What are you listening 2 now?

[Traverso]

Corelli

12 Concerti Grossi Op.6

Musica Amphion Pieter-Jan Belder

[Der lächelnde Schatten]

Now playing Shostakovich Symphony No. 4 in C minor, Op. 43

[DavidW]

[Que]

The funny thing is that some people accept, or even demand, unsatisfactory instruments on the reason that "it's what they played and listened to back then", but when it is pointed out to them that, by the same token, unsatisfactory environments and etiquette should also be accepted, because "it's where and how they listened back then", they strongly disagree.

There is no such thing as "unsatisfactory" instruments, Andrei. Over time technical developements have create new possibilities and changes of the circumstances in performing led to new requirements. Though I dare anyone to demonstrate that the people that construct a present-day "run-of-the-mill" Steinways posses technical skills that are superior to Johannes Ruckers, the famous Flemish harpsichord builder, or Constanzo Antegnati, the famous Italian organ builder.

[Florestan]

What you don't understand is that there are people - many of them active musicians - who think that the old "imperfect" instruments are the ideal vehicles for the old music written for them.

If ideality (is this a word?) means agreement between something and the original vehicle through which that something was presented, then I have no problem whatsoever in agreeing that harpsichords are ideal for Bach's keyboard partitas. My problem is with the selective application of this criterion. Harpsichords were not designed for being listened to in concert halls or through headphones from a recording. Therefore, such listening environments are not ideal for Bach's keyboard partitas. Demanding strict adherence to harpsichords while making allowance for recordings or recitals is inconsistent in terms of ideality. We can have the ideal instrument but rarely, if ever, do we have the ideal environment too, and therefore rarely, if ever,  do we have the ideal experience of old music. That's all I'm saying --- and this is the last time I'm saying it.

[Karl Henning]

I need to take another stab at Krenek. I own that CPO set of symphonies and couldn't really connect with any of the music.

I've been reading yours and @ritter's comments about Krenek with great interest.

I think you'll enjoy this:

[Florestan]

There is no such thing as "unsatisfactory" instruments, Andrei.

Have you never heard a plinky-plonky, out-of-tune fortepiano? @Madiel has just offered us one such example a few posts above.

[Traverso]

Beethoven

"An die Ferne Geliebte"

Dietrich-Fischer Dieskau
Hartmut Holl

[JBS]

Have you never heard a plinky-plonky, out-of-tune fortepiano? @Madiel has just offered us one such example a few posts above.

Dollars to donuts, if you dove into the liner notes, you'll find an explanation that it's using a speculative or experimental or hypothetical tuning that was "really" the one the composer had in mind.
Example: Egarr's recording of the Goldberg Variations (albeit that was on harpsichord).

You don't think they'd admit to it being out of tune after all the trouble and expense of recording it, do you?

[JBS]

Beethoven

"An die Ferne Geliebte"

Dietrich-Fischer Dieskau
Hartmut Holl

The English language folksongs in that set (I don't remember if they were Beethoven or Haydn) make for great comic relief due to the accent DFD attempted to use in singing them.

[Florestan]

Dollars to donuts, if you dove into the liner notes, you'll find an explanation that it's using a speculative or experimental or hypothetical tuning that was "really" the one the composer had in mind.
Example: Egarr's recording of the Goldberg Variations (albeit that was on harpsichord).

You don't think they'd admit to it being out of tune after all the trouble and expense of recording it, do you?

Too bad for them. All the rationalization and speculation in the world will not make an out-of-tune, plinky-plonky fortepiano a satisfactory instrument. 

[Traverso]

The English language folksongs in that set (I don't remember if they were Beethoven or Haydn) make for great comic relief due to the accent DFD attempted to use in singing them.

The return to Ulster...the singing is great and as you say his English is funny indeed....

These are nevertheless more to my liking.

[Karl Henning]

Dollars to donuts, if you dove into the liner notes, you'll find an explanation that it's using a speculative or experimental or hypothetical tuning that was "really" the one the composer had in mind.
Example: Egarr's recording of the Goldberg Variations (albeit that was on harpsichord).

You don't think they'd admit to it being out of tune after all the trouble and expense of recording it, do you?

Which would suggest that the listener's quarrel is with the tuning, rather than with the instrument. 

[Traverso]

Beethoven

Septet

[Der lächelnde Schatten]

I think you'll enjoy this:

Mucho gracias, Karl! I'll check it out.

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

Seixas: Harpsichord Sonatas. Robert Woolley.

Bach: Lute Music. Nigel North.

Based on a suggestion by @Irons for an excellent recording label for recording sound.

[DavidW]

[Linz]

Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky Romeo and Juliet, Fantasy Overture, Capriccio italien, Op. 45, Francesca da Rimini, Op. 32; Elegy in G Major for String Orchestra, TH 51
Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, Vladimir Ashkenazy

[prémont]

If ideality (is this a word?) means agreement between something and the original vehicle through which that something was presented, then I have no problem whatsoever in agreeing that harpsichords are ideal for Bach's keyboard partitas. My problem is with the selective application of this criterion. Harpsichords were not designed for being listened to in concert halls or through headphones from a recording. Therefore, such listening environments are not ideal for Bach's keyboard partitas. Demanding strict adherence to harpsichords while making allowance for recordings or recitals is inconsistent in terms of ideality. We can have the ideal instrument but rarely, if ever, do we have the ideal environment too, and therefore rarely, if ever,  do we have the ideal experience of old music. That's all I'm saying --- and this is the last time I'm saying it.

I think it's impossible to define the ideal musical experience, opinions differ too much.

In my post above I wrote about the degree of compromises (abstractions) we must accept in the process of listening to music. So instead of seeking the ideal musical experience we should rather strive for the for us, as individuals, optimal musical experience. Even here opinions differ, but this will not prevent me from listening to music in the way I find optimal in the given circumstances.

[prémont]

Dollars to donuts, if you dove into the liner notes, you'll find an explanation that it's using a speculative or experimental or hypothetical tuning that was "really" the one the composer had in mind.
Example: Egarr's recording of the Goldberg Variations (albeit that was on harpsichord).

Human beings have theorized and experimented with tunings for many hundred years, and every existing tuning may be said to be theoretical, because there is no natural tuning. Also equal tuning is highly theoretical and experimental.

And as for the Goldberg Variations, we are at a loss, as we do not know the tuning Bach used. He reportedly had his own personal tuning.