Dear Anthony,
My comments are below yours:
Anthony Hind wrote:
Le 4 févr. 09 à 22:08, Martin Shepherd a écrit :
Dear Anthony and All,
Please don't use me as a metronome! I haven't checked this
particular performance against a metronome, but I can confidently
predict that it will be seriously adrift of strict time. Whether it
should be, of course, is an interesting issue.
I suppose there needs to be, at least some sort of suggested
stability, if we want the variation from that strict pattern to be
understood as significant?
Yes, that's why it's so important to establish the stability for the
listener - see below.
For years I never used a metronome, because the only one I had was a
wind-up mechanical one which sounded wrong to me and I never trusted
it. With the advent of the electronic variety, I started to
experiment and found it a very useful tool. If your score is on the
computer, and Fronimo can play it for you, that is also interesting.
I can't get used to a mechanical one, either, it sounds too equal,
and thus hurried. Like the Tocsein, it seems to tell you to go faster
than it is going itself. In fact I had the same problem with an
elctronic one which had no variable intensitiy of the beat. I finally
found one that does, and that is easier to use, but somehow I just
don't like being disciplined by a machine, even if I am the one that
sets the pace.
I have a Mac, and haven't got round to making it PC compatible.
Varying intensity of beat can be useful, as can experimenting with
longer or shorter subdivisions - e.g. if you're playing at minim=40, try
setting the metronome to 20, 40, 80, etc.
Another tip (from Stewart McCoy): play a piece at normal speed to the
metronome, then notch it up faster and faster. Surprisingly, we can
always go faster (up to a point). Then notch it down slower and slower,
until it is much slower than the normal speed. Things will start to
break up - playing slowly is very difficult. You can learn some
interesting things this way.
I often hear amateur lutenists who are so intent on stability that
they seem robotic, but I imagined that might be a necessary phase
through which the learner has to go while mastering tempo. Would you
encourage your students to take liberties, even from the beginning?
I wouldn't encourage anyone to play robotically, but I would insist on
clarity - the listener has to be able to "get it". If taking liberties
is being sloppy or unclear, I'm dead against it. I think it's important
to distinguish between rhythm and other aspects of timing. People often
talk about "rubato", the conventional wisdom being that any time you
steal you have to pay back. In fact this never happens - nor should it
- if one note is played later than normal, it makes no sense to play
subsequent notes earlier than normal, in fact what actually happens is
everything gets displaced from there on. It is always a mistake to play
a note too early, often very effective to play it a bit late.
The trouble with lute players is they have a tendency to indulge in
random variations in timing which they call being "expressive" - but as
you say, it's only expressive in relation to a context. If you mangle
the rhythm of the piece so the listener loses that context (the basic
rhythm of a pavan, or whatever) you have also lost all possibility of
being expressive. One could make the same point about spreading chords
- if you do it all the time, it loses its point and destabilizes the
rhythm. Talking of which, the most difficult bit of playing that
Cutting pavan (also Lachrimae, etc.) is playing the first chord, and
then (possibly even more difficult) the next note. I still haven't got
it right...
Best wishes,
Martin
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
