Do Scott Joplin Piano Rolls Solve Tempo Controversy?
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 03. 2019
- In this video I talk about the tempo controversy with regard to current performances of Scott Joplin's piano music and how the piano rolls he left behind help solve this controversy.
S U B S C R I B E to my channel here: bit.ly/2Cl0ta2
I also briefly discuss Scott Joplin's life and influences with regard to his compositional style. At the end of the video I perform the "Magnetic Rag,” using the same arrangement found on the 1916 player piano roll.
*** INFO CORRECTION! I state in the video that "Magnetic Rag was the last rag that Joplin composed in his lifetime. What I meant to say was that Magnetic Rag was the last PUBLISHED rag that composed in his lifetime. "Reflections rag" is actually the last rag that he composed for piano in 1917.
SIGN UP ON MY EMAIL LIST - www.nicksandersmusic.com - Hudba
Awesome video!!!!!
Thank you for checking it out!
I agree. Classical music is almost always played slower today than originally intended because we usually view it with a nostalgic lens when it was absolutely novel (and at times even rebellious) at the time.
Another bit of evidence is a recording of Brun Campbell playing the Maple Leaf Rag. Campbell was a student of Joplin’s and said that he played it as taught to him by Joplin.
Hi Jacqueline! Thank you for sharing this information. I’ll look into this, and if he was Joplin’s student then that is indeed a very interesting piece of evidence! Very cool 😎
I have heard his pieces and I believe they sound exactly the way Joplin would have wanted them played.
Campbell claimed to be Joplin's pupil - but there's no corroborating evidence and many scholars doubt the claim.
Either way, Campbell's rendition of "Maple Leaf" is nothing like Joplin's piano rolls or sheet music.
One of the problems with relying upon the Joplin piano rolls is that it's very possible that they were either heavily edited or possibly not actually played by Joplin. It has been reported that at the time he supposedly recorded those rolls, his health was in serious decline. Eubie Blake recalled hearing Joplin play and stated that he was so feeble that he couldn't get through his own Maple Leaf Rag. It is very possible that whatever the Connorized company got from those recording sessions was pretty much unusable and that one of their house pianists, possibly William Axt, had to rerecord the pieces. Some of the departures from the written score show up on other rolls played by Axt. Unfortunately, we will never know for certain.
Hi Todd! Thanks for this enlightening info! I'm always so fascinated by people who come across this video and add additional insight and info into this topic. In my opinion, given what we do know with regard to all facets of the "correct tempo" question at which the rags are supposed to be played, it seems safe to say it shouldn't be one extreme or the other (obviously too slow or at a break neck fast tempo). My thought is that most of the rags should be played at a moderately upbeat tempo (unless otherwise specified). Of course, within "moderate upbeat" there is a range of speeds from which to choose and it's ultimately up to the interpreter to decide. Aside from that, the Eubie Blake account is at the same time fascinating and sad given Joplin's illness before his death. Thank you for sharing!
@@NickSandersMusic Every scott joplin video on youtube has a debate in the comments that is about history haha. its amazing how passionate people are about him and getting the history right
@@Guidus125 it is amazing right?!
@@NickSandersMusic definitely! Im just happy people are interested in this type of music. im in my 20s and most of my peers have never even heard of scott joplin
I remember reading that they edited the piano rolls directly to make it line up, but that it's actually him playing. Not sure where you got that they got someone else to play it for him, never heard anything about that, only that he was not healthy enough to play it properly and it needed fixed. Decent hypothesis but not based - arrogant to say we'll never know! Pretty definitive in my mind. Official take, to me: is that the rolls themselves were edited, not a stand in. He wouldn't have wanted that, nor would the recording studio. It would have been stitched together like an old film reel. Irregularities would have stemmed from time constraints and lack of funding and the generally difficult task of making it sound right when you cut and paste them together that way. The original reels are surely marked with severe editing, also that can be easily proven. Given the fact that it's easy enough to do, just tedious work, compiled with anecdotal evidence I'd say it's open and shut case that's what happened. If he had a fill-in he could have recorded a lot more than seven. Bottom line is there wouldn't be reports of his playing not living up to snuff if some angry old guy wasn't up late nights stitching his rolls together.
Joplin was a genius.
OMAMA JOHNPAUL I agree with you 100 %
@@NickSandersMusic ..yes... a gift from god, he sure had... to enhance that genius!! never will be anyone like him!!
Great video! I always wondered if Joplin wrote the note about not playing ragtime fast as a way of removing it from the context of barroom and brothel music that his music had been when Joplin performed it for a living, as it was often played very fast so people could dance to it. A lot of music critics at the time didn't see ragtime as a bonafide means of musical expression and looked down at it. I loved the performance of Magnetic Rag at the end as well!
Thanks for your comment and I'm glad you enjoyed the performance at the end. You bring up another interesting point about the actual real world function of Joplin's music at that specific time and place in history; i.e. playing in brothels and bars etc. - Because of the specific conditions I often wonder if he played his compositions differently in private or differently depending on the situation/function that he was in at any given time while performing his own music.
Awesome video!! This is what I've been trying to explain to the so called "ragtime purists" for a long time now. I was good friends with the roll collectors/ performers / ragtime aficionados, Mike Montgomery and Trebor J. Tichenor, who both knew Scott Joplin's close friend and disciple Arthur Marshall. Trust me, they would both firmly stand in support of your video. A job well done!!
Hi Reginald! Thanks for this comment and wow that is super interesting about your friends who knew Arthur Marshall! Please feel free to share this video with your friends/subscribe to support the channel and thanks for watching and glad you enjoyed it!
@@NickSandersMusic You're most welcome!
I have been both a Scott Joplin fan and a piano roll enthusiast since my teens. I bought the “Scott Joplin -1916” album back in 1973 and it is still today one of my favorite albums. I particularly love “The Silver Swan” which was a roll possibly written and played by Joplin, but never published as sheet music.
In any case, I took these slower renderings as being true to Joplin’s ideal tempo, allegro non troppo! Some rag pianists were sloppy and just showed off their dexterity for the sake on a fast shimmy. I imagine Joplin’s rags as struts and cakewalks, not silent movie chases or romantic interludes (except maybe “Solace”).
But thank you for taking me back to the beautiful “Magnetic Rag”. I have several Joplin rags as rolls, but not that one.
Nick beautifully played and explained. Thank you for putting this together for us. ♥
Enrique Sanchez thank you so much for your kind words! I’m glad you got something out of it!
Great video Nick. Always love learning a bit more about the ragtime genius Scott Joplin. Keep these videos coming mate!
Thank's for listening and for your kind comment! Indeed Joplin is an amazing composer!
I've always wondered, is there any actual films of Joplin playing? Filming existed even in his day!!
Lovely! And this is the same tempo range my piano instructor taught me to play Mr. Joplin's music at many years ago. You can hear the nuance and the interweaving syncopation at this tempo. After all - ragtime was in effect, dance music. Imagine someone playing the main theme from Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake at 1/4=160 or 180 - its the same thing. I think the whole playing it faster and faster came with "cutting contests, " later. Much like the blues cutting contests that came after that. Cutting contests were generally held in taverns, and alcohol was involved. Thank you again for this analysis.
Cynthia Klenk thank you for this insightful comment! Yes I agree with you in regard to the “cutting contest” mentality. Most likely, it might have given the impression that the music was supposed to be played much faster and even sloppily. Obviously this shouldn’t be the case! - I’m glad to hear that your teacher must have done some research too with regard to the tempos for Joplin’s music. 👍🏼
What should not be forgotten are the restrictions placed on Joplin by the recrding equipment,this would almost certainly require him to play a little faster.This can also be observed on early blues recordings that seem to come to an abrupt end as the recrding medium only had a limited time to run before there was no more medium to work with.My benchmark for tempo as a listener would be the Nonesuch recordings by Joshua Rifkin and yes,the Magnetic Rag along with Solace a Mexican Serenade are for me the ultimate Joplin compositions showing more of a classicl technique.........................................
Thanks for your comment! I also noticed this with piano rolls by Debussy (Claire De Lune) feels a bit faster probably because of the equipment. I first listened to Rifkin’s recording of Joplin’s music and thought it was most likely a good reference as far as tempo choice but of course we can never know for sure. Always an interesting conversation to have!
Hello Nick!
I absolutely loved your video! Very informative! I hope we get more content from you soon... (If somethings happening that is preventing you from uploading, I totally understand)
Thank you so much!
I just found this, and have really enjoyed it. Thank you.
Thank you so much for listening! I’m glad you enjoyed the video too.
Great video!! As a bit of a nerd, I appreciate the history lesson and the evidence. And lovely playing!
Thank you so much for listening and your kind comments!
You play this piece really well, just listened to it twice in a row.
Thanks for listening Terry and glad you enjoyed the video!
The Joplin gabf played rolls were all released years ago on the Biograph label. There was one odd one out - a Uni Roll - which was edited less and wad much more chaotic. On the others you can hear Joplin just trying to get the notes right.
Qué bonito video, es muy interesante ver este video por el tema que trata, nunca me había percatado de esos detalles que mencionaste, qué increíble era Scott Joplin.
Scott Joplin es uno de mis compositores favoritos, me encanta oír sus composiciones cada día, me animan o tranquilizan muchas veces cuando lo necesito; aunque a veces por ello me siento diferente cuando estoy con mis amigos, soy un chavo de apenas 16 años, y al menos aquí en México la gente no está acostumbrada a oír música como el Ragtime, muchos de mis amigos de mi edad solo escuchan "Corridos Tumbados" o "Reggaeton", géneros muy escuchados por aquí; y francamente a mí me encanta el Ragtime, me encanta Scott Joplin, James Scott y Joseph F. Lamb, cada día disfruto de oír sus composiciones, me ayudan bastante cuando es necesario. ¿Debería sentirme raro solo porque me guste música gringa de principios del siglo XX?
Creo que este gusto lo heredé de mi abuelo José, mi papá me contaba que en los años 1970s y 80s mi abuelo tenía muchos cassetts con música de Scott Joplin que todos los días escuchaba, a él le encantaba Scott Joplin de verdad, escuchaba mucho Maple Leaf Rag, The Easy Winners, Sugar Cane Rag, y muchísimas otras piezas, su favorita era The Entertainer. Ojalá siguiera vivo, hoy se cumplen 11 años de que falleció, desearía que me pudiera ver tocar Maple Leaf Rag.
José de Jesús Martínez (1938 - 2013)
Awesome. Thank you. I absolutely love the Magnetic Rag. The Gladiolus Rag is also a favorite.
Thank you so much for listening!
Thank you! Been having this debate in my head since a young age. The majority of contemporary Joplin interpreters play it slow (sometimes approaching dirge tempos), but as I participated more in our local jazz scene in nola, I recognized how big an influence Joplin was on early stride pianists. It almost seems wrong to play Joplin extra straight, when he so clearly influenced the lively, improvisational style Fats Waller and James P Johnson popularized.
Of course theres no “wrong” way to play! But i think modern audiences might get more into Joplin if performers interpreted his music more as jazz than classical
Thanks for doing a great job exploring this very interesting topic. And you performance is really nice, very tasteful. However you seem to see your main point as being that Joplin intended a quicker tempo than is commonly thought these days. OK, I have heard occasionally some performances which may have been too leisurely, but surely the thing Joplin was getting at with his many ‘Not Fast’ etc tempo markings was to warn against the horribly fast ‘rinkeytink’ approach to ragtime which can still be heard very often and I guess must have been a plague of his own time too. I have noticed the same regrettable tendency in many interpretations of Debussy’s Golliwog’s Cake Walk (sorry but that’s the title), which is exquisite and rhythmically seductive when taken at a moderate tempo - just as Joplin pieces are - but an overexcitable mess when rushed along.
Hey Ronan thanks for this thoughtful reply. Yes I think your assessment here is good. I feel like the general consensus among ragtime players of Joplin's music is "Don't play too fast!" which I think is definitely moving in the right direction given the knowledge that we have from Joplin's own tempo markings and piano rolls etc. That being said, I feel like many interpreters of Joplin's music end up over doing it in one direction or the other....either way too slow, or making it into "an overexcitable mess." I personally believe that unless it was explicitly stated in the music, that the rag's should be played at a nice moderate-upbeat tempo.
great video and loved your performance of magnetic rag!
Thank you so much for watching and listening Susan !
Hello and thanks. Not a mention on the speed calibration of player pianos which was specified at feet per minute? Were those piano rolls played at the rate printed on them? Many said 80, 100, 140, etc. which is 8, 10, 14 feet per second multiplied by a factor of 10. Many people apparently went confused and thought that those were BPM. Only when one knows if the recordings of such player piano interpretations were made following the feet per minute rate specified, will we then have an authentic representation of what was “intended” by whomever.
For what it's worth, Richard Dowling (who a couple of years ago recorded all of Joplin) gave a talk at the 2019 West Coast Ragtime Festival about this exact topic. His conclusion was that Joplin played at the rate you suggest, moderate but upbeat and sometimes fairly fast. Perhaps there were more players going crazy with speed than to Joplin's liking, so he started adding the direction to play slow.
Hi Curt thanks for your comments here. That's great that you got to check out the 2019 West Coast Ragtime Festival! Glad to hear that Richard Dowling came to a similar conclusion. I definitely think it's possible that there could have been players during Joplin's time that were playing in a way that he disagreed with and therefore adding his tempo specifications. Thanks for commenting here!
In the score of Magnetic Rag the indication reads "Allegro ma non troppo" (fast but not too fast). This marking almost certainly came from Joplin's own hand as it was one of his few self-published works. This leads credence to the piano roll's speed as being true to the composer's intentions and I believe this tempo in general was what Joplin meant whenever he wrote "not fast".
Beautifully played!
Dee Dragoon thank you for listening!
I remember a Scott Joplin album recorded by Dick Wellstood in 1974 on the Pickwick label in which he said on the liner notes that he was actually playing one rag slower than Joplin's metronome marking, so he didn't want to get any letters from dissatisfied listeners that he was playing it too fast!
Your tempo feels exactly right. The roll seems the tiniest bit rushed which is probably the playback issue you mentioned.
Thanks for the comment and for watching David!
I think for musicians study of historical performance practice is just another tool to help create a better interpretation, and for them whatever tempo sounds the best is ultimately the right tempo. For historians this isn't the case though: their goal is to preserve as much information about the past as possible. Both are good and necessary.
Beethoven has the world thinking of the composer as some sort of genius prophet whose interpretation can never be added to which, as a composer myself, is just not true. Composers tend to be good interpreters and they have very valuable input on how to play their own music, but so do good performers, who are able to see the music more objectively than the composer. But it's important to preserve the composer's perspective as best as possible for musicians to reference, hence part of the value of music historians.
Hi Jesse! Thanks for checking out this video and for this insightful comment! I completely agree with you here.
clicked like before I even watched this video. Love this topic.
Excellent playing, to say the least! As to What's the One Correct Tempo, it's hard to say: Joplin's works can be played fast or slow; and each way brings out different dimensions. It's been said that a truly great piece of music can be played by different people, & each one brings out a different dimension. This is more true of Joplin than of any other composer. Still, thanks to Mr Sanders for the information & for his recording.
Thank you so much for this awesome comment! Of course anyone is free to play whatever tempo they wish but it is an interesting topic to explore nonetheless.
"What's up, everyone?"
My god, some of his pieces are really difficult!!!
Interesting video man!
exoticpianoman thanks for watching! Appreciate it and glad you enjoyed it.
Those boogie-woogie runs in the middle section are very interesting - had that been used before?
Amazing video!
Thank you so much for watching! :-) I'm glad you enjoyed it!
Piano rolls are fascinating in that they represent the earliest attempts to not only edit, but effectively, remix music.
Yes--as someone here mentions--Joplin's probable syphilis had left him in bad shape, toward the end. There's the very unfortunate "Maple Leaf Rag" piano roll from 1916 where Joplin stumbles and cannot keep time. Evidently, the piano-roll editors could not punch-out enough performance corrections to make the roll viable for public release.
Not to brag, but I had the opportunity in 1972 (as a near beardless and callow youth), to discuss Joplin with Eubie Blake during a PBS TV filming, hosted by Bill Taylor.
Blake said that at some time in 1916, during a Washington DC conference, Joplin had been coaxed (very reluctantly) into playing the "Maple Leaf". "Pitiful, just plain pitiful", said Eubie, as he autographed the LPs he was promoting.
All and all--and disregarding his late-in-life attempts to imprint his own style on piano rolls, Joplin and his music would have been so much better served if the opportunity had presented itself to record piano rolls via the Steinway Duo-Art capabilities. Allegedly capturing up to 90% of the piano performance nuances and tempo shadings provided by piano virtuosi such as Paderewski and Joseph Hoffman (to name a few), I can't help but think Joplin's classical background, and the relentless lyricism of his piano rags, would have found a truer and happier representation.
Your rendition was very enjoyable, thank you. I think the piece drags on more like a ballad if all the repeats are followed.
Thank you for listening and I’m glad you enjoyed the video Curt!
Beautiful rendition of that piece. I'm particularly into the Joshua Rifkin interpretations of Joplins music. I like the slow deliberate tempo. Your thoughts on this?
Thanks ! Yes I’ve checked out Rifkin’s recordings and I like them a lot. His recordings were among some of the first that I actually really got into when I first started listening and learning about Joplin.
@@NickSandersMusic Thanks for the feedback. Can you clarify what these piano rolls from Joplin are all about? Are they in fact a record of his actual piano playing? Is it like a punch card of his notes? I'm assuming there are no actual audio recordings of Joplin.
It is also possible that he wasn't the one that printed that admonition but the music publishers. I just don't see him forcing people to do anything with his music, but that is IMHO.
Really, Really good on the piano 🎹
Thank you for listening !
awesome
Has there always been an exacting standard for piano roll speed for recording and playback, such as a regulated rate in inches of paper per second? If so, then it would seem to elucidate the tempo definitively. But if player piano speed is adjustable or unregulated then it would tell us little.
Do not trust the rolls. Indeed, the pianolist (the person operating the player piano) has quite a degree of latitude in overall speed, rubato, overall loudness, accenting of notes, and selection of theme over the rest of a tune. There are usually at least three control levers, and the skilled pianolist has "educated" feet to vary the pressure on the pedals. These methods can bring the roll's performance towards the standard of a hand-played rendition.
All that said, when you hear a player piano the pianolist occasionally consists merely of a vacuum pump, sometimes a vacuum cleaner that has been pressed into service to overcome the effort needed on an old piano with leaky bellows. I am a skilled pianolist. Most people are not.
For those reasons you gain little information about the intent of the recording artist, and many rolls were produced on drafting tables or on a recording mechanism such as the roll-punching piano at QRS that was operated by the prolific J. Lawrence Cook. Editing of rolls was and is common. I've done it, on a drafting table I built for the purpose.
@@amazing7633 Thank you for the awesome explanation!
@@amazing7633 How do you edit them?
You played this great! Do you have strong opinions about sitting low at the keyboard?
Thank you for listening! I think where you sit on the keyboard varies from person to person and I know for me, I've changed positions a few times over the years but now generally prefer to sit lower...for some reason the feeling of being more eye level with the keys is more comfortable. Also, I love Glenn Gould and was inspired to sit lower because of him. That being said, it's important to always be aware of your body and being as relaxed as possible when playing.
I think the rolls provide some guidance on tempo but aren't necessarily the last word. I'm not sure how diligent roll companies were on setting the tempo. Joplin may have insisted on more adherence to the tempo, but we don't really know.
The flourishes and additions you mentioned, based on some analysis, appear to be the additions of the roll editors of the time. Though in this instance of Magnetic Rag, it's likely that Joplin did start with a slower tempo on the intro. The roll company wouldn't have gone to that much trouble to do that themselves.
Joplin had a fair amount of guidance in his sheet music too, regarding tempo. Its seems in general, that the tempos Joplin recommended were somewhat faster than are being taken today by classical performers playing Joplin's music.
Stanford is doing some good work with their Player Piano project. A recent analysis of classical works, played by the same performer on both disc and roll, show a very close relationship in terms of characteristics such as tempo and dynamics. Popular rolls were likely not fussed over as much as their classical counterparts.
While it's good to understand what Joplin's intentions were, ultimately it's up to the performer and what they like and want to convey.
Hi Paul - Thanks for your comments here. Have you listened to Debussy playing Clair De Lune? czcams.com/video/Yri2JNhyG4k/video.html - - it's noticeably faster than the "standard" performance tempo that is usually taught/suggested today. This may be because of the length of the rolls themselves or maybe Debussy was playing it that way. As you stated earlier, "we don't really know." Still, it's fascinating to have these rolls to at least gain a better understanding of a composer's possible intention. Of course, it's completely up to the performer with regard to interpretation.
Beautful rendition. Thank you. It's too bad Scott Joplin didn't make it clearaer for posterity on the tempo of his music by providing us with metronome setting. That would solve the mystery once and for all.
thank you for listening and checking out the video! Appreciate the support! And yes, it would have solved the mystery but we have to work with the information we have!
Very nice. What do you think of Joshua Rifkin's work?
Thank you! I like it! It was the first recording I heard of Joplin's music.
Great video. What speed did you pick here if going by m.m.?
Thank you so much for listening! It's about metronome 165 or so
@@NickSandersMusic thank you
I feel that Joshua Rifkin played the collected works of Joplin at the most perfect tempo.
We might not have joplin records but we do have video of cakewalks done in the 1900's. I think Joplin is best played between 100-130 bpm. Any faster and it's difficult to dance a cakewalk to unless you're a professional. 130bpm is fine if you're a professional dancer and I think 120bpm is the tempo Joplin is aiming for in his rolls. I think it's the same with modern music. If you want people to dance you can't be playing 140bpm. So for instnace, Super Freak by rick James is 132bpm, Staying Alive is 103 bpm. So really nothing has chanced in 100 years, people still dance to the same tempos and because of this I think 140bpm has to be wrong. That's listening to music not dancing to music.
That's a good point with regard to the cakewalks and also the dance element that seems to be timeless. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and checking out the video!
That Magnetic Rag almost has a boogie woogie feel to it at one part on the left hand.
Thank you for listening!
Is it required that modern performers strive to play composers' works at exactly the same tempo the composer played? I don't think so. For example, some of Rachmaninoff's performances of his own music (like the Elegie, for one) are much faster than than great Russian pianists of today. I am sure they all have heard Rachmaninoff's own recording, but they opt for a much slower tempo because Rachmaninoff tended to play his own music too fast. Composers are more composers than they are performers. Let the performers decide for themselves how fast or slow at which they choose to play Joplin's works.
Hi BachScholar -thanks for your comment. This is all very true what you are saying here and of course, anyone can play any piece of music however they want. They can even add new notes if they want to etc. - My video isn't some hard and fast rule about how other people should play Joplin's music. It's more of a discussion/exploration into what has historically been a controversial topic among specific specialists of ragtime music and Joplin's music. With that being said, I think it's fair to say that some tempo's most likely fit better than others with regard to certain pieces of music. There's a reason composer's often DID specify a tempo range or at least hinted at a ballpark range for a specific tempo realm. Of course, it's all technically subjective at the end of the day and up to the performer as to how they play any piece of music.
Ragtime is straight up fun. Play it at whatever tempo ya like!
Great piece! Was that some pre-boogie woogie in there too?
Thanks for checking it out! And...yes!!! Pre-boogie woogie indeed!
That stuck out to me as well. As a Texan I have always love Scott Joplin and boogie woogie, which are both Texan as well, and I have been curious about Scott Joplins influence on the creation of boogie woogie and the effect boogie woogie’s creation on Scott Joplin. There was a left hand ascending bar that sounded almost like a traditional walking bassline. It is so cool to see how interconnected music is.
My two cents: I think " not to play fast" meant don't play at presto tempi. There is a video of Joplin playing Maple Leaf Rag (piano roll) which is quite up tempo but definitely not fast. Check out his ornaments and improv (see link). Jelly Roll Morton is also featured in this vid playing same with even more liberty. There was also a video from some film (taken down?) of Zez Confrey playing his Kitten on the Keys at a ridiculous speed. Finally, William Bolcom very clearly states not to play too fast, but not to drag in his rags. Also, he admonished playing (his) rags in "swing" style.
czcams.com/video/qCfKH1AIWAA/video.html
I will check out this link here that you posted! Thank you for listening and commenting @ddgyt50 !
Here's Jelly Roll Morton, who was there during the ragtime era, performing Maple Leaf Rag the way he says it was performed in St. Louis: czcams.com/video/divhKPj6g0Q/video.html
We have many more primary sources. Pianists recorded ragtime on 78RPM records in the 1920s and 1930s. They didn't all just up and forget that ragtime used to be played a lot slower. We also have interviews and recollections from Eubie Blake, Willie "the Lion" Smith, etc. and they all describe ragtime as music that was meant to be danced to, where the pianist was supposed to embellish and improvise. According to them, you'd be looked down upon if you played exactly what was written on the page. The aforementioned records confirm this.
The whole "play ragtime slowly and exactly as written" thing came about in the 1970s when some well-meaning scholars tried to get ragtime accepted as serious art music. This was a good idea, but while arguing that ragtime was unfairly ignored because it wasn't played in stuffy conservatories, they went on to apply the same stuffy conservatory standards to ragtime itself. This is real art music, they argued, because it just cries out for rubato and expression, and VERY VERY SERIOUS emotions like longing and passion and sadness and other things that would never make you dance or even tap your foot or even crack a smile. Wrong. Ragtime is peppy, fun, happy dance music, and there's no reason in the world why music like that can't be respected as art.
Sure, you CAN play ragtime slowly with rubato, and sometimes it sounds pretty good that way. But there's nothing "more correct" about doing that.
great words here for sure! Thank you for your feedback. Super interesting to see so many people commenting and sharing what they have discovered as well about this topic.
The player piano lacks the ability to control the speed by itself to which the rags are played. It’s not the rolls that are the problem, it’s the ‘inferior’ mechanism of the player piano while the rolls are in operation. The modern player piano has the different capabilities of performing that mimics the actual pianist performing the piece. Also when the typical player piano is powered by electricity, the parts are not adaptive to maintain the functions of the pianos as it was once powered by pumping at the pedals which were used power the rolls. The evolution of the player piano continues on as technology continues to improve.
1:13, I see the flash walking backwards, and you.
😂!
Ragtime like modern dancce music, needs to be of a tempo to dance to. if you can do a simple shuffle and two step than it's perfect. If it dancable tempo than what do you need. Of course play slower for formal events and ramp it up for the youth. Bennie Morton Kansas City orchestras is a good place to start for reserach of danceable ragtime tempos.
Unfortunately, Joplin recorded the piano rolls when he was suffering from dementia paralytica-the final stage of syphillis. Hence they are quite unreliable representations of how Joplin conceived the music itself. Regardless of tempo, the crucial thing in performing Joplin’s music is rhythmic precision, so that the interplay between the different lines can be heard properly. As Joplin points out in his “School of Ragtime,” “Joplin ragtime is destroyed by careless or imperfect rendering, and very often players lose the effect entirely, by playing too fast.”
Wasn't there anybody who actually wrote down how they heard Joplin play? Surely a pianist was asked later to duplicate what he heard.
You have to remember that during most of Scott Joplin's adult life he was very ill with Syphilis which effected his neurological system which caused brain damage. Back then there was no medication for his illness, so I'm sure he had good days and he had bad days which means the music may not have sounded the same at all times. Also remember that a lot of it had to do with the environment he was playing in. If it was played at a bordello it would probably more than likely be played fast. Why piano players in competition to get paid and it was a party environment. If he was playing for the theatre I'm sure it was played much slower.
Coach Cookie thanks for this great comment and you are 100 % right. It makes complete sense he would have adjusted the way he played given the situation. I always find it fascinating that the tempos are such a hotly debated topic! Thanks again for sharing your thoughts!
joshua rifkin
Yes he has good recordings!
Joplin's ability to play had greatly deteriorated by 1916, so I wonder what effect that had on the rolls, if anything. I imagine they had to be redone a number of times.
It’s definitely a possibility!
Nope Mr Scott said play it slow. He meant slow it up obviously.
Reflection rag is actually Scott Joplin’s last rag, he composed it in 1917 and was published after he died but great video tho
VaughnYT thanks for pointing out this correction! I meant to say that it was the last published rag in his lifetime that he composed. I appreciate you checking out the video!
"Shortly after his death, publisher John Stark dug into his archives to pull out one final Joplin rag for publication. It is not entirely certain if this is a complete rag as originally written, or perhaps a fusion of themes from two or more pieces. Still, it is generally believed that the major content of Reflection was written about 1907 to 1908, and Joplin submitted no more pieces to Stark after 1909. It is unusual in that there are five repeated sections played in order, and no reiteration of any of them. This adds to the speculation of Reflection having been "assembled" rather than composed as a single rag." From Bill Edwards www.perfessorbill.com/pbmusic_joplin2.shtml
Joplin was proto-3rd Stream, duh!
Subbing for more Scott Joplin videos :)
Jeremy Franklin thank you so much for subscribing and checking out my video! I love Joplin’s music and plan on publishing another rag in the future. Feel free to let me know of some of your favorites and thanks for your support!
Sounds about the right tempo for Magnetic Rag.
Thanks for listening and checking out the video!
@@NickSandersMusic That's OK. I mostly play James Scott's pieces at the moment but its the same deal with them. There seems to be a "right" tempo for each particular work. The published metronome speeds are always on the fast side and I often wonder whether any of the ragtime composers used (or even owned) metronomes.
Joplin published the score himself and marked it allegro von troppo Joplin was sick and broke and probably not thinking anynone would care so he jazz it up but Jopins own printed score was Defititly classical if Joplin could see into the future he would might have played them more as he wrote them
Thanks for sharing your thoughts PJ and also thanks for taking the time to watch my video!
@@NickSandersMusic You welcone
Ok, one thing I would like to make clear is that Magnetic Rag as far as I'm aware has been agreed upon being at a tempo of 176 (it was written in quarter note time). Almost all Maple Leaf Rag midi files are at tempo 97 which is certainly not fast. Pineapple Rag is recorded at 80 bpm, the Entertainer is very commonly recorded at 60 but I think it sounds just as good at any tempo between 60 and 90 (90 is very upbeat and sounds great to me). Weeping Willow is played very slow in one video of the roll, about 60 bpm, Gladiolus Rag is very typically recorded at 69 and I don't listen to much Joplin other than those pieces.
That 1916 roll probably had significant editing, as when he plays Maple Leaf Rag on a roll in 1916, it's horrible, and he is suffering from the tremors.
good point to remember here Dayton. thanks for your input!
I've heard that 1916 MLR Connorized roll, and you can feel his illness in it, not edited out.
jop;ns very last rag was refelction rag done in 1917 just befire he died!
The King of Ragtime is Tom Brier🙏 not Joplin
There really is no way to know the tempo without having Joplin say it. Maple Leaf Rag is played anywhere from 90 to 120 bpm by most pianists. Weeping Willow is (in my opinion) almost always way to fast (100 bpm is certainly overdoing it). When I playback songs by Joplin in midi form I just wack a tempo that seems to fit the song. Maple Leaf Rag in two recordings on midi have been set at a tempo of 97 though many just set it right to 100 or 90 (90 is slowest acceptable tempo for me). If Joplin just wrote down 97 bpm or 60 bpm on is scores instead of the stupidly imprecise "Temp Di Marcia" or some other crud like that then we'd all be just fine!
Hi Piotr and thanks for your comment ! You're right, it would have been easier if Joplin would have written an exact tempo but I do think it's good to have some liberty with regard to tempo/interpretation. That being said, I think it's fair to say that a performer would like to find a "ballpark" tempo range that still has some freedom but doesn't stray too far from what we know of the time period Joplin grew up in, his own words about his music, other's words about his music and also the piano rolls themselves. Overall, I think that the tempo contreversy is an interesting topic and I really appreciate your thoughts!
For god sake that piano bench is to low your arms coming from your elbows should be like this \ not /
Thanks for your opinion and sharing your thoughts. Many pianists throughout history have sat at different heights. I’ve alternated from low to high to low to middle etc. - Glenn Gould is a perfect example of someone who sits very low, also Stanislav Ioudenitch who won the Van Cliburn a few years back. There are many others. Everyone’s body is different and while there may be some more universally accepted opinions about bench height, it still comes down to personal preference and being comfortable.
Sorry, but much of the haunting mystery of the piece is lost when it is played fast. It's much better sloooow.
"So that means that the piano rolls are the closest representation to how Joplin would have played his own music." *Absolutely not.* Your premises are entirely incorrect. You *have to* go by Joplin's comments on his sheet music. Piano rolls are an entirely different animal. They were scored simply for entertainment, not for authenticity. Your rendition of Magnetic Rag is played entirely too fast.
Thank you for your opinion @mikeymutual5489.
I have to disagree with you here. The piano rolls are in fact the closest representation that we have to how Joplin would/could PLAY his own music. Even if the tempo is faster on the roll because of the length of the roll or other factors, it still is the best representation of how he would have played Magnetic Rag. The fact that we even have anything at all like the piano rolls to be informed by is a fascinating blessing in my opinion. It sheds light on so many elements that are not in the sheet music or in Joplin's own comments. There's nothing better than being able to hear and listen to how the composer actually played his own music. Yes, there are tempo controversies with Joplin's music (which is the point of whole video!) but even despite that, it's still the best thing we have to get a glimpse into how Joplin perceived and conveyed his own music.
Let me give you an example using Magnetic Rag: there are broken octaves which are heard on the piano rolls version starting at measure 39 but aren't there at all in the sheet music. The broken octaves add a completely different character and groove to the music which is entirely lost only using the sheet music. Much of the bass, in fact, is altered significantly throughout the entire rag and differs greatly from the score that Joplin left behind. Whether or not it was simply for entertainment purposes vs. "authentic" etc. is irrelevant in my view. What does that even mean? Just because music is meant to be entertaining doesn't mean it's an inaccurate representation and therefore less "authentic". Also, who's to say that Joplin thought that the version he recorded on the piano rolls was "bad" or inauthentic? Just some things to maybe consider here..
At the end of the day, I will take a composer's actual playing of his own music to direct how someone performs the music over the sheet music alone and I think it's really cool that we even have the piano rolls in the first place to listen to how Joplin played his own music!
@@NickSandersMusic Again, you are making assumptions that are not warranted. Did you ever consider that Scott Joplin was NOT actually playing on these rolls? Or that he might have laid down a basic track, but that the manufacturer embellished his playing? Either scenario is entirely plausible, but you are blissfully unaware of this. EITHER WAY, the rolls were NOT released in a way that could be considered the "most authentic" version of the piece, as rolls were rarely true to the composers' original score. Stop being so naive - these rolls mean *nothing* as far as the piece is supposed to be played, and you look ridiculous trying to defend them.