University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2018 Attitudes And Thoughts On Tone Quality In Historic Piano Teaching Treatises Jeongsun Lim University of South Carolina - Columbia Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the Music Pedagogy Commons Recommended Citation Lim, J.(2018). Attitudes And Thoughts On Tone Quality In Historic Piano Teaching Treatises. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/5024 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ATTITUDES AND THOUGHTS ON TONE QUALITY IN HISTORIC PIANO TEACHING TREATISES by Jeongsun Lim Bachelor of Music Kwandong University, 1994 Master of Music University of South Carolina, 2001 Master of Music University of South Carolina, 2003 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Musical Arts in Piano Pedagogy School of Music University of South Carolina 2018 Accepted by: Scott Price, Major Professor Charles Fugo, Committee Member Sara Ernst, Committee Member Ana Dubnjakovic, Committee Member Cheryl L. Addy, Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School © Copyright by Jeongsun Lim, 2018 All Rights Reserved. ii DEDICATION To my mother. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to recognize and thank all of the members of my committee, Dr. Scott Price, Dr. Charles Fugo, Dr. Sara Ernst, and Dr. Ana Dubnjakovic, for their suggestions and comments. My sincere gratitude goes to my mother who always have been supportive and encouraging for the duration of my doctoral studies. Lastly, I would like to thank God for his grace and provision. iv ABSTRACT Various approaches to the perception and production of tone quality on the piano have been suggested throughout the history of piano pedagogy. Tone quality differences are controversial among physicists, acoustic scientists, pianists, and piano pedagogues. Studies and research began to investigate tone quality with scientific experiments, and physicists and scientists asserted that differences in tone quality are differences in pitch, intensity, duration, and in combinations of tone and noise. They asserted that tone quality does not change with different physical touches and the pianist cannot control the quality of the tone. However, pianists and pedagogues believed that pianists have control over tone quality. They claimed that quality-differences were achievable by the act of touch as well as the mental conception of tone, but that they could not be proved scientifically. Due to differences of thoughts among various music and scientific disciplines, there are widely variant opinions on what constitutes a beautiful and desirable tone, and how it is produced on the piano. This study examines the thoughts and attitudes on tone quality in historical piano teaching treatises. v TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ....................................................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ iv ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................2 1.2 NEED FOR THE STUDY ...........................................................................................3 1.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY .................................................................................3 1.4 RELATED LITERATURE ..........................................................................................4 1.5 DESIGN AND PROCEDURES ..................................................................................10 CHAPTER 2 LATE EIGHTEENTH AND NINETEENTH CENTURY ..............................................11 2.1 DANIEL GOTTLIEB TÜRK (1750-1813) ................................................................12 2.2 MUZIO CLEMENTI (1752-1832) ...........................................................................14 2.3 CARL CZERNY (1791-1857) ................................................................................19 2.4 THEODORE KULLAK (1818-1882) .......................................................................25 2.5 SIGMUND LEBERT (1822-1884) AND LUDWIG STARK (1831-1884) ....................26 2.6 ADOLPH KULLAK (1823-1862) ...........................................................................28 2.7 LUDWIG DEPPE (1828-1890) ...............................................................................33 2.8 WILLIAM MASON (1829-1908) ...........................................................................37 vi 2.9 THEODORE LESCHETIZKY (1830-1915) ...............................................................44 2.10 CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................48 CHAPTER 3 TWENTIETH CENTURY ......................................................................................50 3.1 TOBIAS MATTHAY (1858–1945) .........................................................................51 3.2 ISIDOR PHILIPP (1863-1958) ................................................................................57 3.3 RUDOLPH MARIA BREITHAUPT (1873-1945) .......................................................60 3.4 JOSEF LHÉVINNE (1874-1944) .............................................................................64 3.5 ALFRED CORTOT (1877-1962) ............................................................................67 3.6 OTTO RUDOLPH ORTMANN (1889–1979) ............................................................70 3.7 ABBY WHITESIDE (1881-1956) ...........................................................................76 3.8 KARL LEIMER (1858-1944) AND WALTER GIESEKING (1895-1956) ...................79 3.9 ARNOLD SCHULTZ (1903-1972) ..........................................................................83 3.10 WILLIAM S. NEWMAN (1912-2000) ..................................................................86 3.11 JÓZSEF GÁT (1913-1967) ..................................................................................88 3.12 HEINRICH NEUHAUS (1888-1964) .....................................................................92 3.13 RUTH SLENCZYNSKA (b. 1925) .........................................................................95 3.14 GEORGE KOCHEVITSKY (1902-1993) ................................................................98 3.15 GYÖRGY SÁNDOR (1912-2005) .......................................................................101 3.16 SEYMOUR FINK (b. 1929) ................................................................................106 3.17 BORIS BERMAN (b. 1948) ................................................................................108 3.18 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................114 CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION .........................................................................116 4.1 TOUCH, ATTACK AND RELEASE .........................................................................116 vii 4.2 NOISE ELEMENTS ..............................................................................................119 4.3 INTENSITY AND DYNAMIC SHADING ..................................................................120 4.4 INHERENT QUALITY AND MECHANISM OF THE PIANO .......................................121 4.5 PEDAL ...............................................................................................................122 4.6 PHYSICAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL ASPECT ...........................................................124 4.7 CRITICAL LISTENING AND AUDITORY PERCEPTION ...........................................127 4.8 LEGATO AND SINGING QUALITY ........................................................................128 4.9 PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT, MENTAL PERCEPTION, AND IMAGINATION ...............129 4.10 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................131 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................133 viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION A beautiful tone is one of the primary goals in all music-making. However, what constitutes a beautiful or desirable tone is controversial among physicists, acoustic scientists, pianists, and piano pedagogues. Numerous methods and writings were written based on their studies and experiences. Physicists and acoustic scientists assert that differences in tone quality are differences in pitch, intensity, duration, and in combinations of tone and noise (i.e., the noise of the finger falling on the key. The noise amalgamates with the nearly synchronous tone and modifies the total overtone constellation).1 John Backus, the author of The Acoustical Foundations of Music, argues that the pianist cannot control the quality of the tone.2 However, composers, pianists and pedagogues believe that pianists have control over tone quality. Numerous methods and books pertaining to tone quality began to appear and various findings and opinions based