PaulMW
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2016
- Posts
- 16
- Likes
- 10
No - unfortunately Filius Bonacci doesn't seem to have much connection to it all - at least that I'm aware of - though over the years I have often tried to figure out some involvement for the "number of god" - ie all that 1,2,3,5,8,13,21.... bizzo.
My current #1 CD (of the last 20+ish years) is ZZT080701 - the Biber (my #1 composer of all) "Fiducinium Sacro Profanum" by the group "Les Plaisirs du Parnasse"/DavidPlantier.
The Corelli Op.6 version that I would suggest is a good "standard" one is the late '80's EnglishConcert/Pinnock one - though I'm currently working through some of the Italian groups' ones.
But IMO keep away from any Dutch versions - they play EM like they're from another planet - though always musically/EMtechnically competently enough.
And some of the German groups now seem to be playing John (=J.C.) Bach's music a little more exuberantly/passionately than the English groups who are the more traditional interpreters of his works. Seems to have taken them (Krauts) 2centuries+ to get over the fact that he was a papist - he converted while working in Italy in the 1760s.
I like the "standard" HanoverBand playings of his concerti & symphonies.
I accept what some of my (musically upline) friends berate me with: that as a composer he was "the least" of all the Bachs - his older brother CPE (who taught him) by general agreement being the greatest - and his composition is a bit less impressive than his friend Haydn's. It's just that JC's music always makes me more joyful/consciousnessexpanded; while CPE's is very intellectually fulfilling, in general it simply doesn't move me - except in the case of some (quite rare) exceptions). A lovely YouTube video of his (JCB's) work by one of today's best countertenors is "La Dolce Fiamma" by Philippe Jaroussky & co.
All the above usually via the excellent DAC in my Nak AV-10 amp and (now
) a pair of coaxSPDIF-fed RS-220s
PS [W021116] I think that I should add that all that I've been saying over my last few posts in this thread about temperaments (ie the various ways of laying out a 12division keyboard scale) doesn't have much relevance to performances on (baroque) violins (and, of course, other variable pitch instruments). They are at their best when playing in a tuning-system that I, for want of a better word, call "mutable-just" - ie the same nominal note will have a (very slightly) different pitch depending on its surrounding notes - or where it is approached from or going to.
This is, naturally, referring only to baroque violins/music - where notes are ideally played without any vibrato - unlike modern (= rubbish!
) violinplaying/musicingeneral where everything is played with mega vibrato - to disguise the fact that the player/performer doesn't have any remote idea of the exact note they're trying to produce - ie when you don't want to know what it (music) is all about, just cover everything with tomato sauce.
Which leads to the inescapable conclusion that to be a good modern musician it would be a big help to be completely tone-deaf!
How else could one tolerate the inharmonious noises that one was producing!
A little vibrato is however acceptable in baroque performance - but generally only at the end of a note when its pitch has already been clearly established - ie as an ornament/"extra". Or, perhaps, by way of a "compromise" when playing along with a possibly "more dominant" 12tone tuning system accompaniment.
And I should also say that when the meantone tuning system was introduced (Pietro Aron, Univ of Padua, 1535 or 1538??) it was greeted with much the same horror as I regard evil temperament (my deliberately pejorative homophone of equal temperament - = every note equally bad). In earlier times the tone came in two varieties - the large(9:8) tone and the small (10:9) tone. So to simply define a tone as being half of a major third was extremely dubious/avantgarde. But the ability to modulate over several keys that this produced eventually gave birth to the baroque era.
My current #1 CD (of the last 20+ish years) is ZZT080701 - the Biber (my #1 composer of all) "Fiducinium Sacro Profanum" by the group "Les Plaisirs du Parnasse"/DavidPlantier.
The Corelli Op.6 version that I would suggest is a good "standard" one is the late '80's EnglishConcert/Pinnock one - though I'm currently working through some of the Italian groups' ones.
But IMO keep away from any Dutch versions - they play EM like they're from another planet - though always musically/EMtechnically competently enough.
And some of the German groups now seem to be playing John (=J.C.) Bach's music a little more exuberantly/passionately than the English groups who are the more traditional interpreters of his works. Seems to have taken them (Krauts) 2centuries+ to get over the fact that he was a papist - he converted while working in Italy in the 1760s.
I like the "standard" HanoverBand playings of his concerti & symphonies.
I accept what some of my (musically upline) friends berate me with: that as a composer he was "the least" of all the Bachs - his older brother CPE (who taught him) by general agreement being the greatest - and his composition is a bit less impressive than his friend Haydn's. It's just that JC's music always makes me more joyful/consciousnessexpanded; while CPE's is very intellectually fulfilling, in general it simply doesn't move me - except in the case of some (quite rare) exceptions). A lovely YouTube video of his (JCB's) work by one of today's best countertenors is "La Dolce Fiamma" by Philippe Jaroussky & co.
All the above usually via the excellent DAC in my Nak AV-10 amp and (now
PS [W021116] I think that I should add that all that I've been saying over my last few posts in this thread about temperaments (ie the various ways of laying out a 12division keyboard scale) doesn't have much relevance to performances on (baroque) violins (and, of course, other variable pitch instruments). They are at their best when playing in a tuning-system that I, for want of a better word, call "mutable-just" - ie the same nominal note will have a (very slightly) different pitch depending on its surrounding notes - or where it is approached from or going to.
This is, naturally, referring only to baroque violins/music - where notes are ideally played without any vibrato - unlike modern (= rubbish!
Which leads to the inescapable conclusion that to be a good modern musician it would be a big help to be completely tone-deaf!
How else could one tolerate the inharmonious noises that one was producing!
A little vibrato is however acceptable in baroque performance - but generally only at the end of a note when its pitch has already been clearly established - ie as an ornament/"extra". Or, perhaps, by way of a "compromise" when playing along with a possibly "more dominant" 12tone tuning system accompaniment.
And I should also say that when the meantone tuning system was introduced (Pietro Aron, Univ of Padua, 1535 or 1538??) it was greeted with much the same horror as I regard evil temperament (my deliberately pejorative homophone of equal temperament - = every note equally bad). In earlier times the tone came in two varieties - the large(9:8) tone and the small (10:9) tone. So to simply define a tone as being half of a major third was extremely dubious/avantgarde. But the ability to modulate over several keys that this produced eventually gave birth to the baroque era.
daam..