Harpsichord or piano?

[jochanaan]

...the stringed keyboard instruments are part of the same family, history and direct lineage, synthesizers really have no part of that (or the tradition)...

Uh, have you forgotten Switched-On Bach?

[Ten thumbs]

Whilst arguing over how Scarlatti should be played, one must understand the cdircumstances under which his sonatas were composed. According to Fitzpatrick they were nearly all written towards the end of his life when he was music master to Queen Barbara of Spain, who was an accomplished keyboard player herself. Moreover the numbering is more or less chronological. Reviewing them in order you will find a development of style. In the beginning he harks back to the Baroque but soon discards that for the new simplified Classical style with a single key per bar. There is a period rich in imitative sounds, another in which he uses thick heavy chord clusters. This is followed by a period when his textures become sparse. His last sonatas are the obvious precursers of those of Soler. The gist of the argument here is about instruments - the Queen's inventories show that she possessed several harpsichords and a fortepiano. It seems likely that the harpsichords varied in their brightness of sound and that over time her preferences swung from one instument to another. Before anyone can make any assertion as to which is the ideal instrument for any particular sonata, much more research needs to be done.

[lukeottevanger]

Whilst arguing over how Scarlatti should be played, one must understand the cdircumstances under which his sonatas were composed. According to Fitzpatrick they were nearly all written towards the end of his life when he was music master to Queen Barbara of Spain, who was an accomplished keyboard player herself. Moreover the numbering is more or less chronological. Reviewing them in order you will find a development of style. In the beginning he harks back to the Baroque but soon discards that for the new simplified Classical style with a single key per bar. There is a period rich in imitative sounds, another in which he uses thick heavy chord clusters. This is followed by a period when his textures become sparse. His last sonatas are the obvious precursers of those of Soler. The gist of the argument here is about instruments - the Queen's inventories show that she possessed several harpsichords and a fortepiano. It seems likely that the harpsichords varied in their brightness of sound and that over time her preferences swung from one instument to another. Before anyone can make any assertion as to which is the ideal instrument for any particular sonata, much more research needs to be done.

I quite agree with you. However, you seem to be making the assumption that the ideal instrument is the one closest to that Scarlatti was working with/had in mind. Personally, the whole thrust of my posts here has been in agreement with this view of yours - and if a particular sonata is conceived in terms of a particular instrument, I would have thought it only logical to assume that this instrument has something valuable to bring to it. But the argument James was putting forward, as far as I can tell, was that none of these instruments bring anything particular or worthwhile to the music that the modern piano doesn't bring too, and that the modern piano gives more besides, making research pointless except for academic reasons, I suppose. Needless to say, I disagree with this view and share yours, but the different outlooks need to be kept in mind.

That Richard Lester complete set I've mentioned here and on the other current Scarlatti thread uses various harpsichords, organs and fortepianos, from what I can see on the Nimbus site. It seems to be an extremely scholarly edition, backed up by lots of research, and including, as I said above, fairly recently-discovered sonatas not recorded before. Lester seems to be a real expert on this repertoire (which I never suspected when I was having my childhood lessons with him!); interesting to see that he's also recorded Soler.

[Ten thumbs]

thank you - your remaks are very reassuring. Of course I have to play Scarlatti on my Steinway but I see nothing wrong in that either and I'm sure the Queen would have been delighted with such an instrument. The point with the piano is that there many many different ways in which it can be played and I adapt my instrument to the music rather the other way around. When I was young, incidentally, I was taught to imitate the harpsichord but now I don't believe that to be the right approach at all.

[lukeottevanger]

thank you - your remaks are very reassuring. Of course I have to play Scarlatti on my Steinway but I see nothing wrong in that either and I'm sure the Queen would have been delighted with such an instrument.

Yes, absolutely. But of course, as has been pointed out here already, had a piano like yours been available to Scarlatti, his music would have been very different. He was a very instrumentally aware composer, of course.

The point with the piano is that there many many different ways in which it can be played and I adapt my instrument to the music rather the other way around. When I was young, incidentally, I was taught to imitate the harpsichord but now I don't believe that to be the right approach at all.

I think you are correct in both sentences in this paragraph. Specifically, if the piano is only to be used as a substitute harpsichord, the point of using it at all is rather lost - if one is to use the piano, one has to make use of the possibilities it provides. And at the same time, as your first sentence suggests, the intrinsic musical implications of the piece itself must be paramount, and the performer must put his instrument at their service. All of which is as much as to say: performing Scarlatti on the piano requires a careful and calculated balancing act, one which if brought off can be immensely successful. But performing him on the harpsichord requires no such juggling.

I'm put in mind of something Karl very interesting wrote on the Greatness in Music thread, to the point that, if Prokofiev had been attempting to imitate Haydn precisely in his Classical Symphony, and if he had succeeded on all musical levels, there would still be a sense in which he had failed, because the writing of the a piece which would have been natural to Haydn would have necessarily come as an effort to Prokofiev. In the event, of course, Prokofiev tried no such thing - he saw no value in simple imitation, I suppose, and much more in a subtle and revealing conversation between his world and that of Haydn. I think the similarity to the discussion at hand is interesting, perhaps.

[FideLeo]

According to Fitzpatrick they were nearly all written towards the end of his life when....

"Fitzpatrick"= Ralph Kirkpatrick?

[Ten thumbs]

"Fitzpatrick"= Ralph Kirkpatrick?

Goodness me, we'll have to change all those K numbers! I was having one of my fitz.

[quintett op.57]

harpsichord

[Ten thumbs]

I can see the arguments for playing on period pianos coming up next. Should we hear Beethoven as it sounded then?

[lukeottevanger]

Do you need a tin-opener for that can of worms you're holding? 

[Que]

I can see the arguments for playing on period pianos coming up next. Should we hear Beethoven as it sounded then?

Well, I wouldn't say should - each to his taste.
But I prefer it - check the HIP Beethoven thread!

My experience sofar is that Beethoven, and let's not forget Mozart and Haydn, are all better of played on a fortepiano.

Q

[stingo]

Wasn't it Immerseel on Zig Zag that recorded Ravel HIP?

[Bunny]

Wasn't it Immerseel on Zig Zag that recorded Ravel HIP?

He did.  He conducted the Anima Eterna which used French instruments of early 20th century vintage.  Claire Chevalier played a 1905 Erard piano for the Concerto for the Left Hand.  The recording has that particular timbre of pre World War 2 French orchestras.  The only American equivalent would have been the Boston Symphony under Charles Munch which had a decidedly French flavor. 

[jochanaan]

Maybe we should ask, How happy was Beethoven, or Mozart, or Chopin with the instruments of their day?  I get the sense when studying Beethoven's music that he was testing the limits of the pianos available to him in a way few other composers of that time were doing; he might really have "dug" a modern Steinway or Bösendorfer.  But of course, we'll never know for certain.

One reviewer of an early HIP Appassionata recording on a period instrument said that he felt an intensity that was sometimes lacking in performances on modern pianos; he felt that the music stretched the piano almost to the distortion point, much like some recordings that put the sound into the red zones on the recording dials.  Of course, there's no reason you can't get the same intensity on a modern piano too.

[FideLeo]

(Beethoven) might really have "dug" a modern Steinway or Bösendorfer.  But of course, we'll never know for certain.

But the only thing we know about Beethoven is that he was never quite satisfied with anything: even if he might "dig" the instruments we offer today, he would still get dissatisfied and ask for more. 

Of course, there's no reason you can't get the same intensity on a modern piano too.

Yes, but much more physical strength.  To shake the steel frames and make them vibrate...to pound on the heavy, lead weighted keys...to make the fortified, multiple-part action mechanism bounce... imagine the rest.    Those who want to hear a fortepiano pushed to limits in "Appasionata" check out Anthony Newman's over-the-top performance (on now defunct Newport label) if they can find it somewhere.   

[Mozart]

How happy was Beethoven, or Mozart, or Chopin with the instruments of their day?

Ughh Mozart loved it! Just listen to his pcs! They are unmatched by any other composer.

[Bunny]

I can see the arguments for playing on period pianos coming up next. Should we hear Beethoven as it sounded then?

Why not?  Why must one preclude the other?  There's no right or wrong with this.  The sonatas sound differently on fortepiano than Steinway, Bösendorfer or Blüthner, for instance. 

The music always has more secrets to reveal depending on instrument and performance which is why I have multiple recordings of favorite works.

[jochanaan]

Ughh Mozart loved it! Just listen to his pcs! They are unmatched by any other composer.

That doesn't mean he loved what he had to work with.  Remember his flute concertos, and his oft-stated dislike for that instrument...

[FideLeo]

That doesn't mean he loved what he had to work with.  Remember his flute concertos, and his oft-stated dislike for that instrument...

2 flute concertos vs. 27 fortepiano concertos...hmm...

[jochanaan]

2 flute concertos vs. 27 fortepiano concertos...hmm...

But look at the quality!  The flute concertos are as good as the ones for piano or violin.  (Of course, he wrote the latter for himself and the former for noble patrons; still-- )