Gurn's Classical Corner

Started by Gurn Blanston, February 22, 2009, 07:05:20 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Opus106

Quote from: Florestan on August 14, 2009, 02:56:56 AM
In the same spirit I want to share with you two recently discovered Youtube channels  that in my opinion fit very well here. The music is very well organized in playlists and I think it might be of interest to you. Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=Meyerbeer1&view=playlists

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=18thCenturyMusic&view=playlists

Excellent! Thanks a lot! Just the username (in the second link) excited me, and the organisation of the videos is in itself pleasing to the eye. :)
Regards,
Navneeth

ChamberNut

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 14, 2009, 04:30:39 AM
(Classical music is like Chinese food, eat a lot and get hungry again an hour later. :) ).

Gurn, what a great analogy!!  Love it.  ;D

DavidW

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 14, 2009, 04:30:39 AM
(Classical music is like Chinese food, eat a lot and get hungry again an hour later.

A book I recently started completed that analogy by saying that vibrato is like MSG. ;)

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: DavidW on August 14, 2009, 09:42:01 AM
A book I recently started completed that analogy by saying that vibrato is like MSG. ;)

;D

Well, a little vibrato is a necessary thing, despite what any theorist might say. But MSG though  :P

:D

8)

Quote from: ChamberNut on August 14, 2009, 09:33:16 AM
Gurn, what a great analogy!!  Love it.  ;D

Seems like it works for both of us, then. :D

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

Florestan

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 14, 2009, 04:30:39 AM
Don't be a stranger. We're always here. :)

OK, you asked for it!  :D

If I may offer my two cents on the use of fortepiano, here they are.

I've always found the whole idea behind it a little problematic. Judging from all available accounts, Mozart and Beethoven constantly complained about the quality of orchestras and instruments, especially keyboards. Just imagine how delighted would have they been had they a modern piano at their disposal! Also, just fancy what could have Haydn done with a modern orchestra, comprising all the winds and brass in their present form!

So, I see no reason to reject the technical progress of instruments when playing their music. I particularly can't stand the sound of fortepiano, an aversion that has only been enhanced when listening to Antonio Rossetti's Piano Concerto: until the fortepiano came in everything was wonderful, but after the first stroke of the keyboard it was horrendous and I couldn barely made it halfway through the movement. Such a weak and impotent sound, barely audible at times, ruined all the magic for me.

To those who find merit and pleasure in the use of fortepianos, my kudos and envy! I don't think I'll ever come to terms with it. :)

Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Florestan on August 16, 2009, 11:57:05 PM
OK, you asked for it!  :D

If I may offer my two cents on the use of fortepiano, here they are.

I've always found the whole idea behind it a little problematic. Judging from all available accounts, Mozart and Beethoven constantly complained about the quality of orchestras and instruments, especially keyboards. Just imagine how delighted would have they been had they a modern piano at their disposal! Also, just fancy what could have Haydn done with a modern orchestra, comprising all the winds and brass in their present form!

So, I see no reason to reject the technical progress of instruments when playing their music. I particularly can't stand the sound of fortepiano, an aversion that has only been enhanced when listening to Antonio Rossetti's Piano Concerto: until the fortepiano came in everything was wonderful, but after the first stroke of the keyboard it was horrendous and I couldn barely made it halfway through the movement. Such a weak and impotent sound, barely audible at times, ruined all the magic for me.

To those who find merit and pleasure in the use of fortepianos, my kudos and envy! I don't think I'll ever come to terms with it. :)



Florestan,
Well, everyone's opinion has value. I have no vested interest in trying to change your mind. I'm the first to admit that the sound of a fortepiano is an acquired taste. Some more than others. But once you have acquired that taste, nothing else quite fills the bill. :)

No, I don't play that 'imagine if...' game. I believe composers wrote to the instrument they had in hand. And made the most of it too. Somewhere (I'll find it) I have a little chart that lists all of Mozart's sonatas, and the notes used in each. In some of them, he used every single note on the keyboard, in others, all but one or two notes. So, he used what he had available. BTW, I never heard Mozart complain about instruments. He very often complained about 'wretched players', but I have yet to read anything (in many dozens of books) about instruments not being up to snuff. Beethoven, it's true, had some problems with his pianos. However, never was it with the sound of it, it was things like the compass, or the durability, or the escapement. Since your complaint is mainly with the sound, I'm afraid that neither of these stalwart composers can stand by your side.  :D

But as I say, if you don't acquire a taste for the fortepiano sound, it doesn't mean that we won't let you listen to the music. By all means, bring us something new to listen to, and we will return the favor. :)

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

Florestan

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 17, 2009, 04:36:41 AM
BTW, I never heard Mozart complain about instruments. He very often complained about 'wretched players', but I have yet to read anything (in many dozens of books) about instruments not being up to snuff. Beethoven, it's true, had some problems with his pianos. However, never was it with the sound of it, it was things like the compass, or the durability, or the escapement.

I'm sure that had they knew what was to come, they'd have complained about the sound, too.   ;D >:D

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 17, 2009, 04:36:41 AMSince your complaint is mainly with the sound, I'm afraid that neither of these stalwart composers can stand by your side.  :D

Fair enough.  0:).

A related aside: I discovered the wonderful Paisiello's 4th piano concerto from your recommendation here. It is played on a modern piano. What is it in there that doesn't suit the music? Is the charm and the beauty of the music really lost or altered?

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 17, 2009, 04:36:41 AMBy all means, bring us something new to listen to, and we will return the favor. :)

8)

Speaking of which, are you aware of any recording of Rosetti's Concerto on a modern piano?  :)
Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Florestan on August 17, 2009, 04:51:44 AM
I'm sure that had they knew what was to come, they'd have complained about the sound, too.   ;D >:D

Doh! I hate that argument! :D

QuoteFair enough.  0:).

A related aside: I discovered the wonderful Paisiello's 4th piano concerto from your recommendation here. It is played on a modern piano. What is it in there that doesn't suit the music? Is the charm and the beauty of the music really lost or altered?

Speaking of which, are you aware of any recording of Rosetti's Concerto on a modern piano?  :)

Delighted you liked the Paisiello. I have to admit, I didn't know what to expect, but whatever it was wouldn't be too high. So I was equally pleased when I discovered it. :)   I don't know the answer to your question, since the only version I've heard is the Naxos one, thus I can't make any comparison. You shouldn't think that just because I greatly enjoy, in fact even prefer, period instruments (yes, I'm a PIon, I admit it   :-\ ), that I don't like modern instruments too. This is particularly true in orchestral music. However, in chamber music, all other things being equal (the players' abilities, for example), I will prefer the PI every time. They just sound better to me. Although I have no argument with you if you like, for example, the Beaux Arts Trio in Mozart's piano trios. They are wonderful. So are the Gryphon Trio. :)

No, I don't. I thought that one on CPO that Sonic mentioned was on modern instruments. I don't have that work myself, but maybe one of the others will see this and help out. :)

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

DavidW

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 17, 2009, 05:14:33 AM
Doh! I hate that argument! :D

Ah yes Rosen's argument.  It's amusing how ridiculous is to speculate about what a composer would have wanted if the composer had known about the future instruments... even the Mozart is a fraud thread was better reasoned! :D

karlhenning

Quote from: DavidW on August 17, 2009, 08:10:45 AM
... even the Mozart is a fraud thread was better reasoned! :D

0:) 8)

Florestan

Quote from: DavidW on August 17, 2009, 08:10:45 AM
It's amusing how ridiculous is to speculate about what a composer would have wanted if the composer had known about the future instruments...

Well, let's take Haydn's case. Upon his own avowal, as an old man he much regretted that he came to know too late the full capabilities of winds and brass (I'm sure Gurn can find the quote in no time). Add to that the innovative spirit he manifested all throughout his life and suddenly the things are not that ridiculous, methinks.

Just my two cents.  0:)

Bottom line, to each his own. I'm sure nobody will mind me listening to Paisiello on a modern piano just as I don't mind
anyone listening to Mozart's PC 20 on fortepiano.  0:)

Now listening to Gaetano Brunetti's Symphony in G minor.  8)
Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Florestan on August 17, 2009, 11:29:04 AM
Well, let's take Haydn's case. Upon his own avowal, as an old man he much regretted that he came to know too late the full capabilities of winds and brass (I'm sure Gurn can find the quote in no time). Add to that the innovative spirit he manifested all throughout his life and suddenly the things are not that ridiculous, methinks.

Just my two cents.  0:)

Bottom line, to each his own. I'm sure nobody will mind me listening to Paisiello on a modern piano just as I don't mind
anyone listening to Mozart's PC 20 on fortepiano.  0:)

Now listening to Gaetano Brunetti's Symphony in G minor.  8)

Good taste. Paisiello and Brunetti. We'll make you a Corner Dweller in record time. :D

Well, Haydn did say that. He was talking about Beethoven's compositional style after hearing the 3rd symphony. Of course, Haydn didn't have those instruments to play with for most of his career anyway, so the regret is probably more for that than it is for 'overlooking' them, so to speak. I got Solomons Haydn symphonies last week, and caught the orchestration for the first time.  These are mainly the Stürm und Dräng era works, 35, 38, 39, 49, 58 & 59 which he composed from 1767-69. They are written for strings (2-2-1-1-1), 2 oboes, 4 horns & continuuo (bassoon and harpsichord). That's like 15 players. You have to wonder if he could have gotten quite the impact out of the opening of the Eroica with them... :D

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

Florestan

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 17, 2009, 11:44:10 AM
Good taste. Paisiello and Brunetti. We'll make you a Corner Dweller in record time. :D

Oh, but I've been dwelling in the corner ever since I've started listening classical music back in 1985. :)

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 17, 2009, 11:44:10 AMWell, Haydn did say that. He was talking about Beethoven's compositional style after hearing the 3rd symphony. Of course, Haydn didn't have those instruments to play with for most of his career anyway, so the regret is probably more for that than it is for 'overlooking' them, so to speak.

Yes, that's my point: it was not a matter of "overlooking" but of a lack of availability.

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 17, 2009, 11:44:10 AMI got Solomons Haydn symphonies last week, and caught the orchestration for the first time.  These are mainly the Stürm und Dräng era works, 35, 38, 39, 49, 58 & 59 which he composed from 1767-69. They are written for strings (2-2-1-1-1), 2 oboes, 4 horns & continuuo (bassoon and harpsichord). That's like 15 players. You have to wonder if he could have gotten quite the impact out of the opening of the Eroica with them... :D

Well of course he couldn't. He missed the flutes, the clarinets, the trumpets and the timpani. Now, I wonder if he missed them because there were no such players at his disposal or because their capabilities in 1769 were far behind of what they could achieve (and did) in 1804-06?

Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

DavidW

Quote from: Florestan on August 17, 2009, 11:29:04 AM
Well, let's take Haydn's case. Upon his own avowal, as an old man he much regretted that he came to know too late the full capabilities of winds and brass (I'm sure Gurn can find the quote in no time). Add to that the innovative spirit he manifested all throughout his life and suddenly the things are not that ridiculous, methinks.

Since he did not realize the full capabilities of wind and brass as you just said, he did not compose with them in mind, your point undermines itself and it's still ridiculous.

Whenever you say "well so and so would have loved the modern piano" it begs the obvious rebuttal he did not have a modern piano, he didn't know what it sounded like, and he didn't compose for it. 

You are talking about a convenient fiction of the composer being dissatisfied with the instruments and ensembles that he composes for.  With that logic you can argue that it would be right to change old classics to use cgi special effects ala star wars because you would say "well I bet if they had the effects then, they would have wanted to use them!"

Do you see how absurd that is now?

DavidW

Quote from: Florestan on August 17, 2009, 11:19:43 PM
Well of course he couldn't. He missed the flutes, the clarinets, the trumpets and the timpani. Now, I wonder if he missed them because there were no such players at his disposal or because their capabilities in 1769 were far behind of what they could achieve (and did) in 1804-06?

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say ridiculous.  The whole "maybe he would have wanted that way" is speculative, and not a firm foundation for anything.  It's not even an argument!  I can do that too...

Maybe Bach would have preferred his orchestral music to be transcribed to twenty harpsichords.  Hey he liked the sound of the harpsichord!  You can't say for a fact that he wouldn't approve of such a transcription, thus my performance of the Brandenburg #2 on twenty harpsichords is legitimate! :D

Florestan

Quote from: DavidW on August 18, 2009, 04:15:35 AM
With that logic you can argue that it would be right to change old classics to use cgi special effects ala star wars because you would say "well I bet if they had the effects then, they would have wanted to use them!"

I never argued such a thing.  I just expressed my views based on reasonable --- for me --- assumptions, given certain facts. Of course it's all a matter of speculation and I never pretended otherwise (in case you haven't noticed there were two emoticons after the sentence starting with "I'm sure"). If it sounds absurd to you I have no problem with that. Is it really necessary to continue this controversy? I don't think so. You'll still listen to pianoforte, I'll still listen to a modern piano. The world is large enough for us to live under the same sun.  :) 0:)
Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

karlhenning

Quote from: DavidW on August 18, 2009, 04:21:10 AM
You can't say for a fact that [Bach] wouldn't approve of such a transcription, thus my performance of the Brandenburg #2 on twenty harpsichords is legitimate! :D

We shouldn't say that Bach disapproved at all of the practice of transcription.  He was notably efficient with his forces, though, and I doubt he would have found 20 necessary for the musical material of the BWV 1047  8)

Are we channeling Stokowski, David;D

Gurn Blanston

Bach (J.S.) ist verboten hier... >:(

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

Gabriel

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 18, 2009, 05:01:03 AM
Bach (J.S.)* ist verboten hier... >:(

8)

This (*) precision was necessary indeed, Gurn... Otherwise we would miss some of the best music of the period! ;)

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Gabriel on August 18, 2009, 05:11:31 AM
This (*) precision was necessary indeed, Gurn... Otherwise we would miss some of the best music of the period! ;)

:D

Yes indeed, Gabriel. Bach (J.S.) did have good seed, it seems. :)

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)