The masterclass on performance practice on Érard pianos last sunday the 29th of March was a wonderful happening. I had the great pleasure to work with six very gifted young pianists. They were all students of the Amsterdam Conservatory and had practically no experience with 'authentic' pianos. The repertoire ranged from Mendelssohn to Poulenc and three wonderful Érards were available to us. They were manufactured in 1840,1850 and 1907, all three with parallel strings.

Many topics were covered during the masterclass. Of course there was much attention for the technical intricacies when playing on an Érard. How the different key action (less depth then on a 'modern' piano) and lightness of touch makes one consider more consciously the balance between one's finger action and the armweight. And how the transparency, clarity and natural resonance of the different registers influence the pedalling. Talking about key action, Érards invention of the repetition action made everybody more aware on how to use this wonderful feat whereby you don't need to use the full action of the key once you have pressed it. This made fast repeated notes and tremoli possible(It is no coincidence that both are an intricate part of Liszt's compositions). But it is also directly related to legato playing and there are so many colors as well as technical ease to be found by playing from the middle of the key action and not just from the top of the key. The students realised that this can also be applied to the modern piano that uses the same mechanical principle. With all of them it was marvellous to see how their understanding of the score was put in a new perspective. Slurs, dynamic and pedal markings whether from Mendelssohn, Chopin or Liszt could be performed 'literally' on the period instrument and would always work. In specific parts of the pieces the intention of the composer would suddenly become clearer to them. They realised how the instrument the composer might have used in his time could be a key to understanding his music even better. The question then came up on how to achieve this on the 'modern' piano. One might need more pedal changes and a subtle use of quarter pedal and half pedal. To me this will also broaden one's pianistical scope when these experiences about technique, pedalling and sound are taken to the 'modern' piano. To see all the enthusiasm from the students that came from these learnings was obviously an enormous joy for me. They were all amazed by the relative ease to transition from the Steinway to the Érard. Added to that they were happily surprised by the new ways they could relate to the score thanks to the instrumental possibilities. But the best experience was to see how they loved this different sound unlike anything they were used to until then Even when the masterclass was well over they kept going back to the Érards with their friends to play on them well into the night and be inspired by them.

Authentic or modern piano: holding on to a dogma or choosing for the wealth of cross-pollination?

At home, I have a Steinway. On that instrument, I learned to play the piano and I believe it is one of the most beautiful instruments around. When I was about twenty years old, I was fortunate to encounter “authentic” instruments, romantic pianos like Erards and Pleyels and even older instruments like Grafs and Streichers. It was a discovery of a completely new world of sounds and expressive possibilities. Of course, I took the inspiration and revelations that I received from these instruments with me to the modern piano. This resulted in a stimulating cross-pollination of expression and interpretation. Thus, it became more and more self-evident for me to perform the same repertoire on both old and new pianos.

I have always avoided the question whether a composer’s music should only be performed on a historic or modern piano. Performance practice has always been a living and dynamic concept through the centuries. The pianist of today has access to a wide range of instruments and he has the privilege of being able to choose from both the major “traditional” school of piano playing and the authentic school of performance practice which sprang up in the 1970s. The pianist of today is as much a child of Richter, Rubinstein and Kempff as he is of Harnoncourt and Leonhardt. There is no reason why a present-day pianist cannot justify Schumann as easily on a Streicher as he can on a Steinway (or the other way around). Having to choose one world to the exclusion of the other means giving in to a dogma and losing the wealth of experience that a combination of both worlds can offer.

There are certainly pianists who bridge the gap between old and new instruments, but unfortunately this is not a common phenomenon as yet. Pianists tend to belong to one side or the other, and travel between the two certainly cannot be taken for granted. While the music world has accepted this for many years with respect to other instrumentalists, pianists still tend to be assigned to one pigeon-hole or another. Therefore, I hope that the day will come when no one is surprised if a piano recital is performed on several instruments, even if the program is confined to the works of a single composer.

Paolo Giacometti - pianist


Thuis heb ik een Steinway, daar heb ik het pianospelen op geleerd. Ik vind het één van de mooiste instrumenten die er bestaan. Rond mijn twintigste heb ik het geluk gehad in aanraking te komen met ‘authentieke’ instrumenten, romantische vleugels als Érards en Pleyels en nog oudere instrumenten als Grafs en Streichers. Een nieuwe wereld aan klanken en expressieve mogelijkheden ging voor mij open. De inspiratie en de openbaringen die deze instrumenten mij gaven nam ik uiteraard mee naar de moderne vleugel. Er ontstond een stimulerende kruisbestuiving aan expressieve en interpretatieve mogelijkheden. Zo werd het voor mij steeds vanzelfsprekender om hetzelfde repertoire zowel op oude als op nieuwe piano’s uit te voeren.

De vraag of het werk van een componist alleen mag worden uitgevoerd op een instrument uit zijn tijd of op de moderne vleugel ben ik dan ook altijd uit de weg gegaan. De uitvoeringspraktijk is door de eeuwen heen altijd een levend en dynamisch gegeven geweest. De pianist van nu heeft een zeer rijk instrumentarium tot zijn beschikking en heeft het voorrecht te mogen putten uit zowel de grote ‘traditionele’ pianoschool als de authentieke uitvoeringspraktijk die in de jaren zeventig is ontstaan. De pianist van deze tijd is zowel een kind van Richter, Rubinstein en Kempff als van Harnoncourt en Leonhardt. Er is geen reden waarom de hedendaagse pianist niet evenveel bestaansrecht aan Schumann kan verlenen op een Streicher als op een Steinway (of andersom). Het moeten kiezen voor de ene wereld of de andere betekent het kiezen voor een dogma en het verlies van de rijkdom van de ervaring en combinatie van beide werelden.

De pianisten die de brug slaan tussen oude en nieuwe instrumenten zijn er wel, maar het is helaas nog geen gemeengoed. Pianisten behoren tot het ene of het andere kamp en heen en weer reizen tussen die twee is bepaald geen vanzelfsprekendheid. Daar waar de muziekwereld dit al geruime tijd accepteert van andere instrumentalisten, heerst wat betreft de piano nog steeds een hokjesmentaliteit. Ik hoop dan ook dat de dag komt dat niemand er meer van opkijkt dat in de grote zalen een pianorecital op meerdere instrumenten plaatsvindt, zelfs als slechts werken van één componist op het programma staan.

Paolo Giacometti - pianist