LDV82

CÉDRIC PESCIA,PHILIPPE CASSARD, pianos 27 Did you choose your tempi with the aim of remaining faithful to the agogics and inertia associated with the orchestra? Cédric Pescia: Listening to versions like Gardiner’s or Harnoncourt’s, which are faster than the average overall, it’s already possible to observe the fairly extreme disparities in tempo that can exist between orchestral interpretations. As to the question of ‘inertia’, it seems tome that it’s closely linked to the types of instrument and the size of the orchestra. A number of conductors, such as Harnoncourt, have been able to call the very premise of ‘orchestral inertia’ into question by considerably slimming down the sound and the performing forces. And although there is a tradition of doubling the woodwind and playing these symphonies with large, sometimes almost Mahlerian, forces, one wonders what kind of orchestra was the norm at the time Liszt made his transcription. Obviously, we also made tempo decisions taking into account the very nature of the piano, whose sound cannot be sustained in the same way as that of orchestral instruments or voices. In the second movement, we chose a tempo at the upper limit of what is still possible with the double escapement action of the piano (and the flexibility of the wrist for repeated notes). Having said that, I think that if I were a conductor, I would opt for the same tempi we chose in the piano version. But as with any interpretative choice, nothing is ever set in stone, and it’s very likely that things will change again in concert . . .