The Historically Informed Performances (HIP) debate

[Geo Dude]

What gets my goat is bashing of performances merely because they use modern instruments, something which is appallingly widespread.

You mention this every time the topic of HIP comes up, and I'm curious to know what you mean by 'appallingly widespread.'  I hardly ever see bashing of non-PI recordings occurring on this board (not because they don't use period instruments, at least) and I can't think of any prominent reviewers who do that.  Can you give some examples of where such behavior is widespread?

[Bulldog]

   How can you accuse me of being a troll ? I've been a loyal CMG member for several years. 
For the last time I'm NOT anti  HIP. What gets my goat is bashing of performances merely because they use modern instruments, something which is appallingly widespread.  The post was just my opinion. What's wrong with that?  Me a troll ? Unbelievable!

Since I hate the word "troll", I'll leave others to address it.  However, your constant refrain that you are not anti-HIP is betrayed by your comments and tone.  Why not just admit to it and move on?

[Leon]

Other than some people expressing a preference for PI in certain repertory, I don't think I've ever seen anyone either here or in a review express general disdain for modern instrument performance.  However, there are some reviewers, Donald Vroom for example, whose vitriol towards PI performance knows no bounds.

[milk]

   How can you accuse me of being a troll ? I've been a loyal CMG member for several years. 
For the last time I'm NOT anti  HIP. What gets my goat is bashing of performances merely because they use modern instruments, something which is appallingly widespread.  The post was just my opinion. What's wrong with that?  Me a troll ? Unbelievable!

Here's the definition according to wikipedia:

"...a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."

I don't know if the word "troll" is good to use or not but the definition seems to pretty much describe your comment. 

[DavidW]

Other than some people expressing a preference for PI in certain repertory, I don't think I've ever seen anyone either here or in a review express general disdain for modern instrument performance.  However, there are some reviewers, Donald Vroom for example, whose vitriol towards PI performance knows no bounds.

Excuse my ignorance, but who is Donald Vroom?

[DavidW]

   Not too long ago, I got recordings of the Brahms 2nd by Gardiner and the 3rd and 4th by Norrington  on library interloan to try out . They were okay, but the baby seemed to be thrown out with the bathwater.
The performances sounded frankly anemic to me, particularly the gut strings, although mercufully, they didn't have the awful nasal,pinched,wheezing sound which make so many period performances  of baroque and classical works such a trial to listen to.
    Then I got Neeme Jarvi's LSO recording of the 4th on Chandos.  I know it's not politically correct to say this, but Jarvi' warm, full-blooded , heartfelt 4th came as a relief  to my ears .  What a pleasure to return to steel strings and unashamed vibrato !  Take that, Sir Roger !  Nyah Nyah Nyah !

I want to be clear for everyone else who stepped into this late... the quoted post originally appeared on the PI Romantic era thread.  It's a thread where enthusiasts of PI recordings share their favorites with each other.  What Superhorn did is attack period style performances directly to those that love them.  He was trying to get a reaction, and not interested in having a discussion.  That is by definition acting like a troll... so when Gurn called him such he didn't mean at as an insult but the unvarnished truth. 

Superhorn acts like a gentleman in many other threads but not in these.  If you move in the PI circle all you will see is the troll.  If you move in the traditional romantic era and modern threads and the diner you'll see a witty gentleman.  He is both of these people.  While we can all enjoy his contribution to threads involving music that he enjoys, his attitude and behavior on PI threads is abhorrent even by my low standards.  I think that this should be addressed without losing the poster or adding him to a block list.

[Geo Dude]

Excuse my ignorance, but who is Donald Vroom?

Donald Vroom is the editor of American Record Guide.  Coincidentally, based on his opinion pieces in ARG the man is a pompous jackass and a know-nothing that is wrongly convinced of his own adequacy, so it doesn't really surprise me that his attitude problem extends over to recordings he dislikes.

EDIT:  Just to be clear, I find ARG to be a solid publication with some fine reviewers in it and my distaste for the editor shouldn't be misconstrued as a distaste for the publication as a whole.

[PaulSC]

It's Donald VrooN, with an "n" as in nincompoop. For those not familiar, here is an example of how low he can stoop:

After listening to this, all I can say is that I don't like this pianist and have no idea what other people hear in his playing. He is cold and intellectual; he routinely misses the basic emotion, while he is busy devising his approach, imposing his technique on the music. He must be half English and half Japanese. How sterile Moussorgsky sounds here! Nothing at all in the Pictures hits home. He is always outside the music looking in-playing with it and manipulating it.

[Gurn Blanston]

It's Donald VrooN, with an "n" as in nincompoop. For those not familiar, here is an example of how low he can stoop:

O Boy!  How does someone who is so entirely wrapped up in his own preconceptions get ahead in a business which (in an ideal world) is based on some element of objectivity, at least from leadership?  He wouldn't even do well on a forum, let alone in a major publication!

[Geo Dude]

It's Donald VrooN, with an "n" as in nincompoop. For those not familiar, here is an example of how low he can stoop:

That is horrible, but if you really want to see how low he can go you should see his "Critical Convictions" essays.  Pick any one at random, all that I've read are terrible.  They're an unholy mix of politics, logical fallacies, armchair sociology, ranting about various sorts of people that he clearly believes he is superior to (sports fans, for example), and a grating, pompous tone.  Personally, I find many of the topics he writes about in those op eds to be inappropriate subjects for a magazine focused on music reviews -- he seems to forget that he's writing for American Record Guide rather than Rolling Stone -- and his irritating holier-than-thou tone doesn't help matters.

In regards to his HIP hatred, I recently read a review in ARG where he insisted that an HIP influenced performance of a Mozart piano concerto was a 'phase' that the pianist would grow out of.  Clearly unwarranted condescension is the mark of an excellent reviewer, though!

[Leon]

Vroon - Vroom ... anyway, the reason I brought him up was to highlight the disparity between what I see as fact and the accusation made that it is the HIP camp that routinely disparages modern instrument performances.  Not that it really matters much.  I am totally over the whole debate.  It seems it is a few disgruntled MI people who continue trying to pick a fight. 

I subscribed to ARG for almost two decades until I finally had enough of Vroon's diatribes, not least of which were directed at HIP performance.  It has now been over a decade since I read that publication, and only was reminded of it when Sonic Dave posted a disparaging review of a HIP performance from it - not by Vroon - recently.

[DavidW]

I appreciate the explanation... won't be subscribing anytime soon!

[Geo Dude]

I appreciate the explanation... won't be subscribing anytime soon!

For what it's worth, ARG does have many fine reviewers (some of whom like period instruments) even though the editor is atrocious.  That said, I get my copies from a relative who is kind enough to send me his old copies and I'm also hesitant about subscribing until that editor retires.  Then again, given the wealth of information available to me here at GMG I'm not in a hurry to subscribe to any music reviewing magazine; I find reviews much more helpful when I can open a discussion with the reviewer.

[Reverend Bong]

In my ignorance, I only came across the term HIP a few days ago when I started looking for classical music forums online. Having looked it up and found what the acronym stood for, I assumed it meant 'with period instruments' but now I gather that there is a distinction between a HIP and a performance on period instruments.  Can someone tell me what HIP implies if it doesn't need to be on period instruments?

[North Star]

HIP means that the performers have studied the performance practice of the time/place of the original composition, and try to perform the piece with appropriate forces, instruments, distribution of the orchestra, period techniques, etc. Period instruments are usually used, but they don't necessarily mean that the performance is HIP, or that it's not HIP-inspired.

[71 dB]

There is a disctinction? 

[Reverend Bong]

There is a disctinction? 

Well, I was surprised too...  This query is the result of reading a thread here about alternative recordings of Beethoven's 9th that divides them into 3:  normal modern orchestra, period instruments, and HIP.  Since everyone in the thread follows along with this it was clear there was something I didn't know...

[Gurn Blanston]

This is very much a GMG thing, you aren't likely to see it outside of here, or at least not used as we do.

Certainly there are performances on modern instruments that are also HIP. One that you could easily find and listen to is the Zurich Tonhalle Orchestra / Zinman playing Beethoven's symphonies. The thing is, there are many features that go into whether a performance is HIP or not. It is true that the use of period instruments is strongly indicative of such a performance, but it is not a given. Or, as in the Zinman example above, neither is the opposite a given. BTW, another band that feels itself to be HIP on modern instruments is the Heidelberg Band / Thomas Fey.


The term HIP comes with a ton of baggage. Trust me when I say this; if you don't have a graduate degree in musicology, or if you aren't a professional musician, the chances that you would recognize the performance aspects if they slapped you in the face are somewhere between slim and none, and slim just left town. And I apply that, not just to you, but to the majority of people who listen to music as a hobby. This is most of the people here or on any other forum you visit. After many years here of fighting the fight over "HIP" and "non-HIP" performance, I came to the realization that I really didn't care about things like "too much vibrato in the orchestral violins" and "they don't take the 2nd repeat in the trio"   What I cared about and what I really look for is the orchestral color and sound of period instruments. So in order to distance myself from the whole mess, I simply stopped using the term (except for the pun I leave in my avatar) and instead, I go with PI, period instruments. DavidW, a mathematician and member here for many years, had started calling me a PIon many years ago, and I adopted that phrase for myself and anyone else who feels like I do.

Now you know the whole sordid mess. If you look around you will find many, many PIons here, whether they think of themselves as that or not. There are even a few true HIPpies, bless their pointed heads. And there are some anti-HIP modern instrument and performance advocates too. We have reached a point in time where we rarely fight about it anymore. The Golden Age has arrived.

[Opus106]

DavidW, a mathematician and member here for many years, had started calling me a PIon many years ago...

"PIon" only works if David is a physicist, though. Mathematicians hardly care about the sordid mess that is particle physics.

We have reached a point in time where we rarely fight about it anymore. The Golden Age has arrived.

Ah; but wait till Que merges this thread with, you know, the other one and some kind soul decides to take issue with a post made three years ago.

[Gurn Blanston]

"PIon" only works if David is a physicist, though. Mathematicians hardly care about the sordid mess that is particle physics.

Ah; but wait till Que merges this thread with, you know, the other one and some kind soul decides to take issue with a post made three years ago.

My passport to Holland is still valid. He wouldn't want to try that....    

David IS a physicist. The math is just a hobby. Just like me: 2 + 3 =