the hand displacement emphasises the notes it is used on. This breaking up of the longer phrase through hand displacement seems unique to Cortot, as it has not been used to this effect by other pianists in any of the other pieces.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 71 and Bars 72:

Arpeggiation

Cortot is unique in his use of arpeggiation in all the pieces. For example, he sometimes arpeggiates more slowly than other pianists. In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Cortot’s arpeggiation is slower than Rosenthal’s arpeggiation in bars 66 and in the Prelude Op.28 No.3, Cortot arpeggiates more slowly than Koczalski in bar 26. While the difference is subtle, Cortot’s slower arpeggiation creates a more gentle effect than quicker arpeggiation. In the case of the Etude Op.10 No.5, this is suitable since the music is marked with delicatissimo and smorzando.

286 Etude Op.10 No.5 - Bars 65-66:

Cortot also has individual bars where he uses arpeggiation, especially in the Impromptus, Preludes and Waltzes. In the Impromptu Op.29, Cortot uses more arpeggiation than the other pianists, and over twice as many times as Pugno. Cortot’s arpeggiation is mostly slow, and occurs in the middle section of the piece, but in bar 73 Cortot arpeggiates the right hand chord on the first crotchet pulse more slowly than the other times he uses arpeggiation. This emphasises the first accented chord more than the others in the bar.

Impromptu Op.29 – Bars 72-73:

In the Impromptu Op.36, only Koczalski and Cortot use arpeggiation. Cortot arpeggiates more often than Koczalski, and usually more slowly. Cortot uses arpeggiation in individual places six times, and he usually highlights the high point of a phrase, while Koczalski’s arpeggiation usually highlights the start of a phrase. In bar 38 on the fourth crotchet pulse, Cortot arpeggiates more slowly than his other instances of arpeggiation, accentuating the fermata.

Impromptu Op.36 – Bar 38:

287 Cortot also arpeggiates the notes on the second crotchet pulse in bars 10 and 22, which are identical, and come in the middle of the phrase. Cortot’s arpeggiation accentuates the dissonance of the right hand’s D sharp with the left hand’s bass C sharp, which is in line with Kleczynski’s assertion that in Chopin’s phrases, a “dissonance is […] stronger” (Kleczynski 1896: 41-2 cited in Eigeldinger 1986: 42).

Impromptu Op.36 – Bar 10:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.7, Cortot arpeggiates slowly in bar 8, which is a structural point, as it is halfway into the piece and comes at the end of the phrase.

Prelude Op.28 No.7 – Bar 8:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Cortot’s relatively frequent arpeggiation is the most strikingly individual characteristic of his performance, as the other forms of rubato he uses are mostly in common with others or used very subtly. Cortot arpeggiates mostly in places not shared due to his abundant use of the feature. Cortot either arpeggiates on the first beat of the bar, at the high point of a phrase, or to highlight an inner voice. For example, in bars 52 and 53, he arpeggiates the left hand on the third crotchet pulse, which helps to project the start of the phrase in the inner voice.

288 Prelude Op.28 No.15 - Bars 52-53:

Although Cortot usually arpeggiates quickly in bars where his use of rubato is individual to him, a few times he does so slowly. For example, in bar 18 Cortot arpeggiates the chords on the second, third and fourth crotchet pulses, possibly to highlight nearing the end of a phrase.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 17-19:

In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Cortot uses arpeggiation more than most of the other pianists and always in bars that are individual to him, but it is always done very quickly or quickly, whereas Smidowicz’s arpeggiation tends to be slower than Cortot’s in this Waltz. Cortot arpeggiates the left hand fifth on the first crotchet pulses of bars 9, 161, 189 and 197. These left hand notes are structural points, being the start of the first theme. Koczalski notes the importance of this theme, saying that this …first part is composed of short musical phrases […] the sentiment is profound and the expression elegant. Then the whole becomes lighter, but however the smile conserves its sadness […] The fifths of the left hand that are heard at the beginning and the end again, lend sombreness to the picture (Koczalski 1998: 110)174.

174 La première partie est composée de courtes phrases musicales […] le sentiment est profond et l’expression élégante. Puis le ton devient plus léger, mais pourtant le sourire conserve sa tristesse […] Les quintes de la main gauche, qui se font entendre au commencement et à la fin, assombrissent encore le tableau. 289 Waltz Op.34 No.2 – Bar 9:

Cortot also arpeggiates the notes on the third beat of bars 106, 108, 112 and 116, which are the starts of short phrases.

Waltz Op.34 No.2 - Bar 112-113:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Cortot uses arpeggiation ten times, which is more than most of the other pianists, with the exception being Paderewski, who uses it twice as frequently as Cortot. Cortot usually arpeggiates in the same place as Paderewski, but Cortot is the only pianist to arpeggiate in bars 65 and 145 at the start of a phrase. Creating opportunities for arpeggiation by adding notes is not a frequently used rubato technique, but it has occasionally been used by a few of the pianists such as Friedman, Cortot and Paderewski. In bar 65, Cortot creates an opportunity for arpeggiation by adding a left hand note, further slowing the arpeggiation on the first crotchet pulse.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bar 65:

290 Summary

Cortot’s tempi are usually similar to other pianists he is compared with, but occasionally he will play at a significantly faster tempo. The most notable is his much faster tempo in the Più Mosso section in the Waltz Op.64 No.2, which he manages to play convincingly despite the relatively fast speed. Cortot is also unique in some of the ways in which he uses rubato, with most of his individuality resulting from his use of lengthening and arpeggiation. Cortot is one of the few pianists selected for study who use melodic rubato through lengthening the melody note while keeping the accompaniment steady. He does this in the Impromptu Op.36, by turning a group of two quavers into dotted quaver and semiquaver. Cortot arpeggiates in a unique way in all the pieces. Sometimes he arpeggiates more slowly than other pianists in common bars and he also has individual bars to use arpeggiation, especially in the Impromptus, Preludes and Waltzes. Cortot has individual bars to use ritardando, but usually in circumstances that are common to all the pianists across different pieces. Cortot also has a few individual ways to use hand displacement in the Etudes and the Impromptus, and the Prelude Op.28 No.15.

4.2. Friedman

Sometimes Friedman has a faster than average overall or starting tempo than the other pianists. For example, in the Berceuse, Mazurka Op.68 No.2, Prelude Op.28 No.15, and Waltz Op.64 No.1. Friedman’s faster tempo in the slower pieces, the Berceuse and Prelude Op.28 No.15, give the music a lively character that may not be suitable, but his faster than average tempi in the more spirited pieces, the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 and the Waltz Op.64 No.1 sound acceptable. Friedman usually uses rubato more sparingly than the other pianists, especially in pieces where he plays at a faster than average tempo. This is the case in the Berceuse, where Friedman uses rubato sparingly and much less than Koczalski, Rosenthal, Michalowski and Cortot. This is probably due to his faster tempo. In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Friedman also plays at a faster than average tempo, and uses less rubato than Koczalski and Cortot.

Only in the Etude Op.10 No.5 and the Waltz Op.18, Friedman uses more rubato than the other early twentieth century pianists. In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Friedman uses a greater variety of types of rubato than the other pianists, as well as a relatively abundant quantity of arpeggiation. In the Waltz Op.18, Friedman uses rubato more than Koczalski, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz, due to his frequent lengthening and shortening. However, Friedman uses less of the other types of rubato than Paderewski and Koczalski.

291 Sometimes Friedman uses a similar quantity of rubato to the other pianists, but will differ in the ratio of types of rubato. In the Berceuse, Friedman uses a similar quantity of rubato to Pugno but Friedman uses less hand displacement and more lengthening. In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Friedman uses a similar quantity of rubato to Rosenthal, but Friedman uses more hand displacement and less lengthening. In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Friedman uses much less rubato than Koczalski and Cortot, as he uses less lengthening.

Lengthening

Friedman tends to use lengthening less frequently than the other pianists. For example, in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, Friedman uses lengthening six times, which is much less than Smidowicz, and Friedman only lengthens in common bars with Smidowicz or Olejniczak. Friedman’s relatively scarce use of lengthening in this Mazurka is surprising as Evans notes that “Friedman shapes the mazurkas by shifting accents and extending the second or third beats, at times compacting two measures into five-beat sub-phrases” (2009: 7). However, he does use lengthening in quite an individual way in the Mazurkas Op.63 No.3 and Op.24 No.4. In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Friedman uses lengthening nine times, which is about half the number of times as Cortot and Koczalski. Occasionally Friedman lengthens noticeably in an individual bar, especially in the Etudes Op.10 No.5, Op.25 No.6, and Op.25 No.9, and the Impromptu Op.36. In the Etude Op.10 No.5, one of the individual places where Friedman lengthens noticeably is on the first note in both hands in bar 1. This sounds odd because it is so noticeable and there is no apparent reason for it, but Friedman plays the return of the theme in tempo and according to the brillante character.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bar 1:

In the Etude Op.25 No.6, Friedman is also the only pianist to lengthen the first note noticeably. In addition, Friedman lengthens the first note of bar 35, where the first right hand pattern returns, to a lesser extent.

292 Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bar 35:

Both places are at the start of the right hand alternating thirds, and the lengthening seems more suitable here than in the Etude Op.10 No.5 because the left hand is legato rather than staccato.

As in the Etude Op.10 No.5 and the Etude Op.25 No.6, Friedman lengthens the first note in bar 1 of Etude Op.25 No.9. In this Etude, Lukasiewicz also lengthens the first note, but to a lesser extent than Friedman. Friedman’s lengthening here also sounds more suitable than his lengthening in the Etude Op.10 No.5 because in the Etude Op.25 No.9, there is an accent marked on the first right hand note, which the lengthening helps to emphasise.

Etude Op.25 No.9 - Bar 1:

However, Friedman lengthens the first quaver pulse in bar 15, emphasising the climax of the crescendo marking.

Etude Op.25 No.9 – Bars 13-16:

In the Impromptu Op.36, Friedman has three places to use lengthening in an individual way, including once noticeably on the first crotchet pulse in bar 82. This helps ease into the new

293 section with its contrasting rhythm to the previous section. Friedman’s lengthening is heard mainly on the first left hand note in the bar, prolonging the first quaver beat.

Impromptu Op.36 – Bars 81-82:

Friedman uses lengthening in a more individual manner in the Mazurkas Op.24 No.4 and Op.63 No.3. In Op.24 No.4, Friedman usually lengthens the second crotchet pulse in individual places for rubato, while Turczynski and Rosenthal usually lengthen the first crotchet pulse in their individual bars for rubato. Sometimes Friedman lengthens noticeably in his individual bars, for example in bars 10 and 14 on the second crotchet pulse. In bar 10 there is a staccato in the right hand, and in bar 14, the second crotchet pulse is the end of a phrase. In both cases, it emphasises the accent on the delayed third crotchet pulse, and makes the staccato articulation clearer.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bar 10 and Bar 14:

In Op.63 No.3 Friedman lengthens in three places. Twice, Friedman lengthens notes that come on the strong beat or at the end of a slur, which are the same circumstances in which Rosenthal or Michalowski lengthen. In addition, Friedman lengthens the second beat noticeably in bar 27, which highlights the staccato articulation in the right hand.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 27:

294 In the Prelude Op.28 No.19, Friedman uses the same quantity of lengthening as Cortot, and only lengthens in common bars, although in bar 21 Friedman lengthens the third crotchet pulse, which delays bar 22, while Cortot lengthens the second quaver pulse. Friedman’s lengthening of the third crotchet pulse in bar 21 highlights the harmonic colouring.

Prelude Op.28 No.19 – Bars 21-22:

In the Waltz Op.18, Friedman uses lengthening ninety seven times, which is at least twice as frequently as any of the other pianists, and he mostly lengthens the first crotchet pulse in individual and consecutive bars. Although Friedman uses lengthening relatively frequently, it suits the Waltz style and he usually lengthens subtly. Occasionally, Friedman lengthens more noticeably, such as in bars 221-224, where the right hand notes in the lengthened first crotchet pulses are marked with either a staccato or an accent.

Waltz Op.18 - Bars 221-224:

In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Friedman lengthens left hand quavers on the third crotchet pulse, making them dotted in several bars, which is unique to him. One example of this is in bars 153 and 154.

Waltz Op.34 No.2 – Bars 153-154:

295

Ritardando

Friedman’s use of ritardando is most unique in the Etudes, Impromptus, Waltzes Op.18 and Op.34 No.2, and Mazurkas Op.24 No.4 and Op.63 No.3. In the Prelude Op.28 No.19, Friedman is the only pianist out of the four to not use ritardando. Also, in the Waltz Op.64 No.1, Friedman uses ritardando once, while the other pianists use it several instances more. Friedman’s relatively sparse use of ritardando does not make his performance any less expressive than the other performances because the Waltz Op.64 No.1 is a fast piece, and he does use lengthening occasionally.

In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Friedman uses ritardando in common with other pianists in bars 47- 48 and in bar 56, but Friedman’s ritardando is more sudden and dramatic than the others, as discussed in Chapter 3. In the Etude Op.25 No.6, Friedman uses ritardando once in bar 15, for the first 3 quaver pulses, and the effect is more of a ritenuto, which seems to be characteristic of some of his ritardandi in the Etudes.

Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bar 15:

In the Etude Op.25 No.9, he uses ritardando twice, which is the same quantity as Paderewski and Lukasiewicz, but he only uses it in individual places. In bar 33, Friedman’s ritardando is more of a ritenuto, highlighting the climax of the piece, where fortissimo and appassionato is marked in the score. Friedman’s ritardando in bar 50, approaching the end of the piece, is to an even greater extent than the one in bar 33.

Etude Op.25 No.9 – Bar 33 and Bars 50-51:

296 In the Impromptu Op.36, Friedman uses ritardando individually and noticeably in bar 81, which precedes the next section. He combines this with the lengthening of the first beat in bar 82.

Impromptu Op.36 – Bars 81-82:

In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Friedman has one individual place to use ritardando in bar 33. The effect is noticeable and sudden, as in the Etudes, and Friedman speeds up quickly after his ritardando.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bars 32--33:

In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Friedman uses ritardando subtly in three individual places. Although ritardando is usually used at the end of the phrase, Friedman uses ritardando at the start of the phrase in bar 25, which could be to arpeggiate the left hand chord on the second crotchet pulse more expressively. In addition, Friedman’s ritardando in bars 73-74 is longer in duration than the other individual cases of ritardando. His ritardando here draws out the crescendo more, and highlights the ascending melodic pattern.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bars 24-25 and Bars 73-74:

297 In the Waltz Op.18, Friedman uses ritenuto individually in bar 143, where he lengthens the first beat to highlight the highest right hand melody note and returns to his former tempo by bar 144. The other pianists do not use any form of rubato to highlight the same phrase.

Waltz Op.18 – Bar 143-144:

In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Friedman’s ritardandi are more noticeable than Cortot’s or Koczalski’s, especially in bar 188, which is the end of a phrase, and comes soon after the poco ritenuto sign.

Waltz Op.34 No.2 – Bars 187-188:

Shortening

Friedman uses shortening in unique ways in a few of the pieces. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Friedman uses shortening only in individual bars and mainly in the second section, where he shortens the first beat of the bar to half the written length. In the Waltz Op.18, Friedman and Paderewski are the only pianists to use shortening, and it is mainly due to lengthening the first beat of the bar so that the other beats of the bar are shortened to compensate. An individual feature of Friedman’s playing in the Etude Op.10 No.5 is his right hand glissando in bar 65. Rosenthal is the other pianist who uses glissando, but it is in bar 83. These glissandi are unique to Friedman and Rosenthal, as the other Polish pianists, Lukasiewicz and Koczalski do not use any glissandi in the Etude Op.10 No.5.

298 Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bar 65:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.1, Friedman is the only pianist to use shortening. He shortens the right hand crotchet to half its written length on the third crotchet pulse in bar 40. This creates an impression of pressing on towards the next melody note in bar 41.

Waltz Op.64 No.1 – Bars 40-42:

Accelerando

Friedman’s use of accelerando is unique in the Etude Op.10 No.5 and the Waltz Op.18. In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Friedman is the only pianist to use accelerando, although it does not sound gradual. Instead it sounds like bars 21-23 are faster than bars 17-19. This may be unintentional, but it creates contrast between the sets of bars, as bars 21-23 are almost the same as bars 17-19. Like Friedman’s glissando, this is a unique aspect of his playing, and not typical of other Polish pianists.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bars 21-23:

299 In the Waltz Op.18, Friedman uses accelerando once in an individual place, bars 125-128, but it is a sudden speeding up, possibly to catch up in speed due to his slow start to the section beginning at bar 117.

In the Etude Op.25 No.6, Friedman is the only pianist to use accelerando. He uses it once in bars 17-18, but it is subtle due to his already fast tempo. The accelerando calls attention to the rising pattern in the left hand, which contrasts with the surrounding bars.

Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bars 17-18:

Hand Displacement

Friedman does not usually use hand displacement in individual places. However, in the Impromptu Op.36, Friedman is more individual in the places he chooses hand displacement. He usually employs it at the start or the high point of the phrase, while the other pianists tend to use it at the end or high point of a phrase. One example of this is his subtle hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse in bar 43. This helps to accent the climax of the right hand phrase.

Impromptus Op.36 - Bars 41-43:

An example of Friedman’s hand displacement at the start of the phrase occurs on the first crotchet pulse in bar 7. The hand displacement is probably due to the large interval between the right and left hand.

300 Impromptu Op.36 – Bars 7-9:

In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Friedman uses hand displacement twice. The first place is in bar 65, where Friedman adds another right hand note on the first beat to prepare for his right hand glissando. The other place is bar 85 on the last chord. The effect in both bars is unique and contrasts with what the other pianists do.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bar 65:

In the Etude Op.25 No.6, Koczalski, Cortot and Friedman mostly use hand displacement in different places and with different effects. Friedman uses hand displacement once in bar 15, noticeably playing the left hand after the right hand on the third quaver pulse, which projects the relatively high-pitched left hand melody above the right hand double thirds.

Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bar 15:

In the Etude Op.25 No.9, Friedman is the only early twentieth century Polish pianist to not use hand displacement, further showing that he is often inconsistent with other pianists in his choice of the techniques examined.

In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Friedman uses a similar quantity of hand displacement to Michalowski, but has several individual places to use hand displacement. Friedman is the only

301 pianist out of the three to play the right hand before the left hand on the first crotchet pulse in bar 32, which is the last bar of the first section.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 32:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.19, Friedman plays the left hand before the right on the third crotchet pulse in bar 32, which is rare and accentuates the end of the phrase. The other pianists accentuate the end of the phrase in bar 32 by playing it with a ritardando. This is another example of the pianists using differing rubato techniques to highlight the same detail in the score.

Prelude Op.28 No.19 – Bar 32:

Arpeggiation

Friedman uses arpeggiation in a unique way in most pieces where he uses it. His main places to arpeggiate individually are on the first beat and at the start of a phrase, or a left hand slur, but occasionally arpeggiation occurs on a strong beat as Friedman does on the left hand chord on the first beat in bar 68 in Etude Op.10 No.5.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bar 68:

302

Friedman’s arpeggiation in bar 29 on the first beat could be to accent the strong beat further.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bars 28-29:

In the Etude Op. 25 No.9, only Friedman turns the first two left hand quavers in bar 9 into a quickly arpeggiated chord, which emphasises the first beat.

Etude Op.25 No.9 – Bar 9:

In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Friedman uses arpeggiation in bar 39, and it is in combination with softer dynamics, creating a gentler effect.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 39:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.1, Friedman arpeggiates slowly in bar 124, where he adds notes to the left hand, giving the ending a graceful and unique effect. In the repeat of bar 21, Friedman also adds notes to the left hand and arpeggiates those notes, which emphasises the start of the repeated theme. On the first beat of bars 77 and 109, Friedman adds left hand notes and arpeggiates them. This is probably for contrast, since those parts are repeats of previous themes.

303 Waltz Op.64 No.1 – Bar 77 and Bar 109:

Summary

Friedman’s use of tempo and rubato in the pieces analysed is sometimes surprising. He combines faster tempo in the slower pieces with more sparing use of rubato, such as in the Berceuse and the Prelude Op.28 No.15, which gives them a more lively character that does not sound as suitable as when he plays at faster than average tempi in the more spirited pieces such as the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 and the Waltz Op.64 No.1. However, he occasionally uses rubato more than other pianists, such as in the Etude Op.10 No.5, where he uses a greater variety of types of rubato and relatively abundant quantity of arpeggiation.

Friedman’s use of ritardando, lengthening and arpeggiation are the most noticeably unique aspects of his playing. His ritardandi in the Etudes are sometimes sudden and surprising, and he uses lengthening and arpeggiation in individual places in a few of the pieces. While Friedman’s arpeggiation is sometimes in common with other pianists, he makes his arpeggiation more unique by adding notes to the chord, such as in the Waltz Op.64 No.1, where he adds notes to the left hand at the end.

4.3. Koczalski

Koczalski’s choices of tempi are usually similar to others or close to the average of the pianists but he has individual differences in his use of rubato in each piece analysed. The more noticeable differences are in pieces where the pianists tend to use more rubato, such as the Prelude Op.28 No.15, while subtle differences are found in pieces such as the Etudes and the shorter or faster Preludes where rubato tends to be used less frequently.

Koczalski uses rubato in different quantities depending on the piece. In the Preludes Op.28 Nos. 3, 6, 7, and 19, Koczalski uses rubato sparingly, but in the Prelude Op.28 No.15, he uses rubato abundantly, particularly hand displacement and lengthening, perhaps because Prelude Op.28 No.15 is longer and slower than the other preludes. Koczalski uses hand displacement in every

304 piece analysed and it is the form of rubato that he uses most frequently overall. However, in the Etudes, Koczalski uses hand displacement only once or twice. In the Waltzes Op.18, Op.34 No.2, Op.64 No.1, and Op.64 No.2, Koczalski’s main forms of rubato are lengthening and hand displacement, using them in fairly equal quantities, except in Op.34 No.2 in which he uses lengthening more frequently. Less often, Koczalski uses ritardando, although he uses it several times in each of the waltzes studied.

The main way in which Koczalski differs from the other pianists is that he uses more hand displacement. This is the case in the Berceuse, Impromptus Op.29 and Op.66, Prelude Op.28 No.15, Waltz Op.18, and the Waltz Op.34 No.2. In the Berceuse, Koczalski has a similar ratio of types of rubato to Rosenthal, but he uses hand displacement more frequently. In the Impromptu Op.29, Koczalski uses hand displacement more frequently than Cortot and Turczynski, while in the Impromptu Op.66 Koczalski uses hand displacement at least twice as frequently as any of the other pianists. In Prelude Op.28 No.15, Koczalski uses a similar overall quantity of rubato to Cortot, but Koczalski uses hand displacement much more frequently. In Waltz Op.18, Koczalski uses hand displacement more frequently than the other pianists, including more than twice as frequently as Paderewski. In Waltz Op.34 No.2, Koczalski uses a similar overall quantity of rubato to Cortot, but Koczalski uses hand displacement much more often.

In most of the Preludes and the Waltzes Op.64 No.1 and Op.64 No.2, Koczalski uses a similar ratio of types of rubato to at least one other early twentieth century pianist, especially Rosenthal, also Mikuli’s student. In the Prelude Op.28 No.3, Koczalski has a similar ratio of types of rubato to Rosenthal, as they both use lengthening, ritardando, hand displacement and arpeggiation in similar amounts. Koczalski uses rubato sparingly in the Preludes Op.28 No.6 and No.7 and again, his ratio is similar to Rosenthal. However, unlike Rosenthal, Koczalski does not use arpeggiation in Prelude Op.28 No.7, while Rosenthal uses arpeggiation in three instances. This shows that while Koczalski and Rosenthal are similar in a few of the pieces in certain ways, they also have individual ways to use rubato in those same pieces.

In Prelude Op.28 No.19, Koczalski uses less variety of rubato than the other pianists. Unlike Cortot, Friedman and Switala, Koczalski uses no lengthening, but does use ritardando and hand displacement, which still follows Cortot’s advice that there should be “some discreet ritenuti, some suspensions, or rather some emphases on certain particularly sensitive notes” (1937: 51). In Waltz Op.64 No.1, Koczalski’s use of rubato is similar to Cortot, and in Waltz Op.64 No.2, Koczalski uses a similar quantity and ratio of rubato to Rosenthal.

305 Lengthening

Koczalski’s use of lengthening is more individual in the Etudes Op.10 No.5 and Op.25 No.6, Prelude Op.28 No.15, and the Waltzes Op.18 and Op.64 No.2. Unlike the other pianists, Koczalski’s only form of rubato in the Etude Op.10 No.5 is lengthening, and there are only two individual places to use it noticeably, on the first quaver pulse in bars 23 and 57. In each bar, Koczalski’s lengthening of the first right hand semiquaver and the first left hand quaver helps ease into a new left hand pattern.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bar 21-24:

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bars 55-57:

In Etude Op.25 No.6 Koczalski subtly lengthens the second quaver pulse in bar 15 and the fifth quaver pulse in bar 26, both of which are at or near the end of a right hand phrase. In bar 15, the lengthening on the second quaver pulse gives room for the phrases to breathe, especially since there is a rest in the right hand and a relatively large leap in both hands between the phrases. Lengthening to play a large interval more expressively is a commonly used technique by several of the pianists in other pieces such as the Berceuse, Etude Op.25 No.2 and the Impromptu Op.66.

Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bar 15:

306 In bar 26, the lengthening emphasises the chord on the fifth quaver pulse in the left hand. The pianists do not usually emphasise notes that are not at the start, climax or end of a phrase, but Koczalski’s emphasis on this left hand chord works well because it comes at the end of the right hand phrase and the climax of the crescendo marking.

Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bar 26:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Koczalski’s lengthening is noticeable on the third crotchet pulse in bars 52 and 53. This is similar to how he lengthens in bars 36 and 37 in order to highlight the inner voice.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 52-54:

There are other subtle individual ways for Koczalski to lengthen in the Prelude Op.28 No.15, but in circumstances that are common amongst the pianists, such as a way to breathe between phrases, to highlight changes in harmony or the climax of a phrase, or to create further contrast. In bar 16, Koczalski lengthens the first quaver of the bar, creating space between the end of one phrase and the start of the next.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 15-16:

307 In bar 44, Koczalski lengthens the first beat, drawing attention to the start of the left hand phrase. Also, in bar 45, Koczalski lengthens the third crotchet pulse, where the left hand melody leaps to the D sharp.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 44-45:

In addition to these common circumstances in which to lengthen notes, Koczalski also lengthens the first left hand note in bar 15, which highlights the lower bass note at an important structural point and the right hand tie. In bars 71 and 72, Koczalski lengthens the first beat, emphasising the change in harmonies. In bar 81, Koczalski lengthens the B flat in the left hand, which further sets it apart from the repeated A’s.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 71-72:

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bar 81:

In the Waltz Op.18, like Friedman and Paderewski, Koczalski lengthens the first beat in consecutive bars. However, Koczalski has two individual bars to lengthen. Koczalski lengthens the first right hand notes of bars 274 and 278, which are goal points of the repeated note patterns.

308 Waltz Op.18 – Bars 273-274 and Bars 277-278:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Koczalski has individual bars to lengthen on the first crotchet pulse, usually at the start of a right hand slur. Koczalski’s individual lengthening is mostly subtle but it is noticeable on the first crotchet pulse in bar 54. He combines this with ritardando. This may help prepare for the very low left hand bass note, which is at the start of a new phrase, in bar 55.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 54-55:

Koczalski uses lengthening to emphasise notes, especially at the climax of phrases, to highlight structural points in the music or harmonic changes, to allow phrases to breathe, to create contrast and to prepare for new melodic patterns. While Koczalski sometimes uses lengthening in individual places, these reasons for the lengthening are common to the other pianists.

Ritardando

Koczalski’s uses of ritardando in the Etudes and Waltzes Op.64 No.1 and No.2 are mostly in common with other pianists, but in the Impromptus, Preludes and Waltz Op.18, he uses ritardando in more individual ways, possibly in response to expressive markings in the score. For example, in the Impromptu Op.29, Koczalski’s individual use of ritardando is noticeable in bar 34, which is at the end of a phrase, leading into the new section where the right hand plays sostenuto. Also, in the Prelude Op.28 No.6, Koczalski uses ritardando once individually and noticeably in bar 17, which is coming to the end of the left hand phrase, and marked sostenuto. A further example is in the Waltz Op.18, where Koczalski plays more slowly at the beginning of a phrase, such as in bar 165, which is the start of a new section, marked dolce.

309 Impromptu Op.29 – Bars 34-35:

Prelude Op.28 No.6 – Bars 16-17:

Waltz Op.18 – Bar 165:

Occasionally Koczalski slows down simply to make a phrase sound more expressive as in the Prelude Op.28 No.15 where he subtly plays the first three crotchet pulses of bar 15 slower than the fourth crotchet pulse.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bar 15:

In the Impromptu Op.36, Koczalski’s individuality is most audible in his use of ritardando, as he uses it a few times more than the other pianists, and in three places not chosen by the other pianists. In bar 75, Koczalski slows down in an individual way to a large extent, emphasising the two against three rhythm.

310 Impromptu Op.36 – Bars 74-75:

Shortening and Accelerando

A unique feature of Koczalski’s playing in the Waltz Op.18 is his use of accelerando, which is used noticeably in bars 45-46 and bars 280-286, where the melody is rising in pitch and volume.

Waltz Op.18 – Bars 280-283:

Koczalski also uses accelerando individually in the Waltz Op.64 No.2, in bars 37-47 Koczalski plays at a faster tempo than the tempo at which he starts the Più Mosso section in bar 33. Similarly, Koczalski starts the second Più Mosso section at a slower tempo in bar 97, and speeds up during bars 103-105. This may be a way to contrast the phrases or to build excitement.

Hand Displacement

Koczalski’s hand displacement is most unique in the Berceuse, Etudes, Impromptus, and Waltzes. In the Preludes, Koczalski mostly displaces the hands in places in common with another pianist or the individual cases of hand displacement are subtle. In Prelude Op.28 No.15, Koczalski plays the left hand tightly before the right hand on the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 26, stressing the first note of the two-note slur in the right hand.

311 Prelude Op.28 No.15 - Bars 26-27:

In bar 77, Koczalski plays the left hand before the right on the fourth crotchet pulse, highlighting the change of harmony and the rising pitch of the melody. This comparatively large quantity of hand displacement gives the melody a more singing quality by separating it from the left hand accompaniment.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 - Bar 77:

If Koczalski is compared to other early twentieth century pianists in the Berceuse, the differences in the frequency of their use of hand displacement are great. Even Paderewski uses hand displacement about half the number of times that Koczalski does. However, when Koczalski uses hand displacement individually, it is usually subtle. The only time he uses it noticeably is on the first quaver pulse of bars 23 and 24. Also, Koczalski plays the right hand before the left hand on the fifth quaver pulse of bar 23, which is rare, and maybe unintentional. Usually, the pianists play the left hand first.

Berceuse – Bars 23-24:

In the Etude Op.25 No.2, Koczalski uses hand displacement two instances more than the other pianists, which may be significant because of the fast tempo and brevity of the piece. Koczalski displaces the hands subtly on the first note of bar 1, which is at the start of the right hand phrase.

312 Etude Op.25 No.2 - Bar 1:

In the Etude Op.25 No.6, Koczalski uses hand displacement in an individual way on the first notes of bar 27, which is the start of a new section.

Etude Op.25 No.6 - Bar 27:

In each of the Impromptus Op.29, Op.36 and Op.66, Koczalski uses hand displacement more often than most of the other pianists, and it is his most frequent form of rubato, but it is used in some places that are in common with other pianists. In the Impromptu Op.29, Koczalski uses hand displacement individually and very loosely on the first crotchet pulse in bar 56, which is at the end of a phrase.

Impromptu Op.29 – Bars 55-56:

In Op.66, Koczalski uses hand displacement at least sixteen instances more than the other pianists. Although he usually displaces the hands tightly in individual bars, Koczalski’s hand displacements in bar 68 and 80 are more noticeable. The notes in the score of bars 68 and 80 are identical, except that in bar 80 there are no accents. Both times, Koczalski displaces the hands on the first crotchet pulse, which is the high point of the phrase.

313 Impromptu Op.66 - Bars 68 and 80:

In the Waltz Op.18, most of Koczalski’s rubato is in common places, and only to a small extent, except for hand displacement, which he uses mainly in individual places, both subtly and noticeably. Koczalski uses hand displacement noticeably in almost every second bar from bars 71-81, then again from bars 101-113, which has the same melody. This emphasises the starts of each right hand slur, some of which are marked with accents or the starts of diminuendo signs. Koczalski, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz also use hand displacement on accented notes throughout the Waltz Op.18.

Waltz Op.18 – Bars 101-113:

In bar 157, the melody that started in bar 149 is repeated an octave higher. Koczalski draws attention to this higher melody through very subtle hand displacement on the first crotchet pulse.

Waltz Op.18 – Bars 149-150 and Bars 157-158:

In Waltz Op.34 No.2, Koczalski uses hand displacement triple the number of times as any of the other pianists, and also tends to use it more noticeably than the others, but as in the Impromptus, it is also in common places. For example, Koczalski displaces the hands at the start, high point

314 or end of a right hand phrase, such as in bars 52, 60, and 61, the start of a right hand sequence, as in bars 98-101, the low point of a left hand phrase, as in bars 183 and 185.

Waltz Op.34 No.2 – Bars 97-99:

Waltz Op. 34 No.2 – Bars 182-186:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.1, Koczalski uses much more hand displacement than Cortot and Drewnowski, although Koczalski’s hand displacement is always subtle or very subtle in this waltz. In Waltz Op.64 No.2, Koczalski and Rosenthal use much more hand displacement than Cortot, Paderewski and Turczynski. Koczalski uses hand displacement mostly in common with Rosenthal, but Koczalski’s hand displacement is sometimes more noticeable than Rosenthal’s.

Arpeggiation

Koczalski is the only pianist to use arpeggiation in the Etude Op.25 No.6. Koczalski arpeggiates the first chord in bar 31, which overlaps another phrase.

Etude Op.25 No.6 – Bar 31:

Koczalski also has a few individual ways to use arpeggiation in the Impromptus and Preludes, mainly to signal a change in texture or key, or at the high point of a phrase. In the Impromptu

315 Op.36, Koczalski arpeggiates the chord on the second crotchet pulse in bar 101, highlighting a change in texture and a structural point.

Impromptu Op.36 – Bars 100-101:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.3, Koczalski arpeggiates the first beat of bar 16 in an individual way. This is the start of a phrase and modulation to C major, the subdominant key. He does this also on the first beat of bar 17, which has the same notes as the first beat of bar 16.

Prelude Op.28 No.3 – Bars 15-17:

In the Prelude Op.28 No.6, Koczalski uses arpeggiation once, while the other pianists do not use it. Koczalski quickly arpeggiates the first right hand chord in bar 8 bringing attention to the top notes of the right hand.

Prelude Op.28 No.6 – Bars 7-8:

316 In the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Koczalski uses arpeggiation twice as often as Friedman, and his arpeggiation is always quick or very quick in six individual places he uses it For example, Koczalski arpeggiates on the second crotchet pulses in bars 3 and 7, which have identical notes and are at the high point of the right hand phrase.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 2-3:

He also arpeggiates on the first crotchet pulse in bars 6, 61, 63, and 73. The arpeggiated chords in bars 6, 61, and 63 come at a resting point within the long phrase and emphasise the top melody note, while arpeggiation of the right hand chord in bar 73 comes at the climax of a crescendo.

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 5-6:

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 61-63:

Prelude Op.28 No.15 – Bars 71-73:

317 Summary

Koczalski tends to use more hand displacement than other pianists, such as in the Berceuse, Impromptus Op.29 and Op.66, Prelude Op.28 No.15, Waltz Op.18, and the Waltz Op.34 No.2. Koczalski’s hand displacement is most unique in the Berceuse, Etudes, Impromptus, and Waltzes, but he still uses the technique in common ways to other pianists in the places that are individual such as at the start of a phrase, sequence or section, or at the high point, low point, or the end of a phrase. In the Waltz Op.18, Koczalski uses hand displacement noticeably at the start of right hand slurs, some of which are marked with accents or diminuendo signs.

Koczalski has some individual ways to use other types of rubato as well. He has individual places to use lengthening in the Etudes Op.10 No.5 and Op.25 No.6, Prelude Op.28 No.15, and the Waltzes Op.18 and Op.64 No.2, but in ways that are common to other pianists, such as lengthening to play a large interval more expressively, to emphasise the climax of a crescendo, to highlight an inner voice, to breathe between phrases, to highlight changes in harmony or the climax of a phrase, or to create further contrast. Koczalski use of ritardando in the Impromptus, Preludes and Waltz Op.18 are more individual than in the other selected pieces, and in response to expressive markings such as sostenuto and dolce. Occasionally, Koczalski slows down simply to make a phrase sound more expressive or to emphasise a polyrhythm. Koczalski has individual places to use accelerando, such as during melodies rising in pitch and volume, and these could be a way to contrast phrases or to build excitement. Koczalski also has a few individual ways to use arpeggiation in the Impromptus and Preludes to signal a change in texture or key, or at the high point of a phrase.

4.4. Lukasiewicz

Lukasiewicz has an audibly slower tempo than the other pianists in the Etudes Op.10 No.5 and Op.25 No.9 but stays close to the average overall and starting tempi in the Impromptu Op.66, Nocturne Op.15 No.2, and Waltz Op.18. Lukasiewicz’s slower overall tempo of Crotchet = MM92 in the Etude Op.10 No.5 gives the Etude a more gentle character that may not be suitable considering that the tempo marking is Vivace and the metronome speed is Crotchet = MM116.

Just as for Cortot, Lukasiewicz’s most frequently used form of rubato differs for each piece. Lukasiewicz uses arpeggiation several times more frequently than other forms of rubato in the Etude Op.10 No.5, but in the Impromptu Op.66 and the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, hand displacement is Lukasiewicz’s most frequently used form of rubato, and he uses lengthening the

318 most frequently in the Waltz Op.18. Lengthening tends to be the most common form of rubato in the Waltzes amongst all the pianists studied.

Lengthening

Lukasiewicz mainly uses lengthening in common bars or infrequently in individual bars. In the Waltz Op. 18, Lukasiewicz mostly lengthens in common bars to a similar extent to the other pianists. However, he is the only pianist to lengthen the first crotchet pulse in bar 164, at the end of a phrase, which is still a common circumstance in which to lengthen.

Waltz Op.18 – Bar 163-164:

Ritardando

In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Lukasiewicz uses ritardando once and only in common with Cortot, Friedman and Shebanova in bars 47-48. He is more unique in his use of ritardando in the Impromptu Op.66, Nocturne Op.15 No.2 and the Waltz Op.18, although he still uses it in similar circumstances to the other pianists in the same piece. For example, in the Impromptu Op.66, Lukasiewicz uses ritardando twice individually in bars 45 and 56, which are both at the end of phrases, a common place to use ritardando.

Impromptu Op.66 – Bars 44-45 and Bar 56:

In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2. Lukasiewicz uses ritardando at the high point of a phrase in 54, which is marked con forza and contains faster right hand note values at the end of the bars. The other pianists also tend to slow down in rhetorical passages such as this that invite freedom.

319 Bar 54:

Accelerando

In the Impromptu Op.66, Lukasiewicz is the only pianist to use accelerando, and he uses it once quite suddenly in bar 42, perhaps in response to the con anima marking that is between bars 42 and 43.

Impromptu Op.66 – Bars 42-43:

Hand Displacement

In the Etude Op.25 No.9, Lukasiewicz plays the left hand before the right hand noticeably and individually on the first beat of bar 1, and also lengthens the first right hand note. This emphasises the accented first note more and eases into the piece, which is a common feature of the pianists’ performances, although using hand displacement at the start of the piece is not as common as lengthening.

Etude Op.25 No.9 – Bar 1:

320 In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Lukasiewicz uses hand displacement mostly subtly in common bars, but he uses noticeable hand displacement individually on the first quaver pulse of bar 11, perhaps to highlight the change in the ornamental right hand pattern.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bars 10-11:

In the Waltz Op. 18, Lukasiewicz mostly displaces the hands subtly or very subtly, but he displaces the hands loosely on the first crotchet pulse in bar 164, which is the end of a phrase and section.

Waltz Op.18 – Bars 163-164:

Arpeggiation

Lukasiewicz is individual in the way he uses arpeggiation in the Etudes Op.10 No.5 and Op.25 No.9, Nocturne Op.15 No.2, and Waltz Op.18. In the Etude Op.10 No.5, he has three individual bars to use it at the start of the piece. In bars 5 and 9, which are identical bars; he arpeggiates quickly but it gives the music an unusually gentle effect.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bar 5:

321 In bar 67, Lukasiewicz arpeggiates the chord on the first quaver pulse, which is the end of the right hand phrase while Cortot and Friedman arpeggiate the chord on the third quaver pulse, which is the start of a phrase. This shows that the pianists tend to choose one part of the phrase to emphasise, whether it be the start or the high point. They usually do not use a rubato technique more than once per phrase if the purpose of the rubato is to emphasise a certain note.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bars 66-67:

In the Etude Op.25 No.9, Lukasiewicz quickly arpeggiates the left hand chord on the second crotchet pulse in bar 41. This could be to highlight the right hand’s higher pitch from bar 41 or to emphasise the start of a new phrase.

Etude Op.25 No.9 – Bars 40-41:

In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Lukasiewicz uses arpeggiation nineteen times, which is the same quantity as Pugno, but he uses it in three individual bars, including once slowly on the third quaver pulse in bar 11, which highlights the high point of the left hand phrase.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bars 10-11:

322 In the Waltz Op. 18, Lukasiewicz arpeggiates individually and very quickly on the first crotchet pulse in bar 52, which is the end of the phrase and section, and similar to what he does in bar 303, which is also at the end of a phrase and near the end of the piece.

Waltz Op.18 – Bars 51-52 and Bars 300-303:

Summary

Lukasiewicz’s choice of tempo, and use of arpeggiation are the most unique aspects of his playing in relation to rhythm. Lukasiewicz’s slower overall tempo of Crotchet = MM92 gives the Etude Op.10 No.5 a more gentle character that may not be suitable considering that the tempo marking is Vivace and the metronome speed is Crotchet = MM116. Lukasiewicz is individual in the way he uses arpeggiation in the Etudes Op.10 No.5 and Op.25 No.9, Nocturne Op.15 No.2, and Waltz Op.18. In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Lukasiewicz arpeggiates a few chords at the start of the piece, giving the music an unusually gentle effect, especially in combination with the relatively slow tempo. In the other pieces, Lukasiewicz tends to arpeggiate to emphasise the start, end, or high point of a phrase.

4.5. Michalowski

Michalowski’s tempo is usually close to the average overall and starting tempi of each piece. However, in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Michalowski’s Doppio Movimento section is audibly faster than most of the other pianists, though not as fast as Pugno’s performance of the section. In the Berceuse, Mazurka Op.63 No.3 and the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Michalowski uses hand displacement as the main form of rubato, followed by arpeggiation, then lengthening. Even though his main form of rubato is hand displacement in the Berceuse, Michalowski differs from Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski because he does not use it as frequently or use it on consecutive quaver pulses as they do. In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Michalowski uses more rubato than Rosenthal and Friedman, mainly due to his abundant use of arpeggiation, which he uses more than twice as frequently as Rosenthal. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Michalowski uses

323 rubato more frequently than most of the other pianists. Only Pugno overtakes Michalowski in quantity because Pugno uses more hand displacement and arpeggiation than Michalowski.

Lengthening and Ritardando

Michalowski uses lengthening in similar ways to the other pianists in the pieces analysed. In the Berceuse, Michalowski employs lengthening as frequently as Koczalski, Paderewski and Friedman, and does so only in common with Cortot, Friedman or Paderewski. Michalowski is more unique in his use of ritardando as he has more individual places to use it, but still in similar circumstances to other pianists. For example, in the Berceuse Michalowski uses ritardando noticeably in bar 46 which is at the end of a phrase of descending patterns, heralding the reprise and closing section of the work.

Berceuse – Bar 46:

In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Michalowski has one individual and subtle instance of ritardando in bar 14. His ritardando allows him to play the large right hand leap and faster notes more expressively.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bar 14:

In Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Michalowski uses ritardando a similar number of times to Rosenthal and Friedman, and shares three bars in common with Friedman but does not slow down as much as Friedman. Michalowski’s one individual place to use ritardando is to a small extent, in bar 13 at the start and high point of a phrase.

324 Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 13:

Shortening and Accelerando

In the Berceuse, Michalowski uses accelerando more often than most of the other pianists, including in two individual places. In bar 2, he plays suddenly faster than bar 1, then keeps up the new speed from bar 3 onwards. In bars 37-38 Michalowski plays faster than bars 36 or 39, possibly due to the ascending right hand melody in bars 37-38.

Berceuse – Bars 37-38:

In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, like most of the other pianists, Michalowski uses shortening, including three individual places where he shortens the note by half. Michalowski shortens the second quaver pulse of bar 56, but takes more time on the third quaver pulse, which has a right hand trill. This is an example of keeping in time overall but changing the length of notes within a bar.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bar 56:

325 In Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Michalowski plays bar 33 faster than any bar in the previous section, possibly to contrast the more lyrical melody of bars 1-32. He also speeds up in bars 61-62 where the right hand melody ascends in pitch.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bars 61-62:

Hand Displacement

Although Michalowski uses plentiful hand displacement in each of the analysed pieces, it is usually in places in common with other pianists and quite subtle. One individual place that Michalowski uses hand displacement in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 is on the second quaver pulse in bar 8. His tight hand displacement emphasises the accented right hand melody note.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bars 7-8:

Arpeggiation

Michalowski is more individual in his use of arpeggiation than hand displacement. In the Berceuse, Michalowski arpeggiates the right hand individually and slowly on the fifth quaver pulse in bar 11, which may be to highlight the large interval in the right hand and one of the higher notes in the phrase.

326 Berceuse – Bar 11:

In Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Michalowski uses arpeggiation the most frequently, usually in individual bars. Michalowski usually arpeggiates quickly in the individual bars, but he slowly arpeggiates the left hand chord on the second crotchet pulse in bar 65, which is the start of a right hand phrase.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 65:

In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Michalowski arpeggiates the left hand on the first quaver pulse in bar 42, which creates an impression of resting on that beat.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bar 42:

Summary

Michalowski’s playing is noticeably individual in a few ways in the pieces analysed. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Michalowski’s Doppio Movimento section is audibly faster than most of the other pianists, but still not as fast as Pugno’s performance. While Michalowski uses ritardando in individual places, it is mostly in similar circumstances to other pianists, such as at the end of a phrase or to play the large right hand leap and faster notes more expressively. In

327 Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Michalowski’s one individual place to use ritardando is subtle - at the start and high point of a phrase, which is a way of using ritardando that is not as common as using it at the end of a phrase. In the Berceuse, Michalowski uses accelerando more often than most of the other pianists, but in a way that is similar to other pianists’ use of accelerando, such as for an ascending melody. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Michalowski shortens the second quaver pulse in bar 56, but takes more time on the third quaver pulse, which has a right hand trill, which keeps in time overall but changes the length of notes within a bar. Michalowski is more individual in his use of arpeggiation than hand displacement. In the Berceuse, Michalowski’s arpeggiation highlights a large interval, and in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, his arpeggiation creates an impression of resting on that beat.

4.6. Paderewski

In the Berceuse and the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Paderewski is close to the average overall and starting tempi, but in the Etudes Op.25 No.2 and No.9 he has audibly slower than average overall and starting tempi. Also, in the Waltz Op.18, Paderewski has a slower than average overall tempo, and audibly slower Dolce section. Paderewski’s main form of rubato varies with each piece, but in the Etude Op.25 No.2 and in the Waltzes Op.18 and Op.64 No.2, he uses lengthening the most frequently. Paderewski uses hand displacement in each of the pieces analysed, but in the Etudes Op.25 No.2 and Op.25 No.9 he only uses hand displacement once. Paderewski uses abundant rubato in the Berceuse and the Waltzes but in the Etudes his rubato is more sparing. This is a pattern that emerges with most of the pianists. In the Etude Op.25 No.2, Paderewski uses a similar quantity of rubato to Koczalski and Cortot, as each pianist uses rubato sparingly in this etude and in a similar ratio to each other. In the Etude Op.25 No.9, Paderewski uses rubato several instances more than the other pianists, mainly because he uses more arpeggiation.

Lengthening

Paderewski tends to lengthen in a similar manner to the other early twentieth century pianists, but is more unique in his lengthening in the Etude Op.25 No.9 and the Waltz Op.64 No.2. In the Etude Op.25 No.9, Paderewski lengthens the last chord of the piece in common with Friedman and Lukasiewicz but he also adds a note to the chord, making it unique. Paderewski has three individual places to lengthen. The second quaver pulse in bar 8 is about one and a half times its written value, emphasising the accented chords. Koczalski notes the structural significance of

328 this point, saying that the piece “begins piano but from the 9th measure, which marks the start of the accessory part, the play must become a little more energetic” (1998: 77)175.

Bar 8:

As mentioned in the previous chapter, Paderewski also lengthens the third quaver pulse in bar 10, perhaps to heighten the effect of the crescendo marking, but to a smaller extent than in bar 8. In addition, Paderewski lengthens the first quaver pulse in bar 16, maybe to emphasise the diminuendo marking. This is done to a greater extent than in previous bars.

Bars 9-11:

Bar 16:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Paderewski has several individual places to use lengthening, in which he occasionally lengthens pulses to about twice their written length. In the individual bars, Paderewski usually lengthens the third crotchet pulse and draws out the start of a phrase, such as in bars 48, 80, and 112, where his lengthening is most noticeable.

175 Elle commence piano, mais à partir de la 9e mesure qui marque le début de la partie accessoire, le jeu deviendra un peu plus énergique. 329 Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 48-49:

The only individual bar in which Paderewski lengthens the first crotchet pulse is bar 112, which is at the climax of a crescendo marking in the score, but it is to a very small extent.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 111-112:

Ritardando

In the Berceuse, Paderewski uses ritardando twice and only in common places with Michalowski and Cortot. However, in the other pieces Paderewski is more individual in his use of ritardando. In the Etude Op.25 No.2, Paderewski is the only pianist to use ritardando in bar 48 and he slows down the whole bar considerably, returning to his previous tempo at the start of bar 59. This is likely due to his interpretation of the smorzando marking.

Etude Op.25 No.2 – Bar 47-48:

In the Waltzes, Paderewski’s individual uses of ritardando are at the end of a phrase, which is a common trait amongst all the other pianists. In the Waltz Op.18, one individual place that Paderewski uses ritardando noticeably is in bars 50-51, at the end of a phrase.

330 Waltz Op.18 – Bars 50-51:

Also, in the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Paderewski only has one individual bar to use ritardando to a small extent in bar 72, which is at the end of a phrase.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 71-73:

Shortening and Accelerando

In the Etude Op.25 No.2, Paderewski uses shortening once, and is the only pianist to use it. He does so by starting the right hand an octave higher in bar 67, which is the version shown in the Wiener Urtext edition. This is the most noticeably unique feature of Paderewski’s performance of this Etude.

Etude Op.25 No.2 – Bar 67:

331 Hand Displacement

In the Berceuse, Paderewski uses hand displacement thirty-one times, which is more than most of the other pianists. Paderewski has some individual places to displace the hands, such as in bar 4, where he displaces the hands on the second and third quaver pulses.

Berceuse – Bar 4:

In the Etude Op.25 No.9, Paderewski uses hand displacement once subtly on the last chord, which is unique to him.

Etude Op.25 No.9 – Bars 50-51:

In the Waltz Op.18, Paderewski uses hand displacement twelve times, which is more than Friedman and Lukasiewicz, but less than Koczalski. In most of the individual bars that Paderewski uses hand displacement, the right hand is marked with an accent or a small diminuendo on the first crotchet pulse, such as in bars 48 and 270.

Waltz Op.18 – Bars 47-48 and Bars 269-270:

332 In bar 234, Paderewski subtly displaces the hands on the third crotchet pulse, enhancing the contrasting cantabile character of the melody after the dynamic build up from bars 204-232.

Waltz Op.18 – Bars 234-235:

Arpeggiation

Paderewski is quite individual in his use of arpeggiation in the Etude Op.25 No.9, Waltz Op.18, and Waltz Op.64 No.2. Unique to Paderewski in the Etude Op.25 No.9 is his arpeggiation of the left hand chord on the second quaver pulse in bar 36, the right hand sixth and fifth in the second half of bar 36, and the first chord in bar 37. He arpeggiates slowly, and his tempo slows because of the ritenuto marking.

Etude Op.25 No.9 – Bars 36-37:

Paderewski’s relatively abundant arpeggiation is the most noticeably unique feature of his performance of the Waltz Op.18. Paderewski arpeggiates notes marked with accents or the start of a right hand slur. For example, the first crotchet pulses of bars 69, 73 and 75 are the high points of the right hand slurs and the first crotchet pulses of bars 120, 128, 160, and 305 are the end of a phrase, or are marked with accents.

333 Bar 69 and Bars 73-75:

Bar 120 and Bar 128:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Paderewski uses arpeggiation twenty-five times, which is at least double the frequency of the other pianists. Paderewski arpeggiates in some common places with Koczalski and Cortot, but sometimes his arpeggiations are slower, such as in bars 21, 133, and 159. Paderewski usually arpeggiates on the first crotchet pulse, at the start or the high point of a phrase. However, he also arpeggiates on the end of a right hand slur in bars 130 and 134.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 129-134:

In bars 77 and 78, Paderewski arpeggiates the second crotchet pulse, in the middle of a long phrase, on the left hand chords, creating contrast in texture.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 77-78:

334 Paderewski arpeggiates the chords on the third crotchet pulse in bars 79 and 93. The third crotchet pulse falls mid- phrase, but in these bars the left hand is not playing the usual waltz pattern of bass note followed by block chords. In bar 79, there is a rest on the second crotchet pulse and in bar 93, the left hand has block chords on the first and third crotchet pulses, with a single bass note on the second crotchet pulse. This different left hand pattern may be the reason for Paderewski’s decision to arpeggiate the chords in bars 79 and 93.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bar 79 and Bar 93:

Summary

Occasionally Paderewski plays at a slower tempo than other pianists, but his performances still sound convincing and portray the tempo and expressive markings. Paderewski tends to lengthen note values in order to emphasise accented chords, draw out the start of a phrase or to heighten the effect of a diminuendo or a crescendo marking. Like the other pianists, Paderewski uses ritardando either at the end of a phrase, or in response to an expressive marking, such as smorzando. Paderewski uses hand displacement to further emphasise accented notes or to give a melody a contrasting character. Paderewski has individual places where he uses arpeggiation in the Etude Op.25 No.9, Waltz Op.18, and Waltz Op.64 No.2, but he still uses it in common ways to other pianists, such as on notes marked with accents or the start or end of a right hand slur.

4.7. Pugno

In the Berceuse Pugno’s starting and overall tempo is close to the average tempo of the pianists. However, in the Impromptu Op.29 Pugno has a faster than average starting and overall tempo, and in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 Pugno has a much slower starting tempo but much faster Doppio Movimento section than the other pianists. In the Nocturne Op.15, No.2, the tempo is …perhaps the slowest on records – and Pugno defended this by referring to the advice of his teacher Georges Mathias, who was Chopin’s pupil. This opening section is played in a most intimate, coloristic and elegant manner (Timbrell 1992: 37).

335 The comparison of the pianists’ tempi shows Pugno’s individuality in his choice of tempo (MM20) for the outer sections, although Pugno may be right that Crotchet = MM40 is too fast because the pianists play slower than MM40, with Michalowski and modern pianist, Thai Son, playing the outer sections at around MM31. Although Pugno uses abundant rubato in the Impromptu Op.29 and the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, he uses rubato sparingly in the Berceuse. In each of the three pieces, Pugno’s main form of rubato is hand displacement, followed by lengthening and arpeggiation.

Lengthening and Ritardando

Pugno occasionally uses these features to a greater extent than the other pianists. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Pugno lengthens four times, which is less often than the others and only in common places, but sometimes to a large extent, such as on the third quaver pulse in bars 7 and 15 to accommodate the trill in the right hand.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bar 7 and Bar 15:

Shortening and Accelerando

In the Impromptu Op.29, Pugno has two individual places to use accelerando, in bars 22-29, and bars 102-110, which are similar. The series of bars starts with a crescendo, and ends with a diminuendo and accelerando marking in the middle. There is a poco ritenuto in the bar before the accelerando, but Pugno ignores this, and gets faster throughout the series of bars.

336 Impromptu Op.29 – Bars 22-27:

In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Pugno uses accelerando in bars 25-46, which is from the start of the middle section to near its end, and this was probably “implied by the increase of passion” (Peres Da Costa 2012: 283). This increase of passion is signalled by the faster tempo marking of Doppio movimento, the syncopated rhythm in the left hand, and the repetitive dotted rhythms combined with semiquavers in the right hand.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bars 25-30:

Hand Displacement

Pugno is usually not individual in the way he uses hand displacement. In the Berceuse, Pugno only displaces the hands in common bars with Koczalski, Michalowski, Rosenthal, Paderewski or Cortot. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Pugno uses hand displacement fifty-one times, which is much more than the other pianists but he uses it mostly in common bars, and often in common

337 with Michalowski. Pugno’s hand displacement is mostly subtle, and he displaces the hands subtly in the three individual places in which he uses the feature.

Pugno is more individual in his use of hand displacement in the Impromptu Op.29, than in the Berceuse and Nocturne Op.15 No.2. In the seven individual places in which Pugno displaces the hands in the Impromptu, he sometimes does so noticeably, such as in bars the first and third crotchet pulses in bar 47, the third crotchet pulse in bar 64 and the first and third crotchet pulses in 65. This may be to separate the single right hand melody notes with the left hand chords that fall on the first and third crotchet pulses, as well as to further emphasise the accented right hand note in bar 64.

Impromptu Op.29 – Bar 47 and Bars 64-65:

Arpeggiation

In the Berceuse, Pugno arpeggiates very quickly on the fourth quaver pulse in bar 52, where the right hand begins semiquaver triplets.

Bar 52:

In the Impromptu Op.29, Pugno uses arpeggiation a few instances more than Koczalski and Turczynski. Pugno arpeggiates individually on the third quaver pulse in bars 57 and 65, at the high point of the left hand slurs.

338 Impromptu Op.29 – Bar 57 and Bar 65:

In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Pugno usually arpeggiates quickly, but on the left hand chord in bar 25, which is the start of the Doppio Movimento section, Pugno arpeggiates more slowly.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bar 25:

Summary

While Pugno chooses a much slower tempo for the outer sections of the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Pugno is more similar to the other pianists in his tempo choices for the Berceuse and Impromptu Op.29, which shows that Pugno is usually not so individual in his tempo choices. Also, the frequency with which Pugno uses rubato differs according to the piece, as he uses abundant rubato in the Impromptu Op.29 and the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, but he uses rubato sparingly in the Berceuse. However, in each of the three pieces, Pugno’s main form of rubato is hand displacement, followed by lengthening and arpeggiation.

Pugno occasionally uses lengthening and ritardando to a greater extent than the other pianists. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Pugno lengthens to a large extent, in bars 7 and 15 to accommodate a trill. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Pugno uses accelerando from the start of the middle section to near its end, and this was probably prompted by the faster tempo marking of Doppio movimento, the syncopated rhythm in the left hand, and the repetitive dotted rhythms combined with semiquavers in the right hand. Pugno displaces the hands in the Impromptu, to separate the single right hand melody notes with the left hand chords that fall on the first and third crotchet pulses, as well as to further emphasise an accented right hand note. In the

339 Impromptu Op.29, Pugno individually arpeggiates at the high point of left hand slurs, which is less usual than using it at the start of a slur or when there are accents.

4.8. Rosenthal

Rosenthal rarely plays faster than the other pianists, as he has a slower than average tempo in the Preludes and the Waltz Op.64 No.2, but in the Berceuse, Etude Op.10 No.5, and Mazurka Op.24 No.4 he plays close to the average tempo of the pianists. Although Rosenthal and Koczalski sometimes share similarities in their use of rubato, their choice of tempi is noticeably different. In the Preludes Op.28 Nos.6 and 7 and the Waltz Op.64 No.2, the difference in tempo between Koczalski and Rosenthal’s performances is more audible.

Occasionally Rosenthal has a similar ratio of types of rubato to Koczalski, such as in the Berceuse and the Waltz Op.64. However, in the other pieces studied, there are obvious differences between Rosenthal and Koczalski, as well as between Rosenthal and the other pianists. In the Etude Op.10 No 5, Koczalski only uses lengthening, but Rosenthal does not use lengthening at all. Also, in the Etude Op.10 No.5, Rosenthal and Friedman use similar quantities of arpeggiation and use glissando where it is not marked. However, Rosenthal uses less variety of rubato than Friedman does. Unlike the Etude Op.10 No.5, where Rosenthal uses only two types of rubato, in the Mazurka Op.24 No.4 Rosenthal uses six types of rubato, which is more variety than Friedman and Turczynski, showing that Rosenthal varies his quantity and ratio of rubato according to the piece.

Although Rosenthal’s ratio of rubato techniques differs according to the piece, Rosenthal’s most frequent forms of rubato are hand displacement and arpeggiation. He uses hand displacement in every piece except the Etude Op.10 No.5. Rosenthal usually uses hand displacement more often than the other pianists, except in the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, where Michalowski and Friedman use it more often. Usually Rosenthal uses arpeggiation more than the others, except in the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, where Michalowski uses it more often.

Lengthening

Rosenthal’s use of lengthening tends to be similar to others in the Preludes, but more individual in the Mazurkas. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Rosenthal’s lengthening is usually in common with Turczynski and a few instances in common with Friedman but in the few individual bars, Rosenthal sometimes uses it noticeably. Rosenthal’s lengthening on the first crotchet pulse in

340 bar 89, where there is a trill, is to a greater extent than his other instances of lengthening in this Mazurka. Also in bar 118, Rosenthal turns the pair of quavers on the first crotchet pulse into a dotted quaver rhythm through his lengthening, which is an example of melodic rubato.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bar 89 and Bar 118:

In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Rosenthal’s lengthening is mostly noticeable and in individual bars. He lengthens the second crotchet pulse in consecutive bars, such as in bars 2-6, making the piece sound like there are four beats instead of three beats in a bar.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bars 2-6:

Rosenthal also turns the group of two quavers on the first crotchet pulse in bars 6, 33 and bar 54 into a dotted quaver rhythm, which is similar to what he does in the Mazurka Op.24 No.4. This may be an example of melodic rubato, or just rhythmic anomalities.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 33 and Bar 54:

341 Ritardando

Rosenthal’s use of ritardando is more individual in the Mazurkas and the Waltz Op.64 No.2 than in the Preludes. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, it is mostly Rosenthal and Turczynski who use ritardando in the individual bars. The most noticeable individual use of ritardando is in bars 135-136, and this slowing may be a way of contrasting the repeat of the phrase, as bars 131-132 are identical to bars 135-136.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bars 135-136:

In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Rosenthal uses ritardando individually in bar 39 to a small extent, and the effect is quite sudden. Rosenthal may have slowed down to highlight the high point of the phrase, which is not used as commonly as using it at the end of the phrase.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 39:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Rosenthal has individual bars to use ritardando, in which he slows noticeably, such as in bars 13-14 and bars 141-143, which come at the high point of phrases. This shows that Rosenthal used ritardando at the high point of a phrase in different genres of Chopin’s music, at least in the Mazurka Op.63 No.3 and the Waltz Op.64 No.2.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 13-14:

342 Shortening

Rosenthal is quite individual in his use of shortening. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Rosenthal shortens the third crotchet pulse to such an extent that it sounds like there are only two crotchet pulses in the bar. In Prelude Op.28 No.6, Rosenthal is the only pianist to use shortening and only uses it on melody notes so that the accompaniment is not affected. Rosenthal noticeably shortens notes in bars 1, 3 and 9. Rosenthal shortens the last left hand semiquaver in each bar, making them about half their written length, perhaps to give the melody more flow in his relatively slow tempo choice.

Prelude Op.28 No.6 – Bars 1-3:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Rosenthal uses shortening twice, in bars 165 and 166. He plays a dotted rhythm in the right hand on the third crotchet pulse. As shortening is not a common technique amongst the pianists, this may be another rhythmic anomality in Rosenthal’s playing, or could be his way of using melodic rubato.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 165-166:

Accelerando

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Rosenthal has individual places to play at a faster tempo, such as bars 10-11. He does this in similar places in the music later on, such as in bars 26, 28, 138 (identical to bar 10) and 154 (identical to bar 26). In these places the right hand has an ascending melody, which perhaps encourages the accelerando.

343 Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bar 10, Bar 26 and Bar 28:

Hand Displacement

In the Berceuse and Preludes, Rosenthal’s hand displacement is usually in common with other pianists, or subtle. In the Berceuse, Rosenthal displaces the hands individually a few times, and usually subtly. The exception is on the first quaver pulse of bar 43, where Rosenthal places a larger gap between the hands. This may be to emphasise the change in right hand melodic pattern.

Berceuse – Bars 42-43:

In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Rosenthal uses more hand displacement than the other two pianists, using it at least twice as frequently. Occasionally Rosenthal displaces the hands at the high point of a slur, while most other hand displacement by the pianists are subtly on the first crotchet pulse, where there are staccatos or accents in the right hand. Rosenthal displaces the hands more noticeably in a few individual places, such as on the first crotchet pulse in bars 7 and 118.

344 Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bars 6-7 and Bars 117-118:

In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Rosenthal individually displaces the hands on the first crotchet pulse only. These are usually tight and come at the start of a phrase, such as in bars 5, 30, 37, 158, and 165, or the end of the phrase, such as in bars 6, 22, and 130.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 5-6:

In bar 37, Rosenthal’s hand displacement is more noticeable because of the dynamic accent he places on the right hand note at the start of the bar, which may partially be prompted by the diminuendo marking.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bar 37:

Arpeggiation

Since Rosenthal tends to favour arpeggiation more than the other pianists, he has a variety of circumstances to use it across different genres of Chopin’s music. He uses it mainly at the climax of phrases, to emphasise a change in texture, on accented notes, or for contrast. Rosenthal’s use of arpeggiation is more individual in the Mazurkas and Preludes than in the Etude Op.10 No.5. In the Etude Op.10 No.5, Rosenthal’s arpeggiation is mostly quick and in common with Cortot, Friedman or Lukasiewicz. Rosenthal uses arpeggiation in an individual

345 way in the left hand on the high point in a phrase in bar 46. This emphasises the climax of the crescendo more than dynamics alone.

Etude Op.10 No.5 – Bars 45-46:

In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Rosenthal is the only pianist to use arpeggiation, and he uses it twenty-five times. Rosenthal’s arpeggiation is mostly quick, but a few times it is loose, which further highlights his individuality. Almost every time, there is an accent marked on the chord, such as bars 60, 70, 86, 115 and 137, otherwise it is at the start, end or high point of the right hand phrase. In bar 60, Rosenthal arpeggiates the accented chord on the first crotchet pulse on the second repeat.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bar 60:

In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, there are six places where only Rosenthal uses arpeggiation. Rosenthal arpeggiates quickly in these places, except in bar 60 where he arpeggiates the left hand chord on the second crotchet pulse more slowly than in the other bars. This chord comes at the end of a phrase and the climax of a crescendo.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 60:

346 Sometimes Rosenthal emphasises notes with his arpeggiation, such as on the third crotchet pulse in bars 22, 23 and 31.

Mazurka Op.63 No.3 – Bar 22-23:

In Prelude Op.28 No.7, Rosenthal arpeggiates the chord on the third crotchet pulse in bar 4, which is the start of the phrase. He then arpeggiates the chord on the second crotchet pulse in bar 7, drawing attention to the thicker texture of a three-note chord in the left hand.

Prelude Op.28 No.7 – Bars 4-7:

Rosenthal also arpeggiates the chord on the first crotchet pulse in bar 12, at the climax of the piece very slowly. Rosenthal’s arpeggiation in bar 12 is slower than his other instances of arpeggiation, which are quick. His slower arpeggiation is probably due to having more notes to arpeggiate, as well as his slower tempo.

Prelude Op.28 No.7 – Bar 12

The last place that Rosenthal arpeggiates is the chord on the third crotchet pulse in bar 15, which adds contrast between repeated chords.

347 Prelude Op.28 No.7 - Bar 15:

Summary

Occasionally Rosenthal has a similar ratio of types of rubato to Koczalski, such as in the Berceuse and the Waltz Op.64, but sometimes their choice of tempi is noticeably different. Rosenthal uses hand displacement in almost every piece and usually uses hand displacement and arpeggiation more often than the other pianists. Rosenthal’s hand displacements in individual places come in common areas to use hand displacement, such as at the high point of a slur, or the start or end of a phrase. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Rosenthal’s arpeggiation is mostly on accented chords, or at the start, end or high point of the right hand phrase.

Rosenthal’s lengthening tends to be more individual in the Mazurkas. In bar 118 of the Mazurka Op.24 No.4 Rosenthal turns the pair of quavers on the first crotchet pulse into a dotted quaver rhythm through his lengthening, which is an example of melodic rubato that is not often used by the pianists. Rosenthal also uses melodic rubato via shortening in Prelude Op.28 No.6 and the Waltz Op.64 No. In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Rosenthal lengthens the second crotchet pulse in consecutive bars, making the piece sound like there are four beats instead of three beats in a bar, but in the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Rosenthal shortens the third crotchet pulse to such an extent that it sounds like there are only two crotchet pulses in the bar, perhaps to give the melody more flow in his relatively slow tempo choice. Rosenthal’s uses of ritardando are a way of contrasting the repeat of a phrase, or to highlight the high point of a phrase.

4.9. Smidowicz

Smidowicz’s use of rubato in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 and the Waltz Op.34 No.2 are quite different. In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Smidowicz uses less rubato than Koczalski and Cortot, but more than Friedman due to his abundant use of arpeggiation. In the Mazurka, Smidowicz uses much more rubato than Friedman and Olejniczak due to his abundant use of lengthening. This shows that choosing a faster tempo does not necessarily mean less frequent use of rubato. In the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 and the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Smidowicz’s most frequently used form of

348 rubato is lengthening, followed by hand displacement. However, he uses hand displacement more frequently in the Waltz Op.34 No.2 than in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, and his lengthening in the Waltz is mostly to a smaller extent than in the Mazurka. This may be because the Waltz Op.34 No.2 is a longer piece, with a slower tempo and a less lively character than the Mazurka Op.68 No.2.

Lengthening and Ritardando

Smidowicz is more individual in his use of lengthening and ritardando in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 than in the Waltz Op.34 No.2. In the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, Smidowicz uses lengthening twenty-eight times, which is much more than Friedman and Olejniczak. Smidowicz uses lengthening mostly in individual bars and often lengthens the first crotchet pulse in several consecutive bars at a time, giving the music a dance-like feel, such as in bars 22-28.

Mazurka Op.68 No.2 – Bars 24-28:

In the three individual bars in which Smidowicz uses ritardando in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, he uses it subtly at the end of a phrase, which is still a common practice amongst the pianists. One example is in bars 27-28, which is the end of a section.

Accelerando

In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Smidowicz uses accelerando three times and each time he speeds up suddenly so that one bar is faster than the previous bar. This is another unique feature of Smidowicz’s playing, as the other pianists do not use accelerando more than once and those who do apply the feature over more than one bar. Smidowicz speeds up in single bars such as bars 86, 88, and 94, which are audibly faster than the preceding bars. Perhaps this is to emphasise the different right hand rhythm in bar 86 compared to the surrounding bars.

349 Waltz Op.34 No.2 – Bars 85-87:

Hand Displacement

In the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, Smidowicz uses hand displacement nine times, which is several instances more than the other two pianists, and he uses it only places that other pianists do not choose. Although Smidowicz uses hand displacement relatively frequently, it is mostly subtle. Smidowicz uses hand displacement almost every time the right hand melody drops in pitch to the B, for example in bar 15.

Mazurka Op.68 No.2 – Bars 14-15:

In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Smidowicz uses hand displacement twenty-four times, which is more than most of the other pianists, and he has a few individual places to use it. One example of loose individual hand displacement is on the first crotchet pulse in bar 95.

Waltz Op.34 No.2 – Bars 95-96:

Arpeggiation

In the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, Smidowicz uses arpeggiation twice and has one place in common with Friedman to use arpeggiation on the first crotchet pulse in bar 37, but he arpeggiates more

350 slowly than Friedman. Their arpeggiation may have been prompted by the legatissimo marking and bar 37 being a new section after the repeat of bars 29-36.

Mazurka Op.68 No.2 – Bar 37:

Smidowicz’s relatively frequent use of slow arpeggiation is the most unique feature of his performance of the Waltz Op.34 No.2. Smidowicz uses arpeggiation twenty-four times, which is more than the other pianists, and only in individual places. Smidowicz sometimes arpeggiates the left hand accompaniment chords that come on the second or third crotchet pulse. For example, Smidowicz arpeggiates slowly on the second crotchet pulse in bars 17, 19 and 21. This emphasises the dotted crotchet in the right hand and the syncopation of the rhythm.

Waltz Op.34 No.2 – Bars 17-19:

Summary

Smidowicz’s use of tempo and rubato in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 and the Waltz Op.34 No.2, show that choosing a faster tempo does not necessarily mean less frequent use of rubato, as he has a faster than average overall and starting tempo in the Mazurka, but uses much more rubato than Friedman and Olejniczak due to his abundant use of lengthening. In the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, Smidowicz often lengthens the first crotchet pulse in several consecutive bars at a time, giving the music a dance-like feel. In this piece, he also uses ritardando subtly at the end of a phrase, which is a common practice. On three occasions in the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Smidowicz speeds up in single bars such as bars 86, 88, and 94, which could be emphasise the different right hand rhythm compared to the surrounding bars. Although Smidowicz uses hand displacement relatively frequently in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, it is mostly subtle and used almost every time the right hand melody drops in pitch to the B. In the Waltz Op.34 No.2,

351 Smidowicz uses hand displacement more often than most of the other pianists, but still in common circumstances to the others, such as at the start of a phrase. Smidowicz’s use of arpeggiation is quite unique in the Mazurka Op.68 No.2 and the Waltz Op.34 No.2. In the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, Smidowicz’s arpeggiation may have been prompted by the legatissimo marking and bar 37 being a new section, and in the Waltz Op.34 No.2, Smidowicz sometimes arpeggiates the left hand accompaniment chords that come on the second or third crotchet pulse, which emphasises the right hand dotted crotchet and syncopation.

4.10. Turczynski

Turczynski has audibly slower than average overall and starting tempi in the Impromptu Op.29 and Mazurka Op.24 No.4, but in the Impromptu Op.66, Nocturne Op.15 No.2 and the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Turczynski’s overall and starting tempi are close to the average of the pianists. Turczynski usually uses rubato in common with others, with small individual differences. In the Impromptu Op.29, Nocturne Op.15 No.2 and the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Turczynski uses hand displacement and arpeggiation much less frequently than the other early twentieth century pianists. However, Turczynski uses more rubato than Friedman in the Mazurka Op.24 No.4 because of his abundant use of lengthening, which is the most individual aspect of his playing amongst the pieces studied.

Lengthening

Turczynski’s use of lengthening is quite individual in the Impromptu Op.29, Mazurka Op.24 No.4, and the Nocturne Op.15 No.2. In the Impromptu Op.29, Turczynski uses lengthening in similar quantity to the others. However, he has individual places to lengthen, such as on the second crotchet pulse in bar 9, which draws out the syncopation in the right hand.

Impromptu Op.29 –Bar 9:

In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Turczynski uses lengthening thirty-nine times, which is more frequent than Rosenthal and Friedman. His lengthening is mostly on consecutive crotchet

352 pulses. Turczynski also lengthens the first crotchet pulse in a few consecutive bars at a time, such as in bars 21-24, and also every second or third bar such as in bars 73-88.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bars 21-24:

Usually the lengthened crotchet pulses are where the right hand plays a staccato or an accented note. One example of Turczynski’s noticeable and individual lengthening is on the first crotchet pulse in bar 88, which is the end of a right hand phrase, and has a quaver rest preceding an accented note on the second crotchet pulse.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bars 87-88:

In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Turczynski uses lengthening individually on the fourth quaver pulse in bar 23, where there is a demisemiquaver quintuplet in the right hand. Lengthening in order to play faster note values more expressively is common amongst the pianists.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bar 23:

353 Ritardando

Turczynski’s ritardandi are usually in places in common with other pianists, or else it is subtly used. In the Impromptu Op.29, Turczynski uses ritardando individually and subtly in bars 30 and 50, which come at the end of a phrase.

Impromptu Op.29 - Bar 30:

In the Impromptu Op.66, Turczynski slows down in an individual way during the second half of bar 60, allowing him to take time to play the right hand semiquavers, which is a similar circumstance to his lengthening of the fourth quaver pulse in bar 23 of the Nocturne Op.15 No.2.

Impromptu Op.66 - Bar 60:

In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Turczynski has five individual bars to use ritardando to a small or medium extent. Turczynski’s most noticeable individual uses of ritardando are in bars 20, 134, 139 and 142-143. Bar 20 is the end of the first section, bars 134 and 139 are at the end of a phrase, and bars 142-143 are near the end of the piece. Turczynski probably slows down in bar 134 because of the calando marking in bar 131, and he may have slowed down in bars 139 and 142-143 because there is a rallentando marked in bar 140.

354 Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bars 131-134:

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bars 142-143:

Shortening and Accelerando

In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Turczynski uses accelerando once individually and subtly. Turczynski may have also used it in response to the con anima marking in bar 61. The speeding up is more of a sudden change within one or two bars rather than a gradual change over several bars. The effect is surprising and may be a rhythmic anomaly in his playing.

Mazurka Op.24 No.4 – Bar 61:

Hand Displacement

Turczynski has occasional differences to other pianists in his use of hand displacement. In the Impromptu Op.29, Turczynski has two individual places to use it noticeably, such as on the fourth crotchet pulse in bar 52, which is the start of the right hand phrase and the end of the left hand slur.

355 Impromptu Op.29 – Bars 51-54:

In the Impromptu Op.66, Turczynski uses hand displacement three times, which is less frequently than the other pianists. However, on the first notes in bar 91, Turczynski uses hand displacement individually and very tightly, perhaps to emphasise the beginning of the new right hand phrase and the start of the diminuendo.

Impromptu Op.66 – Bar 91:

In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Turczynski uses hand displacement seven times individually and mostly subtly, such as on the first crotchet pulse in bars 12, 79, 87, and 91. In bar 12, Turczynski’s hand displacement highlights the accented right hand octave and high point of the slur. Bars 79, 87, and 91 are similar in melodic shape and rhythm. Turczynski’s hand displacement in these bars comes at the end of a right hand slur.

Bars 11-12:

Bars 78-79:

356 In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Turczynski uses hand displacement less often than the other Polish pianists but on the first crotchet pulse in bar 138, it is tight and at the start of a right hand phrase and a crescendo.

Waltz Op.64 No.2 – Bars 137-138:

Arpeggiation

Turczynski has a few individual places to use arpeggiation in the pieces analysed. In the Impromptu Op.29, Turczynski arpeggiates the left hand chord slowly on the third crotchet pulse in bar 40, which emphasises the accented right hand note at the start of the slur. In the Impromptu Op.66, Turczynski uses arpeggiation once individually in bar 129, which is at the start of a left hand phrase. He does this very slowly and there is a slight pause in the right hand semiquavers to make room for it.

Impromptu Op.29 Bar 40:

Impromptu Op.66 Bars 127-130:

357 In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Turczynski has one individual place to use arpeggiation very quickly on the first quaver pulse in bar 33. This highlights the szforzando marking and the climax of the crescendo from bar 32.

Nocturne Op.15 No.2 – Bars 32-33:

Summary

Turczynski’s most frequently used form of rubato is lengthening in each of the pieces analysed and his individuality is most apparent in his use of this feature. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Turczynski uses lengthening more frequently than Rosenthal and Friedman, usually where the right hand plays a staccato or an accented note. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, Turczynski uses lengthening in order to play faster note values. Turczynski’s ritardandi are usually in common with other pianists, or else subtly used at the end of a phrase. He occasionally displaces the hands and arpeggiates individually, but it is still used in common ways, such as at the start or end of a phrase or to highlight an accented note or the high point of a slur.

Chapter 4 has revealed the more individual ways that the early twentieth century pianists use tempo and rubato, whether it is using a particular technique much more frequently, to a larger extent, or in a more surprising manner. For example, Cortot tends to use more arpeggiation than the other pianists he is compared to, such as in the Prelude Op.28 No.15 and in the Waltz Op.34 No.2; Koczalski uses hand displacement relatively abundantly in the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Waltzes Op.34 No.2 and Op.64 No.1; Friedman is unique in the relatively abundant quantity of rubato that he uses, mainly via lengthening and shortening in the Waltz Op.18, and also uses arpeggiation a few more times than the other pianists in the Waltz Op.64 No.1. However, even in individual places to use rubato, the pianists use it in common ways, which show that there is some agreement between the pianists of different pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras on specific issues relating to tempo and rubato in playing Chopin’s music.

358 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION

This study of tempo and rubato in recordings of Chopin’s works has examined and refuted the popularly held notion of a tradition or Chopinesque style within pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras, at least in relation to tempo and rubato. Claims have been examined and shown to be false. Descriptions of Chopin’s playing cannot reveal the exact extent of his use of rubato or his choice in tempo when performing his pieces as witnesses only describe the technical ease and interpretative freedom with which he played. Although former pupils such as Lenz, Mikuli and Czartoryska claim that there is a true Chopin performance style which has been supplanted by a “pseudo-tradition” based on unorthodox agogic distortions, and inappropriate dynamics, pedalling, tempo and additional notes (Rink 1997), they make no reference to particular pianists or specific examples in which this has happened. Kleczynski (1879) believed in a Chopin tradition, saying that there are principal features, which should be adhered to, and secondary features, which may be open to interpretation, but he does not reveal what the principal features of the tradition are and exactly how they must be followed.

Recent scholars, including Timbrell, Bellman and Abraham use the term tradition or a Chopinesque style of playing when describing what they believe to be the components of a Chopin tradition and possibly a contrasting tradition, such as “the Russian tradition”. The general idea that is gained from reading descriptions of the opposing traditions is that pianists who do not play Chopin in the “true style” are those that play in a way that emphasises technical skill or brilliance over musicality, which could mean that they play too fast and without attention to appropriate use of rubato. However, references to use of tempo and rubato in the opposing traditions are vague.

Bellman claims that there is a Chopinesque style of play that was once possible, but that it has become more of a memory since the piano developed and the fame of more extroverted colleagues outshone pianists such as Edouard Risler and Koczalski, who were “renowned for their intimate, subtle, elegant, Chopinesque style of play” (2004: 38). Bellman emphasises the difference that performing in the correct context, including using a Pleyel piano, can make in achieving Chopin’s pianistic aesthetic, which includes a relatively soft tone, and the use of “misunderstood” (2004: 26) rhythmic inflections. There is also an increased ability to play at a faster tempo on the Pleyel or Erard than what is possible on the modern piano because of the lighter touch of the earlier instruments (Lenz 1872).

359 While this view is true, the analyses of recordings show that the modern piano is sufficient in achieving the metronome marking set by Chopin in the etudes examined in this study. For example, in the Etude Op.10 No.5, the modern pianist Shebanova performs on an Erard piano, while the early twentieth century pianists, including Koczalski, Rosenthal, Cortot, Friedman and Lukasiewicz, perform on modern pianos. All the pianists achieve clarity of texture at their chosen tempi, and Lukasiewicz’s relatively slow performance does not sound any clearer than those with faster tempi.

While other studies of tempo and rubato, such as those by Methuen-Campbell, Hudson, and Peres Da Costa, discuss a few of Chopin’s pieces briefly with reference to one or two pianists, and sometimes the score, this study has provided more detail on different aspects of rubato in relation to eminent pianists in a wide variety of Chopin’s music, including pieces that have not been previously discussed. For example, Hudson gives structural and harmonic reasons for the use of rubato, particularly in relation to “delay” and “anticipation” in a few of Chopin’s pieces including the Concerto Op.21, Mazurkas Op.6 No.2 and Op.7 No.1, and the Nocturne Op.15 No.3. However, I have provided more detail in each piece that I have studied, including comparisons between eminent Chopin pianists in each aspect of rubato, and discussed their use of tempo and rubato in relation to the score.

The data gathered and the analysis of it with reference to historical documents and scores demonstrates that there are a variety of ways that are acceptable in which pianists can use rubato and a range of tempi that can be chosen in interpreting Chopin’s music. The Chopin tradition cannot be narrowly or easily defined because there is a large range of interpretations of Chopin's music by pianists who are considered to be part of the Chopin tradition, whether they are pedagogical descendants, Polish, or modern pianists playing on period instruments, and even within those categories there are differences between the pianists. The analyses of recordings prove Ekier (1960) to be correct in saying that there is no such thing as a Chopin tradition, at least in relation to tempo and rubato, because although there are similarities in certain areas of rubato usage and in tempi chosen, there are also many individual differences between pianists, even when they are of the same pedagogical line, nationality or era.

Each of the pianists selected for study have ways that they use rubato that make their performances sound unique, whether it be individual places to use a particular rubato technique, use of a rubato technique to a significantly larger extent than other pianists in the same place, a surprising or less common way of using rubato, or much more frequent use of a rubato technique in a certain piece.

360 Mikuli’s students, Koczalski, Rosenthal, and Michalowski show individual differences in their use of rubato and choice of tempi across different genres of Chopin’s music. For example, in the Berceuse, Michalowski has a faster overall tempo than Koczalski and Rosenthal, and Paderewski, who was not a student of Mikuli, is closer to Koczalski and Rosenthal in terms of overall tempo than Michalowski. In the Preludes Op.28 Nos.6 and 7, Rosenthal and Koczalski’s choice of tempi are the farthest apart. The difference is significant, as Rosenthal’s performances tend to drag, while Koczalski’s performances flow well.

Mikuli’s students also use rubato in different ways in various pieces. In the Berceuse Michalowski uses rubato half as frequently as Rosenthal or Koczalski, which is substantial because Koczalski and Rosenthal use rubato at least sixty times, and a large proportion of this rubato is hand displacement. In terms of arpeggiation in the Berceuse, Michalowski is most like Paderewski than Koczalski or Rosenthal, as he has a few places in common with Paderewski to arpeggiate and they use the feature as frequently as each other. Koczalski and Rosenthal also use different types of rubato from one another in the Etude Op.10 No.5, with Rosenthal using more arpeggiation, and Koczalski using more lengthening. In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Michalowski uses rubato about 25% more often than Rosenthal, and also uses a different ratio of rubato to Rosenthal, including more hand displacement and arpeggiation but less lengthening.

The Polish pianists also have individual differences in their use of rubato and choice of tempo. Friedman is generally thought to be quite individual in his performances of Chopin’s music. This study has shown this to be true in certain ways. However, the other Polish pianists also have individual ways to use tempo and rubato. The Polish pianists sometimes differ audibly in their choice of tempo across different genres. For example, in the Etude Op.25 No.9, Paderewski, Lukasiewicz and Friedman each have different overall tempi, at Crotchet = MM112, 88, and 98 respectively. Lukasiewicz’s slower tempo causes the Etude to lose some of its Vivace character. Also, in the Waltz Op.18, Koczalski, Friedman, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz have differing tempi in the various sections, with the greatest difference being heard between Koczalski and Paderewski in the dolce section.

The Polish pianists differ in their use of rubato in various pieces. In relation to quantity of rubato, there are sometimes large differences between the Polish pianists. For example, in the Etude Op.25 No.6, Koczalski uses rubato at least twice as frequently as Friedman does, mainly in the form of ritardando. In the Berceuse there are individual differences in the quality of lengthening in common bars. Both Friedman and Lukasiewicz are Polish pianists taught by Leschetizsky, but Friedman uses a wider variety of rubato techniques in the Berceuse, while

361 Lukasiewicz mainly uses arpeggiation. In the Impromptu Op.29, Koczalski uses hand displacement more than triple the frequency of Turczynski, and they mostly use it in places that differ from one another. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Friedman shortens only the first crotchet pulse, while Rosenthal sometimes shortens the third crotchet pulse. In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Paderewski uses arpeggiation and hand displacement much more frequently than Turczynski does, and has some recurring places in common with Cortot to use arpeggiation, despite being of a different nationality and pedagogical line.

While they are both French pianists, just as with the Polish pianists, Pugno and Cortot have differences between them in their use of rubato and choice of tempo. Their choice of tempo in the Berceuse varies more than the difference between Friedman, the fastest Polish pianist, and Koczalski, the slowest Polish pianist. Also, in the Impromptu Op.29, Pugno and Cortot differ significantly in their quantity of hand displacement and arpeggiation.

The pianists also occasionally choose a tempo or use rubato in a way that highlights their individuality when performing a piece. Sometimes this is through their choice of a much faster tempo than other pianists. In more than one piece, even across different genres, Friedman plays at a significantly faster tempo than the other pianists. In the Berceuse, Friedman has the fastest overall and starting tempi out of the eight pianists, and is noticeably different in character to Demidenko’s performance, which is more leisurely. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Friedman plays at a much faster starting and overall tempo than Rosenthal and Turczynski, although his starting tempo comes closest to the score’s metronome marking. In the Mazurka Op.68 No.2, Friedman plays at a much faster tempo in bars 29-36, which is over twice as fast as Olejniczak, and almost twice as fast as Smidowicz. Cortot sometimes starts at a much faster tempo than the other pianists in the more lively pieces, such as in the Etude Op.10 No.5, Impromptu Op.36, and the Prelude Op.28 No.19. Pugno’s tempo is very different to the other pianists’ tempo in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, as he plays the first section much slower than all the other pianists, and plays the middle Doppio Movimento section much faster than the other pianists. Pugno’s extreme choice of tempi is contrary to the instruction Doppio Movimento, as he quadruples rather than doubles the tempo in the middle section.

Achieving melodic rubato through hand displacement or arpeggiation is common amongst the pianists, but melodic rubato through lengthening a melody note while keeping the accompaniment steady is less common. For example, in the Impromptu Op.36, Cortot turns the group of two quavers into dotted quaver and semiquaver in bars 13 and 14, maintaining a steady accompaniment while he changes the rhythm of the melody. These are examples of what Chopin may have done in his playing, as Chopin’s “powerful sense of melodic flow may have

362 made it possible for him, like Mozart, to perform with such independence of hands that he could conceive of rubato, like a singer, in a completely linear fashion” (1994: 215).

While ritardando is often used by the pianists at the end of a phrase and less often at the climax of a phrase, a unique feature in Koczalski’s playing is his ritardando in bar 74 of the Impromptu Op.36, which emphasises the polyrhythm, showing that ritardando can also be used as a way to further highlight contrasts in the music. This may reflect what Chopin might have done as Chopin is said to have used rubato frequently, “accelerating or slowing down this or that theme […] It always justified itself by strengthening or weakening of the melodic line, by harmonic details, by the figurative structure” (Mikuli/A. Michalowski 1932:74-5 in Eigeldinger 1986: 50).

Sometimes the pianists do not use a particular rubato technique as often as other pianists. Koczalski is the exception amongst the early twentieth century pianists in the Etude Op.10 No.5, as he is the only one who does not use any arpeggiation. In the Impromptu Op.66, Koczalski uses hand displacement relatively abundantly, but his use of lengthening is sparse compared to Turczynski.

Occasionally the reason for the use of rubato is not easily explained, especially when one pianist uses it in a certain place. In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Cortot’s lengthening occurs in different circumstances from that of the other pianists, who lengthen the start, high point or end of a slur. Due to this difference, Cortot’s lengthening sounds more random in this waltz. Koczalski also lengthens notes randomly at the end of the phrase in the Etude Op.25 No.6, while Cortot and Friedman use lengthening at the starts of phrases in the same piece. In the Prelude Op.28 No.6, Rosenthal is the only pianist to shorten notes, possibly to give the melody more flow in his relatively slow tempo choice. In the Waltz Op.64 No.2, Rosenthal is the only pianist out of six to use ritardando at the high point of a phrase, rather than the usual end of the phrase. These details contribute to the individual character of each pianist’s playing.

Friedman tends to use rubato in surprising ways in various pieces. In the Etude Op.10 No.5 he lengthens the first right hand note in bar 1, as well as the first octave in bar 83, he uses a ritenuto in bar 56, where the music comes to a halt, he uses a glissando in the right hand in bar 65, and he adds an acciaccatura to the last chord. In the Etude Op. 25 No.6, Friedman uses more of a ritenuto in bar 15, while the other pianists use ritardando only in other bars. In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, a large proportion of Friedman’s rubato is hand displacement, but for Rosenthal and Michalowski, hand displacement makes up less than half of the total rubato used. In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, most pianists use ritardando at the end of a phrase, but Friedman uses ritardando in other places too, such as the start of a phrase.

363

Paderewski also has some unique features in his playing. He is the only pianist out of four to play the alternative version of bar 67 in the Etude Op.25 No.2, where the right hand begins the run an octave higher. In the Waltz Op.18, Paderewski uses arpeggiation more noticeably than the other pianists and his ritardandos are to a greater extent than the others. Paderewski also uses ritardando to a greater extent than the other pianists in the Waltz Op.64 No.2.

Despite individual characteristic of the pianists, there are still similarities between them, whether they are of the same or different pedagogical line, nationality or era. These similarities show opportunities for the use of rubato, the reasons for which can be explained through reference to score markings, structural points, and textural, melodic, or harmonic changes in the piece.

Different genres of Chopin’s music or pieces of different tempi invite the use of different ratios and quantities of types of rubato, although sometimes there are also differences between the pianists playing the same genre or at the same tempo. Generally, the pianists use rubato less frequently or noticeably in faster pieces. Most of the pianists use rubato sparingly in the Etudes Op.25 Nos.2 and 9, and the Preludes Op.28 Nos.3 and 7, mainly because these pieces are either fast, short or contain continuous fast note values in one hand. In the Impromptu Op.29, Koczalski, Pugno, Cortot, Turczynski and Kenner, use at least four different types of rubato, including lengthening, hand displacement, arpeggiation and ritardando, although they use them in differing quantities. Not surprisingly, the pianists also tend to use less rubato less frequently when they play at a faster than average tempo. This is evident in the Berceuse, where Pugno and Friedman, who play at a faster tempo than the other pianists, use less rubato.

Descriptions of Chopin’s playing in the literature do not reveal much detail about how he adapted his use of rubato in the different genres of music he composed, except that in the Mazurkas he used it in such a way that it affected the rhythm of the entire bar, including the accompaniment. In the Mazurka Op.68 No. 2, Friedman, Smidowicz and Olejniczak start at a slower speed than the metronome marking of Crotchet = MM116. Friedman and Smidowicz come close at MM102 and MM105, and Olejniczak plays much slower at MM75. This suggests that in the Mazurkas, staying very close to the metronome marking may not be as important as striving for it in the Etudes.

There are common ways rubato is used by the pianists, which may indicate certain principles that may be applied when performing Chopin’s music. The pianists sometimes agree on the tempo of one section in relation to another section, despite choosing different tempi from one

364 another. For example, in the Waltz Op.18, Koczalski, Friedman, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz choose differing tempi in each section, but they each play the Con Anima section audibly faster than the Dolce section. There are also sometimes similarities between pianists of different nationalities or eras in the way that they use rubato, whether in ratio of types of rubato, the frequency or the extent to which each type of rubato is applied. Occasionally pianists use different forms of rubato in the same place, which indicates agreement on the suitability for the placement of rubato but an individual approach to its realisation.

Although pianists may use a form of rubato more frequently than other pianists, it is often used subtly. For example, in the Prelude Op.28 No.15, Koczalski uses hand displacement much more frequently than the other pianists, but usually he uses it subtly.

Hand displacement is used more on stronger beats of the bar, and at the start, high point, or end of a phrase. Sometimes the pianists use it in response to dynamic or articulation markings, or the start of a new rhythmic pattern in the melody. Less often, it is used on consecutive pulses or in a more random fashion. In the Berceuse, hand displacement is more common on the strong and medium pulses of the bar, and occasionally Polish pianists displace the hands in other parts of the bar, due to using hand displacement on consecutive quaver pulses. In the Etude Op.25 No.2, hand displacement occurs on accented notes or at the start or high point of a phrase or melodic pattern. In the Impromptu Op.29, hand displacement is usually used on the minim beats of the bar, and mostly during the contrasting middle section of the piece, which contains a lyrical right hand melody, showing that rubato is more frequently used in slower sections of a piece.

In the Berceuse, Impromptus Op.36 and Op.66 and the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, hand displacement is usually used at the start, end or high point of a phrase. In the Impromptu Op.66, the pianists also displace the hands on accented notes and in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2 the pianists also displace the hands on the first note of a group of right hand tuplets. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4 the pianists often displace the hands when there are staccati or accents marked in the right hand.

In faster pieces, the pianists are more selective in their use of hand displacement. For example, in the Prelude Op.28 No.3, hand displacement is usually used at the start of a phrase, but it is very subtle and infrequent because of the fast tempo. Hand displacement in the waltzes usually occurs on the first crotchet pulse of the bar. The pianists are also more likely to displace the hands at the start of a section or when there is an accent in the right hand, such as in the Waltz Op.18. As noted in the discussions of the Bercruse, Etude Op.25 No.9, Mazurka Op.63 No.3

365 and Op.68 No.2, and the Prelude Op.28 No.19, the pianists usually arpeggiate notes at the start, end or high point of a phrase.

Lengthening is used in different circumstances and to differing extents according to the genre of the music, but lengthening often occurs at the start of a bar, the start, high point or end of a phrase, before a large melodic leap, or to emphasise the upbeat. The accompaniment is affected when the pianists use lengthening across all the genres, with few exceptions. These exceptions, where the pianists keep the accompaniment steady while changing the rhythm of the melody is only used occasionally by certain pianists, and tends to highlight the individuality of the pianist using lengthening in this way, rather than being the common way to use lengthening.

Hudson notes that the Mazurkas “show far more variety than the Waltz in their accompaniment patterns […] the second beat is not the only place where rhythmic exaggeration can be applied […] it still remains for the performer to determine the precise location” (1994:187). This study has explored the topic of lengthening in the Mazurkas and Waltzes in more detail, as I have provided detailed evidence of aspects of the Chopin pianists’ playing. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, lengthening usually occurs where there is a staccato or accent on the right hand note, and the pianists lengthen noticeably, whether in common or individual bars. In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, the lengthened notes are always either at the start, end or high point of slur.

As expected, lengthening tends to be used more noticeably in a regular fashion in the Waltzes. In the Waltz Op.18, the pianists usually lengthen notes from one and a half times to twice the length of the written value. In the Waltz Op.34 No.2, lengthening is the most frequently used form of rubato by all the pianists, including Koczalski, Cortot, Friedman, Smidowicz, Drewnowski and Olejniczak. In the Waltz Op.64 No.2 the pianists lengthen the second crotchet pulse where there is a rest in the right hand, in the first section of the piece, and this is done subtly. Whenever the pianists lengthen more noticeably, it occurs on the first crotchet pulse at the start, high point or end of a slur.

Like lengthening, ritardando is quite a common rubato technique and it affects both the melody and the accompaniment, but the places for its use are less varied than lengthening because of the larger scale of its effect. The pianists usually use ritardando at the end of a phrase, and less commonly at the high point of a phrase. When used at the high point of a phrase, or in a more sudden way, the ritardando tends to draw attention to the pianist’s individuality.

Accelerando is not a common rubato technique amongst the pianists’ recordings studied here, but it is usually used during the ascending melodies in the right hand, sometimes corresponding 366 with a crescendo marking. The pianists use it in this way in the Berceuse, which creates contrast between the right hand melodic patterns and makes the short note values sound more brilliant. In the Mazurka Op.24 No.4, Turczynski and Rosenthal use accelerando in different bars, but they both use it in response to a rise in dynamics. In the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, the pianists also tend to use accelerando where there is a crescendo marking.

As with accelerando, the pianists do not use shortening as frequently as the other forms of rubato, and usually when it is used, it is to achieve a brief accelerando effect. For example, in the Nocturne Op.15 No.2, most of the pianists, including Michalowksi, Pugno, Turczynski, Yoffe and Thai Son use shortening on a few occasions, while Lukasiewicz uses none. Another form of shortening that is used is when pianists use a glissando, such as Rosenthal and Friedman’s glissandi in the Etude Op.10 No.5, and it highlights the individuality of the pianists who use it, rather than being a standard practice.

There are occasional instances where pianists of a particular pedagogical line or nationality have similar characteristics. In the Berceuse, the Polish pianists, Koczalski, Rosenthal and Paderewski use rubato more frequently than the French pianists, Cortot and Pugno, mainly due to the Polish pianists, with the exception of Friedman, using more hand displacement. In addition, the Polish pianists use arpeggiation in the Berceuse, whereas the French pianists do not.

Another example is in the Etude Op.25 No.9, where Cortot uses rubato at least several instances less than the Friedman, Paderewski and Lukasiewicz, partly because Cortot does not use any arpeggiation, while the Polish pianists use it a few times or more. Also in this etude, only the Polish pianists use hand displacement, and this may be typical but not consistent, as Friedman does not use it. In the Impromptu Op.29, both French pianists, Cortot and Pugno, play at faster starting and overall tempi than Koczalski and Turczynski, which may show a tendency for the French pianists to choose faster tempi than Polish pianists in lively pieces.

In the Mazurka Op.63 No.3, Mikuli students, Rosenthal and Michalowski, choose similar starting and overall tempi, while Friedman has a slower starting and overall tempo, but this could be due to Friedman’s individuality. In the Prelude Op.28 No.6, the early twentieth century pianists use a little more lengthening and much more hand displacement or arpeggiation than the modern pianist Switala, but Switala does have common places with the other pianists to lengthen or to use ritardando. In the Waltz Op.64 No.2 Drewnowski uses ritardando less often and more subtly than the early twentieth century pianists, which may be evidence of a modern approach to ritardando in the Waltzes.

367

This study has examined the idea of tradition or a Chopinesque style within pedagogical lines, nationalities and eras, and refined the understanding of approaches to rubato and tempo through the detailed study of master recordings. It has also thrown light on individual characteristics of playing and noted places for rubato where several pianists are in agreement. The pianists make choices in respect to the different types of rubato showing their individuality, but also have common approaches to certain melodic, harmonic and structural events. From a teaching point of view the study may point the way to a more refined description of rubato and a more detailed consideration of tempo choice.

368 APPENDIX COMPARATIVE TABLES OF RUBATO USAGE

Berceuse

Performer/ Koczalski Michalowski Rosenthal Pugno Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 27, 35, 44, 45, Bars 19, 27, 45, 47 Bars 31, 33, 34, 35, Not applicable 48 44, 45, 47, 48, 49 Shortening Not applicable Bar 48 Bar 44 Not applicable Accelerando Bars 19-22, 25-26 Bars 2, 25-26, 33- Bars 19-23 Bars 20-23, 25-26 34, 37-38 Ritardando Bars 62-63, 68-70 Bars 14, 18, 43-44, Bar 62 Not applicable 46 i) Hand i) Bars 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, i) Bars 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, i) Bars 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, i) Bars 3, 5, 47, 48, displacement 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 9, 10, 47, 51, 58, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 36, 49, 55, 65 ii) Arpeggiation 23, 24, 27, 31, 36, 59, 61 43, 45, 47, 48, 49, ii) Bar 52 37, 39, 48, 49, 56, ii) Bars 7, 10, 11, 50, 52, 55, 59, 63, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 12, 14, 39, 48 65, 66 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, ii) Bars 5, 7, 8 67 ii) Bars 39, 48

Performer/ Cortot Friedman Paderewski Demidenko Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 5, 7, 16, 27, Bars 19, 27, 31, 35, Bars 19, 45 Bars 7, 10, 15, 19, 31, 35, 38, 45, 47, 45, 54 23, 27, 31, 39, 43, 48, 55, 56, 58, 61, 45, 47, 51, 52, 56, 63 61 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Bars 21-23, 26-27, Bars 20-23, 25-26 Not applicable Bar 34 31-32, 53 Ritardando Bars 14, 18, 34, 44, Bar 44 Bars 14, 18-19 Bars 44, 55, 68 62 i) Hand i) Bars 3, 55, 66 i) Bars 3, 55 i) Bars 3, 4, 5, 7, i) Bars 15, 27, 31, displacement 45, 47, 48, 49, 51, 45 ii) Arpeggiation 56, 57, 64, 67 ii) Bars 7, 10, 12, 14, 23, 47, 65

369 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, Pu = Pugno, De = Demidenko Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 3 1 M, R, Pu, C, F, Pa 6 S – M, R, C, Pu, F; M – Pa 4 R, Pa 2 S 5 K 1 S 4 1 M, Pa 2 S 2 Pa 1 S 3 Pa 1 S 4 K, R, Pa 3 S 5 K, R 2 S 5 1 K, M, R, Pu, Pa 5 S 2 K, R, Pa 3 S 4 R, Pa 2 S 5 Pa 1 S 6 1 K, R 2 S 7 1 M, R 2 S 4 K, R 2 M 5 R 1 S 8 1 K, M 2 XS – M; M – K 3 R 1 S 4 R 1 S 5 R 1 S 9 1 R 1 S 2 K, R 2 S 4 R 1 S 5 R 1 S 10 1 K, M, R 3 S – M; M – K, R 4 R 1 S 11 1 R 1 S 2 R 1 S 4 R 1 S 5 K 1 S 12 1 R 1 S 4 K 1 S 15 1 K, De 2 S – K; L - De 27 1 K, De 2 S – K; L - De 31 1 K, De 2 S

370 45 1 R, Pa, De 3 S – Pa; M – R, De 47 1 K, M, R 2 S 3 R, Pu, Pa 3 S 4 R, Pu, Pa 3 S 5 K, R 2 S 49 1 R, Pu, Pa 3 S 3 K 1 S 51 1 M, Pa 2 S 55 1 Pu, F 2 S 4 C, Pu 2 S 56 4 K, Pa 2 S 5 K 1 S 57 1 K, Pa 2 S 2 K 1 S 4 K 1 S 5 K 1 S 58 1 K, M 2 S 2 K 1 S 4 K 1 S 5 K 1 S 59 1 K, M, R 3 S – R; M – K, M 61 1 K, M 2 S 63 1 R 1 S 4 R 1 S 5 K 1 S 64 1 R, Pa 2 S 3 Pa 1 S 4 K, Pa 2 S 5 K 1 S 65 1 K, R 2 S – R; M - K 4 K 1 S 66 4 K, R, C 3 M 5 K 1 S 67 1 K 1 S 3 Pa 1 S

371 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, De = Demidenko Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 23 1, 2, 4, 5 K 1 – L; 2 – M; 4 – S; 5 - XS 24 1, 3 K M – 3; L - 1 36 1 K M 37 1 K S 39 1 K M 43 1 R L 50 1 R S 52 4 R S 60 1, 5 K S 62 1,2 K S

Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, Pu = Pugno, D = Demidenko Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 7 1 C, De 2 M 19 1 F, Pa 2 S – F; M –Pa 2 M, De 2 S 27 1 K, M, C, F, De 5 S – F, De; M – M, C 31 1 R, C, F, De 4 S – F; M – R, C, De 35 1 K, R, C, F 4 XS – K, R; S – F; M – C 3 Pa 1 S 44 4 K 1 S 5-6 R 1 S 45 1 K, M, R, C, F, Pa, De 7 M – R, De 47 1 M, C 2 S – M; M - C Dotted rhythm R, C 2 S – R; M – C (RH B flat) 3 De 1 S 48 Dotted rhythm R, C 2 M (RH G) 6 K 1 S 56 4 C, De 2 S – De; M – C 61 1 C, De 2 S

372 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, Pu = Pugno, D = Demidenko Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 5 C M 10 1 De S 15 1 De S 16 5 C S 23 2-3 De S 33 4 (RH 2nd note R S of triplet) 34 4 (RH 2nd note R S of triplet) 38 6 C M 39 1 De S 43 6 De S 51 6 De S 52 4 De XS 54 1 F S 55 4 C S 58 1 C S 63 1 C S

Common Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, Pa = Paderewski Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 7 1 M, Pa 2 S – M; M – Pa 4 R 1 S 10 1 Pa 1 S 2 M 1 S 12 6 M, Pa 2 S – M; M – Pa 14 5 M, Pa 2 S – M; M – Pa 39 1 K, M 2 S – M; M - K 47 1 K, Pa 2 XS 48 3 M 1 XS

373 Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, Pa = Paderewski, Pu = Pugno Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 4 R S 8 5 R S 11 5 M M 23 2 Pa M 52 4 Pu XS 65 3 Pa XS

Common Bars For Accelerando

K = Koczalski, M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, Pu = Pugno, De = Demidenko Bar Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 20-22/23 K, R, Pu, C, F 5 S – R, Pu; M – K, C; L – F 25-26 K, M, Pu, C, F 5 S – F; M – K, M, Pu, C 34 M, De 2 S – De; M - M

Individual Bars For Accelerando

K = Koczalski, M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, Pu = Pugno, De = Demidenko Bar Pianist Quality 2 M M 31-32 C M 37-38 M M 53 C M

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, De = Demidenko Bar Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 14 M, C, Pa 3 S – M; M – C, Pa 18 M, C, Pa 3 M – Pa; M – M, C 44 M, C, F, De 4 S – F, De; M – M, C 62 K, R, C 3 M – C; L – K, R 68-70 K, De 2 S

374

Individual Bars For Ritardando

M = Michalowski, C = Cortot, De = Demidenko Bar Pianist Quality 34 C L 46 M M 55 De S

Etude Op.10 No.5

Comparative Tables

Performer/ Koczalski Rosenthal Cortot Friedman Lukasiewicz Shebanova Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 23, 41, Not Bar 16 Bars 1, 41, Not Bars 16, 18, 57 applicable 83 applicable 22 Shortening Not Bar 83 Not Bar 65 Not Not applicable glissando applicable glissando applicable applicable Accelerando Not Not Not Bars 21-23 Not Not applicable applicable applicable applicable applicable Ritardando Bar 56 Not Bars 47-48, Bar 56 Bars 47-48 Bars 48, 56 applicable 71-72 (more like ritenuto) i) Hand i) Bar 41 ii) Bars 41, ii) Bars 48, i) Bars 65, i) Bar 41 Not displacement 43, 46, 48, 66, 67, 75, 85 ii) Bars 5, 9, applicable ii) Arpeggiation 55, 56, 64, 76 ii) Bars 29, 17, 48, 55, 66, 72, 75, 41, 43, 48, 56, 67 76 63, 64, 67, 68, 71, 72, 75

375 Common Bars For Arpeggiation

R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, L = Lukasiewicz Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 41 3 R, F 2 XS 43 3 R, F 2 XS 48 1 R, C, F, L 4 XS – F; S – R, C; M - L 55 3 R, L 2 XS – R; S – L 56 3 R, L 2 XS – R; S – L 64 1 R, F 2 XS – F; S – R 66 1 R, C 2 S – R; M – C 3 R, C 2 XS – R; S – C 67 1 C, L 1 S 3 F 1 XS 72 3 R, F 2 S 75 4 R, C, F 3 XS – R, F; S – C 76 4 R, C, F 3 XS – R, F; S - C

Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman, L = Lukasiewicz Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 1 L S 9 1 L S 17 1 L S 29 1 F XS 46 1 R XS 63 3 F XS 68 1 F XS

Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Sh = Shebanova Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists Quality 16 4 C, Sh S 41 1 K, F S

376 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Sh = Shebanova Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 1 F M 18 4 Sh S 22 4 Sh S 23 1 K M 57 1 K M 83 1 F XS

Common Bars For Ritardando

C = Cortot, F = Friedman, L = Lukasiewicz, Sh = Shebanova Bar Pianists Quality 47-48 C, F, L, Sh M 56 K, F, Sh S – K, Sh; M - F

Common Bar For Hand Displacement

K – Koczalski, F = Friedman, L = Lukasiewicz Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 41 1 K, L 2 M

Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

F = Friedman Bar Pianist Quality 65 F S 85 F L

Individual Bars For Shortening

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Pianist Quality 65 F Glissando 83 R Glissando

377 Etude Op.25 No.2

Performer/ Koczalski Cortot Paderewski Shebanova Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 66, 67 Anacrusis, bars 66, Anacrusis, bars 66, Bars 66, 68 67 67 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Bar 67 (starts 8va) Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bar 57, 65, 68 Bars 57, 65, 67-69 Bars 48, 57 Bars 57, 68-69 i) Hand i) Bars 1, 66 i) Bar 65 i) Bar 66 i) Bar 66 displacement

Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski, S = Shebanova Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality Pulse/s Anacrusis 4 C, Pa 2 M – C; L – Pa 66 1 K, C, Pa, S 4 S – S; M – K, Pa; L - C 67 1 K, C, Pa 3 S

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski, S = Shebanova Bar Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 57 K, C, Pa, S 4 S 65 K, C 2 S 67-68 K, C, S 3 S – C; M – K, S

Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, Pa = Paderewski, S = Shebanova Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 66 1 K, Pa, S 3 M

378 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 1 K S 65 6 C L

Etude Op.25 No.6

Performer/ Koczalski Cortot Friedman Shebanova Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 10, 15, 22, 26, Bars 27, 42, 45 Bar 1, 27, 35, 43, 45 Bars 22, 42, 49 27, 42, 43, 45 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Bars 17-18 Not applicable

Ritardando Bars 6, 10, 18, 22, Bars 6, 10, 22, 26, Bars 15 Bars 18, 26, 46 26, 34, 42, 60 34, 38 i) Hand i) Bars 27, 49 i) Bars 45, 49, 62, 63 i) Bar 15 Not applicable displacement ii) Bar 31 ii) Chooses not to ii) Arpeggiation arpeggiate in bar 62

Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Shebanova Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 10 3 K 1 M 22 3 K 1 M 8 S 1 XS 27 1 K, C, F 3 S – C, F; M – K 42 1 K, C 2 S – C; M - K 8 S 1 XS 43 1 K, F 2 S 45 1 K, C, F 3 S – K; M – C, F

379 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Shebanova Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 1 F S 15 2 K S 26 5 K S 35 1 F XS 49 1 S S

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Shebanova Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 6 K, C 2 S – C; M - K 10 K, C 2 S – C; M - K 18 K, S 2 XS – K; S - S 22 K, C 2 S – C; M - K 26 K, C, S 3 XS – C; S – S; M - K 34 K, C 2 S – K; M - C

Common Bars For Hand Displacement

Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 49 1 K, C 2 M

Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

Bar Quaver Pianists Quality Pulse/s 15 3 F M 27 1 K M 45 1 C M 62 5 C M 63 1 C L

380 Etude Op.25 No.9

Performer/ Cortot Friedman Paderewski Lukasiewicz Shebanova Form of Rubato Lengthening Bar 41 Bars 1, 15, 33, Bar 8, 10, 16, Bars 1, 51 Bars 23, 33 51 51 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 23-24 Bars 33 (more Bars 8, 16 Bars 24, 32 Bars 8, 16, 24, like ritenuto), (more like (more like 32 50 ritenuto) ritenuto) i) Hand Not applicable ii) Bars 9, 33, i) Bar 51 i) Bar 1 Not applicable displacement 50, 51 ii) Bars 34, 36, ii) Bars 33, 41 ii) Arpeggiation 37, 50, 51

Common Bars For Lengthening

F = Friedman, L = Lukasiewicz, S = Shebanova Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 1 1 F, L 2 S – L; M - F 33 1 S 1 S 2 and 3 F 1 L 51 1 F, Pa, L 3 M – L; L – F, Pa

Individual Bars For Lengthening

C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, S = Shebanova Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 8 2 Pa M 10 3 Pa S 15 1 F M 16 1 Pa L 23 1 S XS 41 1 C XS

381 Common Bars For Arpeggiation

C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, S = Shebanova Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 33 1 F 1 M 2 L 1 M 50 4 F, Pa 2 M 51 1 F, Pa 2 S – Pa; M - F

Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, S = Shebanova Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 9 1 F S 36 2, 3, 4 Pa M 37 1 Pa M 41 3 L S

Common Bars For Ritardando

C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, S = Shebanova Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 8 Pa, S 2 S 16 Pa, S 2 S 24 C, L, S 3 S – C, L; M - S 32 L, S 2 S – S; M – L

Individual Bars For Ritardando

C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, S = Shebanova Bar Pianist Quality 33 F S 50 F S

382 Impromptu Op.29

Performer/ Koczalski Pugno Cortot Turczynski Kenner Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 7, 51, 55, Bars 53, 58, Bars 31, 33, Bars 1, 9, 51, Bars 40, 42, 59, 61, 65, 73, 59, 61, 67, 74 51, 55, 59, 67, 55, 58, 62, 65, 51, 53, 55, 59, 74, 75, 113, 71, 75, 119 67, 71, 74, 75, 61, 65, 66, 67, 117, 119 119 71, 119 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Bar 61 Accelerando Not applicable Bars 22-29, Not applicable Not applicable Bars 62-64, 59-64, 74-79, 77-79 102-110 Ritardando Bars 18, 34, Bars 18, 45, Bars 18, 45, Bars 30, 50, Bars 18, 100 45, 100, 116, 100 100, 116, 120 100, 116 120 i) Hand i) Bars 35, 36, i) Bars 31, 35, i) Bars 38, 39, i) Bars 31, 35, i) Bars 43, 72 displacement 37, 38, 41, 42, 36, 37, 38, 39, 48, 51, 55, 57, 37, 51, 52, 113 ii) Bars 62, 63, ii) Arpeggiation 43, 44, 46, 51, 40, 41, 42, 43, 59, 71, 72, 127 ii) Bars 37, 40, 64 54, 55, 56, 72, 44, 46, 47, 48, ii) Bars 30, 35, 48, 62, 63, 64 76, 91 49, 55, 64, 65, 36, 37, 41, 42, ii) Bars 48, 62, 113 43, 44, 45, 48, 63, 64, 72 ii) Bars 30, 56, 56, 62, 63, 64, 57, 62, 63, 64, 73, 80, 112 65, 66, 72, 112

383 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, Pu = Pugno, C = Cortot, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 31 1 Pu, T 2 S – T; M – Pu 35 3 K, Pu, T 3 M – Pu, T; L – K 36 1 K, Pu 2 S – K; M - Pu 3 K, Pu 2 M 37 3 K, Pu, T 3 S – K, Pu; M – T 38 1 K, Pu 2 S 3 Pu, C 2 S – C; M – Pu 39 3 Pu, C 2 M 41 3 K, Pu 2 S – K; M – Pu 42 1 K, Pu 2 S 3 Pu 1 M 43 3 K, Pu, Ke 3 M 44 1 K, Pu 2 M 3 K, Pu 2 M 46 1 K 1 L 3 Pu, C 2 S – C; M – Pu 48 1, 3 Pu, C 2 M – C; L – Pu 51 1 C, T 2 M – T; L – C 3 K, C 2 S – C; M – K 55 1 K, C 2 XS – K; S – C 3 K, Pu 2 M 72 1 K, Ke 2 S 3 C, Ke 2 S – Ke; M – C 113 1 Pu, T 2 S – Pu; M - T

384 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, Pu = Pugno, C = Cortot, T = Turczynski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 40 1, 3 Pu M 42 1 K M 47 1, 3 Pu M 49 1 Pu S 52 4 T L 54 1 K XS 56 1 K L 57 3 C M 59 1 C M 64 3 Pu M 65 1, 3 Pu M 66 4 Pu XS 71 1 C L 76 1 K S 91 2 K L 127 1 C L

Common Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, Pu = Pugno, C = Cortot, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 30 4 Pu, C 2 S – Pu; M – C 37 3 C, T 2 M – C; T – L 48 1 C 1 M 3 K, T 2 M – K; L – T 56 3 Pu, C 2 M 62 3 K, C, T, Ke 4 M – K, C, Ke; L – T 63 1, 3 K, C, T, Ke 4 1 – M 3 – M – K, C, Ke; L - T 64 1 K, C, T, Ke 4 M 72 3 K, Pu 2 M 112 4 Pu, C 2 S – Pu; M - C

385 Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, Pu = Pugno, C = Cortot, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 35 3 C M 36 1 C M 40 3 T L 41 3 C M 42 3 C M 43 3 C M 44 1, 3 C M 45 3 C M 57 3 Pu L 65 3 Pu M 73 1 C L 80 3 C L

Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, Pu = Pugno, C = Cortot, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 51 1 K, C, T, Ke 4 M 53 1 Pu, Ke 2 XS – Pu; S – Ke 55 1 K, C, T, Ke 4 M 58 1 Pu, T 2 S - Pu; L - T 59 1 K, Pu, C, Ke 4 XS – K; S – Pu, C; M – Ke 61 1 K, Pu, Ke 3 XS – K, Pu; S - Ke 65 1 K, T, Ke 3 S – K; M – T, Ke 66 4 K, Ke 2 XS 67 1 C, Pu, Ke 3 M 3 T 1 M 71 1 C, T, Ke 3 S – T; M – C, Ke 74 1 K, Pu, T 3 L – K, T, Pu 75 1 K, C, T 3 XS – T; M – K, C 119 1 K, T, C, Ke 4 S – Ke; M – K, T, C

386 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 4 T S 7 3 K XS 9 2 T M 31 1 C XS 33 1 C XS 40 3-4 Ke S 42 3-4 Ke S 62 3 T S 113 1 K S 117 1 K S

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, Pu = Pugno, C = Cortot, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Pianists No. of Pianists Quality 18 K, Pu, C, Ke 4 S – K, Pu; M – C, Ke 45 K, Pu, C 3 S – Pu; M – C; L – K 100 K, Pu, T, C, Ke 5 XS – T; S – Pu, K; M – C, Ke 116 K, C, T 3 XS – T; S – K, C 120 K, C 2 S – C; M - K

Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, T = Turczynski Bar Pianist Quality 30 T S 34 K M 50 T S

Common Bars For Accelerando

Pu = Pugno, Ke = Kenner Bar Pianists No. of Pianists Quality 62-64 Pu, Ke 2 M – Ke; L - Pu 77-79 Pu, Ke 2 M – Ke; L - Pu

387 Individual Bars For Accelerando

Pu = Pugno Bar Pianist Quality 22-29 Pu L 102-110 Pu L

Impromptu Op.36

Performer/ Koczalski Cortot Friedman Kenner Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 1, 13 Bars 1, 4, 13, 14, Bars 1, 46, 52, 73, Bars 1, 7, 13, 14, 25, 26, 53, 68 82 25, 26, 29, 61, 67, 73 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 14-15, 38, 60, Bars 18, 27, 37, 72- Bars 18, 72, 81 Bars 37-38, 72, 108 68-69, 72, 74-75, 73 108-110 i) Hand i) Bars 10, 14, 15, i) Bars 10, 14, 15, i) Bars 7, 8, 9, 10, i) Bars 13, 14, 59, displacement 19, 22, 23, 25, 27, 16, 19, 28 13, 14, 23, 25, 43 60, 67, 68 ii) Arpeggiation 28, 68 ii) Bars 10, 22, 37, ii) Bars 7, 13, 101 38, 105, 108

388 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 10 2 F 1 XS 3 K, C 2 S – K; M – C 13 2 F, Ke 2 XS – Ke; M – F 14 2 K, C, F, Ke 4 XS – K; S – C, F; M – Ke 4 C 1 XS 15 4 K, C 2 XS – K; S – C 19 1 K, C 2 S 23 2 K, F 2 XS – K; S – F 3 K 1 XS 25 1 F 1 S 4 C 1 S 28 1 K 1 XS 4 K, C 2 XS 68 1 K, Ke 2 XS 2 K, Ke 2 XS

Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 7 1, 2 F XS 8 2 F XS 9 2 F XS 16 1,4 C 1 - XS; 4 - S 22 3 K XS 27 1, 4 K 1 – S; 4 – XS 43 1 F S 59 4 Ke S 60 1,4 Ke S 67 2 Ke XS

389 Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 1 1 K, C, F, Ke 4 S – C; M – K, F; L - Ke 2 Ke 1 L 13 1 K, Ke 2 XS – K; M – Ke 4 C 1 S 14 1 Ke 1 S 2 Ke 1 S 4 C 1 S 25 1 C, Ke 2 M 26 3 C, Ke 2 S 73 1 F, Ke 2 S – Ke; M – F

Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 4 1 C S 7 1 Ke S 29 1 Ke S 46 4 F S 52 4 F S 53 4 C S 61 1 Ke M 67 1 Ke M 68 4 C M 82 1 F M

390 Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Ke = Kenner Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 18 C, F 2 S – F; M – C 37 C, Ke 2 M 38 K, Ke 2 S – K; M – Ke 72 K, C, F, Ke 4 S – C, F; M – K, Ke 108 K, Ke 2 S – K; M - Ke

Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Ke = Kenner Bar Pianist Quality 14-15 K M 27 C M 68-69 K M 74-75 K S 81 F M

Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 7 3 K S 10 2 C S 13 2 K S 22 2 C S 37 4 C M 38 4 C L 101 2 K XS 105 4 C S 108 4 C S

391 Impromptu Op.66

Performer/ Koczalski Cortot Turczynski Form of Rubato Lengthening Bar 3 Bars 3, 41, 60 Bars 3, 13, 23, 41, 43, 45, 50, 91 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 40, 50, 53, 61, 62, 65, Bars 62, 82 Bars 40, 60, 62 73 i) Hand i) Bars 44, 48, 49, 50, 52, i) Bars 3, 45, 46, 51, 54, i) Bars 60, 61, 91 displacement 53, 56, 57, 58, 60, 61, 63, 53, 59, 60, 62, 65, 77, 78, ii) Bars 35, 113, 129, 138 ii) Arpeggiation 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 82 74, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82 ii) Bars 35, 113, 138 ii) Bar 138 Performer/ Lukasiewicz Kenner Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 3, 43 Bars 3, 13, 17, 25, 41, 42, 43, 50, 67, 79 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Bar 42 Not applicable Ritardando Bars 40, 45, 56, 62, 65 Bars 40, 53, 62, 72, 74, 77, 82 i) Hand i) Bars 46, 48, 49, 52, 54, i) Bars 43, 46, 52, 60, 64, displacement 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 66, 67, 69, 72, 73, 76 ii) Arpeggiation 64 ii) Bar 138 ii) Bar 138

392 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, L = Lukasiewicz, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. of Pianists Quality 44 1 K 1 M 3 K 1 M 46 1 L 1 S 3 C, L, Ke 3 S – L, Ke; M – C 48 1 K, L 2 S – L; M – K 49 1 K, L 2 S – K; M - L 3 K 1 M 52 1 K, L 2 XS – L; S – K 3 Ke 1 M 53 1 K, C 2 S 54 3 C, L 2 S 56 1 K, L 2 S – L; M - K 57 1 L 1 S 3 K 1 M 58 1 K, L 2 S 59 1 C, L 2 XS – C; S – L 60 1 K 1 S 2/3 K, C, L, T, Ke 4 L 61 1 K, T, L 3 XS – T, L; L - K 62 1 K 1 S 3 C 1 XS 63 1 K, L 2 S 64 1 L 1 XS 3 Ke 1 XS 65 1 C 1 XS 4 K 1 S 66 1 K 1 XS 3 K, Ke 2 XS 69 1 K 1 S 3 K, Ke 2 XS – Ke; M – K 72 1 K 1 S 2/3 Ke 1 L 73 1 K, C, Ke 3 XS – Ke; S – C; L – K 76 1 K 1 M 3 Ke 1 XS

393

Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. of Pianists Quality 78 3 K, C 2 S 82 1 K, C 2 S – C; M - K

Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, L = Lukasiewicz, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 3 1 C M 43 1 Ke XS 45 1 C S 50 1 K M 51 1 C M 67 4 Ke S 68 1 K M 70 1 K S 71 1 C M 74 3 K S 77 1 C M 80 1 K M 81 1, 3 K 1 – S; 3 - M 91 1 T XS

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, L = Lukasiewicz, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 40 K, T, L, Ke 4 S 53 K, Ke 2 S 62 K, T, L, C, Ke 5 S – L; M – K, T, C, Ke 65 K, L 2 S – K; M – L 82 C, Ke 2 L

394 Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, L = Lukasiewicz, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Pianist Quality 45 L S 50 K S 56 L M 60 T S 61 K S 72 Ke S 73 K S 74 Ke S 77 Ke S

Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, L = Lukasiewicz, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 3 1 K, C, T, L, Ke 5 XS – C, L; S – K, Ke; M - T 13 1 T, Ke 2 S 41 1 C, T, Ke 3 M – C, Ke; L – T 43 1 T, L, Ke 3 XS – L; S – T, Ke 50 4 T, Ke 2 M

Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, L = Lukasiewicz, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 17 1 Ke S 23 1 T S 25 1 Ke XS 42 1 Ke XS 45 4 Ke S 60 4 C S 67 3 Ke S 79 2 Ke S 91 1 T XS

395 Common Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, L = Lukasiewicz, T = Turczynski, Ke = Kenner Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 35 1 C 1 S 2 C, T 2 S – C; M - T 113 1 C 1 S 2 C, T 2 S – C; M – T 138 1 K, C, L, T, 4 M – C, L; L – T, K, Ke Ke

Mazurka Op.24 No.4

Performer/ Rosenthal Friedman Turczynski Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 6, 7, 8, 12, 16, 19, 56, Bars 5, 6, 8, 10, 14, 16, 20, Bars 6, 21, 22, 23, 24, 29, 62, 63, 64, 66, 72, 74, 76, 38, 40, 100, 101, 123, 124, 30, 31, 32, 37, 55, 56, 62, 89, 90, 116, 118 130 64, 66, 68, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82,84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 91, 99, 100, 105, 108, 115, 142, 143 Shortening Bars 71, 73, 84, 88, 91, 92, Bars 21, 22, 29, 30, 31, 38 Not applicable 93, 94, 106 Accelerando Bars 68-69, 75, 102-103 Not applicable Bars 61-62 Ritardando Bars 4, 11-12, 19, 24, 32, Bars 4, 33, 52, 60, 73-74, Bars 4, 20, 24, 51-52, 66, 43, 52, 60, 74, 89-90, 105, 121-122, 145 74, 80, 88, 90, 113, 122, 113-114, 117-118, 121- 134, 139, 142 122, 131-132, 135-136, 145 i) Hand i) Bars 5, 7, 11, 44, 51, 53, i) Bars 5, 62, 66, 70, 72, i) Bars 12, 75, 79, 81, 83, displacement 54, 55, 56, 74, 83, 90, 106, 75, 135, 142 87, 91, 104, 142 ii) Arpeggiation 113, 114, 118, 119, 121, 128 ii) Bars 6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 19, 32, 38, 40, 43, 51, 57, 60, 70, 82, 86, 88, 100, 101, 102, 113, 115, 132, 136, 137

396 Common Bars For Lengthening

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman, T = Turczynski Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 6 2 R, F, T 3 M 3 R 1 M 8 2 F 1 M 3 R 1 M 16 2 F 1 M 3 R 1 S 56 1 R, T 2 M 62 1 R, T 2 XS 2 R 1 S 64 1 R, T 2 S 2 R 1 XS 66 1 R, T 2 S 2 R 1 XS 72 1 T 1 S 2 R 1 S 74 1 R, T 2 S 76 1 R, T 2 S – R; M – T 100 1 T 1 M 2 F 1 M

397 Individual Bars For Lengthening

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman, T = Turczynski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 1 F M 7 1 R M 10 2 F M 12 1 R M 14 2 F M 19 1 R M 20 2 F M 21 1 T M 22 1 T M 23 1 T M 24 1 T M 29 1 T M 30 1 T M 31 1 T M 32 1 T M 37 1 T M 38 2 F M 40 2 F M 55 3 T S 63 1 R S 68 1 T M 73 1 T S 75 1 T S 79 1 T S 80 1 T M 82 1 T M 84 1 T M 85 1 T M 86 1 T M 87 1 T M 88 1 T L 89 1 R M 90 1 R M

398

Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 91 1 T M 99 1 T M 101 2 F M 105 1 T M 108 1 T M 115 1 T M 116 2 R S 118 1 R S 123 2 F S 124 2 F S 130 2 F S 142 1 T M 143 1 T M

Common Bars For Hand Displacement

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman, T = Turczynski Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 5 1 R, F 2 XS – R; S – F 75 1 T, F 2 XS 83 1 R, T 2 S 142 1 T, F 2 S – F; M - T

Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman, T = Turczynski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 7 1 R XS 11 1 R M 12 1 T S 44 1 R S 51 3 R M 53 2,3 R S 54 3 R XS 55 1 R XS 56 1 R S 62 2 F XS

399 66 2 F XS 70 2 F S 72 2 F S 74 1, 3 R XS 79 1 T S 81 1 T XS 87 1 T S 91 1 T S 104 2 T S 106 1 R XS 113 3 R XS 114 1 R XS 118 1 R M 119 1 R S 121 1 R S 128 2 R S 135 2 F M

Common Bars For Ritardando

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman, T = Turczynski Bar Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 4 R, F, T 3 XS – F; S – T; M - R 24 R, T 2 S 52 R, F, T 3 M 60 R, F 2 S 74 R, F, T 3 S 90 R, T 2 S 113 R, T 2 S 121-122 R, F, T 3 S – F; M – R, T 145 R, F 2 S

400 Individual Bars For Ritardando

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman, T = Turczynski Bar Pianist Quality 11-12 R S 19 R S 20 T M 32 R S 33 F M 43 R S 66 T S 105 R S 117-118 R S 131-132 R M 134 T M 135-136 R M 139 T M 142-143 T L

401 Rosenthal’s Arpeggiation

Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Quality 6 3 S 8 3 M 12 1 M 14 3 S 16 3 S 19 3 S 32 2 M 38 3 S 40 3 XS 43 3 XS 51 2, 3 S 57 1 XS 60 1 M 70 2 M 82 2 S 86 2 M 88 2 S 100 3 S 101 1 XS 113 2 XS 115 3 M 132 1 S 136 1 S 137 2 M

402 Individual Bars for Shortening

R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 21 1 F M 22 1 F M 29 1 F M 30 1 F M 31 1 F M 38 1 F M 71 3 R L 73 3 R L 84 3 R L 88 3 R L 91 3 R L 92 3 R L 93 3 R L 94 3 R L 106 3 R XS

Individual Bars for Accelerando

R = Rosenthal, T = Turczynski Bar Pianist Quality 61-62 T S 68-69 R S 75 R S 102-103 R S

403 Mazurka Op.63 No.3

Performer/ Michalowski Rosenthal Friedman Form of Rubato Lengthening Anacrusis, 7, 24 Anacrusis, Bars 1, 2, 3, 4, Anacrusis, Bars 1, 27, 65, 5, 6, 13, 33, 40, 49, 53, 54, 72 55 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Bars 33, 61-62, 70-73 Bars 70-73 Not applicable Ritardando Bars 13, 31-32, 48, 63-64 Bars 31-32, 39, 62-63 Bars 15, 25, 31-32, 47-48, 61-64, 73-74 i) Hand i) Bars 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, i) Bars 1, 3, 5, 13, 14, 16, i) Bars 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 13, displacement 12, 13, 14, 21, 48, 51, 53, 17, 41, 42, 48, 49, 60, 75 25, 29, 32, 33, 47, 48, 49, ii) Arpeggiation 54, 57, 63, 65, 66, 76 ii) Bars 22, 23, 31, 49, 52, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59, 63, 64, ii) Bars 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 48, 53, 60 65, 66, 76 51, 53, 54, 55, 62, 63, 65, ii) Bars 39, 62 66, 67

404 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 1 1 F 1 S 2 M, R, F 3 S 3 2 M, R, F 3 S 5 2 M, R, F 3 S 6 1 M, F 2 XS – F; S – M 7 2 M, F 2 S 9 2 M, F 2 S 13 1 M, F, R 3 XS – F; M – M, R 2 M 1 M 14 1 M, R 2 S 2 M 1 S 48 1 M, R, F 3 S – R, F; M – M 2 F 1 S – F; M – R 49 1 R, F 2 S – F; M - R 2 F 1 S 51 2 M, F 2 S 53 2 M, F 2 S 55 1 M 1 S 2 F 1 S 57 2 M, F 2 S 65 2 M, F 2 S – F; M – M 66 2 M, F 2 S – F; M – M 76 1 M 1 S 2 F 1 S

405 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 4 1 M S 12 2 M S 16 1 R S 17 1 R M 21 1 M S 25 1 F M 29 1 F S 32 1 F S 33 1 F S 41 3 R S 42 1 R S 54 1, 2 M XS 59 2 F S 60 2 R S 61 1, 3 F S 63 2 M L 75 1 R S

Common Bars For Arpeggiation

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists Quality 53 2 M, R S – R; M - M 62 1 M, F S – M; M - F

406 Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 3 2 M S 5 2 M M 7 2 M S 9 2 M S 10 2 M XS 22 3 R S 23 3 R S 31 3 R S 39 1 F S 48 2 M S 49 2 R S 52 2 R S 54 2, 3 M S 55 2, 3 M S 60 2 R M 63 2 M S 65 2 M L 66 2 M M 67 3 M S

Common Bars For Lengthening

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists Anac- 3 M, R, F 3 M rusis 1 1 F 1 M 2 R 1 S

407 Individual Bars For Lengthening

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 2 2 R M 3 2 R M 4 2 R M 5 2 R M 6 1 R S 7 2 M M 13 2 R S 24 1 M M 27 2 F M 33 1 R S 40 1 R XS 49 2 R L 53 2 R M 54 1 R M 55 2 R S 65 1 F XS

Common Bars For Ritardando

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 31- M, R, F 3 S – M, R; M – F 32 48 M, F 2 M 63 M, R, F 3 S – R; M – M; L - F

408 Individual Bars For Ritardando

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal, F = Friedman Bar Pianist Quality 13 M S 15 F S 25 F S 39 R S 73-74 F M

Common Bars For Accelerando

M = Michalowski, R = Rosenthal Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 70- M, R 2 M – M; L – R 73

Individual Bars For Accelerando

M = Michalowski Bar Pianist Quality 33 M L 61-62 M M

409 Mazurka Op.68 No.2

Performer/ Friedman Smidowicz Olejniczak Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 1, 9, 21, 45, 49, 57 Bars 1, 5, 6, 9, 13, 21, 22, Bars 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 15, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 45, 21, 23, 45, 55, 57 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 8, 37, 55, 63-64 Bars 8, 27-28, 32, 36, 52, Bars 32, 35-36, 40, 63-64 56, 63-64 i) Hand ii) Bars 17, 37 i) Bars 15, 20, 23, 24, 25, i) Bar 21 displacement 26, 27, 28, 45, 47, 51, 59, ii) Bars 17, 18 ii) Arpeggiation 63 ii) Bars 37, 43

Common Bars For Lengthening

F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 1 1 F, S, O 3 S – F, S; M – O 9 1 F, S, O 3 XS – F; M – S, O 21 1 F, S, O 3 M 45 1 F, S, O 3 M – F; L – O, S 49 1 F, S 2 S 57 1 F, S, O 3 S – F; L – S, O

410 Individual Bars For Lengthening

F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 3 3 O M 5 1 S S 6 1 S S 7 3 O M 11 3 O M 13 1 S S 15 3 O S 19 3 O M 20 1 S S 22 1 S S 23 1 S S 24 1 S S 25 1 S S 26 1 S S 27 1 S S 28 1 S S 46 1 S S 47 1 S S 48 1 S S 50 1 S S 51 1 S M 55 3 O L 58 1 S S 59 1 S S 60 1 S S 61 1 S M 62 1 S M 63 1 S L

411

Common Bars For Ritardando

F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, O = Olejniczak Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 8 F, S 2 S 32 S, O 2 S – S; M – O 36 S, O 2 S – S; M - O 63- F, S, O 3 M – F, S; L - O 64

Individual Bars For Ritardando

F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, O = Olejniczak Bar Pianist Quality 27-28 S S 37 F S 40-41 O M 52 S S 56 S S

Common Bars For Arpeggiation

F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists Quality 17 1 F S 3 O S 37 1 F, S S – F; M - S

Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

S = Smidowicz, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 18 3 O S 43 1 S S

412 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

S = Smidowicz, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 15 1 S XS 21 1 O M 20 1 S XS 23 1 S XS 27 1 S XS 45 1 S S 47 1 S S 51 1 S S 59 1 S S 63 1 S S

413 Nocturne Op.15 No.2

Performer/ Michalowski Pugno Turczynski Form of Rubato Lengthening Anacrusis, Bars 1, 8, 10, Anacrusis, Bars 7, 8, 11, Anacrusis, Bars 7, 8, 12, 12, 51, 54 15, 51 15, 23, 48, 52, 54, 56 Shortening Bars 11, 20, 53, 56 Bars 14, 18 Bars 13, 14, 17 Accelerando Not applicable Bars 20-24, 25-42, 54-56 Not applicable Ritardando Bars 14 Not applicable Bar 61 i) Hand i) Bars 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, i) Bars 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, i) Bars 10, 13, 25, 53, 56, displacement 10, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 58 ii) Arpeggiation 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 49, 18, 20, 22, 25, 49, 50, 52, ii) Bars 25, 33, 57 50, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 62 ii) Bars 6, 8, 14, 15, 17, ii) Bars 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 19, 21, 42, 54, 55, 57, 58 15, 18, 20, 21, 25, 49, 54, 56

Performer/ Lukasiewicz Yoffe Thai Son Form of Rubato Lengthening Anacrusis, Bars 7, 10, 12, Anacrusis, Bars 1, 4, 7, 9, Anacrusis, Bars 2, 3, 9, 10, 15, 16, 19, 50, 52, 56 11, 12, 18, 25, 33, 51, 52, 11, 12, 25, 29, 33, 48, 49, 58 50, 51, 52 Shortening Not applicable Bars 4, 8, 17, 20, 21, 53 Bars 6, 13, 53 Accelerando Not applicable Bars 22-23, 31-32 Bars 21-23, 55-56 Ritardando Bar 7-8, 44-48, 54 Bars 16, 44-48 Bar 8 i) Hand i) Bars 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, i) Bars 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, i) Bars 2, 6, 7, 10, 13, 15, displacement 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 24, 25, 15, 21, 24, 56, 57, 60 20, 23, 24, 50, 56, 57 ii) Arpeggiation 49, 50, 51, 53, 54, 55 ii) Bar 57 ii) Bar 57 ii) Bars 6, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 51, 54, 55, 57

414 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

M = Michalowski, Pu = Pugno, T = Turczynski, L = Lukasiewicz, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 1 1 M, Pu 2 S 2 Pu, Y 2 XS – Pu; S – Y 3 Pu 1 S 4 Pu 1 XS 2 1 M, Pu, L 3 S 3 Pu 1 XS 4 Th 1 S 3 1 M, Pu, L 3 S 4 1 M, Pu, L, Y 4 XS – Y; S – Pu, L; M – M 5 1 M, Pu 2 S 2 M, Pu, Y 3 XS – M, Y; S – Pu 3 Pu 1 XS 4 Pu 1 XS 6 1 M, Pu, L, Y 4 S – M, L, Y; M – Pu 2 Pu, Th 2 S 4 Pu 1 S 7 1 Pu, L 2 XS – Pu; S – L 2 M, Th 2 S 4 Pu, Y 2 XS – Y; S – Pu 10 1 M, Pu, L 3 S – Pu; M – M, L 3 Pu 1 XS 4 Pu, T, Th 3 XS 13 1 M, Pu, T, L, Th 5 XS – L; S – M, Pu, T, Th 3 Pu 1 S 4 Y 1 XS 14 2 M, Pu 2 S – Pu; M – M 15 1 Pu 1 M 2 M, Pu, L 3 S – Pu; M – M 3 Pu, L 2 XS – Pu; M - L 4 M, Y, Th 3 XS – M; S – Y, Th 16 1 Pu, L 2 S – Pu; S - L

415

Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 17 1 Pu, L 2 S 2 M, Pu 2 XS 3 Pu 1 XS 4 M, Pu 2 XS – Pu; M – M 18 1 M, Pu, L 3 S – Pu, L; M – M 20 1 M, Pu, Th 3 XS – Th; M – Pu; L – M 21 2 M 1 S 4 Pu, M 2 S 22 1 Pu 1 XS 3 M 1 S 23 3 M, Th 2 S 24 1 M, L, Y 3 XS – Y; M – L 2 Th, Y 2 S 25 1 M, Pu, T, L 3 M 49 1 M, Pu, L 3 S – L; M – M, Pu

2 M, L 2 XS – L; S – M 50 1 M, Pu, L 3 S – L; M – M; L – Pu 3 Pu 1 XS 4 Pu, L, Th 3 XS – Pu, L; S – Th 53 1 M, L 2 S 2 M, L, T 3 XS – L; S – M, T 54 1 M, L 3 S – M; M – L 2 M, Pu 2 S 55 1 Pu, L 2 S 2 M, Pu, L 3 XS – Pu; S – M, L 4 L 1 XS 56 1 Pu 1 S 2 Th 1 S 4 M, T, Y 3 XS – Y; S – M, T 57 2 M, Y, Th 3 S – Y, Th; M – M 4 Pu, Y 2 S 58 1 M, Pu 3 S – Pu; M – M 2 M, T 2 M – M; L - T

416 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

M = Michalowski, Pu = Pugno, T = Turczynski, L = Lukasiewicz, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 8 2 M S 11 1 L M 12 3 Pu S 19 2 M XS 29 1 M XS 51 1 L S 52 1, 3 Pu S 60 1 Y S 62 1 Pu XS

Common Bars For Lengthening

M = Michalowski, Pu = Pugno, T = Turczynski, L = Lukasiewicz, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality Anacrusis 4 M, Pu, T, L, Y, Th 6 S – L, Y, Th; L – M, Pu, T 7 1 Y 1 S 3 Pu, T 2 M – T; L – Pu 4 L 1 S 8 4 M, Pu, T 3 S 9 1 Y, Th 2 S 10 4 M, L, Th 3 S – Th; M – M, L 11 3 Th 1 M 4 Pu, Y 1 M – Y; L - Pu 12 2 M, T, L, Y, Th 5 M 4 M, T 2 M – T; L – M 15 3 Pu, T 2 M – T; L – Pu 4 L 1 M 25 1 Y, Th 2 XS 33 1 Y, Th 2 S 48 4 Y, Th 2 S – Y; M – Th 50 4 L, Th 2 S – L; M – Th 51 3 M, Th 2 S – Th; M – M 4 Pu, Y 2 M – Y; L – Pu

417

Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 52 2 T, L, Y, Th 4 M 54 1 T 1 M – Y; L – Pu 3 M, T 2 M 56 3 T 1 L 4 L 1 S

Individual Bars For Lengthening

M = Michalowski, Pu = Pugno, T = Turczynski, L = Lukasiewicz, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 1 Y XS 2 2 Th S 3 3 Th M 4 4 Y XS 16 4 L S 18 1 Y S 19 4 L S 23 4 T M 29 1 Th XS 49 1 Th S 58 1 Y M

Common Bars For Arpeggiation

M = Michalowski, Pu = Pugno, T = Turczynski, L = Lukasiewicz, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 6 2 M, Pu, L 3 S – M; M – Pu, L 4 M, Pu, L 3 S – M; M – Pu, L 8 1 Pu 1 S 2 M, Pu 2 S 3 Pu 1 S 13 3 Pu, L 2 S 14 2 M, Pu, L 3 S – M, Pu; M – L 4 M 1 S 15 2 L 1 S 4 M, Pu 2 S – M; M – Pu

418

Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 17 2 L 1 M 4 M, L 2 XS – M; M – L 19 2 M, L 2 XS – M; S – L 3 L 1 M 4 L 1 M 20 1 Pu 1 S 2 L 1 S 21 1 Pu 1 XS 2 Pu, L 2 XS – Pu; S – L 4 Pu, L 2 S 25 1 Pu, T 2 M 54 1 L 1 M 2 Pu 1 S 4 M 1 M 57 2 M, T, L, Y, 5 S – L; M – T, Y, Th; L - M Th

Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

M = Michalowski, Pu = Pugno, T = Turczynski, L = Lukasiewicz Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 7 2 Pu S 11 3 L M 12 3 Pu S 15 2 L S 18 2 Pu S 33 1 T XS 42 1 M S 49 3 Pu S 55 2 L S 56 1 Pu XS

419 Common Bars For Shortening

M = Michalowski, Pu = Pugno, T = Turczynski, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 13 2 T, Th 2 M 14 2 Pu, T 2 S – T; M – Pu 3 Pu 1 M 17 3 T, Y 2 S 20 3 M, Y 2 S – Y; M – M 53 1 Y 1 M 3 Y, Th 2 XS – Th; M - Y 4 M 1 L

Individual Bars For Shortening

M = Michalowski, Pu = Pugno, T = Turczynski, L = Lukasiewicz, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 4 1 Y M 6 2 Th XS 8 1 Y S 11 2 M M 18 3, 4 Pu M 21 3 Y M 56 2 M M

Common Bars For Ritardando

T = Turczynski, L = Lukasiewicz, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 8 L, Th 2 M 44- L, Y 2 L 48 61 L, T 2 S

420 Individual Bars For Ritardando

M = Michalowski, L = Lukasiewicz, Y = Yoffe Bar Pianist Quality 14 M S 16 Y M 54 L S

Common Bars For Accelerando

Pu = Pugno, Y = Yoffe, Th = Thai Son Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 20-24 Pu, Y, Th 3 M 54-56 Pu, Th 2 M – Pu; L - Th

Individual Bars For Accelerando

Bar Pianist Quality 25-42 Pu L 31-32 Y S

Prelude Op.28 No.3

Performer/ Koczalski Rosenthal Cortot Switala Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 7, 23, 25 Bars 5, 13, 16, 23, Not applicable Not applicable 25 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bar 25 Bar 25, 31 Bar 32-33 Bar 31 (ritenuto) i) Hand i) Bars 7 i) Bars 3, 14, 16, i) Bars 9, 20 i) Bar 12 displacement ii) Bars 16, 17, 26 17, 20, 26 ii) Bar 26 ii) Arpeggiation

421 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 20 1 R, C 2 XS – C; S - R

Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 3 1 R XS 7 1 K XS 9 1 C XS 12 1 Sw XS 14 1 R XS 16 1 R XS 17 1 R S 26 1 R XS

Common Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Pianists No. Of Crotchet Quality Pianists Pulse/s 26 K, C 2 1 XS – K; M - C

Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 16 1 K S 17 1 K S

422 Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 23 4 K, R 2 XS – K; S – R 25 4 K, R 2 XS – K; S – R

Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 4 R XS 7 4 K XS 13 4 R XS 17 4 R XS

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 25 K, R 2 XS 31 R, Sw 2 S

Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Pianist Quality 18 K XS 32-33 C XS

423 Prelude Op.28 No.6

Performer/ Koczalski Rosenthal Cortot Switala Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, Bars 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, Bars 1, 3, 5, 9, 11, Bars 1, 8, 9, 15, 11, 13, 15, 16 11, 13, 15, 16, 19, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 16, 19, 20 20 20, 21 Shortening Not applicable Bars 1, 3, 9 Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 8, 17 Bar 8, 24 Bars 2, 8, 24-26 Bars 8, 24 i) Hand i) Bars 3, 6, 11, 15, i) Bars 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, i) Bars 5, 11, 13 Not applicable displacement 18, 19, 23 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, ii) Arpeggiation ii) Bar 8 15, 16, 19, 20, 22, 25

Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 1 1 K, R, C, Sw 4 S 3 1 K, R, C 3 S 5 1 K, R, C 3 S 7 5 K, R 2 S 9 1 K, R, C, Sw 4 S 11 1 K, R, C 3 S 13 1 K, R, C 3 S 5 S 15 5 K, R, C, Sw 4 S 19 5 R, C, Sw 3 S 20 5 R, C, Sw 3 S

424 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 8 6 Sw M 11 5, 6 C M 17 2 C S 21 2 C S

Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Quaver Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 3 1 K, R 2 M 3 R 1 S 5 1 R, C 2 XS – R; S – C 3 R 1 M 6 1 K 1 M 5 R 1 S 11 1 K, R, C 3 XS – C; M – K, R 13 1 R, C 2 S – C; M – R 15 1 K 1 XS 5 R 1 M 19 1 K, R 2 XS 5 R 1 M

425 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Quaver Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 1 R XS 2 5, 6 R XS 7 4, 5 R S 8 3 R S 9 1, 3 R S – 3; M - 1 12 4, 5, 6 R S 13 3, 5 R S – 3; M - 5 16 1, 5 R XS 18 5 K XS 20 1, 5 R M 22 1 R S 23 2 K XS 25 1 R XS

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 8 K, R, C, 4 XS – K; S – Sw; M – R, C Sw 24 R, C, Sw 3 XS – R; S – Sw; M – C

Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot Bar Pianist Quality 2 C S 17 K M

426 Prelude Op.28 No.7

Performer/ Koczalski Rosenthal Cortot Switala Form of Rubato Lengthening Anacrusis Anacrusis Anacrusis, Bars 2, Anacrusis, Bars 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 9, 11, 15 Shortening Bars 4, 6, 8, 10, Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable 12, 14 Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 11-12, 15-16 Bars 11-12, 15-16 Bars 15-16 Bars 13-14, 15-16 i) Hand i) Bars 3, 5, 7, 9, i) Bars 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, ii) Bar 8 Not applicable displacement 11, 13 11, 13, 14, 15 ii) Arpeggiation ii) Bars 4, 7, 12, 15

Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 3 1 K, R 2 S 5 1 K, R 2 S 7 1 K, R 2 S – K; M - R 9 1 K, R 2 M 11 1 K, R 2 S – K; M – R 13 1 K, R 2 S – R; M - K 2 R 1 S

Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

R = Rosenthal Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 1 R S 14 1 R M 15 1 R M

427 Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 11-12 K, R 2 S – K; M – R 15-16 K, R, C, Sw 4 XS – K; M – R, C, Sw

Individual Bars For Ritardando

Sw = Switala Bar Pianist Quality 13-14 Sw M

Common Bar For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists Anacrusis 3 K, R, C, Sw 4 S – K, R, Sw; M - C

Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 1 Sw S 2 3 C S 4 3 C S 6 3 C S 8 3 C S 9 1 Sw S 10 3 C S 11 1 Sw S 12 3 C S 15 1 Sw S

428 Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 4 3 R S 7 3 R S 8 1 C M 12 1 R L 15 2 R S

Individual Bars For Shortening

K = Koczalski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 4 3 K M 6 3 K M 8 3 K M 10 3 K M 12 3 K M 14 3 K M

429 Prelude Op.28 No.15

Performer/ Koczalski Cortot Friedman Switala Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 1, 5, 10, 11, Bars 1, 5, 7, 10, 13, Bars 1, 5, 11, 14, Bars 1, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 14, 20, 23, 24, 27, 20, 23, 35, 41, 79 14, 17, 19, 20, 23, 21, 23, 27, 36, 37, 36, 37, 40, 41, 56, 55, 79 44, 45, 52, 53, 63, 57, 63, 79 71, 72, 79, 81 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 4, 11, 15, 17, Bar 4, 8, 17, 23, 70, Bars 19, 75 Bars 8, 19, 75, 81 63, 73-75 72-75 i) Hand i) Bars 9, 10, 11, i) Bars 4, 9, 71, 72, i) Bars 4, 8, 9, 10, i) Bars 5, 10, 11, displacement 14, 16, 21, 22, 25, 73 14, 20, 23, 76 12, 13 ii) Arpeggiation 26, 27, 64, 65, 72, ii) Bars 2, 3, 4, 7, ii) Bars 9, 13, 22, 77, 78, 79, 84, 85, 8, 9, 13, 16, 17, 18, 23 86, 87, 88 19, 22, 23, 36, 37, ii) Bars 3, 6, 7, 22, 52, 53, 59, 60, 62, 23, 61, 62, 63, 73 64, 65, 67, 68, 74, 75, 78, 79, 85, 86, 88

430 Common Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 3 1 C 1 M 2 K 1 S 7 1 K, C 2 S – K; M - C 2 K 1 S 9 4 C, F 2 S – F; M – C 13 2 C, F 2 M 4 F 1 S 22 1 K, C, F 3 XS – K, F; M – C 2 K, F 2 XS 23 1 K, C 2 S 3 K, F 2 XS – K; S – F 4 C 1 XS 62 1 K, C 2 XS

431 Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot Bar Crotchet Pianist Quality Pulse/s 2 1 C XS 4 1 C M 6 1 K S 8 1 C S 16 4 C XS 17 3 C S 18 2, 3, 4 C M 19 1 C M 36 3 C S 37 3 C S 52 3 C S 53 3 C S 59 1 C XS 60 1, 3 C XS 61 1 K S 63 1 K XS 64 3 C XS 65 2 C XS 67 1 C S 68 1, 2, 3 C XS 73 1 K S 74 1 C XS 75 1 C XS 78 1 C S 79 1 C S 85 1 C S 86 1 C M 88 1 C S

432 Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 1 1 K, C, F, Sw 4 M 5 1 K, C, F 3 XS – C, F; S - K 10 1 K, C, Sw 3 XS – K; S – Sw; M - C 11 1 K, F, Sw 3 XS – F; S – K, Sw 14 1 K, C, F, Sw 3 S 17 1 K, Sw 2 XS – Sw; S – K 20 1 K, C, F, Sw 4 S 23 4 K, C, F, Sw 4 XS – K, C; S – F, Sw 27 1 K, C 2 XS 36 3 K, C 2 S 37 3 K, C 2 S 41 3 F 1 S 4 C 1 S 63 1 K 1 XS 3 C 1 XS 79 4 K, C, F, Sw 4 M

433

Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 9 1, 4 Sw XS 13 1 C XS 15 1 K XS 16 1 K XS 19 1 Sw XS 21 1 K XS 24 1 C XS 35 1 F XS 40 1 C XS 44 1 K XS 45 3 K S 52 3 K M 53 3 K M 55 1 Sw XS 56 1 C S 57 4 C M 71 1 K S 72 1 K S 81 3 K XS

434 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 4 3 C, F 2 XS 9 1 K 1 M 2 C, F 2 XS – C; S – F 10 1 K, F 2 S 3 F, Sw 2 XS – F; M – Sw 11 1 Sw 1 XS 4 K 1 XS 14 1 K, F 2 XS 3 K 1 XS 72 1 C 1 XS 3 K 1 S

435 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 1 Sw S 8 3 F XS 12 1 Sw S 13 1 Sw M 16 1 K S 20 2 F S 21 1 K S 22 1 K S 23 3 F S 25 1 K S 26 4 K XS 27 1 K S 65 1, 2 K S 71 3 C S 73 1 C XS 76 2 F S 77 4 K S 78 1, 2 K XS – 2; S - 1 79 1, 2 K S 84 3 K S 85 3 K S 86 1, 2, 3, 4 K XS 87 1 K XS 88 1 K XS

436 Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 4 K, C 2 S 8 C, Sw 2 S – Sw; M – C 17 K, C 2 XS – K; M – C 19 F, Sw 2 S – F; M – Sw 73- K, C 2 L 75 75 F, Sw 2 S – Sw; M - F

Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Pianist Quality 11 K S 15 K S 23 C S 63 K S 70 C M 81 Sw M

437 Prelude Op.28 No.19

Performer/ Koczalski Cortot Friedman Switala Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 16, 62 Bars 21, 24, 51, 57, Anacrusis, bars 1, Anacrusis, bars 1, 59, 60 21, 22, 32, 54, 62 5, 6, 8, 17, 19, 22, 25, 26, 32, 43, 53, 54, 61, 62 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Bars 21-23, 29-32, 65-67 Ritardando Bars 15-16, 32 Bars 16, 32, 48, 64 Bar 32 Bars 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64, 68 i) Hand i) Bars 13, 15, 16, i) Bars 1, 26, 28 i) Bars 29, 32, 45, i) Bars 5, 17 displacement 24, 33, 54, 62 ii) Bar 70 49, 54, 62 ii) Arpeggiation ii) Bar 70

Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists Anacrusis 3 C, F, Sw 2 S 1 1 F, Sw 2 M 21 2 C 1 S 3 F 1 S 22 1 F, Sw 2 S – Sw; M – F 32 3 F, Sw 2 M 54 1 F, Sw 2 S 62 1 K, F, Sw 3 XS – K; M – F, Sw

438 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 1 Sw XS 6 1 Sw XS 8 1 Sw S 16 1 K S 17 1 Sw S 19 1 Sw S 24 1 C XS 25 1 Sw S 26 1 Sw S 43 1 Sw S 51 2, 3 C M 53 3 Sw XS 57 2 C S 59 2 C M 60 1 C M 61 3 Sw XS

Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Pianists No. Of Crotchet Quality Pianists Pulse/s 54 K, F 2 1 XS – K; S – F 62 K, F 2 1 XS – K; S - F

439 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 1 1 C XS 5 1 Sw XS 13 1 K XS 15 1 K XS 16 1 K S 17 1 Sw XS 24 1 K S 25 1 Sw XS 26 1 C XS 28 1 C XS 29 1 F S 32 3 F S 33 1 K XS 43 1 Sw S 49 1 F S

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Sw = Switala Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 15- K, C, Sw 3 XS – C; S – Sw; M – K 16 32 K, C, F, 3 XS – K, F; S – Sw; M – C Sw 48 C, Sw 2 S – Sw; M – C 64 C, Sw 2 M

440 Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Sw = Switala Bar Pianist Quality 8 Sw XS 24 Sw XS 40 Sw XS 56 Sw XS 68 Sw XS

Individual Bars For Accelerando

Sw = Switala Bar Pianist Quality 21-23 Sw S 29-32 Sw M 65-67 Sw S

441 Waltz Op.18

Comparative Tables

Performer/ Koczalski Friedman Paderewski Lukasiewicz Drewnowski Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 26, 27, Beat 1 of bars Bars 26, 27, Bars 16, 20, Bars 37, 69, 28, 34, 35, 36, 5-20, 35, 37- 28, 34, 35, 36, 67, 68, 117, 120, 166, 168, 40, 58, 59, 60, 47, 67, 117, 58, 59, 60, 66, 164, 165, 173, 174, 178, 232, 66, 67, 68, 69, 143, 165-170, 67, 68, 120, 211, 212, 219, 306 165, 166, 174, 172-180, 189- 128, 160, 165- 306 176, 210, 211, 201, 211, 212, 170, 172-180, 212, 218, 219, 219-232, 259- 210, 211, 212, 220, 274, 278, 272, 275-277, 218, 219, 220, 306 279-282, 306 232, 306 Shortening Not applicable Beats 2 and 3 Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable of bars 5-20, 27, 35, 37-48, 67, 117, 165- 180, 189-201, 211, 212, 219- 232, 282 Accelerando Bars 45-46, Bars 125-128 Bars 245-258 Not applicable Bars 255-258 165-188, 251- 258, 279-286

442

Performer/ Koczalski Friedman Paderewski Lukasiewicz Drewnowski Form of Rubato Ritardando Bars 58-60, Riten – Bar Bars 18-19, Bars 67-68, Bars 35-36, 131-132, 165, 101, 143 43-44, 50-51, 300-303 67-68, 97-98, 218-220, 237 82-84, 130- 131-132, 148, Riten – Bars 132, 161-164, 163-164, 166, 26-28, 34-36, 203-204, 235- 168, 172, 176, 66-68, 101, 237 300-303 165, 210-212, Riten – Bars 273 26-28, 34-36, 58-60, 66-68, 210-212, 217- 219 i) Hand i) Bars 8, 16, i) Bar 153, i) Bars 16, 40, i) Bars 20, ii) Bar 232 displacement 40, 47, 69, 71, 166, 232 48, 79, 117, 117, 121, 161, ii) Arpeggiation 73, 77, 79, 81, ii) Bar 152, 149, 165, 170, 164, 165, 219 101, 103, 105, 159 174, 234, 270 ii) Bars 52, 109, 111, 113, ii) Bars 69, 73, 232, 303 117, 125, 129, 75, 120, 121, 149, 157, 166, 128, 129, 152, 170, 200, 232 153, 160, 161, ii) Bar 116 204, 226, 232, 236, 237, 303, 305

443 Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 16 1 F, L 2 S 20 1 F, L 2 S 26 1 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 27 1 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 28 1 K, Pa 2 S - K; M – Pa 34 1 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 35 1 F, Pa 2 M – Pa; L – F 36 1 K, Pa 2 XS – K; M - Pa 37 1 F, Dr 2 S – F, Dr 40 1 F 1 S 3 K 1 XS 66 1 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 67 1 K, F, Pa, L 4 S – K, F, L; M – Pa 68 1 K, Pa, L 3 S – K, L; M – Pa 69 1 K, Dr 2 XS 117 1 F, L 2 XS – L; M – F 120 1 Pa, Dr 2 S 165 1 K, F, Pa, L 4 S 166 1 K, F, Pa, Dr 4 S 167 1 F, Pa 2 S 168 1 F, Pa, Dr 3 S 169 1 F, Pa 2 S 170 1 F, Pa 2 S 172 1 F, Pa 2 S 173 1 F, L 2 S 174 1 K, F, Pa, Dr 4 S – K, F, Dr; M – Pa 175 1 F, Pa 2 S 176 1 K, F, Pa 3 S 177 1 F, Pa 2 S 178 1 F, Pa, Dr 3 S 179 1 F, Pa 2 S 180 1 F, Pa 2 S 210 1 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 211 1 K, F, Pa, L 4 S – F, L; M – K, Pa 212 1 K, F, Pa, L 4 S

444 218 1 K, Pa 2 M 219 1 K, F, Pa, L 4 S – L; M – F, Pa 220 1 K, F, Pa 3 M 232 1 F, Pa, Dr 3 M – Pa, Dr; L - F 306 1 Dr 1 M 3 K, F, Pa, L 4 M

445 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 1 F S 6 1 F S 7 1 F S 8 1 F S 9 1 F S 10 1 F S 11 1 F S 12 1 F S 13 1 F S 14 1 F S 15 1 F S 17 1 F S 18 1 F S 19 1 F S 38 1 F S 39 1 F S 41 1 F S 42 1 F S 43 1 F S 44 1 F S 45 1 F S 46 1 F S 47 1 F S 143 1 F M 164 1 L S 189 1 F S 190 1 F S 191 1 F S 192 1 F S 193 1 F S 194 1 F S 195 1 F S 196 1 F S 197 1 F S 198 1 F S 199 1 F S

446 200 1 F S 201 1 F S 221 1 F M 222 1 F M 223 1 F M 224 1 F M 225 1 F S 226 1 F S 227 1 F S 228 1 F S 229 1 F S 230 1 F S 231 1 F S 259 1 F S 260 1 F S 261 1 F S 262 1 F S 263 1 F S 264 1 F S 265 1 F S 266 1 F S 267 1 F S 268 1 F S 269 1 F S 270 1 F S 271 1 F S 272 1 F S 274 1 K S 275 1 F S 276 1 F S 277 1 F S 278 1 K S 279 1 F S 280 1 F S 281 1 F S 282 1 F S

447 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianists No. Of Crotchet Quality Pianists Pulse/s 16 K, Pa 2 1 XS 40 K, Pa 2 1 XS 48 K, Pa 2 1 XS 79 K, Pa 2 1 M 117 K, Pa, L 3 1 XS 149 K, Pa 2 1 S – K; M – Pa 165 Pa, L 2 1 M 166 K, F 2 1 S – F; M – K 170 K, Pa 2 1 XS 232 K, F 2 1 L

448 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 8 1 K XS 20 1 L XS 69 1 K S 71 1 K M 73 1 K M 77 1 K M 81 1 K M 101 1 K M 103 1 K M 105 1 K M 109 1 K M 111 1 K M 113 1 K M 121 1 L XS 125 1 K S 129 1 K M 153 1 F XS 157 1 K XS 161 1 L XS 164 1 L L 200 1 K XS 204 1 Pa M 219 1 L XS 234 3 Pa S 270 1 Pa S

449 Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 67-68 K, L, Dr 3 S – L, Dr; M – L 101 K, F 2 S 131-132 K, Pa, Dr 3 S – K, Dr; M – Pa 163-164 Pa, Dr 2 S – Dr; M – Pa 210-212 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 218-219 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 237 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa; L - F 300-303 F, L, Dr 3 S – F; M – L; L – Dr

Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianist Quality 18-19 Pa S 35-36 Dr S 43-44 Pa XS 50-51 Pa M 58-60 K S 82-84 Pa M 97-98 Dr S 143 F M 148 Dr S 165 K S 166 Dr S 172 Dr S 176 Dr S 273 K S

450 Common Bars For Arpeggiation

F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 152 1 F, Pa 2 XS – F; M – Pa 232 1 Pa, L, Dr 2 XS – Pa; S – L, Dr 303 1 Pa, L 2 S – Pa; M – L

Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 52 1 L XS 69 1 Pa M 73 1 Pa S 75 1 Pa XS 116 1 K S 120 1 Pa M 121 1 Pa S 128 1 Pa M 129 1 Pa S 153 1 Pa S 159 1 F XS 160 1 Pa M 161 1 Pa S 204 1 Pa M 236 1 Pa S 237 1 Pa M 305 1 Pa XS

451 Common Bars For Accelerando

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 255-258 K, Pa, Dr 3 S – K, Pa; M - Dr

Individual Bars For Accelerando

K = Koczalski, F = Friedman, Pa = Paderewski, L = Lukasiewicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianist Quality 45-46 K M 125-128 F XS 165-188 K XS 279-286 K M

452 Waltz Op.34 No.2

Performer/ Koczalski Cortot Friedman Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 17, 19, 21, 26-35, 53- Bars 4, 7, 17, 20-22, 25-35, Bars 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 55, 57-64, 67, 69-74, 76- 37-52, 61, 69-75, 85, 87- 12, 14, 25, 26, 37, 52, 78, 83, 87-90, 94-104, 110, 91, 93-119, 120, 137-149, 87,153, 154, 156, 159, 161, 121-132, 135, 137-142, 153-168, 121-129, 131, 163, 169, 173, 177, 181, 133-148 189, 192, 194, 195 185, 189, 190, 195 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Bars 6-7 Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 7-8, 15-16, 34-36, 52, Bars 7-8, 15-16, 31-32, 35- Bars 8, 14-16, 31-32, 35- 67-68, 83-84, 99-100, 103- 36, 59-60, 75-76, 103-104, 36, 44, 59-60, 67-69, 82- 104, 203-204 123, 127, 136, 143-144, 84, 159-160, 167, 172, 176, 151-152, 160, 167, 180, 183-184, 188, 195-196, 184, 195-196, 203-204 203-204 i) Hand i) Bars 17, 19, 21, 27, 29, i) Bars 17, 58, 59, 65, 74, i) Bars 17, 19, 21, 29, 57, displacement 33, 35, 36, 52, 53, 54, 57, 85, 103, 119, 121, 126, 58, 62, 69, 73-74, 76, 77 ii) Arpeggiation 58, 60, 61, 62, 64, 68, 69, 129, 137 70, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 80, ii) Bars 9, 106, 108, 112, 84, 85, 87, 89, 97, 98, 99, 116, 118, 161, 189, 197 100, 101, 103, 104, 120, 121, 122, 125, 126, 128, 129, 130, 133, 136, 137, 141, 142, 144, 145, 146, 152, 179, 183, 185

453

Performer/ Smidowicz Drewnowski Olejniczak Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 5, 17, 21, 23, 25, 53, Bars 25, 26, 38, 40, 42, 44, Bars 1, 5, 7, 13, 17-33, 37, 58, 65, 69, 71, 74, 81, 85, 46, 48, 50, 94, 103, 106, 38, 41, 42, 44, 46, 48, 50, 91, 93, 105, 121, 126, 133, 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, 53, 58, 61, 65, 69, 70, 74, 137, 139, 142, 147, 149, 118, 137, 139, 143 77, 81, 85-90, 94, 96, 101- 159, 160, 173, 174, 177, 104, 106, 108, 110, 112, 181, 185, 195 114, 116, 118, 121, 124, 133, 137, 140, 142, 145, 147, 157, 169, 173, 177 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Bars 39, 41, 43, 45 Accelerando Bars 85, 88, 94 Bars 169-172 Not applicable Ritardando Bars 7-8, 14-16, 31-32, 35- Bars 8, 15-16, 24, 32-36, Bars 7-8, 15-16, 32, 35-36, 36, 51-52, 67-68, 71, 75, 52, 60, 75-76, 103-104, 52, 60, 67-68, 76, 83-84, 83, 100, 103, 127, 135, 120, 135-136, 143-144, 103-104, 136, 151-152, 151, 159-160, 167-168, 151-152 160, 167-168, 176, 184- 172, 180, 184-188, 195-196 186, 196 i) Hand i) Bars 17, 19, 20, 21, 25, i) Bars 53, 64, 68, 69, 76, i) Bars 17, 28, 29, 57, 73, displacement 27, 36, 53, 54, 69, 77, 78, 84, 85, 87, 89, 121, 136, 75, 85, 87, 89, 93, 101, ii) Arpeggiation 85, 87, 91, 93, 95, 100, 137, 144, 152, 179 121, 125, 126, 128, 133, 121, 122, 131, 137, 145, 149 180 ii) Bars 17, 19, 21, 25, 27, 28, 32, 35, 67, 70, 83, 85, 87, 89, 100, 103, 123, 126, 127, 128, 135, 143, 151, 180

454 Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, Dr = Drewnowski, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 1 1 F, O 2 S 4 3 C, F 2 XS 5 1 S, O 2 XS 7 2 C, F, O 3 XS 17 1 K, C, S, O 4 S 19 1 K, O 2 XS – O; S - K 20 1 C, O 2 XS – C; S – O 21 1 K, C, S, O 4 S – K, C; M – O 22 1 C, O 2 XS 23 1 S, O 2 S 25 1 C, F, S, Dr, O 5 S 26 1 K, C 2 S 2 F, Dr, O 3 S – Dr; M – F, O 27 1 K, C, O 3 XS – C; S – K 28 1 K, C 2 S 2 O 1 S 29 1 K, C, O 3 S 30 1 K, C, O 3 XS – C; S – K; M – O 31 1 K, C, O 3 XS – C; S – K 32 1 K, C, O 3 XS – C; S – K, O 33 1 K, C, O 3 S – C; M – K, O 34 1 K, C 2 S 35 1 K, C 2 XS – C; S – K 37 1 C, O 2 XS – C; S – O 38 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 S – Dr; M – O 40 1 C, Dr, O 3 XS – C; S – Dr; M – O 42 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 S 44 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 S 46 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 S 48 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 S

455 50 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 S 52 1 C 1 XS 2 F 1 S 53 1 K, S, O 3 XS 58 1 K, S 2 S 3 O 1 S 61 1 K, C, O 3 XS – C; S – K, O 65 1 S, O 2 XS 69 1 K, C, S, O 4 XS – K, C, O; L - S 70 1 K, C, O 3 XS 71 1 K, C, S 3 XS – K, C; M - S 72 1 K, C 2 XS 73 1 K, C 2 XS 74 1 K, C, S, O 4 XS 77 1 K, O 2 XS – K; S – O 81 1 S, O 2 XS – K; S – O 85 1 C, O 2 S 87 1 K, C, F, O 4 XS – C; S – K, F, O 88 1 K, C, O 3 S 89 1 K, C, O 3 S 90 1 K, C, O 3 XS 91 1 C, S 2 XS – C; S - S 93 1 C, S 2 XS – C; S - S 94 1 K, C 2 S – K; M – C 2 Dr, O 2 S 95 1 K, C 2 XS 96 1 K, C, O 3 S – K, O; M – C 97 1 K, C 2 S 98 1 K, C 2 S 99 1 K, C 2 S 100 1 K, C 2 S – K; M – C 101 1 K, C, O 3 XS – C; S – K, O 103 1 K, C, Dr, O 4 S – K, Dr, O; M – C 104 1 K, C, O 3 XS 106 1 C 1 S 2 Dr, O 2 S 108 1 C 1 S 2 Dr, O 2 S 110 1 K, C 2 XS

456 2 Dr, O 2 S 112 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 S 114 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr 1 XS 116 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 XS – Dr; S – O 118 1 C 1 XS 2 Dr, O 2 S 121 1 K, C, S, O 4 S – S, O; M - K, C 122 1 K, C 2 XS – K; S – C 123 1 K, C 2 S 124 1 K, C 2 XS 125 1 K, C 2 XS 126 1 K, C, S 3 XS 127 1 K, C 2 XS 128 1 K, C 2 XS – C; S - K 129 1 K, C 2 XS – C; S – K 131 1 K, C 2 S 133 1 S, O 2 S 137 1 K, C, S, Dr 4 S 138 1 K, C 2 XS – K; S – C 139 1 K, C, Dr 3 XS – K; S – C, Dr 2 S 1 S 140 1 K, C 2 XS 141 1 K, C 2 XS 142 1 K, C, S, O 4 XS – K, C; S – S, O 143 1 C, Dr 2 S 144 1 K, C 2 XS – C; S - K 145 1 K, C, O 3 XS – K, C; S – O 146 1 K, C 2 XS 147 1 K, C, O 3 XS – K; S – C, O 2 S 1 XS 148 1 K, C 2 XS – K; S – C 149 1 C, S 2 S 153 1 C 1 M 3 F 1 S 154 1 C 1 XS 3 F 1 S 156 3 C, F 2 XS

457 157 1 C, O 2 S 160 1 C, S 2 S 2 S 1 S 161 1 C 1 S 3 F 1 S 163 1 C 1 S 3 F 1 S 169 1 O 1 S 2 F 1 S 173 1 F, O 2 S 2 S 1 S 177 1 F, S, O 3 S 181 1 F, S 2 S 185 1 F, S 2 S 189 1 C 1 S 3 F 1 S 195 2 C, F, S 3 S

458 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, Dr = Drewnowski, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 2 3 F S 3 3 F S 9 3 F S 10 3 F S 11 3 F S 12 3 F S 13 1 O S 14 3 F S 18 1 O S 24 1 O S 39 1 C XS 41 1 C XS 43 1 C XS 45 1 C XS 47 1 C XS 49 1 C XS 51 1 C XS 54 1 K XS 55 1 K XS 57 1 K XS 59 1 K XS 60 1 K S 62 1 K XS 63 1 K S 64 1 K XS 67 1 K XS 75 1 C S 76 1 K S 78 1 K XS 83 1 K S 86 1 O S 105 1 S S 107 1 C S 109 1 C XS 111 1 C XS 113 1 C XS

459 115 1 C XS 117 1 C XS 119 1 C S 120 2 C S 130 1 K XS 132 1 K XS 135 1 K S 155 1 C S 158 1 C S 159 2 S S 162 1 C S 164 1 C S 165 1 C S 166 1 C S 167 1 C S 168 1 C S 174 1 S S 178 1 O S 190 3 F S 192 3 C S 194 3 C S

460 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, Dr = Drewnowski, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 17 1 K, C, F, S, O 5 XS – C, O; S – K, F; L – S 19 1 K, F, S 3 XS – F; S – K; L – S 21 1 K, F, S 3 S – F; M – K, S 27 1 K, S 2 S 29 1 K, F, P 3 XS – O; S – K, F 36 1 K, S 2 S – K; M – S 53 1 K, S, Dr 3 S – K, Dr; L – S 54 1 K, S 2 S 57 1 K, F 2 S 58 1 K, F 2 S 62 1 K, F 2 S 64 1 K, Dr 2 S 68 1 K, Dr 2 XS – Dr; S – K 69 1 K, F, S, Dr 4 XS – F; S – K, Dr; L - S 73 1 K, F, O 3 XS – F, O; S – K 74 1 K, C, F 3 S – C, F; M – K 76 1 K, F, Dr 2 S – F; M – K 77 1 K, F, S 3 XS – F; S - K 84 1 K, Dr 2 M 85 1 K, C, S, Dr, O 5 S – K, C, O, Dr; M - S 87 1 K, S, Dr, O 4 XS – O; S – K; M – S, Dr 89 1 K, Dr, O 3 S – O; M – K, Dr 93 1 S, O 2 S – O; M - S 100 1 K, S 2 S 101 1 K, O 2 S – O; M - K 103 1 K 1 S 3 C 1 XS 121 1 K, C, S, Dr, O 5 S – O; M – K, C, Dr; L - S 122 1 K, S 2 S 125 1 K, O 2 XS – O; M – K 126 1 K, C, O 3 S – C, O; M – K 128 1 K, O 2 S – O; M – K 129 1 K, C 2 S – C; M – K 136 1 K, Dr 2 S – Dr; M - K

461

Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 137 1 K, C, S 3 S – K, C; L – S 144 1 K, Dr 2 S – Dr; M – K 145 1 K, S 2 S – K; M – S 152 1 K, Dr 2 M 179 3 K, Dr 2 S – Dr; M – K

462 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, Dr = Drewnowski, O = Olejniczak Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 25 1 S S 28 1 O XS 33 1 K M 35 1 K M 52 2 K S 60 1 K M 61 1 K M 65 1 C S 70 1 K S 75 2 O XS 78 1 K S 80 1 K XS 91 1 S XS 95 1 S M 97 1 K M 98 1 K S 99 1 K S 104 1 K S 120 2 K XS 131 2 S XS 133 1 K M 141 1 K M 142 1 K M 146 1 K M 180 3 S S 183 3 K S 185 1 K M

463 Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, Dr = Drewnowski, O = Olejniczak Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 7-8 K, C, F, S, Dr, O 6 XS – K; S – C, F, S, Dr, O 15-16 K, C, F, S, Dr, O 6 S – K, C, O; M – F, S, Dr 31-32 C, F, S, O 4 S – C, F; M – S, O 35-36 K, C, F, S, Dr, O 6 S – K, C, F, Dr; M – S, O 52 K, S, Dr, O 4 S – K, Dr; M – S, O 59-60 C, F, S, Dr, O 5 S – C, S, Dr, O; M – F 67-68 K, F, S, O 4 S – K, S; M – F, O 75-76 C, Dr 2 S – C; M – Dr 83-84 K, F, S, O 4 S 99-100 K, S 2 XS – K; M – S 103-104 K, C, S, Dr, O 5 S – K, C, Dr; M – S, O 127 C, S 2 XS – C; S – S 136 C, S, Dr, O 4 S 143-144 C, Dr 2 S – C; M – Dr 151-152 C, S, Dr, O 4 XS – C; S – S; M – Dr, O 160 C, F, S, O 4 S – C, S, O; M – F 167 C, F, S, O 4 S - C; M – F, S, O 172 F, S 2 S 176 F, O 2 S – F; M – O 184 C, F, S, O 4 S – C; M – F, O; L – S 194-196 C, F, S, O 4 S – C, S; M – F, O 203-204 K, C, F, S, O, Dr 3 S – K, O, Dr; M – C, F; L - S

Individual Bars For Ritardando

C = Cortot, F = Friedman, S = Smidowicz, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianist Quality 24 Dr XS 71 S XS 120 Dr S 123 C XS 188 F M

464 Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

C = Cortot, S = Smidowicz Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality

9 1 C XS

17 2 S M

19 2 S M

21 2, 3 S L

25 2 S M

27 2 S M

28 3 S XS

32 32 S M

35 3 S XS

67 3 S S 70 3 S S 103 3 S L 106 3 C XS 108 3 C XS 112 3 C S 116 3 C S 118 2 C XS 123 2 S M 126 3 S S 127 2 S M 128 3 S M 135 3 S M 143 2 S S 151 3 S M 161 1 C XS 180 2 S XS 189 1 C S 197 1 C XS

465 Waltz Op.64 No.1

Performer/ Koczalski Cortot Friedman Drewnowski Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 8, 9, 10, 11, Bars 8, 9, 10, 11, Bars 9, 10, 11, 16, Bars 9, 10, 11, 17, 16, 17, 18, 19, 82, 16, 17, 18, 19, 37, 17, 18, 19, 39, 40, 18, 19, 37, 53, 56, 83, 88, 89, 90, 91 40, 48, 81, 82, 83, 53, 81, 83, 89, 91, 63, 64, 81, 82, 83, 88, 89, 90, 91 104, 120 89, 90, 91 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Bar 40 Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 20, 35-36, 51- Bars 36, 44, 52, 60, Bars 51-52 Bars 35-36, 44, 52, 52, 58-59, 108, 68, 108, 120-121 60, 64, 68, 120-121 120-121 i) Hand i) Bars 9, 11, 17, i) Bars 40, 48 i) Bar 37 i) Bars 43, 53 displacement 19, 21, 39, 40, 42, ii) Bar 121 ii) Bars 21, 77, ii) Arpeggiation 43, 48, 64, 67, 83, 109, 121, 123 89, 91 ii) Bar 121

466 Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 8 3 K, C 2 XS – C; S – K 9 1 K, C, F 3 S 10 3 K, C, F, 4 XS – F; S – K, C, Dr Dr 11 1 K, C, F, 4 S Dr 16 3 K, C, F 3 XS – C; S – K, F 17 1 K, C, F, 4 S Dr 18 3 K, C, F, 4 S Dr 19 1 K, C, F, 4 S Dr 40 1 C, F 2 S 53 1 F, Dr 2 S 81 1 C, F, Dr 3 S 82 3 K, C, Dr 3 XS – K; S – C 83 1 K, C, F, 4 S Dr 88 3 K, C 2 XS 89 1 K, C, F, 4 S Dr 90 3 K, C, Dr 3 XS – C; S – K 91 1 K, C, F, 4 S Dr

467 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 37 1 C S 39 3 F S 48 1 C XS 56 3 Dr S 63 1 Dr S 64 1 Dr S 104 3 F S 120 3 F S

Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 35-36 K, C, Dr 3 XS – C; S – K, Dr 44 C, Dr 2 S 51-52 K, C, F, Dr 4 S – K, C; M – F, Dr 60 C, Dr 2 S 68 C, Dr 2 S 108 K, C 2 S 120-121 K, C, Dr 3 S – C; M – K, Dr

Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianist Quality 20 K XS 58-59 K XS 64 Dr M

468 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianists No. Of Crotchet Quality Pianists Pulse/s 40 K, C 2 1 XS – K; S – C 43 K, Dr 2 1 XS – Dr; S – K 48 K, C 2 1 S

Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 9 1 K S 11 1 K S 17 1 K S 19 1 K S 21 1 K XS 37 1 F S 39 1 K XS 42 1 K S 53 1 Dr S 64 1 K S 67 1 K XS 83 1 K S 89 1 K XS 91 1 K S

Common Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, F = Friedman Bar Pianists No. Of Crotchet Quality Pianists Pulse/s 121 F 1 1 XS K, C 3 2 S – C; M - K

469 Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

F = Friedman Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 21 1 F S 77 1 F S 109 1 F S 123 2 F M

470 Waltz Op.64 No.2

Performer/ Koczalski Rosenthal Cortot Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 3, 4, 7, 8, 19, 20, 23, Bars 3, 4, 7, 8, 13, 14, 19, Bars 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 17, 19, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33, 49, 20, 23, 33, 37, 72, 97, 98, 23, 65, 74, 75, 77, 86, 87, 54, 65, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 129, 131, 132, 135, 90, 91, 129, 131, 133, 135, 131, 132, 135, 136, 140, 136, 142, 143, 147, 148, 145, 147, 149, 151, 152, 141, 145, 147, 148, 151, 151, 152, 154, 161, 162, 155 153, 155, 161 165 Shortening Not applicable Bars 165, 166 Bar 2 Accelerando Bars 37-47, 103-105 Bar 10 Not applicable Ritardando Bars 16, 26-27, 48, 53-54, Bars 13-14, 31-32, 48, 64, Bars 16, 31-32, 48, 64, 80, 63-64, 96, 128, 159-160, 101-102, 112, 128, 141- 83, 88, 112, 128, 144, 157- 176, 191-192 143, 159-160, 165-166, 160, 176, 192 176, 191-192 i) Hand i) Bars 1, 9, 11, 17, 21, 25, i) Bars 5, 6, 9, 11, 21, 22, i) Bars 1, 17, 21, 68, 69, displacement 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 49, 27, 29, 30, 33, 37, 97, 129, 129 ii) Arpeggiation 54, 65, 73, 75, 80, 81, 86, 130, 133, 134, 137, 139, ii) Bars 9, 21, 25, 31, 65, 97, 129, 133, 137, 139, 143, 146, 149, 150, 153, 129, 133, 137, 145, 153, 141, 145, 146, 149, 150, 155, 157, 158, 159, 161, 159 153, 155, 157, 160, 161, 165 192 ii) Bar 79 ii) Bars 27, 29, 31, 155, 157, 159

471

Performer/ Paderewski Turczynski Drewnowski Form of Rubato Lengthening Bars 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, Bars 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 17, 18, Bars 3, 4, 7, 8, 19, 20, 23, 19, 20, 23, 24, 27, 29, 48, 19, 20, 23, 24, 33, 97, 130, 24, 129, 130, 131, 132, 49, 64, 65, 72, 80, 112, 131, 132, 135, 136, 147, 135, 136, 147, 148, 151, 130, 131, 132, 135, 147, 148, 151, 152 152 148, 151 Shortening Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Accelerando Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Ritardando Bars 16, 31-32, 48, 64, 72, Bars 16, 31-32, 48, 64, 80, Bars 27-29, 47-48, 63-64, 78-80, 96, 144, 159-160, 96, 112, 128, 159-160, 124-128, 157-160, 190- 192 176, 191-192 192 i) Hand i) Bars 1, 2, 29, 65, 66, 67, i) Bars 26, 28, 65, 129, i) Bars 1, 65, 129 displacement 81, 97, 129, 133, 137, 139, 138, 161 ii) Arpeggiation 145, 153, 157, 160 ii) Bars 5, 9, 11, 17, 21, 22, 25, 27, 29, 31, 65, 77, 78, 79, 93, 130, 133, 134, 137, 139, 149, 150, 153, 155, 157, 159

472 Common Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski, T = Turczynski, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianists No. Of Quality Pianists 1 1 C, Pa, T 3 S 3 2 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 S 4 2 K, R, Pa, T, Dr 5 S 7 2 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 S 8 2 K, R, Pa, T, Dr 5 S 9 1 C, Pa 2 XS 19 2 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 XS – Dr; S – others 20 2 K, R, Pa, T, Dr 5 XS – Dr; S – others 23 2 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 S 24 2 K, Pa, T, Dr 4 S 27 1 K, Pa 2 S 29 1 K, Pa 2 S 2 Dr 1 S 33 1 K, R, T 3 M 49 1 K, Pa 2 S 65 1 K, C, Pa 3 S 72 2 R, Pa 2 S 97 1 K, R, T 3 S – K, R; M - T 98 1 K, R 2 XS - R; S – K 129 2 C, Dr 2 M 130 2 Pa, T, Dr 3 S 131 2 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 S 132 2 K, R, Pa, T, Dr 5 S 135 2 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 S 136 2 K, R, T, Dr 4 S 145 1 K, C 3 XS – K; M - C 147 2 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 5 S 148 2 K, R, Pa, T, Dr 4 S 151 2 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 S 152 2 R, C, T, Dr 4 S 155 1 K 1 M 2 C 1 S 161 1 K, R 2 S

473 Individual Bars For Lengthening

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski, T = Turczynski, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 2 1 Pa XS 5 1 C S 11 1 Pa XS 13 2 R S 14 1 R S 17 1 C S 26 1 K XS 28 1 K S 48 3 Pa M 54 1 K M 64 3 Pa S 74 2 C XS 75 2 C XS 77 1, 2 C S 80 3 Pa M 86 2 C S 87 2 C S 90 3 C S 91 3 C S 99 1 K S 100 1 K S 101 1 R S 112 3 Pa M 133 2 C M 140 1 K XS 141 1 K S 149 2 C S 153 1 K S 154 1 R S 162 1 R S 165 1 R S

474 Common Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski, T = Turczynski, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality Pulse/s Pianists 1 1 K, C, Pa, Dr 4 XS – K, Dr; S - C, Pa 9 1 K, R 2 XS – K; S – R 3 R 1 XS 11 1 K, R 2 XS – R; M – K 17 1 K, C 2 XS – C; M – K 21 1 K, R, C 3 XS – K, R; S – C 26 1 K, T 2 S 27 1 K, R 2 XS – R; M – K 28 1 K, T 2 S 29 1 K 1 M 3 R, Pa 2 XS 33 1 K, R 2 XS – R; M – K 65 1 K, Pa, T, Dr 4 XS – Dr; S – Pa; M – K, T 81 1 Pa 1 XS 3 K 1 XS 97 1 K, R, Pa 3 S – R, Pa; M – K 129 1 K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 XS – Dr; S – K, R, C; M – Pa, T 133 1 K, R, C, Pa 4 XS – K, R, C; M – Pa 137 1 K, R 2 S 3 R, Pa 2 XS – Pa; S – R 139 1 K, R 2 XS – R; M – K 3 R, Pa 2 XS 145 1 K, Pa 2 M 146 1 K, R 2 S 149 1 K, R 2 XS – R; S – K 150 1 K, R 2 XS 153 1 K, R 3 XS – R; M – K 3 R, Pa 2 XS 155 1 K, R 2 XS – R; M – K 3 R 1 XS 157 1 K, R 3 XS – R; M – K 3 Pa 1 S 160 1 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 161 1 K, R, T 3 XS – R; S – K, T

475 Individual Bars For Hand Displacement

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski, T = Turczynski, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 2 1 Pa S 5 1 R XS 6 1 R S 22 1 R XS 25 1 K S 30 1 R M 32 1 K M 37 1 R M 49 1 K S 54 1 K XS 67 1 Pa XS 68 3 C S 69 1 C XS 73 1 K S 75 3 K S 80 1 K XS 86 3 K XS 130 1 R XS 134 1 R XS 138 1 T S 141 1 K M 143 1 R XS 158 1 R S 159 1 R XS 165 1 R S 192 1 K S

476 Common Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski, T = Turczynski, Dr = Drewnowski Bar Pianists No. Of Pianists Quality 16 ^ K, C, Pa, T 4 S 31-32 * R, C, Pa, T 4 M – R, C, T; L - Pa 48 # K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 XS – Dr; S - others 64 # K, R, C, Pa, T, Fr 6 XS – Pa; S - R, C, T; M – K, Dr 80 K, Pa, T 3 S – K, T; L – Pa 96 K, Pa, T 3 XS – T; M – K; L – Pa 112 # R, C, T 3 S – R, C; M – T 128 K, R, C, T, Dr 5 S – K, R, C; M – T, Dr 144 ^ C, Pa 2 S 159-160 * K, R, C, Pa, T, D 6 S – Dr; M – K, R, C, T; L – Pa 176 # K, R, C, T 4 S 191-192 # K, R, C, Pa, T, Dr 6 S – C; M – K, R, Pa, T; L - Dr ^ * # indicate similar bars

Individual Bars For Ritardando

K = Koczalski, R = Rosenthal, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski Bar Pianist Quality 13-14 R M 27 K S 53-54 K S 72 Pa S 83 C S 88 C S 141-143 R M

477 Common Bars For Arpeggiation

K = Koczalski, C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski Bar Crotchet Pianists No. Of Quality of Arpeggiation Pulse/s Pianists 9 1 C, Pa 2 S 21 1 C, Pa 2 S – C; M – Pa 25 1 C, Pa 2 S 27 1 K, Pa 2 S – Pa; M – K 29 1 K, Pa 2 S – Pa; M – K 31 3 K, Pa 2 S – K; M – Pa 79 3 R, Pa 2 S 133 1 C, Pa 2 XS – C; S – Pa 137 1 C, Pa 2 S 149 1 C, Pa 2 S – C; M – Pa 153 1 C, Pa 2 S 155 1 K, Pa 2 S – Pa; M – K 157 1 K, Pa 2 S – Pa; M – K 159 3 K, C, 3 S – K, C; L – Pa Pa

Individual Bars For Arpeggiation

C = Cortot, Pa = Paderewski Bar Crotchet Pulse/s Pianist Quality 5 1 Pa S 11 1 Pa S 17 1 Pa M 22 1 Pa S 65 1 C M 77 2 Pa M 78 2 Pa M 93 3 Pa S 130 1 Pa S 134 1 Pa M 139 1 Pa S 145 1 C S 149 1 Pa M 150 1 Pa S

478 DISCOGRAPHY

Alfred Cortot Victor Recordings of 1919-1926 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. Berceuse: Cortot, Mat. C 22502; Victor 74623 (rec. 27th January 1920), transfer GEMM CD 9386 Pearl (1989). Impromptu Op.29: Cortot, Mat. C 27346; Victor 6417-B (rec. 28th December 1922), transfer GEMM CD 9386 Pearl (1989). Impromptu Op.36: Cortot, Mat. CE 31689; Victor 6502-B (rec. 21st March 1925), transfer GEMM CD 9386 Pearl (1989). Waltz Op.64 No.2: Cortot, Mat. BE31690; Victor 1101-A (rec. 21st March 1925), transfer GEMM CD 9386 Pearl (1989).

Chopin: Dang Thai Son [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Chopin: Dina Yoffe [Pleyel 1848] 2009, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Chopin: Janusz Olejniczak [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Chopin: Kevin Kenner 2008, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Chopin: Marek Drewnowski [Erard 1849] 2010, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Chopin: Nikolai Demidenko [Pleyel 1848] 2009, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Chopin: Preludes, Impromptus, Barcarolle, Berceuse: Alfred Cortot 1988, CD-ROM, EMI Records, London. Prelude Op.28 No.3: Cortot, (rec. 5th July 1933 & 20th April 1934), transfer CDH 7610502 EMI (1988). Prelude Op.28 No.6: Cortot, (rec. 5th July 1933 & 20th April 1934), transfer CDH 7610502 EMI (1988). Prelude Op.28 No.7: Cortot, (rec. 5th July 1933 & 20th April 1934), transfer CDH 7610502 EMI (1988).

479 Prelude Op.28 No.15: Cortot, Duo-Art 6773-3 (rec. 5th July 1933 & 20th April 1934), transfer CDH 7610502 EMI (1988). Prelude Op.28 No.19: (rec. 5th July 1933 & 20th April 1934), transfer CDH 7610502 EMI (1988). Impromptu Op.66: Cortot, (rec. 5th July 1933), transfer CDH 7610502 EMI (1988). [Recorded at Studio 3 Abbey Road, London. Matrix numbers 2B. 5214-21. Catalog Numbers HMV DB. 2015-18. Transferred from 78’s rpm by überspielt von Original-Schellackplatten von Keith Hardwick].

Chopin: Tatiana Shebanova 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Chopin: Wojciech Switala 2007, CD-ROM, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopin, Warsaw.

Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Alfred Cortot Vol.1 1999, CD-ROM, Phillips Classics, London. Etude Op.10 No.5: Cortot, Duo-Art 6593-4 (rec. July 1933), transfer 456 751-2 Phillips (1999). Etude Op.25 No.2: Cortot, (rec.1933), transfer 456 751-2 Phillips (1999). Etude Op.25 No.6: Cortot, (rec.1933), transfer 456 751-2 Phillips (1999). Etude Op.25 No.9: Cortot, Duo-Art 6593-4 (rec.1933), transfer 456 751-2 Phillips (1999). [Recordings made at No.3 Studio, Abbey Road, London. Matrix numbers 2B. 5203-4, 5207-09, 6799. Catalog numbers HMV DB 2027-29].

Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Ignaz Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Philips, New York. Berceuse: Friedman, Columbia WAX 3243 (rec. 9th February1928), transfer 456 784-2 Phillips (1999). Impromptu Op.36: Friedman, (rec. November 1936), transfer 456 784-2 Phillips (1999). Mazurka Op.24 No.4: Friedman, Columbia WAX 5208 (rec. September 1930), transfer 456 784-2 Phillips (1999). Mazurka Op.63 No.3: Friedman, (rec. September 1930), transfer 456 784-2 Phillips (1999). Mazurka Op.68 No.2: Friedman, (rec. September 1930), transfer 456 784-2 Phillips (1999). Waltz Op.34 No.2: Friedman, Columbia WAX 98230 (rec. 8th February 1926), transfer 456 784-2 Phillips (1999).

480 Ignace Friedman: Early Recordings By the Composer 1993, CD-ROM, The Dolphin Music Group, Newtown. Waltz Op.18: Friedman, Duo-Art 7259-4 (rec.1921-1929), transfer CD-DDC 940 Dolphin Music Group (1993). Waltz Op.64 No.1: Friedman, Duo-Art 67220 (rec. 1921-1929), transfer CD-DDC 940 Dolphin Music Group (1993). [Recorded from reproducing piano rolls made between 1921-1929].

Moriz Rosenthal: Chopin/Strauss 1988, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. Berceuse: Rosenthal, Mat. 30475; Ultraphon F 469 (rec. 1930), transfer GEMM CD 9339 (1988). Mazurka Op.24 No.4: Rosenthal, Mat. XXB 8349; Odeon 171107 (rec. 29th May 1929), transfer GEMM CD 9339 (1988). Waltz Op.64 No.2: Rosenthal, Mat. 21692; Parlophone E 11043 (rec. 28th April 1930), transfer GEMM CD 9339 (1988).

Raoul Koczalski Plays Chopin 1970, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. Etude Op.10 No.5: Koczalski, Mat. 808 1/2 GE8; Decca LY 6115 (rec. date unknown), transfer GEMM CD 9472 (1970). Etude Op.25 No.2: Koczalski, Mat.801 1/2 GE8; Grammophon 67243 (rec. date unknown), transfer GEMM CD 9472 (1970). [Recordings from the collection of Alan Vicat. Dating of Koczalski’s records is not easy as relevant documents were destroyed during the war. Vicat discusses this in the CD liner notes].

Raoul Pugno: His Complete Published Piano Solos 1989, CD-ROM, Pavilion Records, Sussex. Berceuse: Pugno, 2568 (rec. 1903), transfer OPAL CD 9836 (1989). Impromptu Op.29: Pugno, 2566 (rec. 1903), transfer OPAL CD 9836 (1989). Nocturne Op.15 No.2: Pugno, G & T 2511 (rec. 1903), transfer OPAL CD 9836 (1989). Waltz Op.34 No.1: Pugno, G & T 2037 (rec. 1903), transfer OPAL CD 9836 (1989).

The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Backhaus and Cortot 1998, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Waltz Op.34 No.2: Cortot, Disque Gramophone (rec. 1935), transfer Selene CD-s 9805.41 Waltz Op.64 No.1: Cortot, Disque Gramophone (rec. 1935), transfer Selene CD CD-s 9805.41

481 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Friedman 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Etude Op.10 No.5: Friedman, (rec. October 1928), transfer Selene CD-s 9908.53 (1999). Etude Op.25 No.6: Friedman, (rec. April 1924), transfer Selene CD-s 9908.53(1999). Etude Op.25 No.9: Friedman, (rec. October 1928), transfer Selene CD-s 9908.53(1999). Prelude Op.28 No.15: Friedman, (rec. 1926), transfer Selene CD-s 9908.53(1999). Prelude Op.28 No.19: Friedman, (rec. April 1924), transfer Selene CD-s 9908.53(1999). [Recordings from the collections of Jozef Kanski, Stanislaw Dybowski and Futoshi Takei].

The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Impromptu Op.29: Koczalski, Pleyela 10295 (rec. 1948), transfer Selene CD-s 9901.46 (1999). Impromptu Op.36: Koczalski, Pleyela 10311 (rec. 1938), transfer Selene CD-s 9901.46 (1999). Prelude Op.28 No.3: Koczalski, (rec. 1939), transfer Selene CD-s 9901.46 (1999). Prelude Op.28 No.6: Koczalski, Pleyela 10326 (rec. 1939), transfer Selene CD-s 9901.46 (1999). Prelude Op.28 No.7: Koczalski, Pleyela 10326 (rec. 1939), transfer Selene CD-s 9901.46 (1999). Prelude Op.28 No.15: Koczalski, (rec. 1939), transfer Selene CD-s 9901.46 (1999). Prelude Op.28 No.19: Koczalski, (rec. 1939), transfer Selene CD-s 9901.46 (1999).

The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VI 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Etude Op.25 No.6: Koczalski, (rec.1928), transfer Selene CD-s 9902.47 (1999). Waltz Op.34 No.2: Koczalski, (rec.1928), transfer Selene CD-s 9902.47 (1999). Waltz Op.64 No.1: Koczalski, (rec.1928), transfer Selene CD-s 9902.47 (1999). Waltz Op.64 No.2: Koczalski, (rec.1928), transfer Selene CD-s 9902.47 (1999).

The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VII 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Berceuse: Koczalski, (rec.1948), transfer Selene CD-s 9903.48 (1999). Impromptu Op.66: Koczalski, (rec.1948), transfer Selene CD-s 9903.48 (1999). Waltz Op.18: Koczalski, (rec.1948), transfer Selene CD-s 9903.48 (1999). [A recital given by Koczalski on Pleyel Chopina to mark the 138th anniversary of Chopin’s birth. Warsaw 21 February 1948. The Pompeiian Hall in the Belweder Palace].

482 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Lukasiewicz 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Etude Op.10 No.5: Lukasiewicz, (rec. 1948), transfer Selene CD-s 0009.69 (2000). Etude Op.25 No.9: Lukasiewicz, (rec. 1948), transfer Selene CD-s 0009.69 (2000). Impromptu Op.66: Lukasiewicz, (rec. 1948), transfer Selene CD-s 0009.69 (2000). Nocturne Op.15 No.2: Lukasiewicz, (rec. 1948), transfer Selene CD-s 0009.69 (2000). Waltz Op.18: Lukasiewicz, (rec. 1948), transfer Selene CD-s 0009.69 (2000). [Recordings on soft, wax records at his performances given for radio].

The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Mikuli 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Berceuse: Michalowski, (rec. 1933/34), transfer Selene CD-s 9907.52 (1999). Mazurka Op.63 No.2: Michalowski, (rec. 1933/34), transfer Selene CD-s 9907.52 (1999). Nocturne Op.15 No.2: Michalowski, (rec.1933/34), transfer Selene CD-s 9907.52 (1999). [Recordings from the collections of Jozef Kanski, Stanislaw Dybowski and Futoshi Takei].

The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Paderewski 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Berceuse: Paderewski, (rec.1912), transfer Selene CD-s 9904.49 (1999). Etude Op.25 No.2: Paderewski, (rec.1912), transfer Selene CD-s 9904.49 (1999). Etude Op.25 No.9: Paderewski, (rec.1917), transfer Selene CD-s 9904.49 (1999). Waltz Op.18: Paderewski, (rec.1928), transfer Selene CD-s 9904.49 (1999). Waltz Op.64 No.2: Paderewski, (rec.1917), transfer Selene CD-s 9904.49 (1999). [In 1912-24, Paderewski recorded acoustically (into a tube), later electronically (into a microphone). These later recordings were released on the Gramophone and Victor labels].

The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Rosenthal 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Etude Op.10 No.5: Rosenthal, (rec.1931), transfer Selene CD-s 9906.51 (1999). Mazurka Op.63 No.3: Rosenthal, (rec.1931), transfer Selene CD-s 9906.51 (1999). Prelude Op.28 No.3: Rosenthal, (rec.1935), transfer Selene CD-s 9906.51 (1999). Prelude Op.28 No.6: Rosenthal, (rec.1935), transfer Selene CD-s 9906.51 (1999). Prelude Op.28 No.7: Rosenthal, (rec.1935), transfer Selene CD-s 9906.51 (1999). Waltz Op.64 No.2: Rosenthal, (rec.1930), transfer Selene CD-s 9906.51 (1999).

The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Smidowicz 1999, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Mazurka Op.68 No.2: Smidowicz, (rec.1948), transfer Selene CD-s 9905.50 (1999). Waltz Op.34 No.2: Smidowicz, (rec.1948), transfer Selene CD-s 9905.50 (1999).

483 The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Turczynski 2000, CD-ROM, Selene Records, Warsaw. Mazurka Op.24 No.4: Turczynski, (rec. unknown), transfer Selene CD-s 0008.68 (2000). Impromptu Op.29: Turczynski, (rec. 1950), transfer Selene CD-s 0008.68 (2000). Impromptu Op.66: Turczynski, (rec. 1950), transfer Selene CD-s 0008.68 (2000). Nocturne Op.15 No.2: Turczynski, (rec. 1950), transfer Selene CD-s 0008.68 (2000). Waltz Op.64 No.2: Turczynski, (rec. 1950), transfer Selene CD-s 0008.68 (2000). [Recordings from the collection of Roman Palestra. Except for the Mazurka, the recordings are amateur recordings made during a private concert organised by his friends in 1950].

484 REFERENCES

Books/Articles/CD Liner Notes/Websites

Abraham, G. 1974. ‘The Nature of Musical Tradition’ in The Tradition Of Western Music, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Abraham, G. 1980. Chopin’s Musical Style. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.

Bar-Ami, B. 2012, ‘Biography’. In Dina Yoffe Official Website, viewed 2nd January 2013,

Beale, R. 2007. Charles Halle: A Musical Life, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.

Bellman, J. 2000. ‘Chopin and His Imitators: Notated Emulations of the "True Style" of Performance’, 19th-Century Music, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 149-160.

Bellman, J. 2001. ‘Frederic Chopin, Antoine de Kontski and the carezzando touch’, Early Music, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 398-407.

Bellman, J. 2004, ‘Toward a well-tempered Chopin’ in A. Szeklener (ed), Chopin In Performance. Warsaw: Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, pp.25-38.

Bielecki, A. 2013a, ‘Impromptu’. In Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, viewed 27th January 2013,

Bielecki, A. 2013b, ‘Waltz’. In Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, viewed 11th February 2013,

Bourligueux, Guy. ‘Pugno, Raoul.’ In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, viewed 11th March 2010,

Bowen, J. 1996, ‘Tempo, duration, and flexibility: Techniques in the analysis of performance’, Journal of Musicological Research, Vol. 16 No.2, pp.111-156.

Brook, D. 1971, Masters of the Keyboard, Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.

485 Budman, L. 2009, ‘Pianist Kenner displays exceptional gifts in music of Chopin and others’. In South Florida Classical Review, viewed 28th September 2012,

Chissell, J. 1993, ‘Notes and Reviews.’ In Chopin: Piano Concertos No.1 and 2 / Demidenko, Schiff, Et al., viewed 28th September 2012,

Cooper, G. and Meyer, L.B. 1960, The Rhythmic Structure of Music. University of Chicago Press, London.

Cortot, A. 1932, French Piano Music. Hilda Andrews, trans. London: Oxford University Press.

Cortot, A. 1937, Alfred Cortot's Studies In Musical Interpretation, George G. Harap and Co, London.

Covington, V. 1987, Operatic Elements in the Music of Chopin, The American Music Teacher, Vol.37, No.1, pp.20-22, p.54.

Dixon, G. 2010, ‘Review’. In Music Web International, viewed 2nd January 2013,

Dodson, A. 2002, “Expressive Asynchrony in a Recording of Chopin's Prelude No. 6 in B Minor by Vladimir de Pachmann”, Society For Music Theory, Vol.33 No.1, pp.59-64.

Dunn, J.P. 1971, Ornamentation in the Works of Frederic Chopin, Da Capo Press, New York.

Dybowski, S. 1998a, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Backhaus and Cortot, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski, S. 1998b, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume IV, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski, Stanislow 1998c, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Karol Mikuli 1998 CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

486

Dybowski, S. 1999a, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Friedman, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski, S. 1999b, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume V, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski, S. 1999c, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Koczalski Volume VI, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski, S. 1999d, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Paderewski, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski, Stanislaw 1999e, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Rosenthal, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski 1999f, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Smidowicz, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski, S. 2000, The Great Polish Chopin Tradition: Lukasiewicz, CD liner notes, Selene Records, Warsaw.

Dybowski, S. 2007, Chopin: Tatiana Shebanova, CD liner notes, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Dybowski, S. 2012, ‘Kevin Kenner’. In Persons Related To Chopin, viewed 28th September 2012,

Eigeldinger, J. 1986, Chopin: Pianist and Teacher, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Ekier, J. 1960, ‘Chopin: Tradition and Myth’, Music Journal, Vol.3 Iss.3, p.78.

Evans, Allan (1991). ‘Alfred Cortot Plays French Concertos’ in Alfred Cortot Plays French Concertos [CD-liner notes], Pavilion Records, Sussex.

Evans, A. 2009, Ignaz Friedman: Romantic Master Pianist, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

487

Evans, A. 2010a, ‘Friedman, Ignacy.’ In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, viewed 12th March 2010,

Evans, A. 2010b, ‘Rosenthal, Moriz.’ In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, viewed 14th March 2010,

Fritz, T. 1981, ‘How Did Chopin Want His Ornament Signs Played?’, The Piano Quarterly, Vol.29, pp.45-52.

Grabowski, C. 2009, ‘Preface’ in The Complete Chopin: A New Critical Edition Waltzes, Edited by Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger, Urtext Edition by Peters

Guthrie, L. 1989. ‘Alfred Cortot (1877-1962)’ in Alfred Cortot Victor Recordings of 1919-1926 [CD-liner notes], Pavilion Records, Sussex.

Hamilton, K. 2008, After the golden age: romantic pianism and modern performance, Oxford University Press, US.

Hamilton, Kenneth. ‘Leschetizky, Theodor.’ In The Oxford Companion to Music, edited by Alison Latham. Oxford Music Online, viewed 13th March 2010,

Haywood, T. n.d. ‘Demidenko Plays Chopin’. In Music Web International, viewed 28th September 2012,

Higgins, T. 1973, ‘Tempo and Character in Chopin’, The Musical Quarterly, Vol.59, No.1, pp.106-120.

Higgins, T. 1981, ‘Chopin’s Practices’, The Piano Quarterly, Vol.29, pp.38-41.

Hipkins, E.J. 1937, How Chopin Played, J.M. Dent and Sons Ltd, London.

Holeman, J. 1958, ‘The Labyrinth of Chopin Ornamentation’, Julliard Review, Vol.5, No.2, pp.23-41.

488

Holland, J. 1972, Chopin’s Teaching and His Students, Doctorate Thesis, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Hudson, R. 1994, Stolen Time: The History of Tempo Rubato, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Jackson, R.J. 2005, Performance Practice: A Dictionary For Musicians, Routledge, New York.

Ka!ski, J. 2010, ‘Turczy!ski, Józef.’ In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, viewed 12th March 2010,

Kleczynski, J. 1879, How To Play Chopin: The works of Frederic Chopin and Their Proper Interpretation, translated by A. Whittingham, Reeves, London.

Koczalski, R. 1998, Frederic Chopin: Conseils d'interpretation (French Edition), Buchet Chastel, Paris.

Knight, H. 1999 [CD liner notes] The Great Pianists of the Twentieth Century: Ignaz Friedman 1998, Phillips Classics, UK.

Lenz, W. V. 1899, The great piano virtuosos of our time from personal acquaintance: Liszt, Chopin, Tausig, Henselt, translated from the German by Madeleine R. Baker, Schirmer, New York.

Liang, C.T. 2010, ‘Reviews’. In Dang Thai Son, viewed 2nd January 2013,

Methuen-Campbell, J. 1992, ‘Chopin in performance’ in J. Samson (ed), The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.191-205.

Methuen-Campbell, J. 2010 ‘Koczalski, Raoul.’ In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, viewed 12th March 2010,

Mitchell, M. 2006, Moriz Rosenthal in Word and Music: A Legacy of the Nineteenth Century, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

489 Moore, Jerrold Northrop (1989), ‘Raoul Pugno (1852-1914)’ in Raoul Pugno: His Complete Published Piano Solos [CD liner notes], Sussex: Pavilion Records.

Moran, M. 2012, ‘Chopin's Polishness - Song Recital.’ In Classical Music In Poland and Much Else, viewed 28th September 2012,

Morawski, J. 2010, ‘Mikuli, Karol.’ In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, viewed 12th March 2010,

Morrison, B 2010, “Chopin Resonances”. In Gramophone, viewed 2nd January2013,

Morski, K. 2004, ‘Interpretations of the Works of Chopin, A Comparative Analysis of Different Styles of Performance’ in A.Szeklener (ed), Chopin In Performance, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw, pp.153-168.

Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina (2007), Chopin: Wojciech Switala, CD liner notes, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopin, Warsaw.

Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012a, ‘Dang Thai Son’. In Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, viewed 29th September 2012, < http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/persons/detail/id/2881>

Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012b, ‘Dina Yoffe’. In Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, viewed 29th September 2012, < http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/persons/detail/cat/3/page/17/id/6792>

Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina 2012c, ‘Marek Drewnowski’. In Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, viewed 28th September 2012,

National Library Poland 2008, Aleksander Micha!owski - biography, National Library Poland, viewed 14th March 2010, .

National Library Poland 2008, Franciszek "ukasiewicz –biography, National Library Poland, viewed 14th March 2010, .

490

National Library Poland 2008, Ignacy Friedman - biography, National Library Poland, viewed 17th March 2010, .

National Library Poland 2008, Ignacy Jan Paderewski - biography, National Library Poland, viewed 20th March 2010, .

National Library Poland 2008, Raul Koczalski - biography, National Library Poland, viewed 17th March 2010, < http://bn.org.pl/chopin/index.php/en/pianists/bio/14>.

National Library Poland 2008, Józef #midowicz - biography, National Library Poland, viewed 24th March 2010,

National Library Poland 2008, Józef Turczy$ski – biography, National Library Poland, viewed 24th March 2010,

National Library Poland 2008, Maurycy Rosenthal -biography, National Library Poland, viewed 14th March 2010,

Naxos 2010a, Aleksander Michalowski, viewed 14th April 2010, Naxos .

Naxos 2010b, Cortot, Alfred, Naxos, viewed 16th March 2010,

Naxos 2010c, Ignaz Friedman, Naxos, viewed 14th April 2010, .

Nicholas, J. 2010, ‘Straight To The Heart’, Gramophone, Vol.87, pp.36-41.

Nichols, Roger. ‘Cortot, Alfred (Denis).’ In The Oxford Companion to Music, edited by Alison Latham. Oxford Music Online, viewed 12th March 2010,

Nikolska, I. 2004, ‘Russian traditions in Chopin performance’ in A.Szeklener (ed), Chopin In Performance, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw, pp.249-258.

491 Niecks, F. 1973a, Frederick Chopin As a Man and Musician, Cooper Square Publishers, New York, Vol.1

Niecks, F. 1973b, Frederick Chopin As a Man and Musician, Cooper Square Publishers, New York, Vol.2

Paetsch, A. 2009, Performance Practices in Chopin’s Piano Sonatas, Op.35 and 58, University of Western Ontario, London.

Peres Da Costa, N. 2012, Off the Record: Performing Practices in Romantic Piano Playing, Oxford University Press, New York.

Pociej, B. 2009, Chopin: Dina Yoffe [Pleyel 1848], CD liner notes, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Pociej, B. 2009, Chopin: Nikolai Demidenko [Pleyel 1848], CD liner notes, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Pociej, B. 2010, Chopin: Dang Thai Son [Erard 1849], CD liner notes, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Pociej, B. 2010, Chopin: Ewa Poblocka [Pleyel 1848], CD liner notes, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Pociej, B. 2010, Chopin: Janusz Olejniczak [Erard 1849], CD liner notes, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Pociej, B. 2010, Chopin: Marek Drewnowski [Erard 1849], CD liner notes, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Ramakrishnan, M.V. 2010, ‘Chopin Rules!’ The Hindu, viewed 1st January 2013, http://www.hindu.com/fr/2010/12/03/stories/2010120350990300.htm

Rink, J. 1997, Chopin, The Piano Concertos, Cambridge University Press, New York.

Rosenblum, S. 1991, Performance Practices in Classic Piano Music: Their Principles and Applications, Indiana University Press, Indiana.

492

Rosenblum, S. 2004, ‘A composer known here but to few: The Reception and Performance Styles of Chopin’s Music in America, 1839-1900’ in H. Goldberg (ed), The Age of Chopin: Interdisciplinary Inquiries, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp.314-353.

Rowland, D. 1994, ‘Chopin’s tempo rubato in context’ in Rink, J and Samson J. (eds), Chopin Studies 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Rowland, D. 2004, ‘The performance of Chopin’s works for piano and orchestra’ in A.Szeklener (ed), Chopin In Performance, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw, pp.169-184.

Salter, L. 1988. ‘Moriz Rosenthal’ in Moriz Rosenthal: Chopin/Strauss [CD-liner notes], Pavilion Records, Sussex

Samson, J. 1985, The Music of Chopin, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.

Samson, J. 1992, Chopin: The Four Ballades, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Samson, J. 1996, Chopin, Oxford University Press, New York.

Samson, J. 2010, ‘Paderewski, Ignacy Jan.’ In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, viewed 12th March 2010,

Siepmann, J. 1988 in Chopin: Preludes, Impromptus, Barcarolle, Berceuse: Alfred Cortot [CD liner notes], EMI Records, London.

Siepmann, J. 1995, Chopin: The Reluctant Romantic, Gollancz, London.

Skowron, Z. 2004, ‘Creating a legend or reporting facts? Chopin as a performer in the biographical accounts of F.Liszt, M.A. Szulc and F. Niecks’ in A.Szeklener (ed), Chopin In Performance, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw, pp.9-24.

Steinberg, M. 1999, ‘Wonders of Imagination’ in Great Pianists of the 20th Century: Alfred Cortot Vol.1 CD liner notes, Phillips Classics, London.

493 Szklener, A. (ed) 2004, Chopin In Performance: History, Theory, Practice, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw.

Taruskin, R. 1995, Text and Act: Essays in Music and Performance, Oxford University Press, New York.

The Chopin Society UK 2012, ‘Kevin Kenner Recital’. In Recitals, viewed 2nd January 2013,

Timbrell, C. 1992, French Pianism (ed.1), Pro/Am Music Resources, New York.

Tomaszewski, M. 2013, ‘Waltz Op.18’. In Compositions, viewed 10th March 2013,

Vicat, Alan 1990, Raoul Koczalski Plays Chopin 1990, CD liner notes, Pavilion Records, Sussex.

Vogel, B. 2004, ‘The young Chopin’s domestic pianos’ in A.Szeklener (ed), Chopin In Performance, Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina, Warsaw, pp.57-76.

Zaremba, B.U. 2012, ‘From Shoe Laces to a Ship’. In Chopin Society of Atlanta, viewed on 2nd January 2013,

494 Scores

Chopin, F. 1978, Berceuse Op.57, Edited by Ernst Herttrich, G. Henle Verlag, Munchen.

Chopin, F. 1973, Etudes Op.25, Trois Nouvelles Etudes, Edited by Paul Badura-Skoda, Wiener Urtext Edition, Vienna.

Chopin, F. 1949, Studies. Edited by I.J. Paderewski, L. Bronsarski, J. Turczynski, The Fryderyk Chopin Institute, Warsaw.

Chopin, F. 1997, 24 Preludes, Impromptus. Edited by G. Csalog, Konemann Music, Budapest.

Chopin, F. 1997, Chopin Mazurkas (Complete), Edited by Willard A. Palmer, Alfred Music Publishing.

Chopin, F. 2007, Chopin Nocturnes, Edited by Zimmerman, G. Henle Verlag, Munchen.

Chopin, F. 2009, The Complete Chopin: A New Critical Edition Preludes Op.28, Op.45, Edited by Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger, Urtext Edition by Peters, London.

Chopin, F. 2009, The Complete Chopin: A New Critical Edition Waltzes, Edited by Jean- Jacques Eigeldinger, Urtext Edition by Peters, London.

495