About Time

metronome

The best of time.

metronome

The worst of time.

As I wend my way eastward on my annual migration to Tanglewood for the summer–currently passing through Denver–thoughts return to music. I recently read a very perceptive article by Scott Cantrell in the Dallas Morning News. Mr. Cantrell bemoans what he perceives as the dogged adherence to the metronome by young American-trained conductors. He writes: They’re more apt to be metronomes, efficient but heedless of musical shape, harmonic rhythm, direction. Digital, in the bad sense. They seem unaware that music, like our heartbeats and respiration, needs a certain amount of freedom within a well-ordered overview.

I recommend you read his entire article because it contains many points that resonate with orchestral musicians. If I have any bone to pick at all with Mr. Cantrell’s observations, it’s only that my experience has been that the conceptual limitations of conductors are not necessarily restricted to those who are American-trained, nor those who are young.

The central issue is rhythm, and understanding how rhythm works in a musical context. Too often these days, a good sense of rhythm is equated with being able to keep a metronomic beat, when, the opposite is true. Good rhythm means having an understanding of the rhythmic ebb an flow of musical phrases within the broader scope of an entire movement, and an entire composition. The paradox is that even though the music must have a sense of a constant pulse, within that pulse there has to be constant give-and-take based upon the direction of the melodic phrase, the harmony, the more foreground rhythms, the density of the orchestration, etc. Those conductors who disregard those factors do so at the peril of making the music sound prefabricated and emotionless. They miss the essential purpose of music: to convey a subjective, not mathematical, message.

Don’t get me wrong. I often practice with a metronome and insist that my students do so as well. Why? It’s great discipline. You can tell immediately when you’re rushing those Mozartean 16th notes or dragging that lush Tchaikovsky melody into the ground. Once you’ve corrected your own internal rhythmic inaccuracies and you’re comfortable with the regular pulse of the music, though, is when the music starts. A mechanical pitching device might help you to hit a baseball in a batting cage, but it doesn’t teach you a damn thing about the game. Likewise, the metronome is a tool. It’s not music.

Screen Shot 2016-06-09 at 7.07.39 AM

Screen Shot 2016-06-09 at 7.09.42 AM

Sandy Koufax, human pitcher.

Why is this such a difficult concept for so many conductors to embrace? Part of it is historical, and we have several luminaries to thank (or pillory) for that legacy. First is Beethoven who, with his affinity for novel gadgets, took special delight in a device patented in 1815 by Johann Nepomuk Maelzel called a metronome. More or less an upside-down pendulum with a counterweight to adjust its speed, it enabled musicians with poor rhythm–of which there were many–to hone their skills.

 

Screen Shot 2016-06-07 at 2.36.34 PM

Johann Nepomuk Maelzel, Patron Saint of Misguided Musicians

Beethoven was so taken with the metronome that he decided to retroactively indicate the tempos for much of his music, notwithstanding his pesky hearing problem. There are two basic questions raised by these indications: 1) are they the Gospel; and 2) does this mean that, even if they are, a tempo must remain unchanged throughout an entire movement? I would answer with an emphatic “No” to both questions. Part of my answer is that the device itself was not precise, and like with watches from my childhood, would slow down and had to be frequently rewound. Another part of the answer is that it is simply musically simplistic to assume that a march-like first theme and an andante cantabile second theme are somehow legally required to have the same metronome marking. And look at the beginning of the last movement of his Ninth Symphony. If any conductor were to dare play that according to Beethoven’s hyper-frantic metronome marking, the entire string bass section would have him drawn and quartered. Yet there have been conductors who have answered those two questions otherwise; who have equated improvements in technology from the hand-wound, to the electric, to the electronic metronome; to bolster their faith in blind allegiance to an inexorable beat. Which is one reason I stepped away from full-time orchestra playing.

Please note that though after Beethoven it became almost customary for a composer to indicate metronome markings to indicate tempos, before Beethoven no one used it. It would be anachronistically impossible to play Bach metronomically. Sadly, too many musicians have tried to prove that wrong. Flexibility in rhythm was the true standard. Even a conservative, old fuddy-duddy like Leopold Mozart wrote about how a pianist’s right hand should be rhythmically free, lining up with the left hand only on downbeats. Why don’t any historically informed musicians these days give that a try?

In the 20th century, two giants of music, the composer, Igor Stravinsky, and the conductor, Arturo Toscanini, brought the notion of motoric rhythm to the forefront of music-making so powerfully that their influence still affects us a century later. I think there are important things to remember that make them exceptions rather than the rule: First, both Stravinsky’s music and Toscanini’s conducting were in large part reactions to the excesses of late 19th century Romanticism, when tonality and rhythm and interpretations were stretched farther than Coney Island salt water taffy. Certainly, precision was the name of their game–partly. But another part was intensity. Another part was passion. And another part was “I am taking my own path, doing this my own way.” Playing metronomically is the antithesis of that conviction.

So young conductors who find the metronome their safe haven are missing the point if they think they’re emulating the great tradition laid down by these illustrious predecessors. Good rhythm means not being metronomic. It means understanding the underlying flow of the music, and then having the courage of ones musical convictions. As Beethoven said, To play without passion is inexcusable.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “About Time

  1. Stephen Rosenfeld

    Just the best!

    On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 9:29 AM, GERALD ELIAS – Author and Musician wrote:

    > eliaspattn posted: ” As I wend my way eastward on my annual migration to > Tanglewood for the summer–currently passing through Denver–thoughts > return to music. I recently read a very perceptive article by Scott > Cantrell in the Dallas Morning News. Mr. Cantrell bemoans wha” >

    Like

    Reply
    1. eliaspattn Post author

      Thanks, Steve.

      On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 8:42 AM, GERALD ELIAS – Author and Musician wrote:

      > Respond to this comment by replying above this line > New comment on GERALD ELIAS – Author and Musician > > *Stephen Rosenfeld commented on About Time > * > > The best of > time. [caption id=”attachment_2985″ … > > Just the best! > >

      Like

      Reply
  2. Liz Foulser

    Carpenters say “the right tool for the job.” The metronome is a great tool as long as you use it for the right job.

    Roland Small, the retired second bassoonist of the Boston Symphony, used to say that when he joined that orchestra he had to throw away his metronome, so great was their commitment to musical playing.

    Great article.

    Like

    Reply
    1. eliaspattn Post author

      That’s a very interesting comment, Liz, because I once heard from Sherman Walt (Roland’s section leader) that Sherman practiced with a metronome all the time, just to be confident his rhythm was accurate. As you say, it all depends how you use it.

      On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 9:42 AM, GERALD ELIAS – Author and Musician wrote:

      >

      Like

      Reply
  3. frances dearman

    About time: In a hospital setting, once, I was in conversation with the musician-nurse who wandered about the halls playing a large celtic harp for the dying, those experiencing significant pain, or anyone who asked. She said that THE flexible TIMING of live music gave her liberty to match her tempos to the breath and heart beat of the patient…. Recorded music could not do that. My colleague who worked the hospice ward reported that a gentle live guitarist could enable some patients to control their pain, sometimes better than meds. Especially when the body systems are too broken to deliver the drugs to where they’re needed….. Blessings, Fran the pastor

    Rev. Fran Dearman

    Interim Minister serving North Shore Unitarian Church, West Vancouver BC, 2015-2016.

    Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 13:29:31 +0000 To: fdearman@hotmail.com

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s