New recordings or old?

[locrian]

And I respect the acquisition preferences of others.  Concerning "comfort zone", I'm always amazed how mine grows over time.

I wish mine was smaller.   

[Great Gable]

In general I am skeptical of recordings made in the past 10-20 years or so. While technical proficiency has reached unparalleled heights, today's performers in general do not seem to phrase with the imagination or individuality of the great performers of the past. Exceptions abound of course, but as an example think of the bland, generalized approach of a Renee Fleming, Pinchas Zukerman, John Eliot Gardiner, or James Levine, versus the incisive, detailed phrasing of a Lisa della Casa, Petre Munteanu, Zino Francescatti, or Igor Markevitch. And the HIP movement with its often preposterously fast tempos also tends to turn me off. The unfortunate paradox is that while sound quality on recordings keeps improving, performance quality has tended to go in the direction of a depressing sameness (unless one considers the tendency to be eccentric apparently for eccentricity's sake that one finds in the playing of, saying, Olli Mustonen of Piotr Anderszewski, or however you spell it).

I agree with the HIP movement Larry. I'm afraid it leaves me rather cold, or can do. Some performances are marred for me by the scratchiness of the strings and as you stated, the tempi can be too fast. I'm all for authenticity as a concept but I grew up with a certain sound, before the authentic movement really kicked in, and prefer my strings a little lusher. Some have adjusted to it but I just can't warm to it.

Yet another thing I am un-trendy with.

[Great Gable]

And I respect the acquisition preferences of others.  Concerning "comfort zone", I'm always amazed how mine grows over time.

Don - no doubt in twenty years time I shall be buying the historical recordings of the 2000s with relish!. What am I saying - I'll have croaked long before that!

[Don]

I wish mine was smaller.   

Smaller would be an advantage for the bank account, but I still get a kick out of expanding my comfort zone.

[locrian]

Smaller would be an advantage for the bank account, but I still get a kick out of expanding my comfort zone.

Mine includes Willie Nelson. 

[Mark]

Many here will know that, as a rule, I avoid 'old cracklies' (not my term - it was coined by another member ). This said, I have maybe as many as 50 recordings which would constitute 'historical', and a good deal of these I enjoy very much. But this has been but a recent development in my 'tolerance' for poorer sound quality; wherever possible, I want things crystal clear and widely dynamic.

[Harry]

I side with Poju here, cyrstal clear recordings, if they are historical, that's okay with me, but the sound should be good. My oldest recording is the Symphony Fantastique by Berlioz. It is Munch on RCA 1965, and a very good sound. Older than that, well, rather not......

[Harry]

vinyl is superior to cd in terms of sound quality & packaging (though not as susceptible to wear and tear)...
and now things are moving toward mp3s which is the worst of all and very very far from hi-fi...


re: HIP

sure some of it is VERY good, the paler tones, no vibrato (though dodgy brass intonation) and im completely open (& like) the music being performed in many ways (i.e. Bach), yes things were learned from it, but a lot of it seems more concerned with historic accuracy rather than creating the most fresh and exciting performances. I find a lot of it extremely bland and has an interchangeable assembly line effect. I like music to sound as if it was composed just yesterday and spontaneous sounding would help too. I'd honestly rather have the works played with some personality as well, even if it's not the "authentic" personality of the period, than no personality at all. But that's me. and im not so sure given that what we have now, that those older composers would have liked us to hear their music as they did with crummy intonation, tuning, sloppy ensembles and weak forces that weren't properly balanced. They had to compromise and make due with what was available...plus there really is no way to know for certain how the players actually phrased or inflected the passages in those days, it's not notated clearly etc True, there are some verbal accounts but mostly from non-musicians and the terminology changed over time too so it's all unclear.

Vinyl superior to cd's in terms of sound?
That's balderdash!
If HIP would be as you describe it, the following would be minimal.

[Larry Rinkel]

re: HIP
a lot of it seems more concerned with historic accuracy rather than creating the most fresh and exciting performances. I find a lot of it extremely bland and has an interchangeable assembly line effect. I like music to sound as if it was composed just yesterday and spontaneous sounding would help too. I'd honestly rather have the works played with some personality as well, even if it's not the "authentic" personality of the period, than no personality at all.

Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Is it really conceivable that Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven wanted or expected their music to be played otherwise than in "fresh and exciting performances"? Consider the real historical record - such things as accounts of Mozart garnering applause during the movements of his concertos for his bravura renditions of difficult passages; or the memoirs of the first Basilio in Figaro, Michael Kelly, who speaks of how excited Mozart and his first orchestra were by the original Figaro's stentorian rendering of Non piu andrai; or how Mozart pinched the first Zerlina in Don Giovanni when he thought she wasn't screaming convincingly enough. That's what HIP should mean - not these anemic, underphrased travesties one so often hears from self-styled "HIPsters" with their heads buried in "historical manuals" and their musical imaginations turned off or on autopilot.

[FideLeo]

Some people think they have got the monopoly on defining musical imagination.  Well, it's their own problem that they are bothered by "travesties" or mistaken musicians' anecdotes for actual music history.  

[Great Gable]

I think it would be safe to assume that all the greats of the past would embrace the advantages that modern instruments afforded them.

As for vinyl's superiority to CD? In the early days - no question. Even now with top notch decks vinyl will still surpass the best CD players but NOT BY MUCH. My CD player out-performed all but the best record decks when I bought it and that was 9 years ago. I had a Linn LP12 for a while but the clicks and pops of vinyl drove me mad and my CD player was not shamed in the slightest. Vinyl is a poor medium due to it's inherent problem - friction! Even the best balanced TT can only induce wear, albeit in fractions. In the 80's and 90's vinyl, in the UK, was of a very poor and thin quality. At least now the vinyl resurgence has seen thicker albums and better pressings. I used to reject around 40% of all albums at the shop and still had to return a proportion once tested at home. They would scratch easily - often by the dust jacket, and many were presses with little bubbles! never again!

[Don]

Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Is it really conceivable that Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven wanted or expected their music to be played otherwise than in "fresh and exciting performances"? Consider the real historical record - such things as accounts of Mozart garnering applause during the movements of his concertos for his bravura renditions of difficult passages; or the memoirs of the first Basilio in Figaro, Michael Kelly, who speaks of how excited Mozart and his first orchestra were by the original Figaro's stentorian rendering of Non piu andrai; or how Mozart pinched the first Zerlina in Don Giovanni when he thought she wasn't screaming convincingly enough. That's what HIP should mean - not these anemic, underphrased travesties one so often hears from self-styled "HIPsters" with their heads buried in "historical manuals" and their musical imaginations turned off or on autopilot.

What doesn't thrill me about some current HIP practices is an attempt to sound as non-HIP as possible in order to pelase those who have a problem with the HIP recordings of earlier decades.

[Larry Rinkel]

Some people think they have got the monopoly on defining musical imagination.  Well, it's their own problem that they are bothered by "travesties" or mistaken musicians' anecdotes for actual music history.  

The HIP Police speaketh. What mistaken anecdotes, please?

[Don]

I side with Poju here, cyrstal clear recordings, if they are historical, that's okay with me, but the sound should be good. My oldest recording is the Symphony Fantastique by Berlioz. It is Munch on RCA 1965, and a very good sound. Older than that, well, rather not......

That  takes me aback some.  With all the thousands of recordings you own, the oldest is from 1965?  You must hate historical recordings.

[Great Gable]

That  takes me aback some.  With all the thousands of recordings you own, the oldest is from 1965?  You must hate historical recordings.

Me too! There are some exceptional recordings from the 50's

[FideLeo]

What doesn't thrill me about some current HIP practices is an attempt to sound as non-HIP as possible in order to pelase those who have a problem with the HIP recordings of earlier decades.

Such as?  

[FideLeo]

The HIP Police speaketh. What mistaken anecdotes, please?

And are you the persecutor?   

[Larry Rinkel]

Such as?  

Indeed. I have no idea what you're getting at, Don.

[Don]

Such as?  

The one that stands out in my mind currently is a Schumann chamber music disc from the period instrument group, the Michelangelo Piano Quartet.  Compare it to the similar program on an Amon Ra disc from the Fitzwilliam Quartet, and you'll notice that the rich Chandos sound obscures detail and whatever sharp contours that the Michelangelo bring to the table.  The Chandos is for folks who don't appreciate period instrument performances.

[Larry Rinkel]

And are you the persecutor?   

I think you mean "prosecutor," and the answer is no. I'm not the one who writes: "HIP for all and all for HIP! Harpsichord for Bach, fortepiano for Beethoven and pianoforte for Brahms!" It's not the hardware used that matters, but the musical imagination of the performance.