HIP Debate Chapter 85,000

[DavidW]

Very good.

Strongly disagree!  It is a dumb argument.  But like so many others here, I'm absolutely tired of having this and correcting these nonsensical ideas.  There is no zero sum game between MI and PI anything.  Why are we even having this in 2024?  This is decades too late.  The rest of us have moved on to a broader, more sophisticated appreciation of music.

And I'm sure wherever Herman stands he is probably tired of the debate too.  Which is why he didn't say that BRIAN.  You put words in his mouth and I'm totally blaming this on you!

[DavidW]

I can't think of an example of this. For instance, I tend to think of the Trevor Pinnock recordings of baroque and classical orchestral music as having an excessively strict "sewing machine" articulation and I might be tempted to make such a comment, but then I come across people who love those recordings.

Oh yeah British HIP, their approach to music making is much like their cuisine.    The rest of us preferred Dutch baroque performances.  But of course it doesn't really matter anymore, they've all become more free in their playing.

And hey Pinnock's Haydn is fantastic!  I will totally fight you on that.

[Karl Henning]

Strongly disagree!  It is a dumb argument.  But like so many others here, I'm absolutely tired of having this and correcting these nonsensical ideas.  There is no zero sum game between MI and PI anything.  Why are we even having this in 2024?  This is decades too late.  The rest of us have moved on to a broader, more sophisticated appreciation of music.

All granted. As a composer, I focused over-simply on what the composer had to put up with and accept, rather than what the composer genuinely wanted, as being so in accord with my experience.

[Spotted Horses]

Madiel may think of some players who don't master the period instruments well and had been better off with modern instruments.

Also - even on period instruments - there are recordings which are hectic and "scratching" in an annoying way, examples being Amandine Beyer's Bach violin concertos and Musica Florea's Brandenburg concertos.

Never heard of Florea, but I like this Amandine Beyer recordings!

[DavidW]

All granted. As a composer, I focused over-simply on what the composer had to put up with and accept, rather than what the composer genuinely wanted, as being so in accord with my experience.

Ah but that goes hand in hand with limitations forcing artistic focus.  Less is more!

[ritter]

Oh yeah British HIP, their approach to music making is much like their cuisine.   The rest of us preferred Dutch baroque performances. 

Oh, yes, the delights of Dutch cuisine! 

I'm not really into the HIP vs. non-HIP, or the PI vs. MI debate, as my repertoire of interest is usually quite distanced from that, but must say that Trevor Pinnock's Brandenburg Concertos on Archiv are fantastic as well.

[prémont]

Never heard of Florea, but I like this Amandine Beyer recordings!

https://www.discogs.com/release/17284792-Johann-Sebastian-Bach-Musica-Florea-Marek-%C5%A0tryncl-Brandenburg-Concertos-BWV-1046-1051-Complete-

I don't think you missed anything by not knowing them.

As to Amandine Beyer: The recording I refer to makes me nervous - and I can say that I don't get nervous easily.

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/7955847--bach-violin-concertos

[Spotted Horses]

Oh, yes, the delights of Dutch cuisine! 

I'm not really into the HIP vs. non-HIP, or the PI vs. MI debate, as my repertoire of interest is usually quite distanced from that, but must say that Trevor Pinnock's Brandenburg Concertos on Archiv are fantastic as well.

Through the magic of streaming I sampled the Pinnock Mozart symphonies, and I liked it!

[Florestan]

The fact that you play historical instruments does not obligate you to refrain from rehearsing the music properly from a technical point of view. And when do you begin to understand that HIP is not about replicating past performance practice exactly, which is also impossible for obvious reasons.

Looks like we're going in circles, my friend. Allow me to clarify my position once and for all.

@Spotted Horses said:

Speaking for myself, if I admire a composer, I feel I owe it to myself to at least be aware of how the music sounded on the ensemble that the composer write for.

In response to that, I pointed out the well-documented, incontrovertible fact that most ensembles during the Classical Era, that is between roughly 1750 and 1830, were under-rehearsed and semi-professional, therefore they sounded under-rehearsed and semi-professional, ie completely and utterly unlike a HIP ensemble of today, which is comprised of over-rehearsed professionals, oftenly doubling as scholars --- ie, exactly and precisely what the Classical Era musicians were not.

I cannot and will not make my position any clearer than that.

[Florestan]

I tend to think of the Trevor Pinnock recordings of baroque and classical orchestral music as having an excessively strict "sewing machine" articulation and I might be tempted to make such a comment, but then I come across people who love those recordings.

So what? If we were to refrain from making any negative comment about anything for fear that someone somewhere might like it and therefore feel offended by our comment, then we'd better shut down GMG altogether, nay, refrain from commenting on anything at all.

[San Antone]

Looks like we're going in circles, my friend. Allow me to clarify my position once and for all.

@Spotted Horses said:

In response to that, I pointed out the well-documented, incontrovertible fact that most ensembles during the Classical Era, that is between roughly 1750 and 1830, were under-rehearsed and semi-professional, therefore they sounded under-rehearsed and semi-professional, ie completely and utterly unlike a HIP ensemble of today, which is comprised of over-rehearsed professionals, oftenly doubling as scholars --- ie, exactly and precisely what the Classical Era musicians were not.

I cannot and will not make my position any clearer than that.

And the audience came to the concert in horse and buggy, which we also do not replicate.  Your "point" is silly. 

[Florestan]

And the audience came to the concert in horse and buggy, which we also do not replicate.  Your "point" is silly. 

To you, and only because you missed it entirely.

[prémont]

Looks like we're going in circles, my friend. Allow me to clarify my position once and for all.

In response to that, I pointed out the well-documented, incontrovertible fact that most ensembles during the Classical Era, that is between roughly 1750 and 1830, were under-rehearsed and semi-professional, therefore they sounded under-rehearsed and semi-professional, ie completely and utterly unlike a HIP ensemble of today, which is comprised of over-rehearsed professionals, oftenly doubling as scholars --- ie, exactly and precisely what the Classical Era musicians were not.

I cannot and will not make my position any clearer than that.

Circles or not, I don't know. The issue is that you haven't understood the irrelevance of the professional level (or lack thereof) of Classical Era musicians to today's HIP musician. It appears you believe that HIP aims for exact replication, which is not the case. Such a belief would suggest that if, for example, we know that a corno player made several mistakes during the premiere of a work, we would need to replicate those errors 1 to 1 today to achieve a truly historically informed performance, which is, of course, an absurd perspective.

I cannot and will not make my critique of your position any clearer than that.

[prémont]

I tend to think of the Trevor Pinnock recordings of baroque and classical orchestral music as having an excessively strict "sewing machine" articulation and I might be tempted to make such a comment,

This is true to some extent - Pinnock's agogics are very subtle, and maybe we notice it partly because we nowadays are accustomed to more flexible playing. However, when compared to Karl Richter's interpretations of Bach, Pinnock's approach is indeed more flexible, contrasting somewhat with Richter's genuine sewing-machine style

[Florestan]

I cannot and will not make my critique of your position any clearer than that.

Fair enough. 

[Spotted Horses]

Looks like we're going in circles, my friend. Allow me to clarify my position once and for all.

@Spotted Horses said:

In response to that, I pointed out the well-documented, incontrovertible fact that most ensembles during the Classical Era, that is between roughly 1750 and 1830, were under-rehearsed and semi-professional, therefore they sounded under-rehearsed and semi-professional, ie completely and utterly unlike a HIP ensemble of today, which is comprised of over-rehearsed professionals, oftenly doubling as scholars --- ie, exactly and precisely what the Classical Era musicians were not.

I cannot and will not make my position any clearer than that.

The more clear you make your position, the sillier your objection seems. I have never seen an HIP performer or listener aspire to replicate the shortcomings of an individual period performance. The goal is the make the experience more vivid for the modern listener, taking advantage of the sonorities of the ensemble that the music was written for.

[Brian]

One point that creates some philosophical wiggle room is that the exact nature of performances in that era does not mean that the composers were satisfied with that nature. It is hard to imagine someone like Beethoven or Mozart accepting sloppy playing, amateurs, etc. except as the cost of doing business. I think if they were given a choice, they'd choose better players.

For example, Haydn left clarinets out of so much of his work because he didn't know any good clarinetists. What if he had?

This point has also been made about composers who were dissatisfied with the instruments available and might well have been delighted by the manufacturing innovations of later generations.

[Que]

This point has also been made about composers who were dissatisfied with the instruments available and might well have been delighted by the manufacturing innovations of later generations.

Yes, that's a point often made. Although the only example I usually hear and gets used over and over again, is Beethoven. But those composers didn't have a crystal ball to predict what the exact characteristics of those "improved" instruments would be like. They only knew what they knew, and that is what they wrote for. Maybe Beethoven would have absolutely hated a modern Steinway D? Just a thought...

[Spotted Horses]

Yes, that's a point often made. But those composers didn't have a crystal ball to predict what the exact characteristics of those "improved" instruments would be like. They only knew what they knew, and that is what they wrote for.

Yes, and they would have written differently for instruments unknown to them.

I'm a PI enthusiast, not a purist. I enjoy a lot of modern instrument performances (I almost always listen to Bach keyboard music on modern piano) but PI performances have a leg up.

[San Antone]

One point that creates some philosophical wiggle room is that the exact nature of performances in that era does not mean that the composers were satisfied with that nature. It is hard to imagine someone like Beethoven or Mozart accepting sloppy playing, amateurs, etc. except as the cost of doing business. I think if they were given a choice, they'd choose better players.

For example, Haydn left clarinets out of so much of his work because he didn't know any good clarinetists. What if he had?

This point has also been made about composers who were dissatisfied with the instruments available and might well have been delighted by the manufacturing innovations of later generations.

Speculating about these kinds of issues can be an interesting exercise. However, the bottomline is (and this is true for all music, any period, any performance philosophy) a performer, or ensemble, approaches the music with the intent to make the best of it using their collective talent, experience, and scholarship.

The authenticity dilemma is that because we can't truly know what a composer from 200-300 years ago might have intended, all we are left with are the scores, the documented performance practice, the specific instruments of the period, and the good faith of the performers.

The PI/HIP movement is a "post-modern" aesthetic endeavor. While musicians have a lot of information on which to base a PI/HIP performance, ultimately they are making the kind of sound according to their taste, which is formed by modern values.  I doubt any musician today (and for some time) has made a claim of authenticity since everyone is aware of the delusional nature of such a claim.  But their intention is to make a good performance using the known correct instruments of the period.

Generally, I prefer the sound of PI over modern ones, but that doesn't mean I only listen to those recordings. I love Schiff's ECM Bach and Beethoven recordings. And some PI recordings do not strike me as especially good or better.  As always everything depends on the specific performer(s) and our own personal preferences.