David Hurwitz

[Roasted Swan]

That whole great big long quote appears to be about replacing a viola with a violin, not about replacing a viola d'amore with a viola.

Nor are changes to an orchestral score of any real relevance to changes in a quartet setting. The whole POINT of quartet writing is that the instruments have the same timbre. That's why string quartet writing is considered so challenging.

You are quite right about the first point - but I don't think the 2nd quartet was conceived with a viola d'amore so the either/or is not relevant here.  Again, I have no knowledge about how involved Janacek was able to be in the preparation for the 1st performance before his death.  My feeling - simply based on the consistently unique sound-world he creates across all musical genres - is that he would have wanted it played as he wrote it.  By the end of his life he knew what he wanted and how to get it - the problem was others either didn't believe him or couldn't perform what he wanted!

I'm not sure I agree with your statement that all the instruments in a quartet have the same timbre.  A neat online defintion of timbre is " the quality of a sound made by a particular voice or musical instrument..distinct from pitch, intensity, and loudness".  This is evident in a quartet where a violin playing a specific note at a given dynamic is identifiably different from the same note played by the viola or cello.  However there should be a certain equality of tone and dynamic range - as I understand it the main issue with using the viola d'amore is that it simply could not match the other usual instruments so there is an ongoing issue with instrumental balance.  As you say - not an issue in a larger orchestral score where the viola d'amore might just be adding a specific instrumental colour to a key passage.

For me the 'challenge' of quartet writing for composers is to find musical solutions which even in works of substantial scale and complexity only require effectively 4 notes vertically at any given point.  For performers add huge challenges of balance, ensemble, intonation before you even get to interpretation.  But that's why players like playing quartets - high risk high reward....

[AnotherSpin]

I very much doubt Hurwitz has hidden agendas. He's quite forthcoming about them.

It's the people who don't admit the existence of agendas that you have to worry about, not the people who present their opinions in several videos a week.

I am not worried by Hurwitz or by any one else. All people are conditioned in their own way and there is nothing to do (or worry) about.

[Madiel]

My feeling - simply based on the consistently unique sound-world he creates across all musical genres - is that he would have wanted it played as he wrote it. 

The common problem with this notion is determining at what point you say "he wrote it". Rather than "he was writing it". Of course, once you're up to changes that you know happened after the composer had died, it's rather easier to be certain that the composer was not consulted on the changes and didn't express the view that it was a fantastic idea.

[Madiel]

I am not worried by Hurwitz or by any one else. All people are conditioned in their own way and there is nothing to do (or worry) about.

Then don't talk about hidden agendas. That implies a need to reveal.

[Karl Henning]

I think the biggest problem with his channel: less would be more.

Insufficient QC on the content. Truth is, that was a problem of his even before he decided to carpet-bomb YouTube.

[Roasted Swan]

The common problem with this notion is determining at what point you say "he wrote it". Rather than "he was writing it". Of course, once you're up to changes that you know happened after the composer had died, it's rather easier to be certain that the composer was not consulted on the changes and didn't express the view that it was a fantastic idea.

To the bolded text - sorry if I'm being thick but I don't actually understand the point you are making.  As I have said to both my previous posts - I am no Janacek expert so I have no idea to what degree he was consulted or not.  But I do know of so many instances where composers who challenged the performing convention of their time had works modified to conform with those conventions because their demands were deemed at best unreasonable (technically) or at worst plain "wrong".  The general trend seems to be to go back to the original intentions once technical standards permit allied to a greater understanding/appreciation of the original musical goal. 

At the end of the day the debate does risk becoming a discussion of how many musical angels are dancing on the end of a pin - I'm glad this great music is still generating debate and inspiring performances from the best artists.

[Madiel]

The point I'm making is that people frequently make the mistake of assuming that a composer's first ideas are also their last ideas and that composers don't revise. Or people are wildly inconsistent in their thinking about this. We've already thrashed out on this forum how people reinstate Beethoven's Grosse Fugue while not reinstating the several other movements that he cut out of pieces.

Sibelius is an example of a composer who repeatedly revised pieces after their first public performance. I'm sure there are others.

[lunar22]

the mere fact there is a specific thread with 840 posts and counting suggests how much influence Hurwitz now has. As it happens, I more often agree than disagree with him but like everyone, he has his own prejudices and on occasion does spout nonsense. But he can be really funny, esp. in the area of so-called HIP performances where I find him a rather useful corrective.

[DavidW]

the mere fact there is a specific thread with 840 posts and counting suggests how much influence Hurwitz now has.

By that logic Havergal Brian is the most popular composer that ever lived!

I have a feeling that most of the posters here are not paying for Classics Today nor are watching most of his youtube content.

[Florestan]

By that logic Havergal Brian is the most popular composer that ever lived!

Indeed. 

I have a feeling that most of the posters here are not paying for Classics Today nor are watching most of his youtube content.

My thoughts exactly.

[lunar22]

By that logic Havergal Brian is the most popular composer that ever lived!

I have a feeling that most of the posters here are not paying for Classics Today nor are watching most of his youtube content.

well I certainly wouldn't pay for Classics Today, though I have watched around a dozen of his YouTube videos (out of many hundreds). You'll need to explain the Havergal Brain ref. -- the dedicated thread on him only runs to 7 pages  .

[Florestan]

well I certainly wouldn't pay for Classics Today, though I have watched around a dozen of his YouTube videos (out of many hundreds). You'll need to explain the Havergal Brain ref. -- the dedicated thread on him only runs to 7 pages  .

413 pages, actually.


https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1453.0.html

[lunar22]

obviously there must be more than one thread then and I looked at the wrong one....

[Brian]

By that logic Havergal Brian is the most popular composer that ever lived!

I have a feeling that most of the posters here are not paying for Classics Today nor are watching most of his youtube content.

I subscribed to/paid for ClassicsToday for two years (at Sergeant Rock's recommendation), but since Hurwitz "pivoted to video," there is so much less writing on the website that it is no longer worthwhile. Plus, I'm mostly "over" buying CDs except certain out-of-print rarities and the big "complete" megabox sets, which Hurwitz always reviews on video should I desire his opinion. (Actually I find his videos very helpful to assess the physical product on offer: how the box is constructed, whether the book will be worth reading, the layouts of the CD wallets, etc.)

[Karl Henning]

(Actually I find his videos very helpful to assess the physical product on offer: how the box is constructed, whether the book will be worth reading, the layouts of the CD wallets, etc.)

That's certainly more useful than probably anything he's written which I've read.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I am by no means an unalloyed fan, I'm really not, but his video today on the experience of playing percussion in Mahler 1 was quite nice, useful, it really was, and without his all-too-frequent bloviation. He even whistles well, better than he sings. (The list of things he does that piss me off could run to many paragraphs, so I'll stop with that.)

[Karl Henning]

I am by no means an unalloyed fan, I'm really not, but his video today on the experience of playing percussion in Mahler 1 was quite nice, useful, it really was, and without his all-too-frequent bloviation. He even whistles well, better than he sings. (The list of things he does that piss me off could run to many paragraphs, so I'll stop with that.)

I'm impressed that he did a video with which you are this pleased!

[Madiel]

I'm still waiting for anyone to tell me a BETTER source of reviews.

[Brian]

I'm impressed that he did a video with which you are this pleased!

Including a good bit of impersonation 

I'm still waiting for anyone to tell me a BETTER source of reviews.

Besides this board I don't know of any.

[DavidW]

I'm still waiting for anyone to tell me a BETTER source of reviews.

The Guardian, the New York Times, the New Yorker.  For comprehensiveness MusicWeb.  Brian, Todd and others do a great job of writing up reviews here as well.  And don't forget Jens Laurson's blog (when he is not busy writing for Classics Today or posting here).