The Historically Informed Performances (HIP) debate

[Brahmsian]

Probably not, though if he' had another type of instrument, he also probably would have written a somewhat different type of music.

Exactly.  Like a concerto for electric violin.     Repeat x 500 

[karlhenning]

I honestly don't believe that a composer like Vivaldi would have wanted his music to be played on the same instruments it was played on during his lifetime.

Bad example to support your point, for in fact Vivaldi was a violinist, and the violins of his contemporary instrument-makers are still the standard to which craftsmen aspire.  Some types of design, aren't much inmproved upon over the centuries.

[Bulldog]

Thanks for the follow-up about Harnoncourt's Haydn recordings. I've never been into the HIP movement, but I do enjoy Biondi's Vivaldi recordings. Academy of Ancient Music are also quite good. My philosophy regarding HIP performances is I think they're cool, but are ultimately unnecessary. I honestly don't believe that a composer like Vivaldi would have wanted his music to be played on the same instruments it was played on during his lifetime.

Well, period instruments are necessary for my enjoyment of baroque music.  As for Vivaldi, your belief is mere speculation and the usual complaint lodged against the use of period instruments.  Let's face it - all these arguments for or against period instruments are dead issues.
We have come to a point where period and modern instruments exist in harmony.

[DavidW]

I think that Vivaldi would be like "holy cow!  People still listen to my music!?"  In his day even great composers were quickly forgotten.  What would it matter to him what instruments were used?

It matters to the audience and the performers, we are interested in hearing what the music sounded like as performed on the instruments that were around then.  If you don't share in that enthusiasm, then by all means stick to modern instruments.

[Leon]

It is always fun to hear that a keen interest of mine, say, PI performances, is unnecessary. 

[Gurn Blanston]

It is always fun to hear that a keen interest of mine, say, PI performances, is unnecessary. 

PI; for those care care enough to send the very best. IOW, it isn't unnecessary to ME. However, I can now say (which I used to have trouble with) that it can be totally unnecessary to everyone else and I don't care. That's a big first step.   0:)

[The new erato]

Bad example to support your point, for in fact Vivaldi was a violinist, and the violins of his contemporary instrument-makers are still the standard to which craftsmen aspire.  Some types of design, aren't much inmproved upon over the centuries.

Though bows and strings are very different.

[Szykneij]

Though bows and strings are very different.

There are differences in the bridges, bass bars and, especially, the necks of Baroque and modern violins also. The lengths of the fingerboards and angle of the necks are quite different. I need a period of adjustment when I switch from my Guarneri model violin with a modern neck to my Baroque style Stainer model.

[Opus106]

[\B]ut how can music move forward into modern times if it relies on period instruments?

I don't think Karl specifically requests period instruments for the performances of his music. Do you, Karl?

[karlhenning]

I do not.

[Brahmsian]

The instruments of today are period instruments.  Period. 

[Brian]

The instruments of today are period instruments.  Period. 

They are our-period instruments.
(I personally hope that synthesizers will soon be "period instruments" of another period, but one can never tell.)

[Brahmsian]

Here is to hoping that 50 years from now, there are not any HIP performances of the Helikopter String Quartet (unless the 4 helicopters have had regular maintenance check ups).

[kishnevi]

Here is to hoping that 50 years from now, there are not any HIP performances of the Helikopter String Quartet (unless the 4 helicopters have had regular maintenance check ups).

Imagining for a moment an HIP performance of 4'33"   Or would you need a period audience for that instead of a period instrument?

[Opus106]

Imagining for a moment an HIP performance of 4'33"   Or would you need a period audience for that instead of a period instrument?

That's a piece which evolves (it does not age) as time goes by.

Although, on second thought, I don't think it evolves as well.

[karlhenning]

"Period audience" . . . why does that phrase make me think of Woodstock? . . .

[Superhorn]

    The whole HIP movement is based on a number of questionable premises. Among them 1.  Old instruments or reproductions of them still sound exactly as they did in the distant past,2. These instruments are being played exactly as they were in the past, and 3. The music is
actually being interpreted as the composers would have wanted. 
    We just can't be certain about any of these assumptions, because the composers have been dead for ages.  And even if the instruments DO sound exactly as they did in the past and are being played as they were , we can['t be sure that the interpretations would be to the composer's liking. id they could miraculously return and hear our attempts at "authenticity".
   Today, when we perform new or recent works by contemporary composers, the individuals who wrote the music aren't concerned with the
instruments per se, as long as they sound good, and are in tune.  The composers are concerned about  whether the musicians are interpreting the music as they would want.. And they don't always. Sometimes they don't like what the performers do to the music. For example; tempi that are too slow or too fast, excessive use of rubato or excessive rigidity, etc.  The musicians are using the authentic instruments of OUR time, but there is something wrong with the interpretation.
   It was the same in the past.  This just goes to show you that   using period instruments is no guarantee of anything.

[Leon]

This just goes to show you that   using period instruments is no guarantee of anything.

LOL - other than whenever HIP/PI is being discussed it is guaranteed that you will chime in with essentially the same post.

[Gurn Blanston]

    The whole HIP movement is based on a number of questionable premises. Among them 1.  Old instruments or reproductions of them still sound exactly as they did in the distant past,2. These instruments are being played exactly as they were in the past, and 3. The music is
actually being interpreted as the composers would have wanted. 
    We just can't be certain about any of these assumptions, because the composers have been dead for ages.  And even if the instruments DO sound exactly as they did in the past and are being played as they were , we can['t be sure that the interpretations would be to the composer's liking. id they could miraculously return and hear our attempts at "authenticity".

This whole paragraph is based on questionable assumptions. For example, your instrument (I assume it to be the horn, super or otherwise). If 999 people out of a thousand assume that a natural horn sounds just like it did 200 years ago, and you don't, which assumption is questionable?  In science (and in art for that matter) there is a basic assumption that exists before there can be anything else at all, in any field. This is that the laws that govern how things work do not change. Materials may change, but the way they act on each other don't. And if this holds true over billions of years, what is the likelihood that it will be false in you 200 year example? Yes, quite.

Do we play Allegro as Allegro was played in the 18th century? Well, we sure as hell don't play it as it was played in the 19th century, because it was deliberately slowed down. But have we nailed the 18th or 17th century Allegro yet? Maybe we have, in some time and place, and not in a different time and place. But at least everyone ain't playing it like Stokowski any more. If that's what you like, that even in 2011 people should play it like they did in 1940 or 1870, then you are simply lost.

In many cases we DO know what the composer wanted. Even that long ago, people actually wrote shit down! I know, I know, hard to believe. And certainly not true of every composer about every piece, but if you read some stuff you learn some stuff. It isn't like everything fell into a black hole, you know?

Today, when we perform new or recent works by contemporary composers, the individuals who wrote the music aren't concerned with the
instruments per se, as long as they sound good, and are in tune.  The composers are concerned about  whether the musicians are interpreting the music as they would want.. And they don't always. Sometimes they don't like what the performers do to the music. For example; tempi that are too slow or too fast, excessive use of rubato or excessive rigidity, etc.  The musicians are using the authentic instruments of OUR time, but there is something wrong with the interpretation.
   It was the same in the past.  This just goes to show you that   using period instruments is no guarantee of anything.

Absolutely true, crappy playing of old music with old instruments is no more palatable than crappy playing of old music with new instruments. This is what is called a "Duh Moment". But your implication that use of modern instruments IS a guarantee of something is no more reasonable than your last statement.  In addition to which, modern instruments are louder and more numerous which makes their improper use even more offensive.



----------------
Now playing:
Concilium musicum Wien \ Angerer "auf Originalinstrumenten" - Hob 01 008 Symphony in G 3rd mvmt - Menuetto con Trio

[Bulldog]

LOL - other than whenever HIP/PI is being discussed it is guaranteed that you will chime in with essentially the same post.

Yup.  Superhorn's misinformed arguments never change.  What I do wonder is why he continues to rail at windmills.  Nobody forces the man to listen to PI performances.  He just needs to understand that many folks enjoy PI and it's never going away.