Bach on the harpsichord, lute-harpsichord, clavichord

Started by Que, April 14, 2007, 01:30:11 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

premont

Quote from: Que on April 25, 2011, 07:38:25 PM

A recording that has some fame but you didn't mention, is Ketil Haugsand on Simax. Have you heard that? :)


Oh, yes. A sympatic and rather individual interpretation. But still I consider the ones I mentioned to be superior, and I could not mention all recordings I know in this context.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Antoine Marchand

#501
Quote from: premont on April 26, 2011, 09:02:49 AM
Oh, yes. A sympatic and rather individual interpretation. But still I consider the ones I mentioned to be superior, and I could not mention all recordings I know in this context.

It's curious that you use the word "individual" because one of my principal problems with Ketil Haugsand has been that I don't get to recognize his individual voice in these pieces. I mean all the particular aspects are well delivered (and he perfectly manages all the Baroque rhetorical resources), but I miss his own general vision and some sense of fun and enjoyment. With some of my favorite performers one or two words, a definition, come easily to my mind, for instance: Verlet II, passion, emotional turbulence; Dubreuil, Cartesian clarity; Leonhardt II, canonical (even without repetitions) and so, but the definition of Haugsand eludes me.


premont

Quote from: Antoine Marchand on April 26, 2011, 10:11:01 AM
It's curious that you use the word "individual" because one of my principal problems with Ketil Haugsand has been that I don't get to recognize his individual voice in these pieces. I mean all the particular aspects are well delivered (and he perfectly manages all the Baroque rhetorical resources), but I miss his own general vision and some sense of fun and enjoyment. With some of my favorite performers one or two words, a definition, come easily to my mind, for instance: Verlet II, passion, emotional turbulence; Dubreuil, Cartesian clarity; Leonhardt II, canonical (even without repetitions) and so, but the definition of Haugsand eludes me.

Writing "individual" I mean, that Haugsand´s interpretation is unlike what I have heard from others. I do not think it is necessary to put a label upon him. BTW if I should it would be something like human nobility, i.e. he displays the greatness of these works in a very human expressive way,  I think this is caused by his imagination rather than just by his mastery of rhetorical ressources.

On the other hand Dubreuil = clarity, yes ideal clarity, but in a neutral and almost impersonal way IMO, not far from what I have heard from some others e.g. James Weaver, who´s recording also displays ideal clarity. I do not intend to detract from Dubreuil and Weaver, just to state, that I think they to a certain extent lack individuality.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Antoine Marchand

Quote from: premont on April 26, 2011, 02:52:49 PM
Writing "individual" I mean, that Haugsand´s interpretation is unlike what I have heard from others. I do not think it is necessary to put a label upon him. BTW if I should it would be something like human nobility, i.e. he displays the greatness of these works in a very human expressive way,  I think this is caused by his imagination rather than just by his mastery of rhetorical ressources.

I will listen to him with your words in mind the next time.

Quote from: premont on April 26, 2011, 02:52:49 PM
On the other hand Dubreuil = clarity, yes ideal clarity, but in a neutral and almost impersonal way IMO, not far from what I have heard from some others e.g. James Weaver, who´s recording also displays ideal clarity. I do not intend to detract from Dubreuil and Weaver, just to state, that I think they to a certain extent lack individuality.

My approach is different here. I see Dubreuil's version like a very sunny and singing (cantabile) version, where these highly virtuosistic suites naturally recover their dance origins and the music speaks by itself. It's like a very hard work delivered with elegance, without apparent effort.

milk

Quote from: premont on April 26, 2011, 08:52:48 AM

It depends upon how many recordings you want to own, as I find the Leonhardt and Suzuki more "essential" than the Belder and Mortensen.
If I get the time I may write a list of all the recordings I own and rank them with a few words.

My feeling is that Leonhardt and Suzuki are enough for me. I enjoyed the Rousset but will probably not listen to it much. The Leonhardt and Suzuki recordings are such pieces of heaven. 

Your list would be greatly appreciated! 

milk

Quote from: premont on April 26, 2011, 08:52:48 AM

It depends upon how many recordings you want to own, as I find the Leonhardt and Suzuki more "essential" than the Belder and Mortensen.
If I get the time I may write a list of all the recordings I own and rank them with a few words.

I'm always interested in people's essentials. By the way, after listening to the Cera, and enjoying it, I still go back to the Moroney. I find myself attached to it. Take Moroney's Gigue in number 5. It's so down and dirty! I just love it.

What about Well Tempered Clavier? I love Kenneth Gilbert. Recently I acquired Glen Wilson, which I quite enjoy. I also got my hands on Leonhardt's book one. It's stupendous. Will anyone hold it against me if I say that Robert Levin's quirky WTC is among my favorites? I even enjoy his nasty sounding fortepiano.
I have a feeling that people will tell me I'm missing something essential. I'm ready to hear what it is. 

Bulldog

Quote from: milk on April 27, 2011, 04:32:52 AM
I'm always interested in people's essentials. By the way, after listening to the Cera, and enjoying it, I still go back to the Moroney. I find myself attached to it. Take Moroney's Gigue in number 5. It's so down and dirty! I just love it.

What about Well Tempered Clavier? I love Kenneth Gilbert. Recently I acquired Glen Wilson, which I quite enjoy. I also got my hands on Leonhardt's book one. It's stupendous. Will anyone hold it against me if I say that Robert Levin's quirky WTC is among my favorites? I even enjoy his nasty sounding fortepiano.
I have a feeling that people will tell me I'm missing something essential. I'm ready to hear what it is.

I have no idea why you might think you're missing something essential.  The WTC's you mentioned have much to offer, so enjoy!

Mandryka

Quote from: milk on April 27, 2011, 04:32:52 AM
.
I have a feeling that people will tell me I'm missing something essential. I'm ready to hear what it is.

The intimacy and coloufulnesss  of Kirkpatrick's Clavichord.
I think Landowska does some pretty unique and enjoyable things with WTC too.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

premont

Quote from: milk on April 27, 2011, 04:32:52 AM

What about Well Tempered Clavier? I love Kenneth Gilbert. Recently I acquired Glen Wilson, which I quite enjoy. I also got my hands on Leonhardt's book one. It's stupendous. Will anyone hold it against me if I say that Robert Levin's quirky WTC is among my favorites? I even enjoy his nasty sounding fortepiano.
I have a feeling that people will tell me I'm missing something essential. I'm ready to hear what it is.

Well. exactly Leonhardt, Wilson and Gilbert are my essentials concerning the WTC, so nor do I see, what you are missing.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

premont

#509
Quote from: Antoine Marchand on April 26, 2011, 04:14:04 PM
My approach is different here. I see Dubreuil's version like a very sunny and singing (cantabile) version, where these highly virtuosistic suites naturally recover their dance origins and the music speaks by itself. It's like a very hard work delivered with elegance, without apparent effort.

I agree very much with this. My point is, that Dubreuil isn´t the only one with that kind of approach.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Que

Spurred by this thread I'm doing a Partitas survey  :D for a possible 2nd harpsichord recording (next to Rousset, which is admittedly in a very personal style). Suzuki sounds very good indeed, Leonhardt is off the list  - I have never been big on him and he skips repeats.

Anyone familiar with this? :)



Q

milk

Quote from: Bulldog on April 27, 2011, 10:04:40 AM
I have no idea why you might think you're missing something essential.  The WTC's you mentioned have much to offer, so enjoy!

A sigh of relief! I love these versions so (Gilbert's Goldberg is also great) and another version might be a distraction! I just can't resist when there's a consensus on the merits of an interpretation I don't have. I've often put my finger near the download button for Kirkpatrick but always stopped short.

Mandryka

The reason to listen to Kpk is that it's very different from Gilbert and Wilson. Same with Ldk, though that is so poorly recorded that I can imagine lots of people would find their pleasure limited. Kpk and Ldk are poets in their own way, at least as creative as Wilson and Gilbert.

I don't believe in these lists of essentials. I think you should try to listen to everything - or at least everything that's creative and original.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

milk

Quote from: Mandryka on April 27, 2011, 10:02:10 PM
The reason to listen to Kpk is that it's very different from Gilbert and Wilson. Same with Ldk, though that is so poorly recorded that I can imagine lots of people would find their pleasure limited. Kpk and Ldk are poets in their own way, at least as creative as Wilson and Gilbert.

I don't believe in these lists of essentials. I think you should try to listen to everything - or at least everything that's creative and original.

"Essentials" is just a way of saying the same thing. It's hard to listen to everything - and it's expensive. Also, I'm always afraid I'm going to wear it out. If someone has something important to say in a performance then I'm game. But I'm musically uneducated. I can't really say what that is. 

premont

γνῶθι σεαυτόν

premont

#515
Quote from: Mandryka on April 27, 2011, 10:02:10 PM
The reason to listen to Kpk is that it's very different from Gilbert and Wilson. Same with Ldk, though that is so poorly recorded that I can imagine lots of people would find their pleasure limited. Kpk and Ldk are poets in their own way, at least as creative as Wilson and Gilbert.

I don't believe in these lists of essentials. I think you should try to listen to everything - or at least everything that's creative and original.

Do you consider variety an aim per se?

Swingle singers and Wendy Carlos were also quite original.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

premont

Quote from: milk on April 27, 2011, 09:47:48 PM
I've often put my finger near the download button for Kirkpatrick but always stopped short.

Kirkpatrick´s Bach harpsichord recordings for Archive from the late 1950es and the early 1960es are certainly most interesting. It is amazing how many strange but still efficient sounds he could "worm" out from his far from period Neupert model Bach harpsichord, and his rhytmic sense is mesmerizing. He was an extrovert and energetic kind of artist and one looks (almost) in vain for introspection, but it is certainly fun and stimulating. I am less convicted by his clavichord recordings. IMO his playing is too extrovert to the intimate character of that instrument.   
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Mandryka

#517
Quote from: premont on April 28, 2011, 10:50:43 AM
Kirkpatrick´s Bach harpsichord recordings for Archive from the late 1950es and the early 1960es are certainly most interesting. It is amazing how many strange but still efficient sounds he could "worm" out from his far from period Neupert model Bach harpsichord, and his rhytmic sense is mesmerizing. He was an extrovert and energetic kind of artist and one looks (almost) in vain for introspection, but it is certainly fun and stimulating. I am less convicted by his clavichord recordings. IMO his playing is too extrovert to the intimate character of that instrument.

The trick to coming to terms with Kptk's clavichord recording is to turn the amplifier volume down very low. Anyway, I suspect you  have a predilection for contemplative introspective  interpretations. But maybe I'm wrong  (you did say you like Verlet -- I've bought the Astree! Velet's  the exception that proves the rule maybe.) ;)

I think that it's good to have an open mind to authentic sincere musicians. They all deserve a good hearing.  And personally I'm amazed at the pleasure I get from trying to take in what they do. I think, in fact, that recorded music is a very high art form, to be treated critically and seriously.

I'm not so sure how authentic and sincere Swingle singers were -- as opposed to just making a fast buck out of some crisp vocalise.

As I'm writing this I realise I'm coming dangerously close to some form of intentionalism, which I really want to avoid . . .

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

milk

Quote from: premont on April 28, 2011, 10:50:43 AM
Kirkpatrick´s Bach harpsichord recordings for Archive from the late 1950es and the early 1960es are certainly most interesting. It is amazing how many strange but still efficient sounds he could "worm" out from his far from period Neupert model Bach harpsichord, and his rhytmic sense is mesmerizing. He was an extrovert and energetic kind of artist and one looks (almost) in vain for introspection, but it is certainly fun and stimulating. I am less convicted by his clavichord recordings. IMO his playing is too extrovert to the intimate character of that instrument.

What do you think of Levin's strange recording? He uses clavichord, harpsichord, organ, and fortepiano. Perhaps it could be thought to be eccentric? I find it compelling. It rounds things out for me. I'm not sure I can adjust my ears to the Neupert. I've also listened to samples of Kirkpatrick's clavichord and they didn't entice me whereas Levin's versions on clavichord leave me satisfied (I bought Tilney's version on clavichord a few years back and only listened to it once or twice). Sometimes I'm afraid my ears are going to get crowded! Do you ever worry you'll wear things out? I listened to the Goldbergs so many times that, honestly, now I can only listen to it once or twice a year. When I look at Donald Satz reviews I marvel at how he can go through so many versions without spoiling the music. On the other hand, of course a really great performance can bring me back to a piece so I hear it in a new way. The new Staier Goldberg did that for me. 

Bulldog

Quote from: milk on April 28, 2011, 04:01:12 PM
What do you think of Levin's strange recording? He uses clavichord, harpsichord, organ, and fortepiano. Perhaps it could be thought to be eccentric? I find it compelling. It rounds things out for me. I'm not sure I can adjust my ears to the Neupert. I've also listened to samples of Kirkpatrick's clavichord and they didn't entice me whereas Levin's versions on clavichord leave me satisfied (I bought Tilney's version on clavichord a few years back and only listened to it once or twice). Sometimes I'm afraid my ears are going to get crowded! Do you ever worry you'll wear things out? I listened to the Goldbergs so many times that, honestly, now I can only listen to it once or twice a year. When I look at Donald Satz reviews I marvel at how he can go through so many versions without spoiling the music. On the other hand, of course a really great performance can bring me back to a piece so I hear it in a new way. The new Staier Goldberg did that for me.

There's nothing strange about Levin's set; I just think of it as a diverse use of instruments.

Concerning my Goldbergs reviews, and a few others, the key to going through dozens of versions is to possess a great love of the music.  At one time, I was going to do similar reviews of the Brandenburgs.  I lined up the versions I owned and acquired many more in preparation.  Unfortunately, I found that my love of those works wasn't strong enough for me to spend so much time on this one project.  I learned from that mistake.