[Oistrakh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by technobarbie /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was gonna put the Joshua Bell version to freak certain people out. Oh what the hell. Couldn't resist!

boo joshua bell!

 

[Schalldampfer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oistrakh /img/forum/go_quote.gif boo joshua bell!

Yeah... kinda leaning towards that sentiment myself.

The only violin sonatas that struck me as amazing were Bach's first through third and also his partitias. Violinist was Henryk Szerying. I couldn't get to the scratchy tune of the violin when I first started listening to classical, but after a while, they became one of the most beautiful and thought-provoking pieces I own.

 

[Oistrakh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schalldämpfer /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yeah... kinda leaning towards that sentiment myself. The only violin sonatas that struck me as amazing were Bach's first through third and also his partitias. Violinist was Henryk Szerying. I couldn't get to the scratchy tune of the violin when I first started listening to classical, but after a while, they became one of the most beautiful and thought-provoking pieces I own.

get milstein's recording...

 

[Schalldampfer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oistrakh /img/forum/go_quote.gif get milstein's recording...

All righty. That will be another thing on my list to get when I go back home this week for Thanksgiving. I am going to splurge and buy a bunch of classical CD's, hopefully.

 

[technobarbie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oistrakh /img/forum/go_quote.gif boo joshua bell!

Just for the record that was a joke. hehehe

 

[BAwig05]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oistrakh /img/forum/go_quote.gif get milstein's recording...

Bach:

Milstien's is excellent, as is to be expected. (DG)

Grummiux's (spelling,) is on a Philips Duo (Philips)

Brahms:

Perlman/Ashkenazy (EMI, 11.99). A true great recording of the century.

Suk/Katchen (Decca, 11.99). Not to be repetitive, but this is surely a Decca legend too.

Beethoven:

Perlman/Ashkenazy (EMI) or Perlman/Barenboim (EMI). The first is better.

Mozart:

Szgeti/Szell. Yes, Szell, a four disc set of the complete sonatas. Very good. (Vanguard, 16.99)

Hope this helps,
Brian

 

[Bunnyears]

I don't know about the "greatest violin sonatas" of all time, but here's a great new recording of some of Beethoven's violin sonatas that I recommend very strongly.

Daniel Sepec is playing a violin that belonged to Beethoven (on loan from Beethoven Haus) and Andreas Staier is playing a fortepiano of a type that Beethoven himself might have used at the time he wrote the sonatas. It's a delightful recording with a bit of an accoustical surprise.

 

[JayG]

You do love your fortepiano recordings, don't you, Bunny? I don't have much experience at all with the instrument, but all of your glowing posts about fortepiano performances (Mozart concertos, sonatas) are making me want to pick some up.

-Jay

 

[Bunnyears]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayG /img/forum/go_quote.gif You do love your fortepiano recordings, don't you, Bunny? I don't have much experience at all with the instrument, but all of your glowing posts about fortepiano performances (Mozart concertos, sonatas) are making me want to pick some up. -Jay

It's a very different dynamic, and the balance of the instruments is different the way the balance in hip/hybrid orchestras is different. DA thinks the sound of a fortepiano is too compressed, but once you acclimatize to the different sound, there is a lot to gain about how Beethoven actually heard and performed his music.

Beethoven so much more than Mozart and Haydn translates well to the modern piano, perhaps because he was always writing for the biggest and roundest tone and widest dynamic range in his works. However, we forget how very grounded Beethoven was in the classical era and constantly move him into the romantic, both in big band performance and modern piano performance. Listening to his works on fortepiano lets me see how much he was part of the classical tradition and at the same time makes me appreciate how truly innovative he was. Aside from that, I really enjoy the sound of the older instruments which is much more delicate than the piano of today.

 

[Masolino]

Doing a little search on wiki on the topic of piano history and musical performance yields something that would argue STRONGLY FOR using fortepianos to perform not just Beethoven, Mozart or Haydn, but Schubert, Schumann, Brahms, Chopin, Liszt, even Debussy and Ravel. For many inquisitive musicians, fortepianos or early pianofortes can provide an "authenticity solution" to many of their performing problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piano_h...al_performance

 

[JayG]

That was an interesting and informative read. I think, though, that when it comes to actually performing these works (especially composers of the Romantic period and later), it becomes counterproductive to get totally caught up in HIP practices. I think it's important to know where the music came from and how it might have been performed in it's day, but I think it's more important to get inside the music itself and really try to understand what makes it sing and what the composer wanted to say. I'd take a more inspired performance of Brahms on a modern piano, muddier chords and all, over a performance of the same piece on a HIP piano that lacks an equal level of interpretive strength.

All composers (except maybe Beethoven) wrote for the instruments they had available. If they were working today, and they wanted to write piano music, they would write for the modern piano. Maybe they would have made some small changes to voicing and harmony to make things more clear on the modern instrument, but it's just a vehicle to get their musical vision out.

If a performer wants to use a historical instrument because they feel like it will help them get to the heart of the music better, more power to them. But if they want to perform on that instrument just because they want people to hear how it would have sounded in the composer's day, they might as well not waste their time. The instrument should be a secondary consideration; a decision to make once you have decided that you have a genuine reason to put a personal and individual mark on a piece of music.

-Jay

 

[Oistrakh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BAwig05 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Grummiux's (spelling,) is on a Philips Duo (Philips)

Tyson apparently thinks Grumiaux's is "monochromatic"...

 

[Bunnyears]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayG /img/forum/go_quote.gif That was an interesting and informative read. I think, though, that when it comes to actually performing these works (especially composers of the Romantic period and later), it becomes counterproductive to get totally caught up in HIP practices. I think it's important to know where the music came from and how it might have been performed in it's day, but I think it's more important to get inside the music itself and really try to understand what makes it sing and what the composer wanted to say. I'd take a more inspired performance of Brahms on a modern piano, muddier chords and all, over a performance of the same piece on a HIP piano that lacks an equal level of interpretive strength. All composers (except maybe Beethoven) wrote for the instruments they had available. If they were working today, and they wanted to write piano music, they would write for the modern piano. Maybe they would have made some small changes to voicing and harmony to make things more clear on the modern instrument, but it's just a vehicle to get their musical vision out. If a performer wants to use a historical instrument because they feel like it will help them get to the heart of the music better, more power to them. But if they want to perform on that instrument just because they want people to hear how it would have sounded in the composer's day, they might as well not waste their time. The instrument should be a secondary consideration; a decision to make once you have decided that you have a genuine reason to put a personal and individual mark on a piece of music. -Jay

For me, it's a matter of wanting to know how the composer heard the music and understood the balance between all of the instruments in ensemble playing. For years I listened to Beethoven with the woods and reeds barely discernible through the heavily vibrato enhanced, expanded string sections. Then I heard Beethoven played in a more historically informed manner and I was actually shocked by the difference. I have experienced the same shock when centuries of grime are carefully removed from a great painting. All of the "patina" of added layers of varnish and dirt which we admired and mistook for the true colors are stripped away and something so much more vibrant appears. Hopefully when a painting is cleaned or a piece of music is performed in an historically informed manner, the works won't be mishandled so that too much is stripped away. Ideally it should illuminate how the composer or painter envisioned the work, and not create a new, different, false vision.

Btw, bad performance is not a function of how historically informed the practice is. I've heard bad performances that are conventional and historically informed. Every performance and interpretation should be trying to gain insight into the music, but unfortunately I've been to enough clunker-concerts and bought enough clunker-recordings to admit that sometimes it just doesn't happen.

 

[Masolino]

Hello Bunnyears!

I think you said it better than I ever can here. "Bad performance is not a function of how historically informed the practice is." Rene Jacobs's Figaro which you have recently mentioned on a Mozart thread is a case in example: vibrant both as sound and as an interpretation.

 

[JayG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunnyears /img/forum/go_quote.gif For me, it's a matter of wanting to know how the composer heard the music and understood the balance between all of the instruments in ensemble playing. For years I listened to Beethoven with the woods and reeds barely discernible through the heavily vibrato enhanced, expanded string sections. Then I heard Beethoven played in a more historically informed manner and I was actually shocked by the difference. I have experienced the same shock when centuries of grime are carefully removed from a great painting. All of the "patina" of added layers of varnish and dirt which we admired and mistook for the true colors are stripped away and something so much more vibrant appears. Hopefully when a painting is cleaned or a piece of music is performed in an historically informed manner, the works won't be mishandled so that too much is stripped away. Ideally it should illuminate how the composer or painter envisioned the work, and not create a new, different, false vision. Btw, bad performance is not a function of how historically informed the practice is. I've heard bad performances that are conventional and historically informed. Every performance and interpretation should be trying to gain insight into the music, but unfortunately I've been to enough clunker-concerts and bought enough clunker-recordings to admit that sometimes it just doesn't happen.

I agree with all of this. I was just pointing out that, to me, it seems like a significant portion of HIP performances spend so much time making sure they are historically accurate that they forget to pay attention to all the little nuances that separate great performances from merely good ones. By no means did I mean to insinuate that there are no HIP recordings that compete on an artistic level with conventional ones. I love most of Gardiner's Beethoven, and Jacobs' work with Mozart opera has so far been enlightening. There are countless examples of great HIP work, but there is also no shortage of HIP junk. My point is that I don't think whether or not a performance is historically accurate or not should be the first and most important factor in a comparison.

I agree that it is a boon to be able to hear, for example, the proper orchestral balances in Mozart and Beethoven symphonies/concertos. And using period instruments is one effective way to do that. But it is also not the only way.

Also, my comments were directed more toward attempting HIP practices with post-Beethoven composers. Certainly the magnitude of the effect of using HIP practices increases with the age of the music, so it's a more important consideration the farther back you go.