This recording of Debussy was performed on a piano outfitted with a Welte-Mignon device which unlike other piano rolls is very sensitive to touch, pedaling and dynamics. It was played back on a meticulously restored identical machine. It's far superior to typical piano rolls. Many Debussy lovers regard these recordings played by Debussy (released by Pierein in 2000) as extraordinarily faithful to the original performances as can be discerned by current play/ playback tests with a Welte-Mignon.
Thought I should bring this comment closer to the top for people like me who needed it explaining to them: "No, this is an audio recording of a piano roll. That is to say, Debussy played on a specialised piano with made cuts in a roll of paper as he played, this was played back more recently by a piano mechanism which translated the holes into which notes to play, and this second performance was recorded in audio, which is what is played in this video."
grace 73 Yes, it was preserved. I saw this device at the Music House Museum in Traverse City, MI where we were treated to the last section of Rhapsody in Blue that was actually played by Gershwin himself. The speed at which the music was played needs to be set by the person setting up the roll, but otherwise dynamics, touch and pedal are all preserved. These types of pianos have been known to receive applause after performances because of high level and quality performance.
Strictly speaking, the music was burnt into the roll, using a high voltage spark. No kind of knife could act fast enough to cut the paper as a pianist played. Presumably the holes were then enlarged to suit the playing instrument. These were no ordinary player pianos but had additional holes to capture the dynamics, so the playback is a very close facimile of what the original audience heard.
@@hughx5235 Hi Hugh, sorry, but you're incorrect. To my knowledge, the only machines that make perforations in a music roll by burning holes were: #1 an unknown machine (maybe even a small awl or fireplace poker) owned by the late Reszo Weiser of Budapest, who in the 1950s-1970s(?) used it to make custom rolls for his large build-up orchestrion, composed of parts of a Welte style 6 orchestrion, a Philipps orchestrion, and others. The late Siegfried Wendel found several rolls arranged by Reszo by burning holes in the paper when he rescued this orchestrion (and several others) from destruction in the late 1980s. I think these rolls are probably preserved at Siegfried's Mechanisches Musikkabinett Museum in Rudesheim, Germany. and #2 Mr. Don Neilson, major American mechanical music collector, commissioned an engineer to create a laser-driven roll perforator for him, around 15 years ago. The perforator only cuts (burns) one hole at a time, but can accomodate any hole size and spacing, and can cut multiple copies at once, the same as a regular production perforator (using sharp metal punches). Frank and Amanda Himpsl of Valley Forge Music Roll Co. used it to make recuts of rare and unusual American orchestrion and band organ roll formats for several years, and it's currently on display at the American Treasure Tour museum in Oaks, Pennsylvania, where it is hoped to find a person to run it again, and continue the custom roll recutting business.
@@hughx5235 As to "no kind of knife could act fast enough to cut the paper", that is also wrong. You are correct in the sense that MOST producers of hand-played rolls (including Welte) used other means to record the pianist's performance besides punching it in real-time (Welte, for Debussy and other pianists using their German system, had a recording machine which had inked rubber wheels or tires which each came down and drew lines on the moving paper of the master roll as the pianist played each note). Besides this, however, at least two high-speed master perforators were known to have been used by two major companies for a time to produce hand-played masters for actual production rolls: #1 the Aeolian Company of New York (and possibly the branch in the UK) used a high-speed perforator which actually cut the master roll in real-time as the pianist played, to record their "Uni-Record" series of hand played rolls that were made and issued from 1912 to about 1916 or 1917. As far as I know, the 'punched master' (or whatever they called it) was then edited lightly for mistakes and wrong notes, and then used as a master in the production perforator to punch the duplicate copies which were sold to the public. Felix Arndt, Egon Putz, Les Copeland, and even Scott Joplin all made rolls using this system (as well as several other pianists). These "Uni-Record" rolls all have a characteristically jerky feel caused by them coming directly from a real hand-played performance with no quantized, mathematical version being made by them which would smooth out the rhythm, the touch and the phrasing, and make it more mechanical sounding. After around 1916/1917, subsequent Aeolian "hand played" rolls were either entirely arranged on the drawing board like other other arranged rolls (especially those made by Frank Milne who made them at home on his kitchen table), or else used a more conventional marking machine to make lines on paper like most other companies' "hand-played" recording systems (for example, QRS). These "marked masters" were then edited and an arranged, mathematical perforated version was created which then became the "production master" used on the regular perforator to punch all the copies sold to the general public for their pianos. This same method was used both for Aeolian's "Universal", "Mel-O-Dee" and "Metro-Art" hand-played 88-note rolls, and also their "Duo-Art" full reproducing rolls that also had the dynamics coded in the margins. (From recollections of various Aeolian artists including Robert Armbruster, I believe the Duo-Art dynamics were 'recorded' by a skilled musician listening while the pianist played in real-time, and marking the sheet-music score in pen or pencil, which was then translated into the roll dynamic coding by another person, and cut into the final roll master). #2 the other major company using a high-speed recording perforator, and who used it longer than any other company of which I have details, was the Mills Novelty Co. of Chicago, who made the "Violano-Virtuoso" player violin and piano, and also the "Mills Magnetic Expression Piano" coin piano, both in regular and 'race horse' versions. These instruments, unlike most other player instruments of the day, did not operate pneumatically or even mechanically, but used a direct-electric solenoid control system to operate them, with solenoids and electric motors. Henry K. Sandell and Herbert S. Mills were the principal inventors of most of the technology found in these instruments, 1905-1929. In his GREAT interview with Don Barr for the MBSI (Musical Box Society International) "Journal" in the late 1970s or early 1980s, Herbert S. Mills recounts how the early rolls for the Violano in the early days, 1912 to sometime in the late 'teens or so, were arranged by a few trained musicians using the usual 'drawing board' arranging method commonly used for most other non-hand-played orchestrion, organ and piano rolls. After an argument with the main musician about the quality of his arranging, the head musician stomped out and quit, taking his staff with him, and Mr. Mills had to scramble to keep the latest hits coming out without any arrangers at the staff. He hurriedly made a few rolls himself despite having only rudimentary musical knowledge, and then (being a great inventor) quickly put together a high-speed recording perforator that could punch a roll in real-time as the artist played, also creating "recording" 44-note pianos and a "recording" violin which was basically a Violano violin mounted on a platform, played by an organ-type keyboard. Mr. Mills said this recording setup "played like an organ", and that after a few musicians came in to experiment with it in duo-format (one playing the piano, the other playing the "violin"), they really liked it. He quickly got top Chicago popular, salon and classical musicians to come into the studio and make rolls for a fee for the Mills Violano-Virtuoso, all of which (throughout the 1920s to the end) were then hand-played, and none of which were credited with the artists' name (probably, they worried if played back on a Violano in BAD condition, sounding like a screechy cat on a backyard fence, it would harm their artists' reputation!!!). Some amazing, totally non-quantized, lifelike performances are on these later Violano rolls, both of popular and classical music, even with a little jazz, perhaps even Joe Venuti and Rube Bloom. In fact, they, more than anything else, probably helped 'sell' more examples of this machine in the 1920s, since the rhythmic realism and phrasing of these performances made the violin and piano 'come to life' when in good shape, much more than the 4 dynamic levels each on the piano and violin might suggest!
@@kittyneko7 You are right that the instrument at Music House Museum you heard was a "reproducing piano" which is a sort of sister-instrument to this (i. e. the Welte-Mignon, heard here with Debussy, is the ORIGINAL reproducing piano, and the Duo-Art is one of the later ones using a somewhat different system). Reproducing pianos can be found in upright or grand format and do play rolls with the dynamics coded in the margins, delivering a more lifelike performance than a regular player piano roll (comparing with a regular home player piano roll pumped by someone without adding dynamics, as you can manually do on most player pianos via careful pedaling and use of the finger levers). The instrument at Music House Museum playing Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" is a Steinway Duo-Art grand piano. The Duo-Art was Aeolian's system, introduced in 1914, and made through the 1930s, which was in competition to Welte and to American (who made the "Ampico" system). There were also other systems as well. Duo-Art, Ampico and Welte-Licensee (the later, American version Welte system) pianos all have variable tempo, so that regular 88-note rolls can be played on them as well, and Duo-Arts, having binary dynamics, can play reproducing rolls back at different tempos and still achieve pretty good results that are pretty realistic. The Welte and Ampico systems, however, each have crescendo systems as part of their dynamic controls, and those happen at a fixed rate. i. e. when the crescendo for the treble, say, is turned on, the treble will gradually get louder at a fixed rate, and when it is turned off, will get softer at that rate. So, the roll has to be going at the proper tempo or else when the dynamics occur, the end of each crescendo or decrescendo will not match up with its proper logical place in the music, and the music will sound 'funny' and less realistic (plenty of dynamics, but illogical ones!). The original German "Red" Welte-Mignon system, heard here, is ALL based upon the principle of slow and fast crescendos, with one 'mezzo-forte' reference point in the middle, and so the roll speed is crucial or else the performance will greatly suffer. All the Red Welte systems play back at ONE paper speed and there is no means of adjusting this faster or slower on the instrument itself. The speed is set by the technician at the factory and the restorer after restoring the player system. Thus, different tempos are achieved by using more or less paper and spacing the holes closer together or further away, which is a little different than most regular production piano rolls which are fairly mathematical and rely more on the tempo marking on the beginning of the roll. Welte wanted the most realistic reproduction possible, and didn't want to allow the opportunity of some uninformed (if well-meaning) person to ruin the playback by monkeying with the paper speed of the roll. All the rubato you hear here is cut directly in the roll, the same as with the arranged 'book music' for fairground organs (although that, of course, is not hand played, nor is it piano music).
This is how I remember this piece and prefer it. Those commenting negatively on the drunkedness of the timing would do well to consider what a "Golliwog's Cakewalk" is.
@@derekgerdes In the strictest sense, yes, but the dance itself was a chance for slaves to make fun of the "airs" put on by the aristocracy/plantation owners. It was a chance for slaves to make fun of the owners.
Then, are we to assume the slaves were drunk in their steps? Don’t forget, this was a chance for their owners to make fun of them, not the other way around…it just so happened that an oppressed people found an outlet to express themselves in a life without liberty.
My grandfather learned to play this in the 30's and the version he played was closer to this recording than most of the professional ones. He did not know how to read rhythm in music and picked it up by listening to others play. He always said that his version sounded a bit more like ragtime than the original.
I suppose this is a piano-roll recording. Debussy recorded it on a piano roll (a machine like a musical box) and somebody recorded the piano roll into CDs several years ago. Otherwise the sound would be very poor since Debussy played it in 1913.
This is a reproduction of a piano roll recording made by Debussy. Many people, at first listen are surprised by some of his rhythms, phrasing, dynamics and tempos. He did attend the Paris Conservatoire for 11 years from age 10-21 studying composition, theory, piano and organ (w/ Cesar Frank!) among other subjects. Debussy was quite versatile if not stubborn. But I think we're all glad he pursued composition.
No, this is an audio recording of a piano roll. That is to say, Debussy played on a specialised piano with made cuts in a roll of paper as he played, this was played back more recently by a piano mechanism which translated the holes into which notes to play, and this second performance was recorded in audio, which is what is played in this video.
It astounds me when anyone criticizes a composer's interpretation of his own work. This is obviously a piano roll, but the capricious performance of Debussy rings through and I love it. He can do whatever he wants with his own music.
yes me! i was brushing up on 1930s music which led me to the jazz age of the previous decade; then i began listening to the music that preceded the jazz age. this led me to vaudeville, ragtime, tin pan alley and finally the cakewalk. i learnt a lot and downloaded some timeless music that i can listen to forever.
These piano roll recordings are fantastic. I have a CD of recordings made from Scott Joplin's piano rolls. They are wonderful documents of the original composer's intentions in both cases.
This version is much more fluid than some other interpretations which use less echo pedal. And it's Debussy playing it himself! I am just discovering this. I did not know there were recordings of Debussy. Thanks for posting this!
I have always been a big fan of his style. The feel of all of his pieces just grabs me and draws me in. His use of the entire piano, I think I am drawn by his use of solid base lines and not just chords or helper notes down low on the scale.
I love how his pieces are, classically speaking, atonal, and dissonant, but yet, they sound perfectly consonant. He was a perfect pitched genius who took those concepts and put them on their 'ear', so to speak! I adore him.
maaannn!!! at first I thought this was a real video of Debussy. Of course this is totally awesome, but a video of Debussy playing would have been freakin' out of this world:)
If he recorded it to a paper "Piano Roll," then that roll can be played back on a modern piano, in a modern studio, hence the modern sounding recording.
for all those talking about the merits and faults of piano rolls, debussy wrote to the inventor of the apparatus used to make his piano rolls, of which this recording is one. debussy wrote - "it is impossible to attain a greater perfection of reproduction than that of the welte apparatus. i am happy to assure you in these lines of my astonishment and admiration of what i heard." just thought you'd be interested :)
Listening to the composer play his/her own piece is a historical document. Once Walt Disney was in a filmed story conference for a Mickey Mouse cartoon, acting out some "business" for the other story men to see how it played out. "I'm..haha..Mickey Mouse. You know...Mickey Mouse?" At this point he subconsciously held out his hand at waist high...the only hint as to how large the mouse would be next to real people. Composers who play their own pieces also leave such subtle hints as to what they saw or heard in their heads. As far as I'm concerned, Ferde Grofe's last conducted performance of his Grand Canyon Suite brings a subtlety to both the Sunset and On the Trail sequences that have never been captured by another conductor. It was a more precise rendition of the sonic experience of Grofe's imagination. Possibly the reason some people don't like this rendition of Golliwogg's Cakewalk is because they disagree with the composer's original vision and prefer modern sanitized versions. Emma Eames, famed Metropolitan Opera soprano, said she worked with many of the original composers, making her works "documents". We should not hasten to shred documents in our haste to be right.
Thanks very much for uploading, it's absolutely fascinating hearing his own interpretation of it at last. I grew up with the Tomita version on Snowflakes Are Dancing so it takes getting used to the almost chaotic timing compared to Tomita's strutting, Tony Monero Golliwogg, perfect voltage controlled timing. I think what we are calling sloppiness is 100% intentional, for comic effect. In fact it must be hard to play the piano lurching along in stops and starts like that when you're classically trained. It's a deliberately comical performance. Right down to the Golliwogg finally toppling over at the end.
Another remarkable find! While Debussy was a very noted pianist in his day, piano rolls and early recording often do a disservice to a composers' intentions. However, this one isn't too bad at all - a remarkable testament to a pianist and composer.
How I love this performance! No matter about the variables of the speed of playback and the sonority of the individual piano, the color and inner voicing in the playing is sublime.
Best lesson ever learned from an old televised master class with Arthur Rubinstein...forget technique, don’t worry if you hit the occasional wrong note, just make it musical, because it’s music.
How lucky we are to hear Debussy playing his own works as recorded on piano rolls! Very interesting how he practically disregards the metronomic use of barlines to achieve a wonderfully 'flowing' effect!
A piano roll is a music storage medium used to operate a player piano, piano player or reproducing piano. A piano roll is a continuous roll of paper with perforations (holes) punched into it. The perforations represent note control data. The roll moves over a reading system known as a 'tracker bar' and the playing cycle for each musical note is triggered when a perforation crosses the bar and is read. YES THIS TECHNOLOGY AND OTHER COOL STUFF EXISTED BEFORE APPLE.
If you notice and listen to alot of these old composers actually its a video describing that they practiced their music alot different then today's composers do. The connection was they dont play the melody and the background on the same tempo. They play the melody either slower or faster. They did this to seperate the lead from the background instead of playing it all together. Also back then they played very fast and as the time go on we play slower and slower. That explains why old composers played their music fast and also it was noted fast music is happy music so the faster the happier. They were more focused on achieving a character and personality to their playing while today we are more focused on being on tempo and very tight. So playing something on perfectly on tempo everytime will achieve a robotic feeling and its odd cuz we are told its good which it is but nobody operates perfect thats why they broke tempo at times also thats why blues and jazz have emotions because they are more focus on character then being perfectly on tempo. They probably played with they eyes closed and just feel like blues and jazz musicians do. Today practice perfect is good but back then it was about achieving personality and character. They will sacrifice tempo to get a different character. Another connection was they didnt play on the same tempo on the whole song. They often speed up or slowed down on parts while we stay constant. So people now are confused but they practiced different then us and played music differently trying to achieve something different. So if you was to go back in time you will be suprised because we have the sheet music but not the emotion the composer played with and that is up to us to create. Rules are important but dont get too caught up in them where you lose the true essence of why this music was meant to use played.
I'd say he meant the piece to feel 'loose'... and rag-doll like. There are plenty of great recorded 'interpretations' and this is the one the composer made.
Sooo different from how I've heard other later interpretations playing this. None of the elegance or delicacy usually heard coming out of this fun little piece. Instead a stronger, more solid yet almost dreamlike quality. How remarkable.
A romp, I’d call it. Yes, my limited interpretation of Debussy has been informed most of all by dreaminess but his own playing is much more robust. Have you listened to his Claire de Lune? Makes mine sound really pussy.
@@moragmacgregor6792 It’s because piano rolls don’t have dynamics, his playing was actually very delicate and not as clean as other frenchies like ravel or faure.
This piece is influenced by the cakewalk, but a classical (impressionist era) interpretation. Obviously, not a true cakewalk in the ragtime sense. I think it really gives us a good idea how Debussy envisioned it to sound. Even if there are things that are lost in the piano roll, you really get the idea! I feel like I've been transported back in time!
My piano teacher had a very old teacher who owned some of Debussy REAL recordings (of very poor quality) from his time of living. She told me Debussy played this piece much slower than any recordings of pianists on youtube. I trust her words, she also told me piano roll doesn't give exact timing
wow! this old recording is scratch free. Piano-roll can be played today and get the feel of Debussy. A few sloppy parts thought, could not Debussy but mechanical failure. But all-on-all quite interesting.
+BroadwayG, this recording is not old, so no cleanup was necessary. The piano roll was old, but it was played on a modern piano that has the Welte-Mignon mechanism, then recorded with modern equipment.
+Steve Holcombe Mystery solved. Wow, we should do this with surviving rolls. So fantastic. I had to listen to it again. Before this I had only famed interpreters to go by, for example, Robert Casadesus who died in 1972. Debussy's instructions on how to play his music is at times ethereal. So, thanks, again.
Recordings by Debussy are mostly quite different from what I’ve heard from more modern interpreters, definitely different from what I was taught. I love this one..sounds more familiar to my ears. If he stumbled while playing...I’m going with the photograph. There was a party. Everyone was drinking!
I agree. If this is Debussy, its surprising that the meter would be so uneven. But he can certainly play his own piece the way he wants to. Who knows ? Maybe this is how he always intended and everyone else has had it wrong ever since.
This must have been seriously remastered. The quality is astounding for 1913! If it is a piano roll, it's pretty incredible how the nuances come through.
Great!!! thanks for posting that. Even though it is recorded from a mechanical piano the true interpretation comes through. NOW I KNOW HOW TO PLAY IT !
31 dislikes to DEBUSSY'S playing.I cannot believe it.:(((((((........ ( .I believe the roll is a true rendition of Debussy's playing. )31 people can't believe how lucky they are to hear such a treasure.
A man is not a jude-box machine ! ... Debussy does not using the brain and notes to play the piano. He uses his temperament artist to express what he feels at that very moment ..... I just love it ....
ragtime was incorporated by debussy after he heard Sousa play in paris in 1900 - the later jazz musicians took debussy's complex harmonies in turn and this formed much of jazz as we know it - so thank you claude! He processed ragtime - kinda cross breeding it with impressionistic harmony.
This is actually a reproducing piano roll. Piano rolls are not recordings, though the best rolls, made and released by the most artistically sensitive and technically advanced companies, such as Welte, are nearly as good, IF played on a well-restored and regulated (and I mean WELL-REGULATED!) piano. This piano sounds pretty good to me.
I remember an awesome atari game where u played a mouse trying to find all the cheese on every level. This was the BGM. trip down memory lane. thank you Debussy!
@esl63 This is a Welte-Mignon roll, made by a company in Germany for their own special line of player pianos. Their rolls are encoded with dynamics in the margins, which, when played on the proper piano (a "Red Welte"-type player piano, vorsetzer, or cabinet piano), activate special quick-acting expression mechanisms which can immediately alter the suction level of the bass and treble halves of the stack (the assembly of valves and pneumatics which actually play the notes on the piano).
I love this piece...and OF COURSE if DEBUSSY playing himself...thanks god Reproducing Pianos were invented in that times...so we can enjoy this fabulous interpretation, and most of all, to know how really Claude play is own compositions... If are more rever or not...its other problem... CONGRATULATIONS...I would love to have that rolls...but my reproducing piano is a DUO ART...
im sure it would have pleased Scott Joplin very much to know ragtime was embraced by several serious composers (Debussy, Stravinski), and they even composed some pieces in ragtime style
Reproducing pianos were pure genius. If you don't know the difference between a reproducing piano and an ordinary player piano-educate yourself. These machines were capable of such perfect nuance that the fact they have lapsed into obscurity (since the 1929 market crash) would be as astonishing to Debussy as was their musical capabilities he trusted reproduce his performances.
I'm not sure but I think Welte-Mignons were possibly compatible with Duo-Art. The high-end piano roll reproductions captured dynamics quite perfectly. I once heard a Eubie Blake medley of some show tunes, ca 1915, recorded on the Duo Art process and played back on a Duo-Art reproducer and it was EERIE, not like a piano roll at all. It was as though Eubie Blake's phantom was in the room, playing that piano!
