Author Topic: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites  (Read 41463 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jay F

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1376
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #20 on: January 27, 2015, 11:19:02 AM »
Please send me the link to round 1.

Please don't disappear halfway through, as two out of three Comparisonmeisters have done recently.

Offline (: premont :)

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 10042
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2015, 01:51:48 PM »
Round one. A judgement based upon one single movement must necessarily become somewhat simplified and to tell the cellist even more difficult, because there are so many  options. My guesses are just indicative.

These are my votes:

1)   A noble pre-HIP interpretation, my first thought was Fournier or something alike. Because my taste have changed in the direction of HIP, I only say OK to this.

2)   An old recording, interpretation however not that oldfashioned (Casals?) so also OK to this.

3)   An agile extrovert HIP interpretation. Could be Beschi. YES to this.

4)   A rather conventional pre-HIP interpretation. Options are legio. OK to this.

5)   Sounds like violoncello da spalla. Not Terakado, probably not Badiarov, probably S Kuijken.YES to this, even I prefer the two others to Kuijken.

6)   I find this interpretation to be on the romantic side, particularly the second bouree, which in these ears is played in a misguided way. My first association is Rostropovich. However NO to this.

7)   This is a version which vary the repeats very much and in my opinion not in a convincing way. My thoughts are directed towards Lipkind or less probably Zelenka. NO to this.

8)   HIP for better or worse, rather willful (Wispelwey is my first association). A small ok to this.

9)   Very dancing pre-HIP version, charming I would say (Schiff? Queyras?) YES to this.

10)   HIP, expressive in a very convincing way, maybe the best of these ten versions (first association Bijlsma). YES to this.
As soon as a word has left the lips, not even the fastest horse can catch up with it.

Offline aukhawk

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1431
  • Oh no! Someone catted my avatar!
  • Location: England
  • Currently Listening to:
    Bach to Björk
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #22 on: January 27, 2015, 02:03:17 PM »
That was group B by the way folks.  Thanks :premont: and sorry about the lack of :repeats: (It won't happen again.)

Please don't disappear halfway through, as two out of three Comparisonmeisters have done recently.

I know, I'm very worried about that, I'm expecting a visitation from the Men In Black any time ...
« Last Edit: January 28, 2015, 01:43:49 AM by aukhawk »

Offline Jay F

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1376
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2015, 06:15:52 PM »
Group A:

Favorites: A3, A9

Liked: A2, A5, A6, A7, A8, A10

Meh: A1 A4
« Last Edit: February 02, 2015, 02:29:13 PM by Jay F »

Offline betterthanfine

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 292
  • Location: The Netherlands
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #24 on: January 28, 2015, 04:06:09 AM »
Is it too late for me to join in? :)

By the way, Mozart was cancelled, so no scheduling problems.

How come? I was looking forward to that one.

Offline mszczuj

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1043
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #25 on: January 28, 2015, 01:48:20 PM »
Could I?

Offline mc ukrneal

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 9138
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #26 on: January 28, 2015, 04:37:04 PM »
How come? I was looking forward to that one.
That member is no longer around...
Be kind to your fellow posters!!

Offline betterthanfine

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 292
  • Location: The Netherlands
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #27 on: January 29, 2015, 12:37:32 AM »
That member is no longer around...

Ah, thanks. That's too bad.

kishnevi

  • Guest
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #28 on: January 29, 2015, 09:02:34 AM »
Group C
NO to C4
Yes to all the others.


My No vote is based on the theory that, while heavy breathing is valid in 50 Shades of Grey, it is not valid in Bach. And it is heavy breathing, not singing along a al Gould.

Offline aukhawk

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1431
  • Oh no! Someone catted my avatar!
  • Location: England
  • Currently Listening to:
    Bach to Björk
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #29 on: January 29, 2015, 09:43:45 AM »
Thanks Jeffrey.
Keep 'em coming folks - by all means add brief comments if you wish.  No-one definitely eliminated yet although two are hanging by a fingernail (including, inevitably, one of my favourites   ::) )

Offline Pat B

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 2139
  • A=430
  • Location: USA
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #30 on: January 31, 2015, 04:16:32 PM »

B1 Reverberant recording. Fairly light touch at times but also digs in when needed. Counterpoint in Bourree II is really well done. Repeats in Bourree I are well-differentiated. A great start to the comparison.
B2 Much older recording. Playing also not up to today's technical standards. Repeats at end of excerpt are not differentiated. Overall style is not bad but I don't hear any special insights to overcome the problems.
B3 Opening sounds frantic, with semiquavers having as much bow noise as string tone. Fingerboard tapping sound is distracting. Counterpoint in Bourree II is done pretty well. Awkward pause at 2:13. Repeat is played a bit louder, with a crescendo, an unusual way of differentiating it (though one I heard again later).
B4 Very dry recording. Opening reminds me of a dead-wall practice room (though some reverb creeps in later). Nice trills at 0:46,0:49. Often very legato. Bourree II is very slow. Repeats are barely differentiated.
B5 Imperfect intonation, a few duffed notes, sometimes wiry tone. Bourree II is good, a bit exaggerated in spots but I like it. But sounds like it was recorded in different acoustic. Repeats sound a bit rushed.
B6 Dry acoustic but brighter sound than B4. Adds some double stops at beginning. Bourree II is taken slowly and made to sound like a march. Counterpoint is handled well. Like B3, repeats are played louder. Also a bit ornamented. This is really good if a bit idiosyncratic.
B7 Back to reverb. This sounds familiar (but later, I don't think it can be). 0:48-0:58 seems willful. What on earth is that at 1:23? And at 1:43? And at 1:52? And at 2:45? And at 2:50? I like the ornamentation at the end but it's not enough to overcome the previous flaws.
B8 Pretty straightforward but reasonably well done. Would like the counterpoint and repeats to be more differentiated.
B9 Dry sound. Like the early character but bass notes have an unattractive tone. 0:40-0:55 is too square. Bourree II is more elegant than most. Bourree I is really good.
B10 Reverby. Breathing is a bit too audible. Playing is very well characterized. Bourree II is elegant a la B9 but better tone. Repeats are subtly differentiated.

Yes: B1, B6, B10
OK: B3, B4, B5, B8, B9
No: B2, B7
« Last Edit: January 31, 2015, 04:21:38 PM by Pat B »

Online Jo498

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 5481
  • Location: Germany
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #31 on: February 01, 2015, 01:02:18 AM »
+ yes, - no, ~ don't care

c1 -

c2 +

c3 viola? +

c4 - too much reverb

c5 ~

c6 +

c7 +

c8 +

c9  I do not like the sound of this one, but it sounds so strange that I'd like to know who it is.

c10 +
Struck by the sounds before the sun,
I knew the night had gone.
The morning breeze like a bugle blew
Against the drums of dawn.
(Bob Dylan)

Offline aukhawk

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1431
  • Oh no! Someone catted my avatar!
  • Location: England
  • Currently Listening to:
    Bach to Björk
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #32 on: February 01, 2015, 02:31:50 AM »
Thanks folks.
With 4 out of 5 votes in for Group B, it's still hard to shake them apples out of the tree.  The favourite 2 are clear enough (and surprising, to me) and so are the un-favourite 2 (including the obligatory 'shock') but the remaining 6 are difficult to separate.  At least 1 more, preferably 2, must go, I'm relying on you, betterthanfine;)

Online North Star

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 17619
  • Location: Oulu, Finland
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #33 on: February 01, 2015, 03:11:26 AM »
C1 YES
C2 NO
C3 YES
C4 YES
C5 NO
C6  YES
C7 YES
C8 ~
C9 NO
C10 YES
"Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it." - Confucius

My photographs on Flickr

jlaurson

  • Guest
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #34 on: February 01, 2015, 03:44:43 AM »
Still possible to join?

Offline aukhawk

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1431
  • Oh no! Someone catted my avatar!
  • Location: England
  • Currently Listening to:
    Bach to Björk
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #35 on: February 01, 2015, 05:22:52 AM »
Yes but as these are really short 'Prologue' clips I'm hoping to be able to move on and send out Round 1 proper by, well it's looking like Tuesday evening (UK time).  That round will be about 12 minutes of music and 3 groups of 6 (or possibly 7 if the current round is inconclusive).
I've PM'd you links to Prologue Group A which is the one where I most need votes at the moment, but if you don't have time I'll include you again when sending out the links for Round 1.

Offline Moonfish

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 6447
  • Location: USA
  • Currently Listening to:
    Timeless soundscapes...
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #36 on: February 01, 2015, 09:18:11 AM »
This is tricky....

Group A

Yes: A1, A3, A7, A10

Maybe: A2, A6, A9

No: A4, A5, A8
« Last Edit: February 03, 2015, 10:54:18 PM by Moonfish »
"Every time you spend money you are casting a vote for the kind of world you want...."
Anna Lappé

Offline jfdrex

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 138
  • Location: USA
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #37 on: February 01, 2015, 09:54:05 AM »
My quick take on the Group C performances in the Prologue Round:

C1 – okay   (I'm not crazy about this one, but it does have character.)
C2 – yes
C3 – okay
C4 – no
C5 – okay / no?   (I can take it or leave it. I won't be disappointed if it's cut.)
C6 – yes
C7 – no
C8 – yes
C9 – yes
C10 – okay / yes?   (It's not quite my cup of tea, but I think it deserves further hearing.)


N.B.: At this point, I'm being less critical than I'd be at a later stage.  I don't want to be the one responsible for eliminating a famous recording before we can even give it a chance. ;)

Offline aukhawk

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1431
  • Oh no! Someone catted my avatar!
  • Location: England
  • Currently Listening to:
    Bach to Björk
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #38 on: February 01, 2015, 12:04:26 PM »
Thanks.

I don't want to be the one responsible for eliminating a famous recording before we can even give it a chance. ;)

As it happens, of the two you voted a definite 'no' - one was already doomed and the other already guaranteed a place.  So you can sleep easy tonight  ;)


Ken B

  • Guest
Re: Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites
« Reply #39 on: February 01, 2015, 12:52:04 PM »
I'm not in it, but the "too much reverb" comments suggests a terrific Fournier set is doomed ...