Bach on Piano?

[Mandryka]

What do you think about these fortepianos? (obviously just the Cristofori was historically available to Scarlatti)

http://www.youtube.com/v/207j8Bpl5oQ&feature=share&list=PLvdX-BeHPXk-c3aF6FKSC3w5cvKOEly_n&index=2

http://www.youtube.com/v/OiEHhASKuj0

Unfortunately, there are not online examples of Aline Zylberajch.

BTW, apparently the vast majority of Scarlatti's output was composed very late in his life.

Very nice indeed at first glance, I'll listen carefully tomorrow. Thanks.

Have you had a chance to hear Baiano's piano CD (on spotify?)

[Ken B]

Has anyone recorded JS on fortepiano?  He is recorded as having played early pianos I recall, chez le roi.

[Marc]

Has anyone recorded JS on fortepiano?  He is recorded as having played early pianos I recall, chez le roi.

Yes, this visit has been talked about before in this thread.
And a few posts before yours, Premont mentioned a.o. Lorenzo Ghielmi playing the Ricercar a 3 on a fortepiano.

http://www.amazon.com/Johann-Sebastian-Bachs-Life-Work/dp/B0002HUB1Y/?tag=goodmusicguideco

Walter Riemer played both the Goldberg Variationen and Die Kunst der Fuge on a fortepiano:

http://shop.niederfellabrunn.at/

IIRC, there's also some fortepiano WTC stuff recorded by Daniel Chorzempa and Anthony Newman, who used different instruments for Book 2.

[Wakefield]

Very nice indeed at first glance, I'll listen carefully tomorrow. Thanks.

Have you had a chance to hear Baiano's piano CD (on spotify?)

Just after you mentioned it. It looks very attractive, indeed: the harpsichord for the fast sonatas, the fortepiano for the slow ones.

I'll give it a careful listening. Thanks!

[prémont]

......indeed: the harpsichord for the fast sonatas, the fortepiano for the slow ones.

This sounds very reasonable. I was never adverse to the period fortepiano for the sonatas suited for such a rendering. It is the modern piano I have problems with.

Thanks for the fortepiano links. I have listened to some of the sonatas and find the playing most convincing. The style of the sonatas, I listened to, is also relative modern in a Scarlatti context.

[prémont]

Walter Riemer played both the Goldberg Variationen and Die Kunst der Fuge on a fortepiano:

Walter Riemer´s fortepiano (for the AoF and probably the GVs as well) is not strictly period, as it is a copy of an instrument by Andreas Stein 1773. 

IIRC, there's also some fortepiano WTC stuff recorded by Daniel Chorzempa and Anthony Newman, who used different instruments for Book 2.

Not to forget Robert Levin´s recording of WTC for Haenssler.

[Karl Henning]

Not to forget Robert Levin´s recording of WTC for Haenssler.

What's your opinion on this one?

[prémont]

What's your opinion on this one [Levin WTC]?

Here is what I wrote about Levin´s WTC long time ago, and I have not changed my mind:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,289.msg258227.html#msg258227

[Karl Henning]

Thanks!

[Mandryka]

What do you think about these fortepianos? (obviously just the Cristofori was historically available to Scarlatti)

http://www.youtube.com/v/207j8Bpl5oQ&feature=share&list=PLvdX-BeHPXk-c3aF6FKSC3w5cvKOEly_n&index=2

http://www.youtube.com/v/OiEHhASKuj0

Unfortunately, there are not online examples of Aline Zylberajch.

BTW, apparently the vast majority of Scarlatti's output was composed very late in his life.

Mario Sollazzo's CD is on spotify. I liked the Cristophori piano in the slower sonatas a lot, thanks for pointing it out. Is that a modern piano he plays for some of them?

He's not afraid to play fast is he? 289 is as fast as Hantai. I don't much like it like that - Leonhardt plays it slightly slower and I think it really benefits. Another fast one is 175, but I thought that it wasn't spanish or percussive enough. Hantai is outstanding in that one.

[Wakefield]

Even if it is very likely that a number of Scarlattis´s sonatas may be written with the early fortepiano in mind, they are obviously not written with the modern piano in mind, so playing Scarlatti on modern piano looks like an emergency solution for musicians who do not have access to / have interest in or master the fortepiano nor its style.

I do not hear percussive elements in harpsichord sound as opposed to piano sound, and this is not surprising, because the piano is a percussion instrument, and the harpsichord isn´t.
But I agree that some harpsichordists seem to overdoo the Spanish guitar elements. But this may to some extent be caused by the fact, that most harpsichords sound more incisive and aggressive on recordings than in the real life.

I admire Horowitz very much - his musicality and technical powers - even I do not agree, that his Scarlatti (or any other pianist´s Scarlatti I have heard for that matter) does full justice to the specific harpsichord effects in the music for the reasons I stated above.

Sorry, I hadn't seen this message, Poul, but I must confess this time I don't understand exactly your point because maybe we are thinking of different issues.

I guess you know, after some years, I'm not a guy particularly fond of the piano sound. But I answered the question of this thread as if it were: do you prefer Bach or Scarlatti played on "modern grand piano"?

My best assumption is: you prefer Bach played on modern piano. Or maybe not.

My own answer was the opposite: I vastly prefer Scarlatti to Bach played on modern piano because of the reasons I have pointed out. But this doesn't mean any kind of general preference for modern piano over period instruments (harpsichord or fortepiano) in Scarlatti's music, although sometimes the harpsichord interpretations are a bit tiring in his music, precisely because of the aforementioned percussiveness and folk elements in some interpretations. After all, I have and enjoy two integral recordings of his music (almost exclusively) played on harpsichord and a fair amount of single disks played on harpsichord.

That said, I'm maybe wrong and just percussion instruments can be percussively played, but I'm not totally persuaded about this. 

[prémont]

Sorry, I hadn't seen this message, Poul, but I must confess this time I don't understand exactly your point because maybe we are thinking of different issues.

Yes. I think we are.

The original question was not Bach or Scarlatti, but Bach and Scarlatti on modern piano. I answered, that I prefer period instruments (some of my reasons given above), but that I think it is OK with modern piano (as long as I am myself to decide whether I want to listen to it or not).

Your question seems to be whether Bach or Scarlatti suffers the least when played on modern piano. This is a more delicate question.

Some of Scarlatti´s sonatas are very harpsichord-specific, and I do not find a rendering of these on piano advisable. Other Scarlatti-sonatas are written in a more modern style and are perhaps even more suited for pianoforte than for harpsichord. But this statement does not necessarily imply, that I find them suited for modern piano, but maybe they are the ones, which suffer the least in that way.

Bach´s harpsichord music is less instrument-specific than Scarlatti´s sonatas, but still I find that his music suffers on modern piano and that nothing is gained. Other than the reasons I stated above (dull piano sound, slower action and equal tuning), there are other stylistic questions, but this is more about the pianists than about the instrument (even if the instrument invites to that kind of playing). I think f.i. of too much legato playing and the common practice to indicate the metre and rhythm by dynamic accents instead of doing it by means of rhythmic articulation.

So by thinking that a part of Scarlatti´s sonatas suffer the least from a rendering on modern piano, I agree partly with you.

[prémont]

The harpsichord is significantly narrower, and especially in articulation, and it does sound much more percussive attack-wise than a piano which is much more sensitive to subtle degrees of touch & articulation. The piano can really sing and flow & is more lyrical & rich (great for vocally rooted music of JSB), due to how it is designed and its tonality; you don't get this with a harpsichord which is much more boxy, stringy, thin & twangy.

To be able to say anything sensible about this, you need to have some personal experience with both harpsichord playing and piano playing.

[prémont]

The harpsichord is significantly narrower, and especially in articulation, and it does sound much more percussive attack-wise than a piano which is much more sensitive to subtle degrees of touch & articulation. The piano can really sing and flow & is more lyrical & rich (great for vocally rooted music of JSB), due to how it is designed and its tonality; you don't get this with a harpsichord which is much more boxy, stringy, thin & twangy.

No. This is not only for the ears. You write about attack and articulation in a way, which only one who has got this in his own fingers can say.

[jochanaan]

It is more than fingers with these instruments, we aren't talking guitars here. How the notes are attacked/executed by the mechanisms within the instrument can be registered with the ear too. It is also tied to the inescapable nature of the instrument. Yes finger pressure etc. also plays a role, and goes into the mix of what comes out. But attack/articulation are definitely registered as part-of the instruments general sound characteristics.

You're not making sense, James, to those of us who actually have played harpsichords.  There is literally no control over tone or dynamics or attack; that's set when we regulate the instrument.  Where we have control is on timing/rhythm and length/articulation.  Tempo is very very important, also those tiny time variations that add expressiveness when you can't control dynamics.  Historically, a detached sound is normal for harpsichords, but it is also possible to play legato, to "flow like oil" (Mozart).  It's all done with rhythm and articulation.

[Karl Henning]

Whom are you going to believe: someone who has actually played the instrument, or James? 

[Ken B]

But the instrument does have tone, dynamic and attack. That is definitely heard as it is being played. How are the notes sounded if they aren't attacked in some way?

They surrender after being besieged.

[Mandryka]

You're not making sense, James, to those of us who actually have played harpsichords.  There is literally no control over tone or dynamics or attack; that's set when we regulate the instrument.  Where we have control is on timing/rhythm and length/articulation.  Tempo is very very important, also those tiny time variations that add expressiveness when you can't control dynamics.  Historically, a detached sound is normal for harpsichords, but it is also possible to play legato, to "flow like oil" (Mozart).  It's all done with rhythm and articulation.

But if you press the key harshly won't that result in an explosive sound? And  if you stroke the key, won't you get a mellow tone?

I first noticed this when I was listening to Leonhardt's Frescobaldi Capricci. But maybe it's all done with jacks and touch.

[jochanaan]

But if you press the key harshly won't that result in an explosive sound? And  if you stroke the key, won't you get a mellow tone?

I first noticed this when I was listening to Leonhardt's Frescobaldi Capricci. But maybe it's all done with jacks and touch.

No, there is really no way to control tone with touch.  But most harpsichords have several sets of jacks and strings, and the more elaborate ones have dual or even triple keyboards like organs.  That's how you get contrasting dynamics and tone on a harpsichord.  (I'm not a harpsichord specialist, but I helped build and maintain one at my college.)

What you can do with touch is vary the timing, or perhaps roll chords (versus playing "straight").  That affects the perceived attack.  Also, a detached articulation will of course sound crisper, more "attacked," than legato.  Finally, if all the notes and chords are exactly in time, it sounds crisper than if they're a little sloppy, as happens sometimes even in major recordings...

[jochanaan]

They surrender after being besieged.

...and then rebel after the piece is over!