# Carl Czerny: A Pedantic DESTROYER of J.S.Bach's Legacy? Or Forgotten Authentic Voice?



## Guest (Jun 20, 2020)

A fascinating video on the rather vexed question of metronome markings as they apply to Bach, Beethoven and Czerny. Only 14" of your time, it's worth it. Not overly technical, non-musicians should be able to follow and there are some very interesting comparisons (James Friskin, Walter Gieseking, Rosalyn Tureck, Gustav Leonhardt, Glenn Gould, Ton Koopman ...).


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

AuthenticSound (Wim Winters) is a "conspiracy theorist" who thinks before mid-19th century, music was played twice as slow as it is today. He argues that the original knowledge of the metronome and tempo markings is "somehow lost" today, so we're "misinterpreting" them to be twice faster than it is actually supposed to be.


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

I am convinced that the whole-beat metronome practice is historically correct. The Leonhardt and Koopman tempi sound right to me, I guess partly because I’m used to them but also because doubling the speed leads to rather unpleasant music. Similarly for Beethoven: The 144 has to be for eighth notes, or else the music would sound weird according to “common esthetic sense.”


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Having never been a fan of the metronome, I usually just take metronome markings as a "ball park" something-or-other to give an idea as to tempo anyway. I've never used one apart from the one my piano teacher used when I was a kid. Maybe that's what turned me against them. :lol: Czerny's edition of the Well Tempered Clavier will always have a place in my heart because it was the first edition I knew, and I still have it, but I use it now just for fingering suggestions which are often pretty good. His phrasing, tempo and dynamics indications are sometimes a little odd and (to me) out of character, no matter if this is the way Beethoven played them or not. My go-to edition is the relatively "clean" Bärenreiter.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

I have and still use (am doing so at the moment in fact - just started working on the C minor prelude & fugue from Bk.2) Tovey's edition published by the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music (and current in the 1960s when I got it) here in the UK. Tovey was one of my formative influences when I was getting into classical music in a big way and the notes are an absorbing read in themselves.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

I'm sorry, but no. This is not worth anyone's time, unless you are entertained by cranks and nitwits.

Wim Winters has no credentials as a music scholar, employs a great deal of fallacious thinking and totally misguided assumptions, and comes to conclusions that are utter nonsense. He is not a musicologist. 

He is a nutter.

You may as well go enjoy some "The Apollo Program was a Hoax" videos, "Young Earth Creationism," or "Flat Earth" advocacy. This guy's thinking is on that level, seriously.

Laughable at best.


----------



## david johnson (Jun 25, 2007)

I was talking to Bach one day and he said he didn't worry much about metronome marking. He just wanted to have his music played. I was on the Moon that day with beer … never saw the guys


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

TalkingHead said:


> A fascinating video on the rather vexed question of metronome markings as they apply to Bach, Beethoven and Czerny. Only 14" of your time, it's worth it. Not overly technical, non-musicians should be able to follow and there are some very interesting comparisons (James Friskin, Walter Gieseking, Rosalyn Tureck, Gustav Leonhardt, Glenn Gould, Ton Koopman ...).


Funny that Czerny cites Beethoven as his authority on tempi, but it's well known that Beethoven's metronome ran fast.

The gentleman giving this little thesis compared tempi of various players, and observed that only Glenn Gould came closest to Czerny's crazyfast tempo markings. Gould, however, is notorious for his outside-the-box interpretations.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

pianozach said:


> ...but it's well known that Beethoven's metronome ran fast.


This is actually little to no factual support for this. It was always largely baseless speculation from a few who wanted reasons to reject Beethoven's markings.

Here's where Mr. Winters goes wrong. It's the same thing that goes wrong with innumerable cranks out there in the world. He comes up with a hypothesis. So far, no problem. He then looks for evidence to support his hypothesis. No, no, no, no. No. N. O. That's not scholarship. What a real scholar does is first look for ways _to falsify_ their hypothesis. So far, he's just a bad scholar. Where it really goes off the rails is that he rejects, without valid reasons, or hand-waves away evidence that contradicts his hypothesis. That's what makes him and others of a similar ilk crackpots, like the people advocating for A=432 hz or whatever.


----------



## EmperorOfIceCream (Jan 3, 2020)

Just concerning the narrow point, there is a good reason to disregard (or not take too precisely) Beethoven’s tempi: he was deaf! When he tried to conduct in later life, the orchestra would ignore him because he would lag by several bars and just not maintain the right speed. It’s easy to make bad markings if you can’t hear how fast you are notating. Unlike the Wim Winters gobbledygook, this is no conspiracy theory. While he was never fully deaf, he was deaf enough that he had to give up his piano career, which should in itself be enough to warrant flexible interpretations of his tempi. Jan Swafford explains this in his relatively recent Beethoven biography.


----------



## Guest (Jun 22, 2020)

Knorf said:


> I'm sorry, but no. This is not worth anyone's time, unless you are entertained by cranks and nitwits.
> 
> Wim Winters has no credentials as a music scholar, employs a great deal of fallacious thinking and totally misguided assumptions, and comes to conclusions that are utter nonsense. He is not a musicologist.
> 
> ...


There are just so many gulls out there for this kind of stuff!!


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

the only destroyers of Bach legacy are Glenn Gould with his stupid humming and piano crap and Ton Koopman and his awful passion renditions


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Knorf said:


> You may as well go enjoy some *"The Apollo Program was a Hoax" videos*, "Young Earth Creationism," or "Flat Earth" advocacy. This guy's thinking is on that level, seriously.


The Moon Landing Hoax Theory has some substantial evidence to support it though.
Since this is not the right thread to discuss the issue, I suggest you post in the thread <Moon landing anniversary> if you would like to continue discussing it.






*[ 32:00 ]*


----------



## Lilijana (Dec 17, 2019)

This is a particularly good video in response to the nonsense that Wim Winters posts on his channel.






Not only is Wim Winters pretty much music's equivalent of a flat earther, my experience of him online has proven that he's also a horrid, spiteful, self-centred person who is obviously frustrated that the vast majority of musicians have no time for his ridiculous assertions.

However, if you _do_ like Wim Winters, you might enjoy Robert Newman. I believe you might even find some of his musicological findings on this very forum if you look hard enough! (Although, thankfully, he's been banned from this site)


----------



## Guest (Jun 22, 2020)

hammeredklavier said:


> The Moon Landing Hoax Theory has some substantial evidence to support it though.


This does not belong here or on any community forum thread (only IMO of course).

But, while I'm here, I feel compelled to point out that online videos hardly constitute the best source for convincing people that film/video has been faked, now that it's even easier to fake video than it was in 1969.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

hammeredklavier said:


> The Moon Landing Hoax Theory has some substantial evidence to support it though...


I used to ask who would believe that stuff. Now I know.


----------



## Gray Bean (May 13, 2020)

Who cares? I mean, really?


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

TalkingHead said:


> A fascinating video on the rather vexed question of metronome markings as they apply to Bach, Beethoven and Czerny. Only 14" of your time, it's worth it. Not overly technical, non-musicians should be able to follow and there are some very interesting comparisons (James Friskin, Walter Gieseking, Rosalyn Tureck, Gustav Leonhardt, Glenn Gould, Ton Koopman ...).


Interesting post, but for piano teachers and professors a common secret. All the big piano teachers like Czerny, Tausig, Hannon etc. they have an initial speed and a final one. They say ''practice here, perform here and your target for excellency (or virtuosity) is this XXX tempo mark. Czerny he did with Bach exactly what he had done with his Etüden: He challenged the performer to reach his limits. The correct speed for the CM Invention is the 67 (of Turek, could be everything between 60 and 70), every piano teacher and scholar knows this and no problems at all for both Carl and the interpreters. (Valentina is destroying the Father. She can practice like this, bit never publicly perform).


----------



## Guest (Jun 22, 2020)

Animal the Drummer said:


> I have and still use (am doing so at the moment in fact - just started working on the C minor prelude & fugue from Bk.2) Tovey's edition published by the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music (and current in the 1960s when I got it) here in the UK. Tovey was one of my formative influences when I was getting into classical music in a big way and the notes are an absorbing read in themselves.


Ah yes, good old Donald Tovey and his essays on musical analysis! I'd be curious to know if he has anything to say about the tempi that relates to the video I posted above, please let us know.


----------



## Guest (Jun 22, 2020)

Gray Bean said:


> Who cares? I mean, really?


About Czerny? What?


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Wim Winters' channel AuthenticSound is dedicated entirely to one of the most ill-conceived modern day conspiracies of any sort, indeed _the_ worst conspiracy pertaining to classical era, backed by about much evidence as the idea that 5g causes the coronavirus and that the earth is flat.

His theory brings up more questions than it does answers. Take, for example, his recording of Schubert's Wanderer Fantasy, at the "speed Liszt would've performed it".






Let's look at some of the glaring problems posed by this recording:

1. Many pianists of the day complained about the speed and difficulty of the octaves in the Wanderer Fantasy. Liszt simplified them in his orchestrated version, allowing the strings to take the brunt of the virtuosity. Schubert himself was reported to have said that "the Devil may play them." Are we really to believe that pianists back then were so technically poor as to not be able to play octaves at such a ponderous pace?

2. Refer to the Adagio at 14:18. It is mind-bogglingly slow, so slow as to lose all coherence as far as the melody is concerned. This section is based on Schubert's own lieder, "Die Wanderer". Imagine "Die Wanderer" sung at this tempo. It would be frankly impossible, the performer's lungs would surely burst.

3. It is BORING. Dreadfully, agonizingly, BORING. I don't think any more words must be said on the matter. Why should performers and audiences be subjected to a "historically accurate" performance if it is not interesting to the ears?

There are many additional miscellaneous issues that Wim has posed with his multitude of abysmal recordings and I will take the liberty of posing them below.

1. Hans von Bülow complained that Chopin's Op.10 No.1 was too fast in its original tempo (MM 176) and suggested MM 152 instead. This makes zero sense at half tempo.

2. Beethoven's Hammerklavier was considered unplayable for a significant period of time. This makes much more sense when Czerny's (very fast) MM of 138 is taken at face value.

3. Schumann's Toccata was dubbed the "hardest piece ever written" by the composer. Again, this makes more sense when the contemporaraneous MM suggestions of 96-107 are taken at face value. This surely cannot have been the "hardest piece ever written!"

4. Many composers wrote timestamps as to how fast they wished their piece to be played. Brahms, for example, gave timestamps for some of his symphonies. There are historical notes of an 5 hour performance of the Gotterdammerung, fairly consistent with today's practices. They all contradict Wim's method of counting time.

5. Wim claims that his theory is supported by the fact that Czerny's tempi are impossible. This is not altogether true. On the lighter actions of older pianos, his tempi can and have been achieved by today's virtuosos. Perhaps Wim would go into conniptions if he were to see this:






6. There are dozens of recordings done by pianists who have indeed come in contact with the old masters. Why do they play equally quick-or even quicker-than the pianists of today? If Wim is correct and that the performance speed gradually sped up to what it is now, why are there recordings of pianists that are much faster than what is commonly seen? Cortot and Rachmaninov, for example, play Schumann's Carnaval almost 5 minutes faster than most modern recordings. Did Francis Planté (born in 1839) really double his tempos of the 
at the ripe old age of 89 in order to make his recordings conform with modern practices?






7. Wim Winters postulates that there was a specific moment in history-somewhere in the late 19th century-where metronome practices changed from whole beat to half beat. That begs a question: why? And why was this not recorded in the orgy of historical evidence we have from the 19th century? This isn't like finding out if Moses was a real person or not where we have scant evidence either for or to the contrary. We have THOUSANDS of documents from the era and even RECORDINGS from the era-and none mention this missing link of a time shift which if it were true, would've been a historic, nay, MOMENTOUS shift in the history of music.

Does nobody remember the uproar at Glenn Gould's shift in tempo playing Beethoven? Or Barenboim's unorthodox tempi doing the same? Why, then, was there no similar uproar in the 19th century when tempos were suddenly or gradually doubled?

Out of all the holes in Wim's theory-any of which are capable of bringing it to an intellectual standstill-this is the most damning.

*Conclusion*

Being that Wim's entire theory of inanity was brought about by Czerny's admittedly fast readings of Beethoven and Bach, let's come to our own conclusions about this little issue.

Perhaps Czerny really was a madman. After all, his etudes (some with instructions to repeat 30 times in a row) do support this idea, and it's certainly a more believable theory than halving every single metronome marking in existence just to make Czerny's more plausible. Occam's razor really does shine through in this scenario.

Perhaps his metronome was broken. After all, metronomes were a fairly new technology back in his day. It is not inconceivable that his had a flaw that rendered it slower than usual.

Or perhaps Czerny and Wim Winters both had similar artistic ideals, just to opposite extremes. I'll leave it up to you to decide.


----------



## Guest (Jun 22, 2020)

Sorry...wrong thread!


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

chu42 said:


> https://youtu.be/dYrJXXN_8hk







"By the 1930s, even the 90-year old veteran pupil of Liszt, Francis Plante, who had heard Chopin play, and won his first piano prize in 1850, had been recorded for posterity on wax and celluloid. These films now serve as a window into a lost age of performance, where personality, improvisation, and a sense of harmonic structure were at least as important to performers as technical precision."


----------



## Guest (Jun 22, 2020)

Indeed, these performances are now 'documents' which link one era of music to another - and I'm very glad we have them. Also, the early recordings made by Arthur Nikisch (who was a friend of Brahms). They don't necessarily represent a musical continuum because just listen to the use of portamento in this amazingly clear recording from 1913. However, had the HIP movement not stopped everything in its tracks we may very well have found music simply carrying on late 19th century traditions - 'hearing' the works and performing them on that basis. To some extent that did happen, in spite of leaner orchestral forces making compelling cases as to 'authenticity' and sound. Some have called this "pedantic".






That recording was chronologically closer to Beethoven himself than we are to Nikisch!!


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2020)

Knorf said:


> I'm sorry, but no. This is not worth anyone's time, *unless you are entertained by cranks and nitwits*.
> 
> Wim Winters has no credentials as a music scholar, employs a great deal of fallacious thinking and totally misguided assumptions, and comes to conclusions that are utter nonsense. He is not a musicologist.
> 
> ...


*Cranks* and *nitwits* are two of several reasons I enjoy reading stuff on this forum - and I do indeed find it entertaining.
As to Wim Winters and the link I gave above, I maintain I found it fascinating as an idea, I never said I endorsed it.
Much more interesting are the references he makes to the article by Marten Noorduin, _Czerny's 'impossible' metronome marks_, which you can easily find and download on the web (I did so via JSTOR).
Another point that grabbed my attention in the Winters video was Czerney's note in his preface about the tempi that Beethoven himself used in some of the fugues, suggesting that LvB took them fast, too. Impossible to prove, of course, and Czerney may be recalling such things erroneously a decade or two after the event.
Still, whatever the demerits of the Winders video, it has opened up a hearty discussion about MM, Italianate tempo markings and, more broadly, what is musically appropriate.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2020)

pianozach said:


> Funny that Czerny cites Beethoven as his authority on tempi, but it's well known that *Beethoven's metronome ran fast.*
> 
> The gentleman giving this little thesis compared tempi of various players, and observed that only Glenn Gould came closest to Czerny's crazyfast tempo markings. Gould, however, is notorious for his outside-the-box interpretations.


The Marten Noorduin article I mentioned just above touches tangentially on that point:

[...] _Maelzel's article from the _Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung_ [only cites] the first few lines in which the inventor complained about musicians not using the metronome in the right way_.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2020)

Knorf said:


> This is actually little to no factual support for this. It was always largely baseless speculation from a few who wanted reasons to reject Beethoven's markings.
> 
> Here's where Mr. Winters goes wrong. It's the same thing that goes wrong with innumerable cranks out there in the world. He comes up with a hypothesis. So far, no problem. He then looks for evidence to support his hypothesis. No, no, no, no. No. N. O. That's not scholarship. What a real scholar does is first look for ways _to falsify_ their hypothesis. So far, he's just a bad scholar. Where it really goes off the rails is that he rejects, without valid reasons, or hand-waves away evidence that contradicts his hypothesis. *That's what makes him and others of a similar ilk crackpots, like the people advocating for A=432 hz or whatever*.


Ah yes, those who believe that *A=432 is the natural resonance* of the universe and all that? It is, agreed, laughable.
Check this link out (University of Surrey / School of Arts): https://blogs.surrey.ac.uk/arts/2014/04/23/432-hz-so-good/


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2020)

chu42 said:


> Wim Winters' channel AuthenticSound is dedicated entirely to one of the most ill-conceived modern day conspiracies of any sort, indeed _the_ worst conspiracy pertaining to classical era, backed by about much evidence as the idea that 5g causes the coronavirus and that the earth is flat.
> 
> His theory brings up more questions than it does answers. Take, for example, his recording of Schubert's Wanderer Fantasy, at the "*speed Liszt would've performed it*".


Yes, that is dreadfully slow! And very boring. _Allegro con fuoco ma non troppo_, my foot! Too much of the _ma non troppo_, clearly.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2020)

chu42 said:


> 5. Wim claims that his theory is supported by the fact that Czerny's tempi are impossible. This is not altogether true. On the lighter actions of older pianos, his tempi can and have been achieved by today's virtuosos. Perhaps Wim would go into conniptions if he were to see this:


Excellent point. To quote the last paragraph of the Noorduin article: 
_The possibility that Czerny really did play these works at the tempi indicated should therefore not be excluded, which seems to be the most likely explanation for the existence of these indications. Given the fact that he was considered to be one of the best pianists alive in his day, he could have replied in the same way that Vladimir Horowitz allegedly did, when asked why he played a certain passage so fast: 'Because I can.'
_


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

TalkingHead said:


> Ah yes, those who believe that *A=432 is the natural resonance* of the universe and all that? It is, agreed, laughable.
> Check this link out (University of Surrey / School of Arts): https://blogs.surrey.ac.uk/arts/2014/04/23/432-hz-so-good/


On the other hand there may be those who will cling to a=440+ just to show how rational they are, unlike the "flat earthers". I happen to think a=430 or so does simply sound better. I've tried it on cello and guitar, and...it just does. Not for any cosmic mystic reasons necessarily. I haven't tried it on a piano yet; I may play around with my digital piano some time to see if there's any difference.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Knorf said:


> I'm sorry, but no. This is not worth anyone's time, unless you are entertained by cranks and nitwits.
> 
> Wim Winters has no credentials as a music scholar, employs a great deal of fallacious thinking and totally misguided assumptions, and comes to conclusions that are utter nonsense. He is not a musicologist.
> 
> ...


The Apollo program was a hoax? Oh no, my whole ethos shot down in flames. How will I go on! In the words of the Bee Gees, Tragedy!!:lol:


----------



## StevenOBrien (Jun 27, 2011)

I actually like Wim's performances, and I used to find his channel to be an excellent resource for learning about HIP performance practice. The recent (imo bad faith) peddling of his theory as the one true historically correct way to play pre-1850 compositions has been very disappointing to watch.

His theory is demonstrably false. There are countless sources (some from the composers themselves!) which show that modern tempi are roughly in line (perhaps slightly slow) with the tempi the composers expected. Someone compiled a wonderful 80-page pdf that gathers all of these sources together: https://www.mediafire.com/file/zclp63qdpqeqwz3/Historical_Tempi.pdf/file

To just pick one example from that, here's a play-bill for Don Giovanni from within Mozart's life-time:









It ran from 7PM to 10PM. It didn't run for 5-6 hours until 1AM or 2AM as it would have to for Winters' theory to hold any water. Maybe he wants to argue that clocks ran at half-speed in those days too.


----------



## Guest (Jun 25, 2020)

StevenOBrien said:


> Someone compiled a wonderful 80-page pdf that gathers all of these sources together: https://www.mediafire.com/file/zclp63qdpqeqwz3/Historical_Tempi.pdf/file


Thanks for that, a very useful compilation.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

this is another funny thing done by Winters:


----------



## Guest (Jun 25, 2020)

hammeredklavier said:


> this is another funny thing done by Winters:


It's about as funny as having your heard drilled open and filled with litres of concrete.


----------



## StevenOBrien (Jun 27, 2011)

pianozach said:


> but it's well known that Beethoven's metronome ran fast.


"His metronome was broken and ran fast"
"He was deaf, he didn't realize what he was doing"
"Composers always write tempi that are too fast, and their metronome markings should be ignored"
"The action of pianos was lighter back then"

etc. etc.

I've always found it strange that certain scholars/performers can't seem to accept that maybe the crazy, erratic genius who wrote the Grosse fugue also wanted eccentric tempi for some pieces.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

hammeredklavier said:


> this is another funny thing done by Winters:


I don't hear anything funny. Although the tempos are slowish, I enjoyed the performance; piano sounded okay to me.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> I don't hear anything funny. Although the tempos are slowish, I enjoyed the performance; piano sounded okay to me.


Perhaps that one isn't so bad but try this for speed. Or not for speed, depending on your perspective.






Zzzzzz


----------



## StevenOBrien (Jun 27, 2011)

I feel an overwhelming sense of helplessness when I'm 10 minutes into one of Wim's recordings and the exposition is only now repeating.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

chu42 said:


> Perhaps that one isn't so bad but try this for speed. Or not for speed, depending on your perspective.


I think it's fine for an in-home recital. I'm at home and enjoying it. However, over an hour is a bit much.


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

chu42 said:


> Perhaps that one isn't so bad but try this for speed. Or not for speed, depending on your perspective.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sorry to say this about my beloved composer's music, but it's really awful. It makes no sense to me at all. Sounds like someone was rehearsing before a concert or as not very successful prima vista playing. It reminds me of a scene from Amadeus where the emperor tries to play a welcome march... To quote Knorf, "No, no, no."


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Speaking of Czerny's edition, I got my copy out this morning and I noticed that that edition would be *much* harder to play "prima vista" than a "cleaner" edition like the Bärenreiter. In my (of course) subjective opinion, the Czerny edition is so "busy" and somehow over-edited, like the von Bülow-Lebert edition of Beethoven's sonatas. Both of them seem to be suited more for silent reading away from a keyboard than practical playing.


----------



## ribonucleic (Aug 20, 2014)

I’m inclined to take the word of András Schiff on musical matters. And he says, having handled Beethoven’s metronome himself: “It works.”


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

ribonucleic said:


> I'm inclined to take the word of András Schiff on musical matters. And he says, having handled Beethoven's metronome himself: "It works."


I think Herr Schiff overstepped a bit on that one. Beethoven's metronome _does _survive, though it's missing its counterweight. So while the mechanism may seem intact and working, there's no way to know if its tempi were accurate.

That said, Beethoven was a professional musician who gave piano and composition lessons even on days he was totally deaf, depending on sight only. I would guess he would notice if his metronome were really out of calibration.


----------



## ribonucleic (Aug 20, 2014)

KenOC said:


> Beethoven's metronome _does _survive, though it's missing its counterweight. So while the mechanism may seem intact and working, there's no way to know if its tempi were accurate.


All I know is that if Yuja Wang can play the opening of the Hammerklavier that fast (while half naked, to boot), there's no excuse for the slowpokes.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

DaddyGeorge said:


> I'm sorry to say this about my beloved composer's music, but it's really awful. It makes no sense to me at all. Sounds like someone was rehearsing before a concert or as not very successful prima vista playing. It reminds me of a scene from Amadeus where the emperor tries to play a welcome march...


Come on now. Weller plays much better than the Emperor. :trp:


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> Come on now. Weller plays much better than the Emperor. :trp:


Playing better than the movie emperor isn't so difficult for a professional. But it was an exaggeration, of course. 
Anyway, that interpretation is really off...


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

ribonucleic said:


> I'm inclined to take the word of András Schiff on musical matters. And he says, having handled Beethoven's metronome himself: "It works."


I love Schiff's performances of the Beethoven sonatas. I could be wrong but I don't think he uniformly follows those "crazy" Beethoven metronome indications.


----------

