Klarinet Archive - Posting 001040.txt from 1999/12

From: "Dee D. Hays" <deehays@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Tempos over time
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:18:58 -0500

----- Original Message -----
From: "George Kidder" <gkidder@-----.org>
Subject: Re: [kl] Tempos over time

[snip quote]
>
> Yes, I realize (and indeed approve) of that. But the question was, "Is
> there any hard evidence as to any change in the meanings of these terms
> over time?", and the only real evidence from the pre-recording periods
> might be found in the markings on the earliest metronomes. We already
> "know" (from only two data points) that the meanings of these terms have
> shifted to faster tempi over the last ca. 100 years, and suspect (from the
> tempi now used to play older works) that this change might have been going
> on before that. Can anyone add more data points? Somewhere in museums
> there must be older metronomes marked both in words and beats per minute,
> or marked in words and still operating so they can be tested for bpm. I
> have not seen such, and was wondering if anyone else had. With luck we
> could extend the time back nearly another century and see if this trend
> continues.

[snip interpolated quote]

> And has this tradition changed over time? Clearly, tempo markings are
> meaningless if there is not some general agreement as to what they mean.
> My thesis (based on two data points) is that the generally accepted ranges
> have changed over time, and I am looking for more data.
>

Have you surveyed all (or at least a very broad sample of) currently
produced metronomes and orchestration books to see if they agree on the
meanings of the words? If you do not find current agreement, then comparing
*one* metronome of today to *one* of the past is hardly enough to kick off a
study of changes of tempo standards. Not only would you need to survy a
broad spectrum of today's metronomes but also a broad spectrum of metronomes
of each time period to see if they agree for that time period. If you just
use one from each time period, it has little meaning. The data points would
be too few to be anywhere near statistically valid. Plus for older time
periods, when there was less contact from city to city and country to
country, you will need to include mutiple samples from different areas.
Bear in mind that it is known they didn't agree on a pitch standard so there
is a good probability that they did not agree on a tempo standard.

Before undertaking such a study, you need to establish a methodology and
determine a meaningful sample size.

Also for the last 70 years or so, recordings are available. I think if you
were to take a specific piece and track down a broad range of old and new
recordings of it, you would find variability in tempo among the different
orchestras in each time period just as you do today.

Metronome markings are not the dictators of tempo but the result of the
manufacturer's opinion on the typical meaning. The best use of these, is to
establish a steady beat at the selected tempo so that students can learn to
hold that steady beat. Otherwise in playing alone, a person unknowingly
drags in the hard parts and rushes in the easy parts.

I would also suggest to you that the metronome markings are based on the
underlying concept of a quarter note for the beats per minute. If you are
playing 6/8 time counted in two beats, using a tempo of 120 beats per minute
for "allegro" has a good chance of being too fast for the piece but a tempo
of 80 bpm gives the same duration to the eighth, sixteenth notes, etc as 120
bpm would be for a piece written in say 3/4 or 4/4.

Now if the composer has specified beats per minute in his composition, we
should honor that. But if he/she has used only a verbal description,
forcing it to a corresponding metronome marking will very often not make
sense. Verbal descriptions have to be interpreted in terms of the overall
composition. Different composers will have meant different tempos. The
same composer in different pieces will have meant different tempos. They
are (and were) after an effect not a specific tempo.

English speaking composers are now often using English in their scores. I
have yet to find "calming" or "lively" or "bouncy" or "majestically" on a
metronome. I've seen all these in scores. The composer wants an effect not
a specific tempo.

What I am trying to say is that verbal tempo indications are not meaningless
even if we never reach a consensus on what is the corresponding bpm. Look
at the original meanings of the Italian terms and work the music
accordingly. These tempo terms could justifiably be called expression terms
rather than tempo terms. The composers didn't agree on the terms so we will
not really be able to either.

Dee Hays
Canton, SD

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org