Simplifying piano music

pseudonym58

I thought that this topic might be of interest to progressing pianists of intermediate abilities or above. It deals with the notion of taking music that might be a stretch in terms of difficulty, and simplifying certain awkward or challenging passages with the intention of making the music more playable.

I had mentioned in a previous post that it could involve something like playing single notes in place of octave passages, or thinning out the voicings in certain dense chordal passages. I mentioned, for example, eliminating duplicated scale tones in certain full chords.
Here's an example of something that I recently adjusted for easier playing, since I was never able to play the passage as originally scored without flubbing a few notes. The simplified version allows me to pivot my left hand in both directions without completely lifting it and moving it from one position to another rapidly. The fourth measure shown I did not change, as the 8ths allow for more time to position my left hand. The original and ossia (alternate).
Sorry about the brutal key signature 😁; that's in the original piece for full orchestra.

pseudonym58

thepianoplayer416

Starting with the simplified version on top, the bass notes are all 1 beat notes.
The original at the bottom we see that some of the bass notes are in 2 parts (voices). A piece that is rated as lower intermediate can be played as a beginner piece without the overlapping parts.

pseudonym58

Another thought: I have noticed a lot of piano students discussing various different levels at which music is graded by music teachers associations; level 1, level 5, etc.
Assuming you're not a beginner, and can read, however haltingly, some fairly complicated music, it might make sense to not be put off by a higher "official" level rating (within reason).
To my mind there's nothing wrong with working on a challenging piece of music, even if you know you might not be able to play it at this time up to tempo, or even close to tempo. I think this challenges the brain in a useful way, as long as expectations are reasonable. I'm not suggesting that this should be the only way that someone selects music to play; it's often gratifying to play something well within capabilities.
If my cello students bring in a piece of music that I think is somewhat above their level, I generally encourage them to try and work out what they're capable of, push themselves a bit.

TheBoringPianist

There are definitely places where even "advanced" pianists may choose to simplify the music for playability. In the Scriabin Fantaisie, for example, my score has an editor's note suggesting that the B could be omitted from a awkward A#-B-D#-A# chord (** mark in m. 110):

Another example in the 1st mvmt of 1. X. 1905: the RH low Db in m. 17 is virtually impossible to play in time with the Ab, but rolling it kind of kills the momentum I want to build during that section. So, I replaced the Db with an Ab:

pseudonym58 it might make sense to not be put off by a higher "official" level rating (within reason).

I would add that on the other side, just because you have the technique to play incredibly difficult pieces doesn't mean you only have to play difficult pieces! It felt a little weird learning Russell's Jamaican Dance No. 2 (an ABRSM Grade 7 piece), let alone programming it into my amateur competition, but there's really no reason I can't just play music I enjoy, and even competitions aren't just technical demonstrations.

ShiroKuro

Apologies for coming to this thread a little late…

How much of reluctance to simplify is due to not knowing how to simplify, versus not wanting other people to know you’ve simplified? I guess I should say, do you think the latter concern is ever at play? Since I play primarily contemporary pieces, I rarely worry because it’s not likely I’m playing something super famous that everyone immediately recognizes. Years ago, this knowledge was more of a comfort to me, in that I knew people wouldn’t be as familiar with the music should I skip a whole section or something. These days, I don’t think about it much (and of course, since the pandemic, I had have far fewer opportunities to play for others, unfortunately).

Separate from that…

pseudonym58 To my mind there's nothing wrong with working on a challenging piece of music, even if you know you might not be able to play it at this time up to tempo, or even close to tempo. I think this challenges the brain in a useful way, as long as expectations are reasonable

I definitely agree with this (adding to @pseudonym58 ’s caveat another caveat, that the pianist also play some pieces more within her capabilities).

Recently I’ve returned to some pieces that I worked on years ago and found too hard, or that maybe I got mostly playable but the piece was hard enough that the end result before putting it away was still sort of shaky. It has been delightful to find these pieces are now either just much more playable, or in some cases even easy.

Certainly part of that is because I have improved and my comfort level with complex scores has improved. But another part of it is clearly because I’ve played the piece before, and I left all my fingerings and rehearsal marks on the score, meaning that I’ve already done a lot of the preparatory work. So working on those pieces roughly 10 years ago and then coming back to them has been like getting a present from former me. 🙂

Lastly, the other benefit of playing challenging pieces is that they make the easy pieces I play seem that much easier. I’ve always tried to have a mix of pieces for that reason. 😃

Rubens

Are we talking about, gulp, cheating here??
Well I do it, sometimes. And the pros do it too. What matters is to do it in a way that the audience doesn't hear it. It works better with certain composers than others. You can do it in many spots with Rachmaninoff, but much less with Chopin, and not a all with the composers before Beethoven.

With Rachmaninoff what happens is that there are a few passages that are so fast and busy that the only audible difference is that the simplified version flows better than the original version, so the end product is more satisfying musically. And then there is the "morally justfiable" aspect of it sometimes. For example the original version of his Sonata no 2 was deemed to be so difficult by the composer himself that he wrote an easier and much shorter version of it 18 years later. What I did was to take the original version and simplify some parts in my own way, and without removing any section. I'd say the end product is still much more difficult than the composer's second version, but easier to play well than the original where he really went too far at times in terms of technical difficulty. And let's keep in mind that just because a piece is more difficult doesn't mean it's better musically. Any monkey can write music that is impossible to play, including Sorabji (sorry, not a fan of his). What matters is the effect it has on the listener, that's the only thing that matters to me.

Rubens

ShiroKuro How much of reluctance to simplify is due to not knowing how to simplify, versus not wanting other people to know you’ve simplified? I guess I should say, do you think the latter concern is ever at play?

To me, it's not about not wanting people to know. It's about not compromising the musical effect of the piece. So I'm ok if the listeners think "hmm it seems he removed some notes here, but it sounds great".

pseudonym58

A couple of things - where we live, there are very few professional level pianists. I would suspect that only a pianist that had played a work which I simplify would notice, and only possibly, in close listening. The idea would to make the changes as unobtrusive as possible. It's highly unlikely that anyone else would ever notice, or even think along those lines.
With regards to not wanting other people to know that I've simplified music, I have no pretensions of being anything close to a professional level pianist, so if I can somehow convincingly play a piece of music that I like, the fact that someone might realize that I've simplified something doesn't matter to me.
As someone mentioned here earlier, a lot of musicians probably do this, perhaps without premeditation. I was recently working on some Schumann, and I found that sometimes in order to maintain the tempo, I had to add a little more sustain pedal than I would have liked, and even leave off a couple of very quick notes before a large jump. I definitely didn't plan that, but part of playing is simply managing to convincingly "paint a picture"; not all of the details are equally important.

ShiroKuro

@Rubens @pseudonym58 It may be more of an issue for adult beginners...

I started piano as an adult, while living in Japan, where there is a very high level of familiarity with classical music, even for those who don't play. I think back then I was quite self-conscious about being an adult, but also a complete beginner at the piano. And I had lots of opportunities to play in recitals with kids who were far, far better than I was. At recitals, I never wanted to play the standard classical pieces that beginners usually play, because I felt like all my mistakes, and any modifications, would be on full display. Probably people would have noticed far less than I thought, but given that I already struggled with performance anxiety, it was a concern for me.

I have now been playing for 25 years (yikes!) and I am not anywhere near so self-conscious these days. Whether that's because I play better, or because of the pieces I play, or a bit of both...

Whatever the reason, I have zero reluctance about modifying a piece if it makes it more accessible to me and means I can play it with more musicality.

@pseudonym58 used the word convincing, and as it happens, that's exactly the word my teacher used when we were talking about with a piece I'm working on right now. It's September Song, by Alexis Ffrench, which I think @Rubens listened to when he was doing the Miracles score for me.

I have made various modifications throughout the piece, and I was asking my teacher about some of them, and his way of telling me that those modifications work was to describe them as convincing.

I think another factor might be whether a modification stands out -- if a casual listener notices there's something different, or something missing, then maybe that's not a good modification, but if they don't notice, then I think that's an indication that the modification works.

thepianoplayer416

To simplify a score, there are things my teacher would say:
If you have notes in the middle between the top & bottom line, drop some of the middle notes. If a lower note requires a big jump, move it up /down an octave so that it's closer to the notes before & after.

Besides simplifying your playing, just get a book with pieces for "easy" piano. Many are arranged for piano than original pieces. Many are transposed to another key with fewer sharps & flats, contain just the main melody with a few easy intervals or chords without the fancy intro.

ShiroKuro

Re things arranged in an easier key…

Years ago, I bought a book of “easy Christmas carols” because I wanted to be able to play some at Christmas time, and maybe sing along even though the pieces were described as solo arrangements.

When I started playing through the pieces, I realized that every single one had been arranged to be in the key of C major. It was awful and I was super disappointed. I’m pretty sure I still have that book somewhere, but I never played it again.

At some point I decided that I wanted to be comfortable playing in all the keys, and for pieces I knew, I really wanted to be able to play them in the original key. I don’t remember if this carol book instigated it (and sometimes with music like Christmas carols, it can be hard to know what the “original” key is).

Anyway, my point is, changing to an easier key is one modification I have always tried to avoid, and I think it really helped my sightreading. (Although I’ve always found sharps easier to sightreading than flats… maybe I’ll make a thread about that. 🙂

thepianoplayer416

A few decades ago there was an electronics store chain in the US call "RadioShack". Sometime in the 1990s before the company went bankrupt, there was a generic 61-keyboard with the name "Concertmate" in the stores. With the keyboard was a set of books for beginners with easy songs in lead sheets (1 melody line & chord symbols on top). The songs are in large print in 2 pages. Not all the pieces are in the same key of C but none written with the key signature on the left. All the sharps & flats are next to the notes. Each note head has A, B, C, etc. written on it.

The simplest pieces are ones with 1 melody line (no accompaniment) spread across 2 hands. This is as absolute beginner as you can get.