Mozart in Period Performances (HIP)

Started by Bunny, April 12, 2007, 10:40:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

San Antone

Quote from: Gordon Shumway on October 21, 2012, 04:09:20 PM
Few days ago, I posted this in the "New Releases" thread:

http://www.clarinetclassics.com/shop/mozart-2/
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Clarinet%2BClassics/CC0068

It looks quite interesting, IMO.

These guys of "The Revolutionary Drawing Room" have recorded several discs on CPO, including some remarkable Boccherini.

I am familiar with their Boccherini, and agree with you; but I just discovered that they have also recorded a good bit of Donizetti's string quartets, maybe all of them (very interesting).

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Gordon Shumway on October 21, 2012, 04:09:20 PM
Few days ago, I posted this in the "New Releases" thread:

It looks quite interesting, IMO.

These guys of "The Revolutionary Drawing Room" have recorded several discs on CPO, including some remarkable Boccherini.

Indeed, IMO too! And that's not to mention the superb Donizetti 4tets they did, also on cpo. And Colin Lawson is top shelf too. Altogether looks like a 'gotta have it'!

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

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

Leo K.

Quote from: Gordon Shumway on October 21, 2012, 04:09:20 PM
Few days ago, I posted this in the "New Releases" thread:

http://www.clarinetclassics.com/shop/mozart-2/
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Clarinet%2BClassics/CC0068

It looks quite interesting, IMO.

These guys of "The Revolutionary Drawing Room" have recorded several discs on CPO, including some remarkable Boccherini.

This disk is a recording I was waiting for in a long time, a chance to have these fragments (with completions) in one place with the finished quintet, I'm real excited thanks!

8)

Lilas Pastia

The concept of Mozart in period performances is a curate's egg, to say the least. Mozart lived and worked in a transitional era that saw the demise of some types of instruments and the emergence of others (like the clarinet and the fortepiano) that were to undergo significant and very fast improvements even during his own short lifespan. Therefore a performance practice based on instruments alone cannot really be circumscribed. And we should remember that Mozart himself was a great fan of the new instruments. Their tonal characteristics were hugely exciting for him both as a composer and a  player. Mozart was an enthusiastic proponent of modernism in instrument building and playing. A Mozart HIP can only be a transitional, even fictional affair.

That being said, the most successful performances of Mozart's music in HIP often stem from solo instruments or chamber ensembles. Up to an extent these can extend to concertos. The one systematic failure of HIP Mozart is the symphonies. It's not so much the size of the ensembles as the blend of instruments and orchestral balances that fail to satisfy. IMHO Mozart was ahead of his time in composing for the orchestra. HIP WAM symphonies sound astringent, bass-deficient and incapable of blending satisfyingly. Mozart composed long musical phrases, often with sustained phrase-ends. The hiccupy, borborygmic sounds of the old instruments' harmonie is at odds with the sustained notes asked of the strings. In return, the acidic, pungent sound of PI strings cannot blend with the mellow sound of period horns and flutes. The decision of some prominent HIP conductors like Harnoncourt to record these works with a modern orchestra should be taken into consideration. I yet have to hear a recording of those works on old instruments that sounds like Mozart. It doesn't help that the best-known proponents like Brüggen, Pinnock and Gardiner seem incapable of expressing feelings in music.

Whenever I hear Haydn symphonies played in HIP, I hear a tonal (timbral, harmonic and ryhmic) justification. It makes musical sense, even to a high degree. I just don't hear it in Mozart's most advanced orchestral works. The times they were a-changin'.

Elgarian

#804
Quote from: André on October 27, 2012, 08:06:23 PM
I yet have to hear a recording of those works on old instruments that sounds like Mozart.

Granted all the uncertainties you mention here (and you're far better informed than I), how do we know what Mozart should sound like? I pick this sentence to comment on because I'd be tempted to say the same thing about modern instrument recordings - that is, I feel that none of them sounds like Mozart. I suspect that what we both really mean is that they (in your case the old and in my case the new) don't sound like our idea of what Mozart should sound like. Although I'm quite sure you're right in the general thrust of what you say, nevertheless my favourite HIP Mozart performances 'feel' authentic to me. I sense a (possibly illusory) rightness in them that I find very satisfying - they're more effective at enabling me to imagine Mozart is in the room, as it were.

I think what I'm suggesting is that I don't listen to HIP Mozart recordings because they're authentic, but because the most successful of them make me feel as if they are; and the experience (for me) trumps the reasoning.

Que

#805
Quote from: André on October 27, 2012, 08:06:23 PM
The concept of Mozart in period performances is a curate's egg, to say the least. Mozart lived and worked in a transitional era that saw the demise of some types of instruments and the emergence of others (like the clarinet and the fortepiano) that were to undergo significant and very fast improvements even during his own short lifespan. Therefore a performance practice based on instruments alone cannot really be circumscribed. And we should remember that Mozart himself was a great fan of the new instruments. Their tonal characteristics were hugely exciting for him both as a composer and a  player. Mozart was an enthusiastic proponent of modernism in instrument building and playing. A Mozart HIP can only be a transitional, even fictional affair.

In everything you say, I see all the more reason to perform on the instruments Mozart wrote for. Music that is transitional instruments-wise runs the risk of being stuffed in a mold it doesn't belong in. And if Mozart was so keen on the instruments, their sound and their characteristics, why shouldn't we?  :) Basically your reasoning is: things changed, so it doesn't matter. A fascination for innovations in instruments (as I explained before in the case of Beethoven's keyboard music) does not mean that it's natural to play on later versions of instruments that the composer was not familiar with. And no, composers are no psychics, unfortunately. 8)

QuoteThat being said, the most successful performances of Mozart's music in HIP often stem from solo instruments or chamber ensembles. Up to an extent these can extend to concertos. The one systematic failure of HIP Mozart is the symphonies. It's not so much the size of the ensembles as the blend of instruments and orchestral balances that fail to satisfy. IMHO Mozart was ahead of his time in composing for the orchestra. HIP WAM symphonies sound astringent, bass-deficient and incapable of blending satisfyingly. Mozart composed long musical phrases, often with sustained phrase-ends. The hiccupy, borborygmic sounds of the old instruments' harmonie is at odds with the sustained notes asked of the strings. In return, the acidic, pungent sound of PI strings cannot blend with the mellow sound of period horns and flutes. The decision of some prominent HIP conductors like Harnoncourt to record these works with a modern orchestra should be taken into consideration. I yet have to hear a recording of those works on old instruments that sounds like Mozart. It doesn't help that the best-known proponents like Brüggen, Pinnock and Gardiner seem incapable of expressing feelings in music.

Whenever I hear Haydn symphonies played in HIP, I hear a tonal (timbral, harmonic and ryhmic) justification. It makes musical sense, even to a high degree. I just don't hear it in Mozart's most advanced orchestral works. The times they were a-changin'.

Though I share your admiration for Harnoncourt's RCO recordings, I don't hear a failure in the symphonies. I think what you hear is that in the symphonies a HIP performance makes the biggest difference is emotional meaning/colour. You might be attached to the "Romantic" feel of the old style performances, and you are entirely entitled to do so! :) But what the HIP performances show is that these are not late Classical or Romantic symphonies, though some of the last symphonies stand apart from the rest in this respect.

As for performances: try Hogwood. But he also will present the majority of Mozart's symphonies as bubbly, witty and intimate affairs. To me in retrospect Harnoncourt's RCO recordings, however so beautiful, are not giving an entirely true picture of Mozart: more weighty and straight laced, also too much of an Haydnesque approach - a composer that is still Harnoncourt real forte in the Classical era IMO.

BTW since when do gut strings produce an "acidic" sound compared to metal wired strings? ::) The opposite is actually true: gut strings produce a gentler, softer, more sonorous sound. The only thing is that their tuning tends to be less stable.

But, that being al said: if you don't like the sound of it, nobody is going to stop you from making a different choice!  :)
If it doesn't fit your preference, so be it. I just don't agree with your rationalizations. 8) And I honestly don't think that your arguments are necessarily connected with Mozart in particular.

Q

Dancing Divertimentian

#806
Quote from: Que on October 28, 2012, 02:03:48 AM
BTW since when do gut strings produce an "acidic" sound compared to metal wired strings?

Gobs of recordings with gut strings sound acidic, or to my ears, "steely". Most notoriously Hogwood, Pinnock, Goebel, sometimes Gardiner, etc... The fault could lie in the recorded medium of course but if that's all many of us have to go on, then what do we do?

I've been reading of this criticism since day one of the mainstreaming of HIP. It's not really a secret.

Certainly many HIP recordings have over the years tamed this problem to a large degree (Herreweghe, Veldhoven, Quatuor Mosaïques, to name just a few) but taming the problem only serves to highlight the issue.   

QuoteBut, that being al said: if you don't like the sound of it, nobody is going to stop you from making a different choice!  :)

But I think sometimes that's a bit too simplistic a come-back. I've said it before, Mozart's symphonic writing makes such novel use of instrumentation that it's obvious he's stretching beyond the limitations of his orchestras. He's attempting to be forward-thinking in a sea if inhibitions. I haven't heard a single HIP symphonic Mozart recording (symphony/concerto/opera, etc...) over the years that equals Mozart's unique vision (and I've owned a boat load of them).

In a sense I think that's what André is getting at. And I think it's a fair criticism.

Unfortunately criticizing HIP seems to have the effect of circling the wagons. But if anyone else can be criticized, then so can HIP.

EDIT: and the usual disclaimer: I'm an avowed HIPster! :)

Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

Scarpia

Quote from: Elgarian on October 28, 2012, 12:51:18 AMI think what I'm suggesting is that I don't listen to HIP Mozart recordings because they're authentic, but because the most successful of them make me feel as if they are; and the experience (for me) trumps the reasoning.

Same here.  I think that is important that Mozart is performed on period instruments because it tells us what Mozart was expecting to hear as he wrote those works.  Such insights are valuable.  But in the end I enjoy recordings of some PI ensembles because I like the sounds of those instruments and find the performances compelling.

Mandryka

#808
Quote from: André on October 27, 2012, 08:06:23 PM
The concept of Mozart in period performances is a curate's egg, to say the least. Mozart lived and worked in a transitional era that saw the demise of some types of instruments and the emergence of others (like the clarinet and the fortepiano) that were to undergo significant and very fast improvements even during his own short lifespan. Therefore a performance practice based on instruments alone cannot really be circumscribed. And we should remember that Mozart himself was a great fan of the new instruments. Their tonal characteristics were hugely exciting for him both as a composer and a  player. Mozart was an enthusiastic proponent of modernism in instrument building and playing. A Mozart HIP can only be a transitional, even fictional affair.

That being said, the most successful performances of Mozart's music in HIP often stem from solo instruments or chamber ensembles. Up to an extent these can extend to concertos. The one systematic failure of HIP Mozart is the symphonies. It's not so much the size of the ensembles as the blend of instruments and orchestral balances that fail to satisfy. IMHO Mozart was ahead of his time in composing for the orchestra. HIP WAM symphonies sound astringent, bass-deficient and incapable of blending satisfyingly. Mozart composed long musical phrases, often with sustained phrase-ends. The hiccupy, borborygmic sounds of the old instruments' harmonie is at odds with the sustained notes asked of the strings. In return, the acidic, pungent sound of PI strings cannot blend with the mellow sound of period horns and flutes. The decision of some prominent HIP conductors like Harnoncourt to record these works with a modern orchestra should be taken into consideration. I yet have to hear a recording of those works on old instruments that sounds like Mozart. It doesn't help that the best-known proponents like Brüggen, Pinnock and Gardiner seem incapable of expressing feelings in music.

Whenever I hear Haydn symphonies played in HIP, I hear a tonal (timbral, harmonic and ryhmic) justification. It makes musical sense, even to a high degree. I just don't hear it in Mozart's most advanced orchestral works. The times they were a-changin'.

I think what you say about Harnoncourt is slightly misleading because he has recorded the Prague symphony with CMV. But it's true that he's recorded 39 through 41 with VPO more recny, and I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for prompting me to investigate.

Have you heard those VPO records (they're on DVD)? Or were you thinking only of the Concertgebouw CDs?

I like that CMW Prague symphony. Another HIP record I like is Bruggern's two orchestras symphony 40, and his Linz Symphony. I think you're slightly unfair about Bruggen.


Your point about blend is interesting, though the textures that the HIP orchestras tend to produce may be valid, more valid in fact.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

San Antone

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on October 28, 2012, 07:53:45 AM
Gobs of recordings with gut strings sound acidic, or to my ears, "steely". Most notoriously Hogwood, Pinnock, Goebel, sometimes Gardiner, etc... The fault could lie in the recorded medium of course but if that's all many of us have to go on, then what do we do?

I've been reading of this criticism since day one of the mainstreaming of HIP. It's not really a secret.

You may read this criticism but to my ears it does not hold true.

Scarpia

#810
Quote from: Mandryka on October 28, 2012, 08:35:33 AMYour point about blend is interesting, though the textures that the HIP orchestras tend to produce may be valid, more valid in fact.

The inappropriate use of the word "valid" to describe such performances is the source of the trouble.  Whatever performance allows a listener to appreciate what Mozart created is "valid" to him or her.  More often then not I find myself getting more out of HIP performances, but I would scarcely characterize them as more "valid" in any objective sense.  They may be a closer approximation of what Mozart expected to hear, but there is more in that music than can be heard in any one performance.

Elgarian

Quote from: Scarpia on October 28, 2012, 08:57:51 AM
The inappropriate use of the word "valid" to describe such performances is the source of the trouble.

Spot on. Heck, even among HIPsters there's substantial disagreement. Remember all that fuss a while back about Viviana Sofronizky's recordings of the piano concertos? For me, and some others, it seemed as if a vivid Mozartian light had suddenly switched on. When I listen to them I feel as if I have a direct link to Mozart's intentions. It's an illusion, surely (and that's why these questions of 'validity' are so misleading) - but an illusion that draws me tightly into the music and that's what counts. For others they didn't work very well at all, and no amount of discussion about validity is likely to change such responses.


Mandryka

Quote from: Scarpia on October 28, 2012, 08:57:51 AM
The inappropriate use of the word "valid" to describe such performances is the source of the trouble.  Whatever performance allows a listen to appreciate what Mozart created is "valid" to him or her.  More often then not I find myself getting more out of HIP performances, but I would scarcely characterize them as more "valid" in any objective sense.  They may be a closer approximation of what Mozart expected to hear, but there is more in that music than can be heard in any one performance.

I don't think there's any disagreement between us. 

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

Lilas Pastia

#813
Of Harnoncourt's Mozart symphonies I have the COA and the COE (the latter is more to my taste, having a better internal flow to them). I also attended a concert in which he played the 25th,  40th and concerto 16 in Amsterdam. I recall how jolting the effect was.

I know both the Hogwood and Pinnock sets. I sold Pinnock, kept only copies of 38 and 39. Norrington, another HIP apostle, has recorded some in Stuttgart with the SWR. I have kept 25, 32 and 38. To my ears the best Mozart cycle I heard was recorded by Hans Graf with the Mozarteum Orchestra. No revelations, but no dispappointment, and a very intelligent layout. It's a small orchestra, which suits the music, and the timbres are just right. IMO the Salzburg Mozarteum Orchestra can be considered a HIP group in its own way. Founded in 1841, it has played Mozart non-stop for the last 171 years !

San Antone

Quote from: André on October 29, 2012, 03:38:24 PM
To my ears the best Mozart cycle I heard was recorded by Hans Graf with the Mozarteum Orchestra. No revelations, but no dispappointment, and a very intelligent layout. It's a small orchestra, which suits the music, and the timbres are just right. IMO the Salzburg Mozarteum Orchestra can be considered a HIP group in its own way. Founded in 1841, it has played Mozart non-stop for the last 171 years !

I know some of these recordings; there's a near complete set of the symphonies by them with Graf on Spotify.  You're right they are pleasant recordings.

:)

Mandryka

#815
Quote from: André on October 29, 2012, 03:38:24 PM
Of Harnoncourt's Mozart symphonies I have the COA and the COE (the latter is more to my taste, having a better internal flow to them). I also attended a concert in which he played the 25th,  40th and concerto 16 in Amsterdam. I recall how jolting the effect was.


I expect he's  doing it  deliberately, he probably thinks you could do with a good jolting. You know he believes  that romantic interpretations of baroque music make the music too smooth and easy, with the emphasis on luxuriant long lines, legato, and dissonances understated. He thinks that this denudes the  music of some of its meaning, and reduces it to just palatable, easy to eat, ear candy. Pap. At his best, his Bach is full of jolts and dissonances.

He may well feel the same about Mozart. That's part of what I meant by suggesting that the textures that repel you may be "valid."

One thing that interested me was that the one late Mozart symphony he did record with CMV he didn't record afterwards as far as I know (38).
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

xochitl

his don giovanni commendatore scene certainly scared the **** outta me

mszczuj

Quote from: André on October 29, 2012, 03:38:24 PM
I know both the Hogwood and Pinnock sets. I sold Pinnock,

I haven't heard Pinnock yet but for me Jakob ter Linden is much more exciting than Hogwoood.

Opus106

Quote from: xochitl on October 30, 2012, 01:53:43 AM
his don giovanni commendatore scene certainly scared the **** outta me

Which performance is that?
Regards,
Navneeth

xochitl

#819
Quote from: Opus106 on October 30, 2012, 08:08:52 AM
Which performance is that?


but i think the one on youtube may be even better