The Historically Informed Performances (HIP) debate

[Karl Henning]

Now we have arrived at the core of the issue.... 

The density of harpsichord music can be off puting at first.
But the ear, or rather the mind, can be trained to analyse and separate the different voices and musical lines.
The rewards or great....

On the piano the instrument and the performer does the job for you, by adding different dynamics to the various musical lines.
Which basically destroys (a distinctive part of) the original effect

Q

I used (long ago, by now) not to be able to listen to recorded harpsichord music for more than 10 minutes.

That began to change when I made friends with a harpsichordist;  my ears learnt how to listen to the instrument.  Now I could almost listen to nothing but harpsichord solo music for a week.

[prémont]

When I say something, what I mean is independent of my intentions. The speaker does not create the meaning of the expressions, it's the way the community of speakers responds to the words which make the utterance meaningful (this is Wittgenstein's Private Language Argument)

So you don't intend to say, what you mean?? Do you really mean that?

[Mandryka]

So you don't intend to say, what you mean?? Do you really mean that?

No, what I mean is, I succeed in saying something because I'm part of a community of speakers. It's the whole community which makes the words mean what they do, not my intention. It's not me and my intention which  makes "snow" mean snow and "white" mean white.

There's another model, where the speaker decides that "snow" means snow, by a sort of internal private act of definition, a private mental naming. That's the model of meaning which I'm opposing.

[Que]

"There are no rules. Pleasure is the law". If I don't enjoy what I hear no amount of historical research or theoretical analysis will convince me that I should actually enjoy it or that I should be spending my time trying my best to enjoy it, especially when there is already a way by which I can enjoy it.

Absolutely, musical enjoyment comes and everybody is free in his/her way to achieve that.

All I'm saying is that the harpsichord offers a different, and very rewarding, way to enjoy this music that you are currently missing out on. Which, aside from theoretical " correctness"  happens to be the kind of musical experience that harpsichord music was created for... 

But then again, what you don't know, you can't miss...
And if you are happy with the way you enjoy the music now,  good on you... 

Q

[San Antone]

Absolutely, musical enjoyment comes and everybody is free in his/her way to achieve that.

All I'm saying is that the harpsichord offers a different, and very rewarding, way to enjoy this music that you are currently missing out on. Which, aside from theoretical " correctness"  happens to be the kind of musical experience that harpsichord music was created for... 

But then again, what you don't know, you can't miss...
And if you are happy with the way you enjoy the music now,  good on you... 

Q

Your argument is the similar to ones I have heard from religious proselytizers, i.e. you are missing out on so much by not having my kind of faith.   

Small doses is how I listen to the harpsichord.  But the fortepiano just rankles my brain.

[prémont]

No, what I mean is, I succeed in saying something because I'm part of a community of speakers. It's the whole community which makes the words mean what they do, not my intention. It's not me and my intention which  makes "snow" mean snow and "white" mean white.

But when you say something you use words in the meaning which are defined by the community, aimed at expressing the meaning you intended. If you don't know the precise meaning of a word, you may risk to say something unintended.

[Mandryka]

But when you say something you use words in the meaning which are defined by the community, aimed at expressing the meaning you intended. If you don't know the precise meaning of a word, you may risk to say something unintended.

Correct -- at least if I understand you correctly.

[prémont]

Correct

OK, I often understand things better, when I have put them into words myself. 

[San Antone]

I think there are problems when language/speech is compared to music.  "My cat is black" is easily understood by anyone with a command of the English language.  However, what does Beethoven Piano Sonata no. 29 mean?

[Madiel]

When I say something, what I mean is independent of my intentions.

Nope.

Not unless you misuse the word "independent". Which, given what you are arguing, is truly ironic.

"Independent of" is not a synonym for "different from".

[Mandryka]

I think there are problems when language/speech is compared to music.  "My cat is black" is easily understood by anyone with a command of the English language.  However, what does Beethoven Piano Sonata no. 29 mean?

The question isn't what Beethoven Piano Sonata no. 29 means, it's what the score of the hammerklavier means. How to interpret  those signs as sounds.

That's why these things are fundamental. HIP is a principle for the interpretation of scores,

[Mandryka]

Nope.

Not unless you misuse the word "independent". Which, given what you are arguing, is truly ironic.

"Independent of" is not a synonym for "different from".

Yes.

[Madiel]

Yes.

Asparagus vehicle in dancing.

[San Antone]

The question isn't what Beethoven Piano Sonata no. 29 means, it's what the score of the hammerklavier means. How to interpret  those signs as sounds.

That's why these things are fundamental. HIP is a principle for the interpretation of scores,

Even so, the score is far more imprecise than a spoken or written language.  There is a wide variety in how different performers will interpret a crescendo or pp marking, as opposed to a sentence like "my cat is black."  This is also ignoring the fact than many scores have no expressive markings.  But no one simply plays the notes without expression.

[prémont]

I think there are problems when language/speech is compared to music.  "My cat is black" is easily understood by anyone with a command of the English language.  However, what does Beethoven Piano Sonata no. 29 mean?

When music is compared to speech, it is particularly the phrasing and articulation (and affect)which are compared. I do not think it makes sense to compare any (intended or unintended) "meaning".

[Mandryka]

Even so, the score is far more imprecise than a spoken or written language.  There is a wide variety in how different performers will interpret a crescendo or pp marking, as opposed to a sentence like "my cat is black."

The score is imprecise, some aspects more precise than others. I don't know about more imprecise than natural language, I'd have to think about it.

[Karl Henning]

When music is compared to speech, it is particularly the phrasing and articulation (and affect)which are compared. I do not think it makes sense to compare any (intended or unintended) "meaning".

Hear, hear.

[Karl Henning]

Even so, the score is far more imprecise than a spoken or written language.  There is a wide variety in how different performers will interpret a crescendo or pp marking, as opposed to a sentence like "my cat is black."  This is also ignoring the fact than many scores have no expressive markings.  But no one simply plays the notes without expression.

All true.  And the question arises, if music is (supposedly) a "universal language"—who is doing the speaking?

[Mandryka]

When music is compared to speech, it is particularly the phrasing and articulation (and affect)which are compared. I do not think it makes sense to compare any (intended or unintended) "meaning".

Yes, I'm not comparing music to speech like Harnoncourt here. I'm just saying that the elements of the score have a meaning in the sense that they refer to certain types of sounds, more or less precisely. And that reference functions in a way analogous to the way reference works in natural language.

A triplet in an early music  score means what it means because of the way the community of musicians agreed that that triplet sign should be played. Similarly for a bar line, a time signature, a direction like discrétion . . . What Bach meant when he put these things in his scores is a function of  the practices of the musicians who were his contemporaries, how they "followed the score" And interpreting the score means finding out what those practices were.

[Florestan]

I would like to propose you all a little game. Here are two versions of the 2nd movement Andante cantabile from Tchaikovsky' String Quartet No. 1 in D major op. 11.

https://www.youtube.com/v/AkUhVDh3uQo

https://www.youtube.com/v/zl3ckjAgxqI

Please listen to them both and let us know which one do you like more (just that, without going into any explanations). Thanks for participating.

I on my part prefer no.2, but my experience with this kind of music is too limited to say which one is most in accordance with the composers style.

Okay, since no one else played, here is my two cents on the issue.

Misha Elman was a pupil of Leopold Auer who in turn taught violin at the St. Petersburg Conservatory, was the dedicatee of Tchaikovsky's Violin Concertos (the latter praised Auer for his "great expressivity, the thoughtful finesse and poetry of the interpretation") and was himself the leader of a famous Russian string quartet. All this is strong reason to suppose that the Elman's version, admittedly much more sentimental, bordering on saccharine, is more "authentic" than the Borodin's and it's probably how this quartet was played during Tchaikovsky's lifetime.

Now: does this piece of historical information change your preference? Are you going to prefer the Elman's interpretation from now on just because theirs is probably what Tchaikovsky himself would have heard?