Tagged As: Waltz Sheet Music
Question:
I am beginning playing the sublime Chopin Waltz No 7 Op 64 No 2 in C# Minor. I couldn't afford the ur text so bought the ABRSM which is edited by Thomas Fielden and Harold Craxton. With some of the money I saved not buying the ur text I treated myself to Rubenstein's recordings of the 14 Walzes etc. However, in the intro to the sheet music, Mr Fielden remarks of No 7: Here is another Chopin piece that is maltreated by the 'rubato-mongers'. The 3rd and 4th bars (and their repetion) are often mutilated beyond recognition. I wonder if Mr Fielden could be referring to Rubenstein, who plays with a fair amount of rubato. Probably plays rather better than Mr Fielden too. But, my question is - is Mr Fielden right?
Answer:
I'm not good at remembering Opus numbers. I had to do a little searching for the sheet music to remind myself which one you're talking about. As one of my wife's professors was found of saying Nobody ever built a statue to a critic. I suppose what Mr. Fielden is talking about is the amount of space you should put after beat 2. IMHO: Though a waltz is a dance, a concert piece in waltz form doesn't have to be so strict that you can dance to it. And as a matter of fact I've heard Strauss waltzes with plenty of rubato. Still... I think that you should maintain a waltz feeling, which means at least an emphasis on the first beat. I suppose it also means a preferance for a long third beat over a long second one as well. I'd say you should experiment with different interpretations, on this or any other piece. Over time I've grown more toward a much simpler interpretation of this particular waltz, especially in bars 49-64. I now tend to play that in almost strict time with very little dynamic change, going more for delicatissimo and clarity of the individual notes. But that doesn't mean it's wrong to try for a different effect. By is Mr Fielden right?, if you mean do many pianists play this piece with more rubato than is appropriate? then, well, maybe. He is giving his opinion (whatever he means, which is not clear to me from the quote) on what is appropriate, and how carefully thought-out his opinion is and how valid it is is really up to you to decide. (He might be full of crap). I would go to other sources besides an unfamiliar editor who uses phrases like rubato-mongers: specifically, I would listen to other pianists (such as Rubinstein, probably, as you say, playing it better than Mr. Fielden, but, gosh, I'm not even much of a collector and I've accumulated six or eight versions - it's pretty commonly recorded) and listen to what they do and why they do it. At some point, however, it doesn't really matter that much; what's important is to play it as clearly, cleanly and beautifully as possible (clear and clean playing is easily discerned; beautiful playing is a harder task). In general, if you really learn it well and listen to yourself for how well you're projecting what you want to project in the music, you probably won't earn Mr. Fielden's disapproval.
Add to favorites