Recordings That You Are Considering

[San Antone]

The Amadeus recording is about 10 years old or more. Once I did own it, but culled it because I found Montanari much too willful to my taste. I suppose the Cantus set is another and relatively new recording.

IMO willfulness spoils the S&P (Monica Huggett, Sirkka-Liisa Kaakinen) but not the cello suites as much (Angela East)..

Are you saying that you consider Monica Huggett willful?

[Mandryka]

. . .  I suppose the Cantus set is another and relatively new recording.

Ah. I wonder if that's right.

IMO willfulness spoils the S&P (Monica Huggett, Sirkka-Liisa Kaakinen) but not the cello suites as much (Angela East)..

I'm fascinated by the interaction between creative performer and score. When the performance is  wilful  I enjoy the sense of the musician sharing his ideas with me, I like the challenge of trying to make sense of what he has decided to do. Sirkka-Liisa Kaakinen's a good example.

My relationship to musical performance is becoming more and more intellectual, less and less about enjoyment.

[prémont]

Are you saying that you consider Monica Huggett willful?

Yes, I think her S&P makes that impression. Maybe it is because she struggles hard with the music, because in other music I do not find her willful in the same way..

[San Antone]

Yes, I think her S&P makes that impression. Maybe it is because she struggles hard with the music, because in other music I do not find her willful in the same way..

Wow, I've never heard anyone say that she "struggles hard with the music".  From what I've seen the critical response has been similar to the Gramophone's review, the first paragraph of which is quoted here:

With these impressive performances (on her beautiful-toned Amati) of the Solo Sonatas and Partitas Monica Huggett sweeps other baroque interpretations off the board. She nails her colours firmly to the mast in her printed introductory note (which follows an uncommonly perceptive and informative commentary on the music by Mark Audus): her aim, she says, is a characteristically bright and sweet seventeenth-century timbre, and she declares herself less interested in the virtuoso aspect of the music, more in the "interior spirituality of the sonatas and the gracious elegance of the partitas". That certainly does not imply any absence of virtuosity: there have been few recordings of these pillars of the repertoire so impeccable in intonation and so free from any tonal roughness.

[prémont]

I'm fascinated by the interaction between creative performer and score. When the performance is  wilful  I enjoy the sense of the musician sharing his ideas with me....

Concerning Medieval and Renaissance music a creative performer is for obvious reasons a conditio sine qua non. But in Baroque music I think the performer must act a bit more restrained.

My relationship to musical performance is becoming more and more intellectual, less and less about enjoyment.

To me the main attraction of music or musical performance is that I enjoy it. The intellectual aspect may make me enjoy it even more.

[prémont]

Wow, I've never heard anyone say that she "struggles hard with the music".  From what I've seen the critical response has been similar to the Gramophone's review, the first paragraph of which is quoted here:

It's a long time since I heard her S&P's. But my impression, as I recall it, was what I wrote. Sometimes it is difficult to know if a performer makes tempo shifts for technical reasons, or because of willfulness.

Here is another review I have found. The reviewer describes her as willful.

Monica Huggett
Bach: Sonatas & Partitas

AllMusic Review by Mike D. Brownell
Monica Huggett's recording of the complete Bach Solo Partitas & Sonatas is a difficult one to peg, and listeners are likely to have widely differing opinions depending on what their priorities are in a good Bach recording. The strong points in Huggett's recording are plentiful. For starters, her sound quality is magnificently pure and unforced. Throughout the two-disc set, there's not even a hint of her Amati violin being pushed too hard, nor any chord being crunched. As a student of Baroque violin, Huggett infuses her playing with nuances of sound, articulation, and bow speed appropriate to period performance practice. Intonation is equally exceptional to a degree not often found in even the most popular recordings of these works. What some listeners may find as a downside is Huggett's sense of pacing. She makes frequent alterations to the tempo of each movement, often interrupting phrases in an attempt to highlight particular musical ideas. However, these interruptions are too extreme and too frequent and the result is generally a lack of a consistent musical line. The fugues of the three sonatas, for example, are very disjoined as Huggett overemphasizes the shift of the subject between registers. Still, her technique is quite dazzling, and in instances where she allows her phrases to flow without interruption (as in the Corrente of the Second Partita) her interpretation can be quite satisfying, though inconsistent.

[San Antone]

It's a long time since I heard her S&P's. But my impression, as I recall it, was what I wrote. Sometimes it is difficult to know if a performer makes tempo shifts for technical reasons, or because of willfulness.

Here is another review I have found. The reviewer describes her as willful.

Monica Huggett
Bach: Sonatas & Partitas

AllMusic Review by Mike D. Brownell
Monica Huggett's recording of the complete Bach Solo Partitas & Sonatas is a difficult one to peg, and listeners are likely to have widely differing opinions depending on what their priorities are in a good Bach recording. The strong points in Huggett's recording are plentiful. For starters, her sound quality is magnificently pure and unforced. Throughout the two-disc set, there's not even a hint of her Amati violin being pushed too hard, nor any chord being crunched. As a student of Baroque violin, Huggett infuses her playing with nuances of sound, articulation, and bow speed appropriate to period performance practice. Intonation is equally exceptional to a degree not often found in even the most popular recordings of these works. What some listeners may find as a downside is Huggett's sense of pacing. She makes frequent alterations to the tempo of each movement, often interrupting phrases in an attempt to highlight particular musical ideas. However, these interruptions are too extreme and too frequent and the result is generally a lack of a consistent musical line. The fugues of the three sonatas, for example, are very disjoined as Huggett overemphasizes the shift of the subject between registers. Still, her technique is quite dazzling, and in instances where she allows her phrases to flow without interruption (as in the Corrente of the Second Partita) her interpretation can be quite satisfying, though inconsistent.

I have been listening to her recording and I can understand the reviewer's comments about pacing.  There is a somewhat jerky quality when she slows down to focus on a figure and then quickly moves on to the next thing she wants to highlight.  I am undecided if I like her interpretation or not, at this point.  I am sure I've heard recordings I like more, but "willful" would not be a word I'd use.  I am unsure exactly what adjective would best describe her playing, maybe indulgent.

[Mandryka]

However, these interruptions are too extreme and too frequent and the result is generally a lack of a consistent musical line.

This presumes that a string instrument should sing in long phrases, something which may be hard to justify when interrogated. 

The fugues of the three sonatas, for example, are very disjoined as Huggett overemphasizes the shift of the subject between registers.

This is true, but not necessarily a bad choice. But definitely a bad choice if you think the music should be singing like an aria from an Italian opera.

I could imagine similar comments being made of things by Anner Bijlsma.

I am sure I've heard recordings I like more, but "willful" would not be a word I'd use.  I am unsure exactly what adjective would best describe her playing, maybe indulgent.

The word I'd use is experimental. She's trying out some ideas about phrasing. I see this as a wholly good thing, because it gives me food for thought.

It would be interesting to take one of her fugues and see whether it has a rhetorical structure -- inventio, dispositio etc.

[Madiel]

Maybe if I was the kind of person who collected 20 recordings of the same work I would be chiefly interested in the performer's ideas.

But as I'm the kind of person who is usually trying get just 1 recording each of as many works as possible, my primary interest is in the composer's ideas.

[Florestan]

Maybe if I was the kind of person who collected 20 recordings of the same work I would be chiefly interested in the performer's ideas.

But as I'm the kind of person who is usually trying get just 1 recording each of as many works as possible, my primary interest is in the composer's ideas.

The questions is, which performer is closer to the composer's ideas. 

[Mandryka]

I just got an email confirming that "it is the original 2012 performance repackaged." So nothing new after all.

[Madiel]

The questions is, which performer is closer to the composer's ideas. 

We can rule out the ones that actually ignore instructions in the score. And yes, such performers do exist.

[Pat B]

This presumes that a string instrument should sing in long phrases, something which may be hard to justify when interrogated. 

This is true, but not necessarily a bad choice. But definitely a bad choice if you think the music should be singing like an aria from an Italian opera.

I could imagine similar comments being made of things by Anner Bijlsma.

Brownell was talking about pacing, not articulation, and he wasn't demanding a strictly steady tempo.

I spot-streamed some of Huggett's fugues and I agree with Brownell: she frequently picks out things to emphasize at the expense of flow. When she's doing that it can be tough to listen to. (She also does some wonderful things, like the delicate arpeggios at 2:40 in the first fugue.)

I don't hear the comparison to Bylsma at all. He tends to keep a basic pulse, preferring to use dynamics and articulation for making points.

[Mandryka]

Ah. When he says this

She makes frequent alterations to the tempo of each movement, often interrupting phrases in an attempt to highlight particular musical ideas. However, these interruptions are too extreme and too frequent and the result is generally a lack of a consistent musical line.

I thought he's saying that she breaks up what he sees as a single phrase into smaller components, either by an interruption (a hesitation?) or by a tempo alteration. It's all a bit too abstract, it would be nice to have some examples to focus in on.

I guess I'm not clear about the difference between what Hugget does and using "articulation for making points." And why one should be a greater problem than the other.

[Madiel]

Ah. When he says this

I thought he's saying that she breaks up what he sees as a single phrase into smaller components, either by an interruption (a hesitation?) or by a tempo alteration. It's all a bit too abstract, it would be nice to have some examples to focus in on.

I guess I'm not clear about the difference between what Hugget does and using "articulation for making points." And why one should be a greater problem than the other.

So. You. Don't see. The problem. With. Excessive. Breakdown. Of larger phrases. Into. Smaller cells. Or. The difference. To using. A bit. Of. Emphasis?

[Mandryka]

The questions are to about why Hugget phrases as she does, and how she achieves the articulation (tempo changes, suspensions)

[Madiel]

The questions are to about why Hugget phrases as she does, and how she achieves the articulation (tempo changes, suspensions)

Well no, those weren't the questions presented.

That was emphasis, by the way. To make a point. Without breaking up something into unnaturally small components.

[Mandryka]

But you can't say whether the phrasing is inappropriate  unless you've identified its motivation. We can see straight away that So. You. Don't see. . . is inappropriately articulated because the sentence is made up of meaningful units of a language we understand. But music isn't language- like that. When people say that the phrasing is unnatural or excessive, without identifying the performer's motivations for doing it like that, they're really saying nothing more interesting than I don't like it. It's a disingenuous way of trying to make a totally personal response sound as though it's saying something about the performance rather than about the speaker.

[Madiel]

But music isn't language- like that.

See, people keep insisting on this. Where exactly do you think the term "phrase" comes from?

I maintain that music is a language, like that. Almost all the structural terms for music were adopted from literature precisely because people understood the similarities, and I would say that the best performers are the ones who understand that music operates in phrases and paragraphs. People who play notes as if they're not part of some larger structure are exactly like people who utter individual words in a pretty fashion without conveying that words need to operate within a larger context to fulfil their function.

Certainly, for any music written with key centres and tonal goals, a performer ought to be able to convey the sense of beginnings/endings or departure/arrival that tonal music involves. Notes have functions within that system. A performer who doesn't treat a leading note as leading to the tonic is no different to a person who begins a sentence and doesn't

You're focused (as is typical for you, and I don't mean that perjoratively) on a particular performer and their "motivations". I'm not. I'm focused on the general question, and you said you didn't understand the difference between 2 modes of operation. Well, I'm trying to illustrate it for you. I've not heard the particular performer and have no interest in entering into whether the particular performer is good or not. But you often talk about things like "a performer's motivations" as if anything a performer comes up with is automatically valid. I disagree. I suggest it is perfectly possible for a performer to have misconceived motivations that are at odds with the motivations of the composer and to show that they really don't understand the composition they are performing, just as it is possible for an actor to not understand the play/script they are performing.

Otherwise you give the composer zero value and you might as well listen to performers doing their own improvisations rather than buy albums of compositions of particular composers. If you accept that there is an existing musical text, then that inevitably means it is possible for a performer to not deliver that text well.

Although these days, I suppose you could take the view that if 97% of people all sit in the audience wincing thinking that the music is being delivered badly then that's just 97% of the audience having a "personal response". If there's one thing the modern world has decided it can try to do without it's any measure of objectivity or consensus.

[Mandryka]

Ok. Now the work begins. We'd have to look at the phrasing in, f.e. a fugue by Hugget and see  how it relates to the tonal structure of the music, and then, if there are prima facie  inconsistencies, see whether they can be justified by some other objective. 

(But not right now because I've got to go to the gym!)