Dennis Lee Masterclass (NPVC 2017)

Masterclass Programme

Mozart - Piano Sonata No. 14 in C minor, K.457

Chopin - Piano Sonata No. 3 in B minor, Op. 58

Debussy - L’isle Joyeuse, L.106

The first point that Dennis Lee made (from his conclusion of the competition) is the importance of the performer adhering to the manuscript. One should understand that everything on the manuscript is a deliberate effort by the composer with a specific purpose. Conversely, one can think about possibilities the composer could have adopted; this includes articulation and more pertinently, patterns. If a pattern is repeated several times (in the Mozart Sonata for example) each repeat should have distinction; and if it is in the forms of sequences then one must be “cunning” and “strategic” in the pre-planning of the direction of the series of patterns. Thus it is crucial to have in mind where the music is heading, how long are the phrases in the music and what preparations should be made (at the start of the phrase for example). Articulation markings on the score suggest instrumentation, subject to interpretation. Another interesting point that was brought up was that rubato, meaning “to steal” does not necessarily only mean slowing down but also “giving back”. Chopin was known to have said that when employing rubato, the left hand should maintain the pulse while the right hand slackens or quickens the tempo, which might be very challenging to do.

I felt that there was a lack of persuasiveness and authority in the performances of the Mozart and Chopin. This was partly due to insufficient tension in the lines, during rests and general intentions (which led to general sounds) which resulted in a “fair” presentation. The Mozart had a lack of emotional drama and rather seemed to be more intellectual (if there is a pause I hear silence but not tension in the air). Dennis Lee remarked that the performer did largely catch the essence of Mozart, however there were details that could be more refined. For example, the trill in bar two is preceded by a semi-quaver thus it should not be blended into the drill; there should be a separation.

For the Chopin I could visually ascertain that the performer was attempting to assert emotionally but unfortunately the assertion led to tension in the body which did not translate in the sound. There was more urgency to leave the keys resulting in a flippant and haphazard phrases (Dennis Lee described it as “froth and air") instead sinking into the key bed creating substantial sound. Dennis Lee commented that one should not only rely on the pedal to produce legato. No doubt finger-legato would provide an aural difference, it would most definitely produce a visual one as well. The listener would observe that the performer is intentionally sustaining the tension of the line. Afterall, as Dennis Lee said: (which I fully agree) The listeners will only get what you give them; Conversely they will not get what you don’t. The performer largely employed the whole first joint of the fingers which probably led to not only inaccuracies but also (as mentioned before) “floaty” sounds that might not always be desirable. Dennis Lee also mentioned that there was not enough “heartache” in the playing.

The Debussy was very polished technically and to some extent, musically, as there were clear buildup of phrases and an amount of atmosphere and “presence”. One thing that was not quite satisfying was the lack of convincing body language. In contrast to the Mozart (which almost had no physical communication) I felt the music produced did not quite match the slightly overdone physical communication. Dennis Lee’s comments for the performance was that it could do with more breathing space. Building onto his point on the physical affecting the mental, the performer could consider using one hand to execute the introductory notes in order to appreciate the intervals and physically feel the twists and turns in the music.