Romantic Improv Edited

8/19/2019 Romantic Improv Edited

1/17

Making up Romanticism

Christopher Nicklin

Music 603D Romantic Music History

November 29, 2015


2/17

During the Romantic era music saw one of the most prolific times in exploring

fantasy in relation to reality. Opera was less about going to the event and becoming more

about the actual stories. The rich no long controlled music and using it primarily for their

entertainment functions. Rather everyone had the opportunity to enjoy and engage each

other on a musical level. Additionally, there was the exploration of one’s self and their

place of history. As a result this was an era where composers strained to make pieces that

would establish themselves in the music canon forever rather than just pleasing the

common people of the time. Composers would look into their heritage and how the past

shaped them. Nationalism would be an example. By looking in one’s self a composer

could create fantasy that helped enrich the reality that they dwelled in.

One of the most expressive forms of creation is improvisation. It was a tradition

that was practiced throughout the previous centuries of western music. Bach would

improvise toccatas and Weiss on the spot would create many fantasias. Stories of Weiss’s

improvisation were so great that Bach actual went to visit him and see it for himself while

in England. Later on in the classical era this tradition was continuing at a fervent pace.

Most people have heard stories of the genius of Mozart and his facility of improvising on

the keyboard. Improvisation became so important to performers that they competed in

improvisation duels. These duels conjure the imagery of two composers at high noon

staring each other down with guns. Some of the most famous of these musical battles are

battles between: Mozart and Clementi, Steibelt and Beethoven, Liszt and Thalberg.

Improvisation became one of the key ways to measure of composer’s compositional skill

in the classical era. In letters and stories about these composers improvisation is one of

the key ideals to compare one player to another. In the battle between Steibelt and


3/17

Beethoven it was noted that in the first round there was not much to separate them but as

soon as the next round of improvisation came along it was no contest because of

Beethoven’s prowess.

With improvisation having such a power to express one’s self at that moment and

romanticism being an era about expression and person’s fantasy in relation to their reality

one would think that improvisation would be one of the most important practices during

the romantic era. However, just the opposite was the case—improvisation declined

steadily, and that trend would continue into the twentieth century within western classical

music. Looking into the romantic era it is difficult to comprehend why this would be so,

as it would almost seem like a shoo-in for the 19th

century. To understand this it is

imperative that we look at the Classical era to see what it meant to improvise at the time

while simultaneously looking at composers who were pushing improvisation into the 19th

century. With this knowledge improvisation can be traced to see if the tradition continued

into the Romantic era and to see if improvisation changed with the centuries. When

looking at romantic improvisation it is necessary to see where it came from.

Improvisation played a huge role in western music through the entirety of its tradition

until the romantic era. The Renaissance is one of the clearest eras of improvisation.

However, because its style and tradition is vastly different to what would become the

romantic style, we will not look at improvisation during the Renaissance, Instead the

Classical era will be our guide to understanding what became of improvisation in the

Romantic era. Many composers have been noted for their improvisation. Mozart,

Beethoven, and Haydn are the dominant examples during the Classical era. However, that

should not exclude many composers that also participated in this tradition. It is just they


4/17

were the most documented and successful at it. At one soiree Johann Albrechtsberger,

teacher to many famous composers, was asked by Mozart to give him a theme to

improvise on. With that Albrechtsberger gave him a German folk song. Mozart spent an

hour with this German folk song creating variation after variation. He even created

fugues with this theme during that time, which impressed Albrechtsberger given that he

was one of the leading contrapuntalists of his time (Todd 46). This suggests that

improvisation was used in a way to display one’s virtuosity to the public. In this case it

was at a party and, as the way the text reads, it was treated as a game. One question that

arises is whether it part of the concert life. Many letters indicate that this was the case. In

January 1787 Mozart improvised for a half hour at the end of his concert (34). Due to his

ability he received so much applause that he was forced to sit down and play another

piece. Not only does its length indicate its relative importance in the concert program, but

it also showed that it was interesting enough to garner an encore.

Beethoven is another of the important improvisers of the Classical era. He also

helps bridge the gap to the Romantic era. Because of this, in many ways he can be

considered one of the first composers to improvise in the Romantic era. In one of

Beethoven’s letters he comments on being afraid of other pianists listening to his

improvisation. His fear is that they would steal his ideas and mannerisms while passing

them off as their own (Samson 127). This was important because improvisation was a

tool for gaining respect and notoriety during the Classical era. It was used as a form of

entertainment for the patrons to judge the worth of the composer. This is why it would be

nerve-racking to Beethoven to have other pianists copy him, because if everyone else

were doing what he was doing then he would not be considered great anymore. This is


5/17

especially difficult because performance and improvisation is what his career was

founded on. Another example of the importance of improvisation in the Classical era was

the piano duel, as mentioned earlier. These duels showcased all the techniques that a

composer needed to be a good musician. These skills would include a piece with

immense virtuosity, sight-reading, and improvisation. These duels could make or break

players, as was the case with Steibelt. Beethoven was involved in many of these duels,

one of the more famous ones being his duel with Joseph Wolffl. It was widely considered

a tie by most people at the duel. It is clear by all the letters of accounts of these events

that improvisation played a huge function in the music life of the Classical era.

One of the most prominent figures to look at in the 19th

century was Carl Czerny.

Even though he is not as well known for his music, even though he composed a large

number of pieces, his contributions to piano pedagogy and improvisation cannot be

overlooked. He learned piano under the supervision of Beethoven and Clementi. These

were two of the most prominent improvisers of the era. With the wealth of knowledge

that he gained he became one of the most prominent teachers to this date that has taught

classical piano. Some of his most famous students included Sigismund Thalberg and

Franz Liszt. The effects of his teaching followed even into the Modern era. Rachmaninoff

can even trace his lineage of learning to Czerny. (The Etude 287).

Even though his pedagogy and etudes for piano is the most well known aspects

that people remember about Czerny in history, his contributions to improvisation are

equally important. This is showcased through his students. Franz Liszt was well known

for continuing the tradition of improvisation. For that matter Thalberg had an illustrious

career that also involved improvisation in her playing. So successful were these two


6/17

students that they had a piano duel with each other, upholding the older classical

traditions. Even though it is known that these two students studied under Cznery it does

bring up the question of what they learned. These lessons were not recorded like they

could be today. This is where Czerny’s treatise on improvisation on the pianoforte comes

into importance. This treatise covers when and how improvisation is to be used during

the 19th century. Some of the most important chapters that are covered in this treatise are

the chapters concerning preludes, cadenzas, fermatas, variations, and single themes. In

the forward by Alice Mitchell she explains that the treatise does not explain how to

improvise as much as to extend the domain of what it means to improvise. In looking at

these treatises it can be seen that Czerny is more concerned with the performer knowing

when to appropriate improvised passages rather then how to construct a phrase. This

would lead one to believe that this treatise is directed to a player that can already

compose and is rather looking at more of the issues with organizing a structure for their

writing.

Czerny’s comments regarding preludes alters the perception of what people

understand about preludes today “if he does not begin directly with the composition itself

but is capable by means of a suitable prelude of preparing the listeners, setting the mood,

and also thereby ascertaining the qualities of the pianoforte, perhaps unfamiliar to him”(

Czerny 6). As was stated preludes were used to set the mood of the next work. If

anything it could be considered mini overture for a piece. One of the key differences that

are noteworthy is that the prelude is not to present one’s virtuosity, as were the

improvisation duels considered earlier. It is only meant to help aid the listener. Anything

more, as is written by Czerny, would be considered in bad taste. One other wording that


7/17

helps bring to light the purpose for improvising preludes during this part of the 19th

century comes in the wording “and also thereby ascertaining the qualities of the

pianoforte,” (6). One has to decipher the meaning of qualities of the pianoforte. There are

two possible definitions to his meaning. One is that one has to get used to the piano and

listen to the timbre of the piano. Therefore the prelude is used to get comfortable with the

instrument and quickly gain knowledge of the piano in the different timbre areas and how

to exploit them later on in the actual composition. The other explanation to this wording

is that Czerny is referring to the tuning of the pianoforte. Especially at this time tuning

was not as refined as it is now. Equal temperament as well as just temperaments along

with a few other variations were used at the time. The prelude could be then used to

figure out how the composition will sonically lay in the pianoforte as well as prepare the

listening for what type of tuning they will be experiencing. Czerny also notes that

preludes can be used to warm up the fingers as well as try out different instruments (5).

This would suggest that preludes should not be taken seriously and only meant to be used

as a way to get into a piece or to prepare oneself. In essence it is only warm-up material.

This is in stark contrast to today where the music in the forms of preludes has been

perverted. However, this will be considered more later on when discussing Chopin and

improvisation.

On page eleven of Czerny’s treatise he goes into greater detail about the

preparation and practice of improvisation. He starts off by saying one should practice the

same passage in all the keys and mix the passages that he has exemplified in the treatise.

This is similar in character to how jazz players practice improvisation. They frequently

practice certain lines or what they call licks in all twelve keys and execute them in every


8/17

possible way to make sure they can use the line in all instances. On page eleven he goes

further in saying, “know how to execute everything with such ease and lack of restraint

that the preludes maintain the character of a momentary fancy. For nothing is more

disturbing to the effect than the recognition that it has been drilled into the performer”.

Here Czerny warns on the lack of practice of lines but at the same time tricking the

listener into thinking that it has not been drilled into the performer. In essence he is

warning the performer to not fall into the trap of turning the lines they have practiced into

something preconceived because then it is no longer improvisation it is just a poorly

constructed composition and does not fit into the improvisation mold nor the category

composition. This can seem esoteric in many ways but at the same time people can

realize when something has been made up on the spot rather than just practiced for

countless hours. Another detail that makes this treaty in particular fit the category of the

Romantic era rather than the Classical is Czerny advocating modulations to remote areas

within a prelude, “it is not necessary to begin in the same key in which one must

conclude. Furthermore, even daring, remote modulations are appropriate in these

preludes, and whoever posses a thorough knowledge of harmony can easily indulge in the

most interesting ventures,” (11). This point more than anything else is showcasing what

was happening at the time. It proves, along with the examples provided, that people were

more explorative and contemplative with the keys they went through in a prelude. The

only thing stopping the performer is their imagination and knowledge of harmony. At the

end of the chapter he states that every performer should have the ability to play a prelude

before every piece they play or study as well introduce many different modifications to it

so that the performer does not perform it the same way every time. This emphasizes that


9/17

performances in general should have a level of spontaneity to them so that pieces or

preludes do not become stale.

In Czerny’s second chapter about prelude improvisation he discusses the idea of

extended preludes. On page seventeen he explains the appropriateness of using an

extended prelude before a piece. In essence he talks about rondos and theme and

variation pieces that just start with no proper introduction. In those cases it is appropriate

and not expected of the performer at the time to be able to create and perform a prelude

based off of their own ideas before it. The one rule that was brought up in the practice of

extended prelude improvisation that it must end on the dominant seventh chord of the

theme. This could be a rule bent in the future but for the sake and success of the

improvisation this would be a principal to consider heavily. Czerny suggests studying

introduction by good composers in order to improve on one’s own ideas. All of these

chapters so far as to express the idea that the performer is expected to create alongside the

compositions that they are playing and suggesting if anything that composers expected

their pieces to have preludes before them. That is why some composers did not write

introductions for their pieces. It was in order to let the performer to have more freedom.

Also, an alternate idea is that some introductions to pieces are just ideas that the

performer can either take or manipulate to their liking and what ever is written down is

just a suggestion.

This idea of inviting a performer to put in their own ideas also comes into play

during certain fermatas and cadenzas, “prolonged pauses appear very frequently in the

midst of a piece over the six-four or seventh chord, where either the composer has

actually inscribed above “Cadenza ad libitum,” or at least a fermata, which would not be


10/17

superfluous–or finally where a cadenza that has actually been written out but is much too

brief can be nicely extended,” (26). Here Czerny suggests that there are many

opportunities to improvise during a piece of music. It does not matter whether the person

sees the suggestion “Cadenza ad libitum” above. They only need to see a fermata on the

dominant or six-four chord to put in a improvisation. This does not mean that one should

be put in every time. One would have to think beforehand if it would make the piece

better or more interesting. In essence it needs to serve the piece. Czerny alludes to this by

saying, “these elaborations in music, just as in other arts, are a measure of good taste,

they arouse the attention of the listeners and direct it toward the following material,” (26).

Directing it to the following material are the key words. If the improvisation does not

serve the piece then there is no point in it being there. On another point that Czerny

makes is that some times the cadenza written out is not adequate enough for the music

and extensions can be made. This highlights the point that what is written does not have

to be set in stone. Pieces can be altered to fit the performers needs. It is all a matter of

knowing what is the typical performance practice in regards to where alterations can

typically be made. The argument could even be made that one could throw out the written

out cadenza completely. After all, cadenzas in publications could be there just so that the

performer has something to play if they do not know how to create one themself. It

should be noted that publications were typically made with amateurs in mind. It would be

problematic at best if the piece did not have a written out cadenza because if they did not

know how to create themselves they would have a unfinished piece. This is even part of

the reason why Czerny wrote A Systematic Introduction to Improvisation on the


11/17

Pianoforte. This treaty can be specifically linked to helping amateurs work on their skills

in musicality.

Looking at improvisation one problem comes to mind when writing about or

studying it. This is the issue is that it is not written down. The only thing that is typically

looked at is the letters and if lucky, as is the case with the Czerny treatise, look at

treatises about the practice of improvisation. On the account of letters there is no

problem. There are countless accounts of composers well into the 19th

century

improvising, especially in the art of preluding. The reason for this not being noted now is

the fact that composers did not make suggestions to improvise a prelude as they did with

cadenzas (Goertzen 1996). As was stated earlier Clementi, Beethoven, Mendlssohn,

Schumann, Liszt, and Brahms were all noted for their improvisation within many

accounts, (Levesque 109). This would suggest that virtually every composer that

performed had this ability. This would exclude composers like Wagner because he was

not a performing musician like the rest. This would suggest that Chopin was an

improviser and this turned out to be the case. Much of this can be heard in his music,

which has improvisation-like qualities. Pieces like his Nocturnes follow a structured first

section and then are varied over and over again until they are finished. This would leave

one to believe that his Nocturnes could have once been improvisations and then he later

then decided to write them down on paper.


12/17

As can be seen from the examples above from Copin’s Op.9 no 2 he is constantly varying

the same ideas over again. He is not so much writing anything new as changing ideas

over and over again as if the Nocturne is a standard for Jazz. Along these lines it brings to

question what other pieces he has written down that are actually based off of his own

improvisations or meant as a showcase of what could be improvised. “Collections of

composed preludes occasionally contained title pages indicating that they were not only

published for performing, but were also examples intended for study, borrowing,

imitating, and improvisatory modeling. To enhance their marketability, these collecting

were sometimes arranged by difficulty level instead of tonality,” (110).

As can be seen from this score from Wessel & Co the words “This work forms book 5 &

6 of Chopin’s grand studies”. Wessel and & Co had exclusive rights to publish Chopin’s

music in England from 1836 on

(http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/institutions/detail/id/1725). This particular image comes

from their publication of the 24 preludes from 1840. The particular wording of Chopin’s


13/17

studies can make one allude to the idea that Chopin’s 24 preludes are no more than

compositions based off of Chopin’s typical improvisations. If this is indeed the case then

these 24 preludes are an invaluable tool in order to understand how people improvised

during the 19th

century. This is especially true due to the fact that these preludes are not

connected to pieces afterward as are the Well temper Clavier by Bach as well as other

pieces. If anything this set of preludes more closely fits the idea set forth by Levesque

that these preludes were meant for study and ideas. Given the fact that Chopin was a

piano composer and improvised countless preludes it would not be a stretch to say that

these preludes in particular are based off his best improvisation. Chopin does go through

countless amounts of characters and figurations during these preludes that would further

suggest that they were more based of his improvisation rather than fully thought out

compositional style. The prelude that easily exemplifies the idea that his preludes are

improvisation preludes rather than worked out works is number 4 in E minor. The

melody is just a simple descent from the 4th

beat to the 1st for every measure with an

occasional flourish in the melody at two different points to build tension. To further the

point the accompaniment are just block chords that change typically one note at a time.

The piece goes on a type of exploration of the tonality of E minor. If anything this

prelude perfectly exemplifies Czerny’s ideals for a prelude that is improvised. With this

knowledge one can use these preludes as evidence of what type of improvisation was

going on at the time concerning preludes.

One has to consider whether any other instruments followed the ideas of

improvising preludes for pieces. One instrument that would come to mind is the guitar.

The guitar has a rich history in the Classical era that mirrors that of the piano, even


14/17

though it may be less successful. Based off of the fact that Tarrega idolized Chopin, this

would also help strengthen the idea that Tarrega’s written preludes are also just written-

out ideas of his improvisations. Evidence of this can be based on the idea that all of his

preludes are simplistic and considering that Tarrega only played concerts in a salon,

where improvisation was most practiced, it can be implied that all of his preludes were

actually just improvisations at one time.

This is just one line from Tarrega’s 7th

prelude but it shows that his preludes are easy in

nature and can be used as examples of what type of improvisation was going on at the

time during the Romantic era, considering that preludes were improvised in common

practice.

One has to question why improvisation started to decline in the Romantic era.

One can point to notation as being a reason. As the Romantic era came in Romantic

composers had more control over their music and progressively started to add more

details to their compositions. It is only natural that as more details that are added the less

a performer can make decisions because they have already been made. However, when

looking at Romantic era manuscripts and scores one can see that even though there are

more details than in the Classical era there is still definitely room to interpret and make

changes within the score. For example, Brahms does not write in tempo markings in his

score as a Modern era composer would. He just has the typical word markings like

allegro or adagio. What has changed the most that makes people today believe that

improvisation declined in the Romantic era is their perspective from today’s viewpoint.


15/17

In today’s Modern view composers have complete control over the music and it is the

performers job only to interpret exactly how the composer is feeling or in other words

getting into the mind of the composer. This is an exceedingly different viewpoint to what

the viewpoint was during the romantic era. During that time music was for entertainment

as it happened in the salons. Music was used as a social functions as other events are used

today, one example being football. However, today classical music is only really listened

to or practiced in a concertizing manner. The idea of social functions centered around the

enjoyment and fun of playing music has left the realm of classical music and because of

this it colors ideas of what was actually going on during the past.

The idea that some of the written music in classical music is just a suggestion

would be a shock to many people who come to classical concerts these days. One could

imagine people rioting if someone played a prelude they had improvised for Beethoven’s

sonata Pathetique or if someone wrote a prelude for the Moonlight sonata. In general

someone should use good taste when deciding when to put in a prelude or when a piece

does not need one but the option should be open rather than never exploring the idea and

never moving a piece forward. However, this goes into the issue of whether classical

music is just a dying museum of art. Although one has to contemplate whether what

made classical music exciting hundreds of years ago was either the spontaneity of

improvisation or the actual composition itself. A case could be made for both. As for the

case of whether classical music in the Romantic era had improvisation or not it can be

confirmed that it did. It is not exactly how people today would imagine it but it did

happen. It was not like the piano improvisation duels that are in our minds it is in all the

smaller details and the things that are not written down in history. For example would be


16/17

Chopin’s preludes, which were probably improvised. Many things that were written

down did not have to be taken literally as they are today because people are more worried

than ever now to play classical music as perfectly as possible as if it was a fragile thing.

Audiences and performers worry about respecting the canon of music too much today. It

is treated as if it were holy and must be taken with the greatest respect. If anything it is

free and should be treated as such, and explored to its greatest depths. This has not been

done for some time in the art of improvisation and that is why classical music has issues

today, because it is missing one of its components from the past. All the well known

Romantic composers improvised. Brahms, Liszt, Mendelssohn were all examples of

people who improvised and yet it is something not looked at thoroughly enough now. It is

a huge part of history that has been missing that must be rediscovered.


17/17

Bibliography

"Czerny, the Forefather of Pianoforte Technic." The Etude, April 1, 1927, 287.

Czerny, Carl, and Alice L. Mitchell. A Systematic Introduction to Improvisationon the Pianoforte: Opus 200. New York: Longman, 1983.

"Fryderyk Chopin - Information Centre - Wessel & Co. - Text." Fryderyk Chopin

- Information Centre - Wessel & Co. - Text. 2013. Accessed November 29, 2015.http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/institutions/detail/id/1725.

Goertzen, Valerie Woodring. 1996. “By Way of Introduction: Preluding by 18th-and Early 19th-century Pianists”. The Journal of Musicology 14 (3). University of

California Press: 299–337. doi:10.2307/764060.

Larry Todd Perspectives on Mozart Performance. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1991.

Levesque, Shane. "Functions and Performance Practice of Improvised Nineteenth-Century Piano Preludes." Accessed November 29, 2015.

http://upers.kuleuven.be/sites/upers.kuleuven.be/files/page/files/2008_1_13.pdf .

Samson, Jim. The Cambridge History of Nineteenth-century Music. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Romantic Improv Edited

Documents

Transcript of Romantic Improv Edited