The Historically Informed Performances (HIP) debate

[Florestan]

These concepts are a result of our (modern) historical thinking.

Precisely my point.

[prémont]

Btw, in his violin treatise Leopold Mozart complains about the abuse of vibrato prevalent in his time --- a clear indication that vibrato was widely used back then. Yet the HIP people miss no opportunity to preach that using vibrato for 18th century music is wrong because that's not how they did it back then. 

This was 1756. you can only conclude, that some musicians used vibrato.

[Florestan]

I didn't say that. Pointing out the special charcteristics and merits of music played on the harpsichord, doesn't equal the dismissal of any other options. You shouldn't do anything but whatever gives you musical enjoyment. That doesn't mean I can't encourage you to explore the merits of the harpsichord.

That's what I inferred from your post but I stand corrected. It's not the first nor the last time I misunderstand something.

[Marc]

I am very surprised to read this. I always considered the Netherlands a guarantee for scientifically reponsible reconstructions.

I fear that this will lead to a debate about what a scientifically responsible reconstruction is.

The communis opinio is now, that an organ isn't a 'stiff' artefact. That, in many cases (not always of course), it's an exhibiton of 'advancing' history/time with different taste, sounds and styles.
Of course, there is also a communis opinio that one shouldn't add ultra romantic/modern/whatever pipes and stops to a baroque organ anymore. So, baroque organs are going to be restored as baroque organs, romantic organs as romantic, and mixed organs as mixed. The latter ones are very interesting, because one can hear the change in taste during the centuries. The Der Aa Kerk organ is a great example of that.

(A monument historian once told me that when Frans Caspar Schnitger got the job to expand the Van Hagerbeer organ in Alkmaar, many people from the contemporary Dutch organ world were furious that again another entirely Dutch organ was 'messed up' with a North German sound. And now everyone is so jubilant about this great Dutch/North German early and late baroque instrument.)

[Marc]

Btw, in his violin treatise Leopold Mozart complains about the abuse of vibrato prevalent in his time --- a clear indication that vibrato was widely used back then. Yet the HIP people miss no opportunity to preach that using vibrato for 18th century music is wrong because that's not how they did it back then. 

I do not know those HIP people. And if they really exist and claim that one should play completely non-vibrato, then they're wrong.
Btw, I only know HIP people who say that vibrato was mainly used as an ornament, a 'bonus' so to speak.

Some years ago, Dutch organist Jolanda Zwoferink claimed that the entire Dutch HIP-world said that Bach on organ should be played non-legato and nothing else, and that she was against that and preferred a different, more 'old fashioned' approach. Personally, I have never heard or read such a thing. They only 'claim' that an extensive use of long legato lines wasn't mainstraim during Bach's time. This has also a lot to do with the complete different way of fingering in the 17th and early 18th century btw.
Anyway, Zwoferink's claim was wrong. Besides that: she plays a lot of legato on her Bach discs, and she picked the Silbermann of the Dresdener Hofkirche to do that, with its extremely reverbant acoustics. Result (I'm a bit exaggerating here): a mess.

[Mandryka]

"Period instruments" and "period playing styles" are modern concepts --- and so is Baroque, for that matter --- of which Bach or Buxtehude or Scarlatti had absolutely no idea whatsoever. Just like Haydn or Mozart had absolutely no idea whatsoever that they were the pillars of the Classical Viennese School.

It doesn't sound totally right to me you know. Bach, for example, deliberately wrote some music in old fashioned styles in Clavier Ubung  3, and indeed in more modern galant styles in the same compendium, the duetti. You could probably see CU3 as a study of period and contemporary styles.

And  there are composers who saw themselves as making a break with past performance styles - Frescobaldi for example in the 1615 preface, I think. Like Bach he was well aware of "period style" and "contemporary style" , and in the case of Bach at least, he was excited about the distinction, he arguably was seeking to synthesise the two.

And re instruments, I think Purcell was well aware that the viol was a "period instrument" when he wrote his fantasias. The fantasias are arguably a collection of music for what was at the time, a period instrument.

[prémont]

I fear that this will lead to a debate about what a scientifically responsible reconstruction is.

Well, I can only talk for myself. A scientifically responsible reconstruction of a Baroque organ is to bring it back to the date of its original construction. Yes I know, that Arp Schnitger often incorporated older pipes in his organs, but in the end he created an integrated organ fulfilling his own aesthetics. It depends upon whether you want to reconstruct the Baroque organ or not. Unfortunately many Baroque organs have undergone re-buildings and "improvements" in the Romantic age, and one could choose to reconstruct a later version of the organ, but this remains a matter of taste. But I consider it a waste of cultural heritage, if a great Baroque organ is reconstructed in a Romantic incarnation.

[Mandryka]

I do not know those HIP people. And if they really exist and claim that one should play completely non-vibrato, then they're wrong.
Btw, I only know HIP people who say that vibrato was mainly used as an ornament, a 'bonus' so to speak.

Some years ago, Dutch organist Jolanda Zwoferink claimed that the entire Dutch HIP-world said that Bach on organ should be played non-legato and nothing else, and that she was against that and preferred a different, more 'old fashioned' approach. Personally, I have never heard or read such a thing. They only 'claim' that an extensive use of long legato lines wasn't mainstraim during Bach's time. This has also a lot to do with the complete different way of fingering in the 17th and early 18th century btw.
Anyway, Zwoferink's claim was wrong. Besides that: she plays a lot of legato on her Bach discs, and she picked the Silbermann of the Dresdener Hofkirche to do that, with its extremely reverbant acoustics. Result (I'm a bit exaggerating here): a mess.

Does this have anything to do with Egarr's 'cantabile heaven" or indeed Rubsam and Hill, who talk a lot about cantabile?

[Marc]

It doesn't sound totally right to me you know. Bach, for example, deliberately wrote some music in old fashioned styles in Clavier Ubung  3, and indeed in more modern galant styles in the same compendium, the duetti. You could probably see CU3 as a study of period and contemporary styles. [...]

Well, as much as I'm convinced that Bach was not an instrument-fetishist, he surely had his opinion about syle and composition. CU 3 is a fascinating example of that. I've read some articles about his ideas, and how he included them in this composition, and it was fascinating reading stuff. But also a bit too difficult to understand for a layman like me. I'm not informed enough to fully grab these extensive and in-depth essays about Bach's musical conceptions. But yes, interesting and sometimes insightful it was.

[Marc]

Well, I can only talk for myself. A scientifically responsible reconstruction of a Baroque organ is to bring it back to the date of its original construction. Yes I know, that Arp Schnitger often incorporated older pipes in his organs, but in the end he created an integrated organ fulfilling his own aesthetics. It depends upon whether you want to reconstruct the Baroque organ or not. Unfortunately many Baroque organs have undergone re-buildings and "improvements" in the Romantic age, and one could choose to reconstruct a later version of the organ, but this remains a matter of taste. But I consider it a waste of cultural heritage, if a great Baroque organ is reconstructed in a Romantic incarnation.

I'm afraid I did not make myself clear.

With the new regulations, baroque organs will be restored as baroque organs, romantic organs as romantic, modern organs as modern, mixed organs as mixed, et cetera.
The Der Aa Kerk organ wasn't a fully baroque organ anymore. It was installed in the Der Aa Kerk in 1815, and very quickly the baroque 'Borstwerk' was replaced by a more romantic 'Bovenwerk' (Timpe). Roughly said: shortly after the 1815 installment in the Der Aa Kerk it has been an organ with 3 manuals and a pedal board, two manuals being baroque, one manual being romantic, and the pedal board being a mix. That's how it was installed, that's how it's known and celebrated for, that's its cultural heritage, and that's what it still is. Nothing has been reconstructed, except for the Cornet 2ft in the pedal (who had gone lost during the years).

[prémont]

It doesn't sound totally right to me you know. Bach, for example, deliberately wrote some music in old fashioned styles in Clavier Ubung  3, and indeed in more modern galant styles in the same compendium, the duetti. You could probably see CU3 as a study of period and contemporary styles.

And  there are composers who saw themselves as making a break with past performance styles - Frescobaldi for example in the 1615 preface, I think. Like Bach he was well aware of "period style" and "contemporary style" , and in the case of Bach at least, he was excited about the distinction, he arguably was seeking to synthesise the two.

Bach is rather the exception because he cherished the Antique style. I do not know about Frescobaldi, who intended to create a new style. But of course every composer builds upon the former generation and must for that reason have some historical perspective. The stylistic systematizing which has been made by musicologists in the 20th century was per definition unknown to the early composers.

[prémont]

With the new regulations, baroque organs will be restored as baroque organs, romantic organs as romantic, modern organs as modern, mixed organs as mixed, et cetera.

Now I am more calm. This is how it should be.

[Marc]

Does this have anything to do with Egarr's 'cantabile heaven" or indeed Rubsam and Hill, who talk a lot about cantabile?

Could be. She didn't mention any of those names. She only mentioned Marcel Dupré as her inspiration.
But she did say she sometimes picked a more cantabile registration than the average 'no legato' Dutch organist.

[prémont]

Does this have anything to do with Egarr's 'cantabile heaven" or indeed Rubsam and Hill, who talk a lot about cantabile?

Yes they talk about cantabile, and Bach did so in his preface to the inventions, but cantabile is not identical with legato. To play cantabile is to play as one sings, and since there are lots of syllables in a given text, you also have to articulate the notes in accordance with this.

[Marc]

Now I am more calm. This is how it should be.

You're very welcome. I hope you're gonna have a good night sleep now. 0:)
But it was almost a 'blind' repeat of what I wrote earlier :

[...] So, baroque organs are going to be restored as baroque organs, romantic organs as romantic, and mixed organs as mixed. The latter ones are very interesting, because one can hear the change in taste during the centuries. The Der Aa Kerk organ is a great example of that.
[...]

[prémont]

Could be. She didn't mention any of those names. She only mentioned Marcel Dupré as her inspiration.
But she did say she sometimes picked a more cantabile registration than the average 'no legato' Dutch organist.

Marcel Dupré played (in Bach) long stretches of unbroken legato. Many of his pupils unfortunately adapted this inauthentic kind of articulation. But to day this is history - almost.

[prémont]

You're very welcome. I hope you're gonna have a good night sleep now. 0:)
But it was almost a 'blind' repeat of what I wrote earlier :

Sorry, maybe you put it better the second time.

[Marc]

Marcel Dupré played (in Bach) long stretches of unbroken legato. Many of his pupils unfortunately adapted this inauthentic kind of articulation. But to day this is history - almost.

Well, as I (and some others) said before: to each his/her own. Now the Dupré lovers are able (even though her discs are not easy to buy abroad, I guess) to buy modern recordings of Bach works who cherish that style of playing. I'm perfectly fine with it. It's not my preferred style, and I also thought she was a bit too much black vs white in her statements back then. A far too 'simple' generalization of 25 years of Bach interpretation by her fellow Dutchies.

[Marc]

Sorry, maybe you put it better the second time.

I read them again and again myself... and you're absolutely right.

Now I'm off to bed. Three concerts tomorrow in my Saturday program. Not all of them with organs btw.

Good night!

[prémont]

I read them again and again myself... and you're absolutely right.

Now I'm off to bed. Three concerts tomorrow in my Saturday program. Not all of them with organs btw.

Good night!

Good night from me, too!