Glenn Gould: Chopin sonata no. 3
Tord Kallqvist Romstad
Any opinions on this recording?
Matthew B. Tepper
Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote:
>
> Any opinions on this recording?
Awful, terrible, wretched, odious, repugnant, horrid, obnoxious, vile.
The robot outdid himself in showing how much he hated this music. Avoid,
avoid, avoid!
--
Matthew B. Tepper * Management and IS Consultant
Positive Support Review Inc. * tep...@psrinc.com
World Wide Web site: http://www.psrinc.com/psr.htm
PSR's 1996 IS Compensation Study is now available!
INDIGOCOP
In article <4s56o5$1...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, tor...@ifi.uio.no (Tord Kallqvist
Romstad) writes:
>Any opinions on this recording?
>
>
It is oddness personified, but very sincere I suppose. I listened to it a
few times and then gave it away. Gould said he disliked all of Chopin, so
I cannot see why he would want to play this superb sonata with so much
time warp and spaced out-abstractions of Chopin's tenderness.
- A thought is an act. A word is a deed.
Carl Tait
In article <4s56o5$1...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>,
Quite bad, but not in the same way as his hilariously mutilated Mozart.
Most of the time, Gould simply sounds lost. The first and third movements
are devoid of sensitivity, and the balance between the parts is often
ridiculous: melodies are drowned out by arpeggio and scale figures.
The third movement sounds like an untalented conservatory student --
not weird, just lousy. Only in the finale is the repulsiveness
distinctively Gouldian: a comical staccato rendering of the main theme.
On the other hand, the fingerwork in both the scherzo and the running
passages of the finale is quite impressive. However, those flying fingers
can't save this truly execrable performance. It's not even up to the
usual comedy level of Gould's most memorable disasters.
--
Carl Tait IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
ta...@watson.ibm.com Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
Farhan Malik
"Matthew B. Tepper" <tep...@psrinc.com> writes:
>Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote:
>>
>> Any opinions on this recording?
>Awful, terrible, wretched, odious, repugnant, horrid, obnoxious, vile.
>The robot outdid himself in showing how much he hated this music. Avoid,
>avoid, avoid!
All true but let's give credit where credit is due. The
recording of the Scriabin 5th Sonata which follows the Chopin on M&A
makes the Chopin sound like Lipatti in comparison.
Farhan
Dan Koren
In article <4s63db$9...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> indi...@aol.com (INDIGOCOP) writes:
>In article <4s56o5$1...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, tor...@ifi.uio.no (Tord Kallqvist
>Romstad) writes:
>
>
One could probably say the same about Charles Manson, right?
:-)
dk
Dan Koren
In article <4s56o5$1...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>
>Any opinions on this recording?
Yes -- it stinks!
dk
LEOCAPRI
I have used this recording as a tray on which to serve martinis.
Mark Shulgasser
Neil Tingley
In article <4s6ctl$4...@ground.cs.columbia.edu>, Carl Tait
<ta...@news.cs.columbia.edu> writes
>Quite bad, but not in the same way as his hilariously mutilated Mozart.
>Most of the time, Gould simply sounds lost. The first and third movements
>are devoid of sensitivity, and the balance between the parts is often
>ridiculous: melodies are drowned out by arpeggio and scale figures.
>The third movement sounds like an untalented conservatory student --
>not weird, just lousy. Only in the finale is the repulsiveness
>distinctively Gouldian: a comical staccato rendering of the main theme.
Let's get one thing clear. GG has no intention of releasing this as a
commerical recording. It represents a one-off run through of a piece he
thought he could do sonething with.
GG has zero interest in Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein
style elegance. He was only interested in fitting the piece into the
greater whole of his musical universe. If you don't like it, I son't see
the point in condemning it, because it was not offered to the public on
a final thought basis.
I will not comment on what Farhan said for fear of starting a global
conflict.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Tingley Furtwaengler FAQ from r.m.c.r contributers at:
ne...@music.demon.co.uk http://www.netlink.co.uk/users/music/ & links to
London, UK G.H Gould and others "more about me" menu.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Tait
In article <prRjkOA3...@music.demon.co.uk>,
Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Let's get one thing clear. GG has no intention of releasing this as a
>commerical recording. It represents a one-off run through of a piece he
>thought he could do sonething with.
Quite true, but that doesn't make it any more listenable. The performance
is an abject failure on all but the technical level.
>GG has zero interest in Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein
>style elegance. He was only interested in fitting the piece into the
>greater whole of his musical universe. If you don't like it, I son't see
>the point in condemning it, because it was not offered to the public on
>a final thought basis.
But Sony *is* offering it to the public as part of a full-price 2-CD set.
People should be warned that the recording is suck-a-rama supremo.
>I will not comment on what Farhan said for fear of starting a global
>conflict.
I hear the air-raid sirens already....
Carl Tait
In article <4s6uqj$5...@erebus.rutgers.edu>,
Farhan Malik <mal...@erebus.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>
> All true but let's give credit where credit is due. The
>recording of the Scriabin 5th Sonata which follows the Chopin on M&A
>makes the Chopin sound like Lipatti in comparison.
You are referring, of course, to Tony Lipatti the auto mechanic.
(I actually have a recording of the Rachmaninoff Second Concerto
played by Horowitz. Mischa Horowitz, that is.)
Alan Swindells
Leocapri (leoc...@aol.com) writes:
> I have used this recording as a tray on which to serve martinis.
> Mark Shulgasser
LP (for passing around) or CD (as a coaster)? And were the martinis
rendered undrinkable?
I have to say that, apart from Gould's Mozart, this recording is quite
the worst I have ever heard; and unlike the Mozart, it isn't even funny.
Regards: Alan
--
* alan...@argonet.co.uk *
Nature, and Nature's laws lay hid in night:
God said 'Let Newton Be!' and all was light.
It did not last: the Devil howling 'Ho!
Let Einstein Be!' restored the status quo.
Mike Quigley
Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Let's get one thing clear. GG has no intention of releasing this as a
>commerical recording. It represents a one-off run through of a piece he
>thought he could do sonething with.
What do you mean "has"? ";-/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check my WWW page for some classical/soundtrack CDs for sale (and the award-
winning Hawaii Five-O Home Page too!): http://web20.mindlink.net/a4369/
INDIGOCOP
In article <4s89o3$p...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, leoc...@aol.com (LEOCAPRI)
writes:
>I have used this recording as a tray on which to serve martinis.
>Mark Shulgasser
I think it should be played as background music for a Star Trek type time
warped civiization. Truly Gould was in another, non-human, lost
civilization when he recorded this piece.
Neil Tingley
In article <31e86043...@news.mindlink.net>, Mike Quigley
<Mr_Gi...@mindlink.net> writes
>Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Let's get one thing clear. GG has no intention of releasing this as a
>>commerical recording. It represents a one-off run through of a piece he
>>thought he could do sonething with.
>
>What do you mean "has"? ";-/
>
GG found living in remote corner of Greenland, cowering from his
critics.
TTBach
We Gouldlians are truly an amazing lot. GG spoon fed us Bach that would
have been unpallatable in most other pianist's hands.
When he died we grieved. Now we are going through a normal berevement
behavior. We are going through his 'closet' looking and 'smelling' his old
'clothing' whilst trying to reunite with him through being reminded of
his genius. I really miss thoses new recordings coming out every year.
Remember the Toccata LPs? It was so great to hear the things I had never
heard before.
I have not heard his Chopin, but I will be sure to give it a listen. I
guess it is pretty crude, but hey?
Matthew B. Tepper
INDIGOCOP wrote:
>
> In article <4s89o3$p...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, leoc...@aol.com (LEOCAPRI)
> writes:
>
> >I have used this recording as a tray on which to serve martinis.
> >Mark Shulgasser
>
> I think it should be played as background music for a Star Trek type time
> warped civiization. Truly Gould was in another, non-human, lost
> civilization when he recorded this piece.
Didn't you know? Glenn Gould was a robot. He was the first advanced
mechanical man, created by scientists in Toronto to mimick a human
being. Originally the idea was simply to create a simulacrum, but when a
talented young pianist (the original human Glenn Gould) died in a tragic
accident, someone had the idea of substituting the robot, and the team
followed this concept through to the end. Unfortunately, RGG suffered
from numerous problems which made it difficult for him to interact with
human beings, and its frequent breakdowns caused the decision to
"retire" from the stage whilst still making recordings.
I can't offer proof, since the robot's remains have been locked away for
all time in a laboratory, but I can certainly offer convincing
arguments, as for example the recordings of Mozart sonatas. No human
being could have, or would have, played Mozart like that. The Chopin
Sonata #3 recording is only one of many showing the robot's inability to
understand human emotion (much like Lt. Cdr. Data on "Star Trek: The
Next Generation," to give but one popular example).
Lastly, consider the case of Isaac Asimov. This great scientist,
teacher and writer was the worldwide authority on robots, their
construction and use. He was notorious for his dislike of travel. Yet
it is documented that he made several trips to Toronto in the early
1950s. Why was this? Was he perhaps in on the charade?
The truth is out there!
--
"There is a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased
that line." -- Oscar Levant
Matthew B. Tepper du...@deltanet.com CIS: 71031,2415
Visit my Berlioz page! http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
Dan Koren
In article <prRjkOA3...@music.demon.co.uk> Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>GG has zero interest in Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein
>style elegance.
Unfortunately that doesn't leave much music for the piano.
>He was only interested in fitting the piece into the greater whole of
>his musical universe.
The wholeness of GG's musical universe is quite open to debate.
>If you don't like it, I don't see the point in condemning it,
What an amazing statement!
>because it was not offered to the public on a final thought basis.
GG never offered anything to the public on a final thought basis,
so how's that different from anything else he recorded?
>I will not comment on what Farhan said for fear of starting a
> global conflict.
Please do! ;-) I'm already arming the fuses on my nukes!
Are we going to start GGIII after WWI and WWII ?!?
:-))
dk
Tord Kallqvist Romstad
Matthew B. Tepper (tep...@psrinc.com) wrote:
: Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote:
: >
: > Any opinions on this recording?
: Awful, terrible, wretched, odious, repugnant, horrid, obnoxious, vile.
: The robot outdid himself in showing how much he hated this music. Avoid,
: avoid, avoid!
: --
: Matthew B. Tepper * Management and IS Consultant
: Positive Support Review Inc. * tep...@psrinc.com
: World Wide Web site: http://www.psrinc.com/psr.htm
: PSR's 1996 IS Compensation Study is now available!
Thanks to all of you!
I have counted 16 replies to my question, all negative.
I will definitely not buy this recording.
Tord
Aloysia
Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>
> Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote:
> >
> > Any opinions on this recording?
>
> Awful, terrible, wretched, odious, repugnant, horrid, obnoxious, vile.
> The robot outdid himself in showing how much he hated this music. Avoid,
> avoid, avoid!
> --
> Matthew B. Tepper * Management and IS Consultant
> Positive Support Review Inc. * tep...@psrinc.com
> World Wide Web site: http://www.psrinc.com/psr.htm
> PSR's 1996 IS Compensation Study is now available!
I agree! Especially the "robot" part (IMO, that goes for most of
his recordings also). :-)
Aloysia
--
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
I could die laughing . . . ___
| -| | |\
- W.A. Mozart _| _| _| _|
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ #(_).(_) (_) (_)
Dan Koren
In article <4sirpt$b...@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU> rw...@scunix4.HARVARD.EDU (Richard Wang) writes:
>In article <dkDunI...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>In article <prRjkOA3...@music.demon.co.uk> Neil Tingley
>><ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>GG has zero interest in Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein
>>>style elegance.
>>
>>Unfortunately that doesn't leave much music for the piano.
>
>pantheon as one could hope for--you have my thanks, Dan. But I do feel
My vision of the pianistic pantheon is not quite as skewed as you
might think, and it is shared by many professional pianists. You'd
be really surprised to find out how many pianists really *hate* to
play Beethoven or the baroque monkey music GG was so attracted to.
>compelled to point out that you have apparently ignored or dismissed
>many composers who made substantial contributions to the genre,
>including Albeniz, Granados, Debussy, Faure, Ravel, Hindemith,
>Schoenberg, Liszt (!), Grieg,Mendelssohn, Mozart (!!), Schumann,
>Schubert, and even Beethoven (!!!). Or have you subsumed *all* of these
>composers under "Rubinstein style elegance"?
Yes. :-) I take that as shorthand for "the repertoire Rubinstein
played". Your point is moot anyways since GG didn't perform Albeniz,
Granados, Debussy, Faure or Ravel any more than he performed Chopin.
dk
Neil Tingley
In article <dkDunI...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> writes
>In article <prRjkOA3...@music.demon.co.uk> Neil Tingley
><ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>
>>GG has zero interest in Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein
>>style elegance.
>
>Unfortunately that doesn't leave much music for the piano.
Mozart :-)
>>He was only interested in fitting the piece into the greater whole of
>>his musical universe.
>
>The wholeness of GG's musical universe is quite open to debate.
>>If you don't like it, I don't see the point in condemning it,
>
>What an amazing statement!
Thanks. GG would not have approved it for release by Sony. Obviously I
can't be sure of that, put I'd put a lot of money on it. He often used
CBC for his musical experiments :-)
>>because it was not offered to the public on a final thought basis.
>
>GG never offered anything to the public on a final thought basis,
>so how's that different from anything else he recorded?
Tripe. He took a great deal of time over the majority of his recordings:
hours of recording, editing and re-editing. For that he was notorious
(amongst many other things ...)
>>I will not comment on what Farhan said for fear of starting a
>> global conflict.
>
>Please do! ;-) I'm already arming the fuses on my nukes!
>Are we going to start GGIII after WWI and WWII ?!?
I'm digging in.
Richard Wang
In article <dkDunI...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <prRjkOA3...@music.demon.co.uk> Neil Tingley
><ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>GG has zero interest in Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein
>>style elegance.
>
>Unfortunately that doesn't leave much music for the piano.
As concise a summary of your strangely skewed vision of the pianistic
pantheon as one could hope for--you have my thanks, Dan. But I do feel
compelled to point out that you have apparently ignored or dismissed
many composers who made substantial contributions to the genre,
including Albeniz, Granados, Debussy, Faure, Ravel, Hindemith,
Schoenberg, Liszt (!), Grieg,Mendelssohn, Mozart (!!), Schumann,
Schubert, and even Beethoven (!!!). Or have you subsumed *all* of these
composers under "Rubinstein style elegance"?
--
Richard Wang rw...@fas.harvard.edu
"Well, that was a cleverly crafted piece of non-claptrap which never once
made me want to retch."--Sideshow Bob
Dan Koren
In article <4smujc$2...@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU> rw...@scunix4.HARVARD.EDU (Richard Wang) writes:
>In article <dkDupG...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>In article <4sirpt$b...@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU> rw...@scunix4.HARVARD.EDU
>>(Richard Wang) writes:
>>>>In article <prRjkOA3...@music.demon.co.uk> Neil Tingley
>>>><ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>GG has zero interest in Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein
>>>>>style elegance.
>
>>might think, and it is shared by many professional pianists. You'd
>>be really surprised to find out how many pianists really *hate* to
>>play Beethoven or the baroque monkey music GG was so attracted to.
>
>practice rooms here, yes, I think I would be surprised to find that so
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>many pianists hate Beethoven and "baroque monkey music."
What you hear played in practice rooms around "there" is largely if
not completely determined by academic requirements rather than by
what people *really* like to play.
>>>compelled to point out that you have apparently ignored or dismissed
>>>many composers who made substantial contributions to the genre,
>>>including Albeniz, Granados, Debussy, Faure, Ravel, Hindemith,
>>>Schoenberg, Liszt (!), Grieg,Mendelssohn, Mozart (!!), Schumann,
>>>Schubert, and even Beethoven (!!!). Or have you subsumed *all* of these
>>>composers under "Rubinstein style elegance"?
>>
>>Yes. :-) I take that as shorthand for "the repertoire Rubinstein
>>played".
>
>Reification rears its ugly head... IMHO, forming a category which
>lumps together composers as disparate as Schoenberg and Mendelssohn
>is at best so broad as to be meaningless, and at worst simply asinine.
This is completely unfair - I did not invent this shorthand - you did!
>>Your point is moot anyways since GG didn't perform Albeniz,
>>Granados, Debussy, Faure or Ravel any more than he performed Chopin.
>
>Ah, but you've missed the point. You were claiming that Gould's lack of
>interest in "Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein style elegance"
>left him with very little to play; I was simply pointing out that there
>was certainly music *available* for him to play if he so chose. The
No, I didn't miss the point. Gould's lack of interest in most of the
piano music written composed from after Beethoven to approximately
before Prokofiev left him with very little that is *pianistically*
worth playing.
>size of Gould's discography and repertoire give the lie to your flippant
>comment anyway.
Discographies should be weighed by quality, not by size. Otherwise
Karajan and Ormandy would count as the greatest conductors, Stern
as the greatest violinist, and Jeno Jando as the greates pianist.
Excuse me!
dk
James C Liu
Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>In article <31e86043...@news.mindlink.net>, Mike Quigley
><Mr_Gi...@mindlink.net> writes
>>Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>Let's get one thing clear. GG has no intention of releasing this as a
>>>commerical recording. It represents a one-off run through of a piece he
>>>thought he could do sonething with.
>>
>>What do you mean "has"? ";-/
>>
>Didn't you hear then ?
>GG found living in remote corner of Greenland, cowering from his
>critics.
Ah. Is he making snowballs to throw at Dan and Farhan, or playing chess
with Elvis?
=8^)
--
/James C.S. Liu "... of all the animals, the boy
jl...@world.std.com is the most unmanageable."
New Haven, Connecticut -- Plato
Richard Wang
In article <dkDupG...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <4sirpt$b...@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU> rw...@scunix4.HARVARD.EDU
>(Richard Wang) writes:
>>In article <dkDunI...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>>In article <prRjkOA3...@music.demon.co.uk> Neil Tingley
>>><ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>>GG has zero interest in Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein
>>>>style elegance.
>My vision of the pianistic pantheon is not quite as skewed as you
>might think, and it is shared by many professional pianists. You'd
>be really surprised to find out how many pianists really *hate* to
>play Beethoven or the baroque monkey music GG was so attracted to.
Considering the amount of Beethoven and Bach I hear when I walk past the
practice rooms here, yes, I think I would be surprised to find that so
many pianists hate Beethoven and "baroque monkey music."
>>compelled to point out that you have apparently ignored or dismissed
>>many composers who made substantial contributions to the genre,
>>including Albeniz, Granados, Debussy, Faure, Ravel, Hindemith,
>>Schoenberg, Liszt (!), Grieg,Mendelssohn, Mozart (!!), Schumann,
>>Schubert, and even Beethoven (!!!). Or have you subsumed *all* of these
>>composers under "Rubinstein style elegance"?
>
>Yes. :-) I take that as shorthand for "the repertoire Rubinstein
>played".
Reification rears its ugly head... IMHO, forming a category which
lumps together composers as disparate as Schoenberg and Mendelssohn is at
best so broad as to be meaningless, and at worst simply asinine.
>Your point is moot anyways since GG didn't perform Albeniz,
>Granados, Debussy, Faure or Ravel any more than he performed Chopin.
Ah, but you've missed the point. You were claiming that Gould's lack of
interest in "Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein style elegance"
left him with very little to play; I was simply pointing out that there
was certainly music *available* for him to play if he so chose. The
size of Gould's discography and repertoire give the lie to your flippant
comment anyway.
--
AMRourk
Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>Your point is moot anyways since GG didn't perform Albeniz,
>>Granados, Debussy, Faure or Ravel any more than he performed Chopin.
Make an exception of Ravel; Gould did record his own piano transcription
of Ravel's "La Valse". It was more of a "finished piece", and definitely
was intended for public release, unlike his experiment with Chopin.
Richard Wang
In article <dkDusD...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <4smujc$2...@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU> rw...@scunix4.HARVARD.EDU
>>Reification rears its ugly head... IMHO, forming a category which
>>lumps together composers as disparate as Schoenberg and Mendelssohn
>>is at best so broad as to be meaningless, and at worst simply asinine.
>
>This is completely unfair - I did not invent this shorthand - you did!
Excuse me? I haven't invented any shorthand at all--in fact, I've been
arguing against what I see as sloppy, arbitrary, off-the-cuff
classification of the pianistic repertoire. Making no claims about
artistic similarity, I listed composers who didn't fit into three rather
carelessly constructed categories. You defended those categories by
claiming that my list was shorthand for "the repertoire Rubinstein
played." Perhaps it is; but that appears to be the only unifying
factor. What possible purpose could it serve to classify composers
according to who performs their music?
>>Ah, but you've missed the point. You were claiming that Gould's lack of
>>interest in "Chopin, Russian school pianism or Rubinstein style elegance"
>>left him with very little to play; I was simply pointing out that there
>>was certainly music *available* for him to play if he so chose. The
>
>No, I didn't miss the point. Gould's lack of interest in most of the
>piano music written composed from after Beethoven to approximately
>before Prokofiev left him with very little that is *pianistically*
>worth playing. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nicely done. You've managed to wriggle out of an untenable position by
introducing a new criterion, and an incredibly subjective one at that.
In that case, perhaps you could tell me what "pianistically worth
playing" means to you.
ObRichter/Lipatti: Oddly enough, it appears that some fairly
accomplished pianists have considered Bach's keyboard music
"pianistically worth playing"--unless, of course, you've pulled a Humpty
Dumpty on me and found some new, improved way to use "pianistically."
>>size of Gould's discography and repertoire give the lie to your flippant
>>comment anyway.
>
>Discographies should be weighed by quality, not by size.
Unquestionably; but this is hardly the point. Gould's discography is
sufficiently large to make rubbish of your claim that he had very little
to play. What you think of his playing isn't really an issue here.
Mike Quigley
amr...@aol.com (AMRourk) wrote:
>Make an exception of Ravel; Gould did record his own piano transcription
>of Ravel's "La Valse". It was more of a "finished piece", and definitely
>was intended for public release, unlike his experiment with Chopin.
Ravel made his own transcription of La Valse. I thought this was what
Gould's "version" was based on (with a few amendments from Gould himself).
AMRourk
Mr_Gi...@mindlink.net (Mike Quigley) writes:
>Ravel made his own transcription of La Valse. I thought this was what
>Gould's "version" was based on (with a few amendments from Gould
himself).
From what I've read, Gould said he discarded "over half" of Ravel's
transcription as unusable, and did extensive remodeling on the rest. In
letters and notes he referred to the piece he recorded as "my
transcription", and other musicians and scholars have also called it
"Gould's own transcription" of "La Valse". I'm not familiar with the
score of Ravel's transcription, and so can't offer an opinion about
whether or not Gould was justified in claiming credit; however, his taking
so much time and trouble over it (and including it on a commercial
recording, the "Glenn Gould Silver Jubilee Album") puts this recording in
a different class than the posthumous release of the Chopin sonata, which,
as Neil Tingley pointed out, Gould never intended for commercial release.
(He did record some Debussy as well... but as another of his CBC
"experiments" which were not really meant to be considered as part of his
oevre.)
Neil Tingley
In article <4srhtr$b...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, AMRourk <amr...@aol.com>
writes
>Make an exception of Ravel; Gould did record his own piano transcription
>of Ravel's "La Valse". It was more of a "finished piece", and definitely
>was intended for public release, unlike his experiment with Chopin.
It was made as part of a TV series. He steadfastly refused to record la
Valse for CBS/Sony despite constant persuasion.
Neil Tingley
In article <4ssnh2$q...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, AMRourk <amr...@aol.com>
writes
>From what I've read, Gould said he discarded "over half" of Ravel's
>transcription as unusable, and did extensive remodeling on the rest. In
>letters and notes he referred to the piece he recorded as "my
>transcription", and other musicians and scholars have also called it
>"Gould's own transcription" of "La Valse". I'm not familiar with the
>score of Ravel's transcription, and so can't offer an opinion about
>whether or not Gould was justified in claiming credit; however, his taking
>so much time and trouble over it (and including it on a commercial
>recording, the "Glenn Gould Silver Jubilee Album") puts this recording in
>a different class than the posthumous release of the Chopin sonata, which,
>as Neil Tingley pointed out, Gould never intended for commercial release.
>(He did record some Debussy as well... but as another of his CBC
>"experiments" which were not really meant to be considered as part of his
>oevre.)
I thought he put it in the Silver Jubilee Album as a backclothe to his
spoof return recital on an oilrig. Wasn't this the case, and did he
actually release the whole piece on this disc ??
He only did it to wind up and rubbish Horowitz and his ilk.
AMRourk
Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>I thought he put it in the Silver Jubilee Album as a backclothe to his
>>spoof return recital on an oilrig. Wasn't this the case, and did he
>>actually release the whole piece on this disc ??
He did use it as part of the Horowitz spoof "Hysterical Return"... I
haven't heard the album, but from written descriptions, I think most or
all of "La Valse" is used in the spoof. As far as I know, until Sony's
reissue, the Jubilee album was the only place it appeared.
>>He only did it to wind up and rubbish Horowitz and his ilk.
Well... from references he made to it, it seemed that Gould took more time
and trouble over the Ravel transcription, and was more willing to regard
it as a serious work, than one-off experiments like the Chopin or Debussy.
Initially, he didn't want to release it on an album (there are letters
where he mentions arguing with Columbia over just that) but he did
eventually put it on a commercial release, even if it was as part of a
satire. Given Glenn Gould's perfectionistic nature, I don't believe he
would have used a piece on a commercial recording that he didn't think was
up to his usual standards or which he felt was unsuccessful musically,
even just in a spoof. That's what puts "La Valse" in a different class
from the Chopin sonata, IMO....
Nitya Rajagopalan
AMRourk (amr...@aol.com) wrote:
: Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
It seems to me that one of gg's principal motivations-which may certainly
seem as roboticism and incapability to express emotion [ w(which is
quite self-evidently belied by many of his Bach-Goldberg,WTC- and Beethoven
sonata and concerto (his no.1 with Golschmann and no.3 with Bernstein
have a more perfect fusion of structural grandeur and lucid expressivity
than any other I have heard) recordings] - was a reaction against
the integrationist interpretive tendencies of the early 60's. He seemed
to be trying to "deconstruct" what he percieved to be the essential
compositional components and reconstruct a new piece in an almost
improvisational way. I don't think he ever believed that, or was even
interested in doing , that, he was presenting a work in a "right" way,
or even what he percieved the composer to have intended. I believe
the performing process was a highly experimental/improviational one to him,
and if one listens openmindedly and in the intended adventurous spirit,
his view is frequently a most stimulating,fresh, unique, and quite often in
its own way, equally integratedl complement to performances monotonously
(and dubiously) presenting the "right" way. After all, didn't
someone as seemingly far removed from Gould's mindset as Furtwaengler was
also maintain that the existing work was only one of a number of
alternatives that could just as likely have existed in the same framework
and of the necessity of improvisation (after proper rehearsal of course)
to go beyond the printed page? Gould in addition to the Furtwangler-type
manipulations of tempo simply went further to a more structural/
composer-like manipulation in performance and recording (which,
incidentally, is why I suspect he had a stronger fascination for the
creative possibilities of recording than of performing for an audience).
And yes I hold this belief with respect to even such flagrant distortions
of the composer's intent as in xthe Mozart sonata recordings. I
apologize for riding this hobby horse into the ground, but I felt
an talternatehis point of view needed to be aired.
Dan Koren
In article <4sre3b$i...@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU> rw...@scunix4.HARVARD.EDU (Richard Wang) writes:
>
>>>size of Gould's discography and repertoire give the lie to your flippant
>>>comment anyway.
>>
>>Discographies should be weighed by quality, not by size.
>
>Unquestionably; but this is hardly the point. Gould's discography is
>sufficiently large to make rubbish of your claim that he had very little
>to play. What you think of his playing isn't really an issue here.
Gould's discography is large by the number of pieces recorded,
but not by the variety of their styles or composers. And what
makes it worse is the fact that a lot of it, even the *best*
of it, is junk,
Look, I don't care that GG made one recording of a Chopin piece
which he clearly did not understand even to the level of a 16
year old. Isolated glitches are excusable. The worst part of
it is that Gould methodically butchered Bach's, Mozart's, and
Beethoven's music. It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
seriously taken as musical performance. Hey, I'd take Liberace
or Victor Borge any day over him -- at least they had a sense
of humor and the integrity to admit what they were doing.
dk
Matthew B. Tepper
Dan Koren wrote:
>
> Look, I don't care that GG made one recording of a Chopin piece
> which he clearly did not understand even to the level of a 16
> year old. Isolated glitches are excusable. The worst part of
> it is that Gould methodically butchered Bach's, Mozart's, and
> Beethoven's music. It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
> illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
> seriously taken as musical performance. Hey, I'd take Liberace
> or Victor Borge any day over him -- at least they had a sense
> of humor and the integrity to admit what they were doing.
Hear, hear! I'd rather have the warmth and humanity of an Artur
Schnabel, a Myra Hess, or yes, even a Wilhelm Kempff than the dull,
robotic arrogance of a Gould. In fact, I'd rather listen to Jose Iturbi
than Gould. I'd rather listen to *Amparo* Iturbi than Gould. Hell, I'd
rather listen to Percy Grainger or Vladimir de Pachmann than Gould.
Here are some more pianists I'd rather listen to than Gould (in no
particular order):
Istvan Nadas
Anatole Kitain
Josef Hofmann
Ossip Gabrilowitsch
David Saperton
Peter Katin
André Watts (!)
Nelson Friere
Martha Argerich
Jorge Bolet
Yakov Zak
Ervin Nyiregyhazi (!!!)
Mike Quigley
amr...@aol.com (AMRourk) wrote:
>I'm not familiar with the
>score of Ravel's transcription, and so can't offer an opinion about
>whether or not Gould was justified in claiming credit; however, his taking
>so much time and trouble over it (and including it on a commercial
>recording, the "Glenn Gould Silver Jubilee Album")
Its appearance on the Silver Jubilee Album consists of excerpts heard in
the background as part of one of Gould's "radio dramas" rather than as a
complete entity. It was never released commercially by itself until it
appeared in the GG Video Edition.
AMRourk
Mr_Gi...@mindlink.net (Mike Quigley) wrote:
>Its appearance on the Silver Jubilee Album consists of excerpts heard in
>the background as part of one of Gould's "radio dramas" rather than as a
>complete entity. It was never released commercially by itself until it
>appeared in the GG Video Edition.
Yes... as I said in the previous post, it was used as part of the spoof GG
did on Horowitz ("Hysteric Return") which was more of a comedy than a
drama. It was not a stand-alone track on the album. However, it was used
in that context almost in its entirety, and, as I said before, I maintain
that Gould, with his obsessive perfectionism over which of his recordings
were heard by the public, wouldn't have used it even for this trivial
purpose if he felt that it was not up to his normal standards. I
contrasted this, in the same post, to the Chopin Sonata #3, which Gould
did not use on a commercial recording in any form, and which, from
evidence, he was not happy with and did not consider successful. I was
also making the point that the Ravel was something which Gould had taken
time and trouble over (redoing Ravel's transcription either partially or
nearly completely) and which he seemed to feel came off well, unlike the
Chopin sonata, which was a one-off experiment that he did not spend much
effort on (and did not intend to release publicly.) You are correct in
saying that "La Valse" was not released separately, rather than as a part
of the spoof, until it was made part of the Gould Video edition and later,
the Gould Sony CD edition... but I didn't claim it was.
Because of the above biographical evidence, I say that Glenn Gould's
performance of Ravel's "La Valse" should be considered as part of his true
oevre, while the Chopin Sonata #3 should be looked on as an unsuccessful
"experiment" which Gould would not have wanted Sony to release in any
form, and which one should not consider in judging the worth of Gould's
pianism.
Dan Koren
In article <31F441...@deltanet.com> "Matthew B. Tepper" <du...@deltanet.com> writes:
>than Gould. I'd rather listen to *Amparo* Iturbi than Gould. Hell, I'd
>rather listen to Percy Grainger or Vladimir de Pachmann than Gould.
While I certainly share your dislike of Gould, I'm certainly not
decadent enough to want to listen to Grainger.
:-)
dk
PS. I'd be delighted to borrow de Pachmann's socks... :-)
William J. Karzas
In article <4t7286$g...@ground.cs.columbia.edu>, ta...@news.cs.columbia.edu
(Carl Tait) wrote:
> In article <31f64ca4...@news.mindlink.net>,
> Mike Quigley <Mr_Gi...@mindlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >[Gould's performance of his own arrangement of Ravel's "La Valse"]
> >was never released commercially by itself until it
> >appeared in the GG Video Edition.
>
> By any chance, was the sheet music to Gould's version ever made available?
> Of all the Ravel pieces that exist in both piano and orchestral forms,
> "La Valse" is the only one that started as an orchestral work. The
> composer's piano transcription is decidedly lacking: most pianists make
> substantial changes, and it would be interesting to see what Gould did.
Ravel also made a 2-piano transcription of Bolero [after the orchestral
work.] And Ravel's transcription of 'La Valse' was also for 2 pianos. As
near as I can tell any solo piano performances are in someone else's
arrangement. I do not believe there is a "composer's [solo] piano
transcription," which might explain why "most pianists make substantial
changes."
I am not a Ravel specialist, so I may be in error, but that's what my
references tell me. Also, note that 'La Valse" is not generally included
in recordings of the complete solo piano works.
Regards,
--
Bill Karzas wjk...@pacificnet.net
Matthew B. Tepper
Actually, I'd especially rather listen to Grainger than Gould in the
music of Grieg -- even though Gould was related to Grieg.
Carl Tait
In article <31f64ca4...@news.mindlink.net>,
Mike Quigley <Mr_Gi...@mindlink.net> wrote:
>
>[Gould's performance of his own arrangement of Ravel's "La Valse"]
>was never released commercially by itself until it
>appeared in the GG Video Edition.
By any chance, was the sheet music to Gould's version ever made available?
Of all the Ravel pieces that exist in both piano and orchestral forms,
"La Valse" is the only one that started as an orchestral work. The
composer's piano transcription is decidedly lacking: most pianists make
substantial changes, and it would be interesting to see what Gould did.
--
Carl Tait IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
ta...@watson.ibm.com Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
Carl Tait
In article <wjkarz-2507...@news.pacificnet.net>,
William J. Karzas <wjk...@pacificnet.net> wrote:
>
>Ravel also made a 2-piano transcription of Bolero [after the orchestral
>work.] And Ravel's transcription of 'La Valse' was also for 2 pianos. As
>near as I can tell any solo piano performances are in someone else's
>arrangement. I do not believe there is a "composer's [solo] piano
>transcription," which might explain why "most pianists make substantial
>changes."
It's true that Ravel made a two-piano arrangement of "La Valse," but
the sheet music for the solo piano version clearly states that the
transcription is by the composer. (With Bolero, the two-piano version
is by Ravel, but the solo arrangement published by Durand is not.)
As for why most pianists make all those changes: the transcription
includes a number of passages where Ravel seemed to think there were
too many voices for two hands. So above the two staves of music, there
is often an additional line showing what another instrument in the
orchestra would be doing at that moment. Gould would naturally have
relished the challenge of making as polyphonic an arrangement as possible.
>I am not a Ravel specialist, so I may be in error, but that's what my
>references tell me. Also, note that 'La Valse" is not generally included
>in recordings of the complete solo piano works.
Whose set(s) do you have? Both Abbey Simon and Louis Lortie include it.
James Scott u
AMRourk (amr...@aol.com) wrote:
: Mr_Gi...@mindlink.net (Mike Quigley) wrote:
:
: >Its appearance on the Silver Jubilee Album consists of excerpts heard in
: >the background as part of one of Gould's "radio dramas" rather than as a
: >appeared in the GG Video Edition.
: Yes... as I said in the previous post, it was used as part of the spoof GG
: did on Horowitz ("Hysteric Return") which was more of a comedy than a
: drama. It was not a stand-alone track on the album. However, it was used
No, it wasn't.
James
Dan Koren
In article <31F7A2...@psrinc.com> du...@deltanet.com writes:
>Dan Koren wrote:
>>
>> While I certainly share your dislike of Gould, I'm certainly not
>> decadent enough to want to listen to Grainger.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> dk
>>
>> PS. I'd be delighted to borrow de Pachmann's socks... :-)
>
>Actually, I'd especially rather listen to Grainger than Gould in the
>music of Grieg -- even though Gould was related to Grieg.
Sorry, but I cannot possibly understand how and why Grieg liked
Grainger. Percy was a simpleton and a barbarian. I'll stick to
Gilels, Lipatti and Michelangeli.
dk
Steven Correll
In article <dkDuyn...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>Gould's discography is large by the number of pieces recorded,
>>but not by the variety of their styles or composers.
In article <4t993u$o...@decaxp.harvard.edu>,
Richard Wang <rw...@scunix4.HARVARD.EDU> wrote:
>?? This is patently untrue, unless you think that Bach, Mozart, and
>Beethoven were all more or less the same.
...or unless you think Orlando Gibbons, Paul Hindemith, and Richard Strauss
are more or less the same. We're still laboring under the tyranny of the
self-proclaimed romantic geniuses: a pianist who never plays anything but 19th
century warhorses is not viewed as narrow, but a pianist who never plays any
19th century warhorses is.
--
Steven Correll == PO Box 66625, Scotts Valley, CA 95067 == s...@netcom.com
Richard Wang
>Gould's discography is large by the number of pieces recorded,
>but not by the variety of their styles or composers.
?? This is patently untrue, unless you think that Bach, Mozart, and
Beethoven were all more or less the same.
>And what makes it worse is the fact that a lot of it, even the *best*
>of it, is junk.
[snip]
>Look, I don't care that GG made one recording of a Chopin piece
>which he clearly did not understand even to the level of a 16
>year old. Isolated glitches are excusable. The worst part of
>it is that Gould methodically butchered Bach's, Mozart's, and
>Beethoven's music. It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
>illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
>seriously taken as musical performance.
Is it already time for another round of the perennial Gould shindig? I
suppose now you're going say that anyone with a scrap of musical sense
must despise Gould, and quickly follow that up with some vague platitudes
about the way music "should" be played.
Matthew B. Tepper
Dan Koren wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I cannot possibly understand how and why Grieg liked
> Grainger. Percy was a simpleton and a barbarian.
Well, that's the reason right there!
--
"Robert A. Heinlein -- An incontestably great science fiction writer,
whose social philosophies were as nearly as ludicrous as his politics
were loathsome." -- from _The Tepper's Dictionary_, work in progress
Matthew B. Tepper http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm Quack!
Deryk Barker
Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
: In article <31F7A2...@psrinc.com> du...@deltanet.com writes:
: >Dan Koren wrote:
: >>
: >> While I certainly share your dislike of Gould, I'm certainly not
: >> decadent enough to want to listen to Grainger.
: >>
: >> :-)
: >>
: >> dk
: >>
: >> PS. I'd be delighted to borrow de Pachmann's socks... :-)
: >
: >Actually, I'd especially rather listen to Grainger than Gould in the
: >music of Grieg -- even though Gould was related to Grieg.
: Sorry, but I cannot possibly understand how and why Grieg liked
: Grainger. Percy was a simpleton and a barbarian.
Strangely enough, Dan, Percy always speaks very highly of you.....
Has it occurred to you that perhaps Grieg was simply more perceptive
than you are?
--
Deryk.
===========================================================================
|Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept. | Across the pale parabola of Joy |
|Camosun College, Victoria, BC, Canada | |
|email: dba...@camosun.bc.ca | Ralston McTodd |
|phone: +1 604 370 4452 | (Songs of Squalor). |
===========================================================================
Mike Quigley
wjk...@pacificnet.net (William J. Karzas) wrote:
>Ravel also made a 2-piano transcription of Bolero [after the orchestral
>work.] And Ravel's transcription of 'La Valse' was also for 2 pianos. As
>near as I can tell any solo piano performances are in someone else's
>arrangement. I do not believe there is a "composer's [solo] piano
>transcription," which might explain why "most pianists make substantial
>changes."
>
>I am not a Ravel specialist, so I may be in error, but that's what my
>references tell me. Also, note that 'La Valse" is not generally included
>in recordings of the complete solo piano works.
I own a copy of La Valse for piano (the number is Durand D. & F. 9871). It
says right on page one "Transcription pour Piano a 2 mains par l'Auteur). I
bought this about 30 years ago, it cost me all of $2.50!
Dan Koren
In article <4tbpo7$g...@daria.cdnow.com> dba...@turing.cs.camosun.bc.ca (Deryk Barker) writes:
>Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
>: In article <31F7A2...@psrinc.com> du...@deltanet.com writes:
>: >Dan Koren wrote:
>: >>
>: >> While I certainly share your dislike of Gould, I'm certainly not
>: >> decadent enough to want to listen to Grainger.
>: >>
>: >> :-)
>: >>
>: >> dk
>: >>
>: >> PS. I'd be delighted to borrow de Pachmann's socks... :-)
>: >
>: >Actually, I'd especially rather listen to Grainger than Gould in the
>: >music of Grieg -- even though Gould was related to Grieg.
>
>: Sorry, but I cannot possibly understand how and why Grieg liked
>: Grainger. Percy was a simpleton and a barbarian.
>
>Strangely enough, Dan, Percy always speaks very highly of you.....
>
>Has it occurred to you that perhaps Grieg was simply more perceptive
>than you are?
No, and he certainly wasn't. Grieg was never exposed to pianists
with Gilels' or Michelangeli's tonal palette or technical control.
These artists' performances of Grieg's music are completely beyond
anything that Grieg could have imagined.
I'd like to also point out that you have switched subjects and turned
to ad hominem attacks instead of debating the original topic. It is sad
to see you gradually become one of the hooligans of this newsgroup - or
are you trying to fill in for Nathan Eberhardt?
Just to refocus the discussion, let me restate what I said about
Grainger. All the recorded evidence I have heard of Grainger shows
a pianist with unsteady technique, little subtlety of touch or color,
heavy touch and no ability to play true pianissimo, and very crude
musical conception. None of his recorded performances can be taken
seriously in comparison with the top modern recordings of the same
pieces. I really don't care what Grieg thought about him. Grainger's
Brahms and Schumann recordings are just plain ugly.
And if you know of a single Grainger recording which can disprove my
statement, please point it out to the rest of us.
:-)
dk
Deryk Barker
Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
: In article <4tbpo7$g...@daria.cdnow.com> dba...@turing.cs.camosun.bc.ca (Deryk Barker) writes:
: >Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
: >: In article <31F7A2...@psrinc.com> du...@deltanet.com writes:
: >: >Dan Koren wrote:
: >: >>
: >: >> While I certainly share your dislike of Gould, I'm certainly not
: >: >> decadent enough to want to listen to Grainger.
: >: >>
: >: >> :-)
: >: >>
: >: >> dk
: >: >>
: >: >> PS. I'd be delighted to borrow de Pachmann's socks... :-)
: >: >
: >: >Actually, I'd especially rather listen to Grainger than Gould in the
: >: >music of Grieg -- even though Gould was related to Grieg.
: >
: >: Sorry, but I cannot possibly understand how and why Grieg liked
: >: Grainger. Percy was a simpleton and a barbarian.
: >
: >Strangely enough, Dan, Percy always speaks very highly of you.....
: >
: >Has it occurred to you that perhaps Grieg was simply more perceptive
: >than you are?
: I'd like to also point out that you have switched subjects and turned
: to see you gradually become one of the hooligans of this newsgroup - or
: are you trying to fill in for Nathan Eberhardt?
Dan, if you think that a mild jest and a polite enquiry are 'ad
hominem attacks' then you are not speaking the same language as I
am. It was merely a polite suggestion that just perhaps the composer
of the music might have more insight into how he wanted his own music
played than you do.
Of course, I should have known better.
Dan Koren
In article <4tgfso$d...@daria.cdnow.com> dba...@turing.cs.camosun.bc.ca (Deryk Barker) writes:
>Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
>: In article <4tbpo7$g...@daria.cdnow.com> dba...@turing.cs.camosun.bc.ca (Deryk Barker) writes:
>: >Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
>: >: In article <31F7A2...@psrinc.com> du...@deltanet.com writes:
>: >: >Dan Koren wrote:
>: >: >>
>: >: >> While I certainly share your dislike of Gould, I'm certainly not
>: >: >> decadent enough to want to listen to Grainger.
>: >: >>
>: >: >> :-)
>: >: >>
>: >: >> dk
>: >: >>
>: >: >> PS. I'd be delighted to borrow de Pachmann's socks... :-)
>: >: >
>: >: >Actually, I'd especially rather listen to Grainger than Gould in the
>: >: >music of Grieg -- even though Gould was related to Grieg.
>: >
>: >: Sorry, but I cannot possibly understand how and why Grieg liked
>: >: Grainger. Percy was a simpleton and a barbarian.
>: >
>: >Strangely enough, Dan, Percy always speaks very highly of you.....
>: >
>: >Has it occurred to you that perhaps Grieg was simply more perceptive
>: >than you are?
>
>: with Gilels' or Michelangeli's tonal palette or technical control.
>: These artists' performances of Grieg's music are completely beyond
>: anything that Grieg could have imagined.
>
>Grieg's piano concerto directly from the score in Grieg's presence. You
>are suggesting that Gilels and Michelangeli had 'tonal palette and
>technical control' beyond Liszt's.
Yes, of course, and anyone remotely familiar with the instrument we
call a piano knows that. Tonal palettes like Michelangeli's, Gilels'
Richter's or Horowitz' were simply not possible on the instruments
available in Liszt's time. And notice how you switched topics again
and how you are trying to substitute opinions for verifiable facts.
We have no evidence other then hearsay of Liszt's playing, but let
me remind you that there was no argument, even while he was still
alive, that other pianists had equal, if not better, control of the
instrument. Liszt himself said that about Tausig. Albeniz, Busoni,
Friedman, Godowsky and Rosenthal could probably outgun Liszt if we
are to judge from the testimony of their contemporaries and from
the recordings they left, not to mention Lhevinne and Rachmaninov
who could probably eat him alive. And there is the story of Egon
Petri hearing Sofronitsky and saying that he had never heard anyone
play like that.
Deryk, with all due respect you do not know much about piano playing
and piano history.
>: I'd like to also point out that you have switched subjects and turned
>: to ad hominem attacks instead of debating the original topic. It is sad
>: to see you gradually become one of the hooligans of this newsgroup - or
>: are you trying to fill in for Nathan Eberhardt?
>
>No Dan, simply trying to compensate for your absolutism.
What a deft maneuvre - to accuse me of absolutism! This at the
same time that you are trying to establish Grainger's standing
as a pianist using the
>: Just to refocus the discussion, let me restate what I said about
>: Grainger. All the recorded evidence I have heard of Grainger shows
>: a pianist with unsteady technique, little subtlety of touch or color,
>: heavy touch and no ability to play true pianissimo, and very crude
>: musical conception. None of his recorded performances can be taken
>: seriously in comparison with the top modern recordings of the same
>: pieces. I really don't care what Grieg thought about him. Grainger's
>: Brahms and Schumann recordings are just plain ugly.
>
>: And if you know of a single Grainger recording which can disprove my
>: statement, please point it out to the rest of us.
>
>Evidently we get different things from recordings - and indeed music -
>so pointing out that I find Grainger's Schumann splendid is merely
>going to result in an insulting retort about my ears (is it no ad
>hominem when you do that BTW?)
No, but unless you care to explain to us dumbwits *why* you think
Grainger's Schumann is splendid, it's just another unsupported
opinion. Would you care to explain what it is that you find worth
admiring in Grainger's Schumann, compared with performances of the
same pieces by, say, Richter, Michelangeli, Argerich or Horowitz?
Let me tell you something: if someone performed Schumann like
Grainger he would be laughed out of the admission exam to any
modern conservatory. And if you don't trust my judgment, ask
some of the other netters who are serious about piano music -
- Farhan, Kojisato, Peter Lemken, or even Nathan Eberhardt.
:-)
dk
Dan Koren
In article <dkDvAJ...@netcom.com> d...@netcom.com (Dan Koren) writes:
>
>>: I'd like to also point out that you have switched subjects and turned
>>: to ad hominem attacks instead of debating the original topic. It is sad
>>: to see you gradually become one of the hooligans of this newsgroup - or
>>: are you trying to fill in for Nathan Eberhardt?
>>
>>No Dan, simply trying to compensate for your absolutism.
>
>What a deft maneuvre - to accuse me of absolutism! This at the
>same time that you are trying to establish Grainger's standing
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oh I dropeed a few lines here!
Sorry.
dk
kojisato
I must agree with Dan here. Grainger's playing would not pass a jury in
a modern conservatory of any reputation. His playing is clumsy, slow, and
uninteresting both in his ideas and sound.
K. Attwood
Deryk Barker
Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
: In article <4tgm8s$i...@daria.cdnow.com> dba...@turing.cs.camosun.bc.ca (Deryk Barker) writes:
[...]
: >It was merely a polite suggestion that just perhaps the composer
: >of the music might have more insight into how he wanted his own
: >music played than you do.
: This is one of those commonly held misconceptions that undermine
: and limit our understanding of the performing arts and which must
: be relentlessly attacked and refuted.
: The composer *never* knows how one experiences *performing* his or
: her works as much as the even the least accomplished performer.
Oh really? Even when the composer is a virtuoso on the particular
instrument?
: Ask
: any actor, dancer, singer, conductor or instrumental player if you
: don't believe me. Celibidache has explained this in very compelling
: words - "when I perform a piece I *own* it more deeply than the
: composer ever did".
Compelling, maybe, convincing? I think not.
: Shakespeare did not understand Hamlet any better than Peter O'Toole
: or Inokenti Smoktunovsky. And Beethoven did not understand the
: Emperor any better than Michelangeli. If you believe otherwise
: you really have no clue as to the meaning of *performance*.
I think it's you who needs the dictionary Dan.
Dan Koren
In article <4tgm8s$i...@daria.cdnow.com> dba...@turing.cs.camosun.bc.ca (Deryk Barker) writes:
>Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
>: >Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
>: >: In article <31F7A2...@psrinc.com> du...@deltanet.com writes:
>: >: >Dan Koren wrote:
>: >: >>
>: >: >> While I certainly share your dislike of Gould, I'm certainly not
>: >: >> decadent enough to want to listen to Grainger.
>: >: >>
>: >: >> :-)
>: >: >>
>: >: >> dk
>: >: >>
>: >: >> PS. I'd be delighted to borrow de Pachmann's socks... :-)
>: >: >
>: >: >Actually, I'd especially rather listen to Grainger than Gould in the
>: >: >music of Grieg -- even though Gould was related to Grieg.
>: >
>: >: Sorry, but I cannot possibly understand how and why Grieg liked
>: >: Grainger. Percy was a simpleton and a barbarian.
>: >
>: >Strangely enough, Dan, Percy always speaks very highly of you.....
>: >
>: >Has it occurred to you that perhaps Grieg was simply more perceptive
>: >than you are?
>: I'd like to also point out that you have switched subjects and turned
>: to ad hominem attacks instead of debating the original topic. It is sad
>: to see you gradually become one of the hooligans of this newsgroup - or
>: are you trying to fill in for Nathan Eberhardt?
>
>hominem attacks' then you are not speaking the same language as I
>am.
Of course not, you speak Canadian! :-) The mild jest was well
understood, and was no excuse to switch subjects! :-)
>It was merely a polite suggestion that just perhaps the composer
>of the music might have more insight into how he wanted his own
>music played than you do.
This is one of those commonly held misconceptions that undermine
and limit our understanding of the performing arts and which must
be relentlessly attacked and refuted.
The composer *never* knows how one experiences *performing* his or
her works as much as the even the least accomplished performer. Ask
any actor, dancer, singer, conductor or instrumental player if you
don't believe me. Celibidache has explained this in very compelling
words - "when I perform a piece I *own* it more deeply than the
composer ever did".
Shakespeare did not understand Hamlet any better than Peter O'Toole
or Inokenti Smoktunovsky. And Beethoven did not understand the
Emperor any better than Michelangeli. If you believe otherwise
you really have no clue as to the meaning of *performance*.
>Of course, I should have known better.
Of course you should!
:-)
dk
kojisato
In article <4tj020$f...@daria.cdnow.com>, dba...@turing.cs.camosun.bc.ca
(Deryk Barker) wrote:
> kojisato (koji...@umich.edu) wrote:
>
> : I must agree with Dan here. Grainger's playing would not pass a jury in
> : a modern conservatory of any reputation. His playing is clumsy, slow, and
> : uninteresting both in his ideas and sound.
>
> Would Cortot or Schnabel pass the same jury?
>
>
Cortot had a vastly better technique and sound. Schnabel had vastly
better sound and ideas.
K. Attwood
Neil Tingley
In article <dkDvAJ...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> writes
>And there is the story of Egon
>Petri hearing Sofronitsky and saying that he had never heard anyone
>play like that.
The has been said of my playing, sober or not :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Tingley Furtwaengler FAQ from r.m.c.r contributers at:
ne...@music.demon.co.uk http://www.netlink.co.uk/users/music/ & links to
London, UK G.H Gould and others "more about me" menu.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deryk Barker
kojisato (koji...@umich.edu) wrote:
: I must agree with Dan here. Grainger's playing would not pass a jury in
: a modern conservatory of any reputation. His playing is clumsy, slow, and
: uninteresting both in his ideas and sound.
Would Cortot or Schnabel pass the same jury?
--
Deryk Barker
Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
: In article <4tgfso$d...@daria.cdnow.com> dba...@turing.cs.camosun.bc.ca (Deryk Barker) writes:
: >Dan Koren (d...@netcom.com) wrote:
: >: No, and he certainly wasn't. Grieg was never exposed to pianists
: >: with Gilels' or Michelangeli's tonal palette or technical control.
: >: These artists' performances of Grieg's music are completely beyond
: >: anything that Grieg could have imagined.
: >
: >You're sure about this Dan are you? I seem to recall that Liszt played
: >Grieg's piano concerto directly from the score in Grieg's presence. You
: >are suggesting that Gilels and Michelangeli had 'tonal palette and
: >technical control' beyond Liszt's.
: Yes, of course, and anyone remotely familiar with the instrument we
: call a piano knows that. Tonal palettes like Michelangeli's, Gilels'
: Richter's or Horowitz' were simply not possible on the instruments
: available in Liszt's time. And notice how you switched topics again
: and how you are trying to substitute opinions for verifiable facts.
I fail to see how I 'switched topics' here, as I was directly
responding to a point of yours. I also don't see how I am 'trying to
substitute opinions for verifiable facts' perhaps you would explain
which are the opinions and which the facts.
So, let me sum up: because Grieg had no conception of what one of your
particular heroes would sound like after he was dead, you can't
understand what he heard in Percy Grainger? Forgive me if I fail to
see the logic in this.
: We have no evidence other then hearsay of Liszt's playing, but let
: me remind you that there was no argument, even while he was still
: alive, that other pianists had equal, if not better, control of the
: instrument. Liszt himself said that about Tausig. Albeniz, Busoni,
: Friedman, Godowsky and Rosenthal could probably outgun Liszt if we
: are to judge from the testimony of their contemporaries and from
: the recordings they left, not to mention Lhevinne and Rachmaninov
: who could probably eat him alive. And there is the story of Egon
: Petri hearing Sofronitsky and saying that he had never heard anyone
: play like that.
And Liszt also described d'Albert as 'a second Tausig' and it was
d'Albert's 'swashbuckling' approach liberally spattered with wrong
notes that was the inspiraiton for Grainger's playing.
: Deryk, with all due respect you do not know much about piano playing
: and piano history.
Now who's reduced to ad hominem attacks?
: >: I'd like to also point out that you have switched subjects and turned
: >: to ad hominem attacks instead of debating the original topic. It is sad
: >: to see you gradually become one of the hooligans of this newsgroup - or
: >: are you trying to fill in for Nathan Eberhardt?
: >
: >No Dan, simply trying to compensate for your absolutism.
: What a deft maneuvre - to accuse me of absolutism! This at the
: same time that you are trying to establish Grainger's standing
: as a pianist using the
Yes absolutism. Your opinions are absolute fact everybody else's are
correct insofar as they agree with yours. Now, what would *you* call
that?
: >: Just to refocus the discussion, let me restate what I said about
: >: Grainger. All the recorded evidence I have heard of Grainger shows
: >: a pianist with unsteady technique, little subtlety of touch or color,
: >: heavy touch and no ability to play true pianissimo, and very crude
: >: musical conception. None of his recorded performances can be taken
: >: seriously in comparison with the top modern recordings of the same
: >: pieces. I really don't care what Grieg thought about him. Grainger's
: >: Brahms and Schumann recordings are just plain ugly.
: >
: >: And if you know of a single Grainger recording which can disprove my
: >: statement, please point it out to the rest of us.
: >
: >Evidently we get different things from recordings - and indeed music -
: >so pointing out that I find Grainger's Schumann splendid is merely
: >going to result in an insulting retort about my ears (is it no ad
: >hominem when you do that BTW?)
: No, but unless you care to explain to us dumbwits *why* you think
: Grainger's Schumann is splendid, it's just another unsupported
: opinion.
And yours aren't? Grainger's Schumann *speaks* to *me* and, for all
the convoluted argument and historicism with which you cloak your own
opinions, that it essentially what you are saying is good about a
particular performance you admire, that it speaks to you.
Dan Koren
In article <kojisato-290...@music1.ccs.itd.umich.edu> koji...@umich.edu (kojisato) writes:
>
> I must agree with Dan here. Grainger's playing would not pass a jury in
>a modern conservatory of any reputation. His playing is clumsy, slow, and
>uninteresting both in his ideas and sound.
>
Bingo! Thanks, Koji. In fairness however we should recognize that
Grainger could wield a mean whip when he wanted to! :-) Somehow
he did not manage to get the same passion into his music making.
Any news from the Kapell?
:-)
dk
Richard Wang
>The composer *never* knows how one experiences *performing* his or
>her works as much as the even the least accomplished performer.
Absolute nonsense. Many composers played or conducted their own music;
would you say that their performances were less informed than those of
"even the least accomplished performer"?
>don't believe me. Celibidache has explained this in very compelling
>words - "when I perform a piece I *own* it more deeply than the
>composer ever did".
Argument by repetition, I see. How very direct.
--
Richard Wang rw...@fas.harvard.edu
"It seems that the cat burglar has been caught by the very person who was
*trying* to catch him."--Homer Simpson
Peter Lemken
d...@netcom.com (Dan Koren) wrote:
>Yes, of course, and anyone remotely familiar with the instrument we
>call a piano knows that. Tonal palettes like Michelangeli's, Gilels'
Bzzzzzzt, Dan:
The Steinway concert grand of 1880 is more or less the same than the
one built 100 years later. I myself owned a Bechstein 7 foot grand
from 1874 and it sounded just like a modern Bechstein, even if was a
little more clumsy to play since it did not have an accelerated action
yet. Your argument in that context is wrong and does not count.
To confirm this, you can listen to a recording by EMI by Michel Dalberto,
who plays Wagner/Liszt transcription on Wagner's own Steinway D in the
Villa Wahnfried. The piano was a present from Steinway to Richard Wagner
some time in the 1870s and it sounds just like an instrument from
Hamburg of today's time.
>Let me tell you something: if someone performed Schumann like
>Grainger he would be laughed out of the admission exam to any
>modern conservatory. And if you don't trust my judgment, ask
>some of the other netters who are serious about piano music -
>- Farhan, Kojisato, Peter Lemken, or even Nathan Eberhardt.
Ooops, I am quite surprised to see my name in connexion with Sir Nathan.
Did I miss something or did Demus just release a new recording of the
moonlight sonata that puts all others into the dust? (I mean the first
movement only, of course...)
>
>:-)
>
>dk
Peter Lemken
Dan Koren
In article <vl$MVJARNT$xE...@music.demon.co.uk> Neil Tingley <ne...@music.demon.co.uk> writes:
>In article <dkDvAJ...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> writes
>>that he had never heard anyone play like that.
>
Perhaps, but probably not by anyone of Petri's stature.
Or perhaps not with the same intonation...
:-)
dk
Dan Koren
Cc: ple...@mail.hb.provi.de
In article <4tkv08$1a...@power5.rz.uni-hohenheim.de> Peter Lemken <ple...@mail.hb.provi.de> writes:
>d...@netcom.com (Dan Koren) wrote:
>
>>Yes, of course, and anyone remotely familiar with the instrument we
>>call a piano knows that. Tonal palettes like Michelangeli's, Gilels'
>
>
>The Steinway concert grand of 1880 is more or less the same than the
>one built 100 years later.
Not the action. Piano actions changed a lot in the 1910's, and tha
action makes a huge difference in what one can get out of a piano.
Otherwise you're right. :-)
> I myself owned a Bechstein 7 foot grand
>from 1874 and it sounded just like a modern Bechstein, even if was a
>little more clumsy to play since it did not have an accelerated action
>yet.
Aha!
>Your argument in that context is wrong and does not count.
You just confirmed that my argument was right.
>To confirm this, you can listen to a recording by EMI by Michel Dalberto,
>who plays Wagner/Liszt transcription on Wagner's own Steinway D in the
>Villa Wahnfried. The piano was a present from Steinway to Richard Wagner
>some time in the 1870s and it sounds just like an instrument from
>Hamburg of today's time.
And does Dalberto sound like Gilels or Michelangeli? :-)
>>Let me tell you something: if someone performed Schumann like
>>Grainger he would be laughed out of the admission exam to any
>>modern conservatory. And if you don't trust my judgment, ask
>>some of the other netters who are serious about piano music -
>>- Farhan, Kojisato, Peter Lemken, or even Nathan Eberhardt.
>
>Ooops, I am quite surprised to see my name in connexion with Sir Nathan.
>Did I miss something or did Demus just release a new recording of the
>moonlight sonata that puts all others into the dust? (I mean the first
>movement only, of course...)
No, I think Demus' next project is just the first page...
:-)
dk
Peter Lemken
d...@netcom.com (Dan Koren) wrote:
>Cc: ple...@mail.hb.provi.de
>In article <4tkv08$1a...@power5.rz.uni-hohenheim.de> Peter Lemken <ple...@mail.hb.provi.de> writes:
>>d...@netcom.com (Dan Koren) wrote:
>>
>>>call a piano knows that. Tonal palettes like Michelangeli's, Gilels'
>>
>>
>>The Steinway concert grand of 1880 is more or less the same than the
>>one built 100 years later.
>
>Not the action. Piano actions changed a lot in the 1910's, and tha
>action makes a huge difference in what one can get out of a piano.
No, it does not. The only difference it makes is in the comfort of
playing. The term accelerated action actually is misleading, since
the acceleration part does not refer to the speed of the hammer
striking the strings, but the speed of the keys being ready for
the next attack. And that does not make a difference in sound volume
or sound quality.
I would agree with you in so far that certain players were able to
create a different sound with an accelerated action, since they felt
more comfortable with it and _commanded_ the piano. But the accelerated
action does not change the sound of the piano as created by the strings
and the sound board.
We can now start a new thread: Does a piano sound like a piano or does
a pianist make it sound like a piano?
Besides, Dan, how many people do you think are able to _really_ hear
the sound qualities of a pianist and can tell one from the other by
their respective sounds? Not too many, I fear.
>Otherwise you're right. :-)
I know...
>
>> I myself owned a Bechstein 7 foot grand
>>from 1874 and it sounded just like a modern Bechstein, even if was a
>>little more clumsy to play since it did not have an accelerated action
>>yet.
>
>Aha!
>
>>Your argument in that context is wrong and does not count.
>
>You just confirmed that my argument was right.
Wrong. See above.
>
>>To confirm this, you can listen to a recording by EMI by Michel Dalberto,
>>who plays Wagner/Liszt transcription on Wagner's own Steinway D in the
>>Villa Wahnfried. The piano was a present from Steinway to Richard Wagner
>>some time in the 1870s and it sounds just like an instrument from
>>Hamburg of today's time.
>
>And does Dalberto sound like Gilels or Michelangeli? :-)
>
Of course he does not. But does Brendel's playing on a Steinway
_sound_ like a Steinway, or Richter playing his Yamaha _sound_ like
a Yamaha? Or does _any_ pianist sound like Michelangeli?
Let me point out another example. There is a short video scene from
Horowitz in Moscow where he visits the home of Alexander Scriabin.
Horowitz played an excerpt of the Etude Op. 8#12 and I'll be dammned
if those crashing bass sonorities typical of VH did not soud like his
Steinway ones. The piano is from 1910...
I just spoke with a pianist and asked him if - given the same piano -
the change from the Viennese action to the modern accelerated action
would make a difference in the sound _quality_ he would be able to
create. Guess what he said: I does not make a difference as soon as
he got accustomed to either action. You know the pianist I spoke with
and we both know that he knows more about piano playing than all of
us, don't you? :-))
>>Did I miss something or did Demus just release a new recording of the
>>moonlight sonata that puts all others into the dust? (I mean the first
>>movement only, of course...)
>
>No, I think Demus' next project is just the first page...
Methinks, he still tries to memorize the first bar. Four sharps is
quite something, you know....
Peter Lemken
frank forman
In article <dkDv8t...@netcom.com>, Dan Koren <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>: >Actually, I'd especially rather listen to Grainger than Gould in the
>>: >music of Grieg -- even though Gould was related to Grieg.
>>
>>: Sorry, but I cannot possibly understand how and why Grieg liked
>>: Grainger. Percy was a simpleton and a barbarian.
>>
>>Strangely enough, Dan, Percy always speaks very highly of you.....
>>
>>Has it occurred to you that perhaps Grieg was simply more perceptive
>>than you are?
>
>with Gilels' or Michelangeli's tonal palette or technical control.
>These artists' performances of Grieg's music are completely beyond
>anything that Grieg could have imagined.
>
>to ad hominem attacks instead of debating the original topic. It is sad
>to see you gradually become one of the hooligans of this newsgroup - or
>are you trying to fill in for Nathan Eberhardt?
>
>Grainger. All the recorded evidence I have heard of Grainger shows
>a pianist with unsteady technique, little subtlety of touch or color,
>heavy touch and no ability to play true pianissimo, and very crude
>musical conception. None of his recorded performances can be taken
>seriously in comparison with the top modern recordings of the same
>pieces. I really don't care what Grieg thought about him. Grainger's
>Brahms and Schumann recordings are just plain ugly.
>
>And if you know of a single Grainger recording which can disprove my
>statement, please point it out to the rest of us.
Your statements may very well be correct, but Grainger had what counts
for more than all the drawbacks, namely absolutely compelling
musicianship! For many years, Kempff's recording of the Brahms PS 3 had
been my favorite, but when I got a recording of the Grainger, Kempff went
out the window as *comparatively* dull. And his Columbia Bach album is
also riveting, no matter what Bach thought he wrote.
Music is a performing art, with the composer of equal stature to the
interpreter and NO higher. Most recordings have far too much composer,
and so it is to such willful personalities as:
Mengelberg, Scherchen, Coates, Mravinsky among the conductors
Gould, Kempff, Backhaus, Schnabel among the pianists
Szigeti, Busch, Thibaud, Spalding among the violinists
that I turn to most. AND Grainger. But he made only five albums, which
are all on two Biddulph CDs: Three Bach pieces more turbocharged than
Stokowski, Brahms 3, Chopin 2, Chopin 3, and Schumann 2 + SYm.Etudes.
Only very rarely is there *more* interpreter than composer, as is the
case with Gould's magnificent Mozart sonatas. But I like Gould better
than Mozart anyhow.
Frank
Tom
On Mon, 22 Jul 1996 19:58:40 GMT, d...@netcom.com (Dan Koren) wrote:
>In article <4sre3b$i...@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU> rw...@scunix4.HARVARD.EDU (Richard Wang) writes:
>>
>>>>size of Gould's discography and repertoire give the lie to your flippant
>>>>comment anyway.
>>>
>>>Discographies should be weighed by quality, not by size.
>>
>>Unquestionably; but this is hardly the point. Gould's discography is
>>sufficiently large to make rubbish of your claim that he had very little
>>to play. What you think of his playing isn't really an issue here.
>
>Gould's discography is large by the number of pieces recorded,
>but not by the variety of their styles or composers. And what
>makes it worse is the fact that a lot of it, even the *best*
>of it, is junk,
>
>Look, I don't care that GG made one recording of a Chopin piece
>which he clearly did not understand even to the level of a 16
>year old. Isolated glitches are excusable. The worst part of
>it is that Gould methodically butchered Bach's, Mozart's, and
>Beethoven's music. It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
>illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
>seriously taken as musical performance. Hey, I'd take Liberace
>or Victor Borge any day over him -- at least they had a sense
>of humor and the integrity to admit what they were doing.
>
>
>dk
Gould certainly can get the juices flowing. But I cannot
understand the hostilities he could bring out in people
that say they enjoy Bach and Beethoven.
I rather agree with Ashkenazy, Bernstein and Stravinsky,
to name a few that also appreciated his music making.
You stick with Liberace. Maybe you should try Merv Griffin.
Tom
Alfredo Enrique Rivas
Obviamente el Baron ha senalado importantes argumentos sobre lo
anteriormente escrito por Dan Koren. El Baron prefiere escribir en su
idioma y yo he de continuar su strategia, por que su lenguage utiliza
detalles y riqueza de expresion que serian dificiles de igualar en ingles:
: Asanurebi io mshvidova cedu, te Anglistunem nakh e shanessolni mkari.
: Cindakhali indauris satsivi, io ghorme sabzi Angliste.
:
: > >Gould's discography is large by the number of pieces recorded,
: > >but not by the variety of their styles or composers. And what
: > >makes it worse is the fact that a lot of it, even the *best*
: > >of it, is junk,
:
: Ara, ajapsandali iqo shashvi mgalobeli Glennunem Gouldunem e pianiakh
: "junk"??? Danem Korenem shnor hagalutiun io yereq Danu Korenu pianiakhli???
Claramente el Baron prefiere un razonamiento deductivo que implica la
que simpleza de la prosa de Dan Koren es insuficiente :
: > >Look, I don't care that GG made one recording of a Chopin piece
: > >which he clearly did not understand even to the level of a 16
: > >year old. Isolated glitches are excusable. The worst part of
: > >it is that Gould methodically butchered Bach's, Mozart's, and
: > >Beethoven's music.
:
: Te ekkasuidze iqo Hammerklavierunem Sonatunem, e puri mshvidoba Glennu
: Gouldu "Adagio"--ara intelligentulebi shashvi io GAREDUKHALNI!!!
: Mshvidoba "16 gody" intelligentulebi saqamo te. Chopine tskha meh ekkasuize.
: Dane Korene "16 gody" intelligentulis maqudo, io nakh shanessolni.
:
Yo obviamente no utilizaria el termino "GAREDUKHALNI" para referirme a un
pianista como Glenn Gould. Como podemos inferir a traves del
razonamiento del Baron el ecucha la "intelligentulebi" de la
interpretacion de Glenn Gould. Pero el ejercicio de forma en
parametros trascendentales que expresa mediante la palabra
"Garedukhalni" no existe en la discografia de Gould, pero si en la de
Carlos Quintero. Su version del Hammerklavier grabada el 15 de abril
de 1936 claramente demuestra no solo su "intelligentulebi" pero su
"garedukhalni" tambien.
> It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
: > >illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
: > >seriously taken as musical performance. Hey, I'd take Liberace
: > >or Victor Borge any day over him -- at least they had a sense
: > >of humor and the integrity to admit what they were doing.
:
: Puri Liberaceunem io Victorunem Borgheunem dishvi asamaqudo, te Glennu
: Gouldu mgalobeli maqudo, te yereq asamaqudo pianiakhli. Tskha puri Danunem
: Korenunem tan indauris satsivi, allaverdoba iqo "integrity" en ekkasuidze.
:
: Baron de Charlus
Es una pena que el Baron no haga referencia a Carlos Quintero, cuyo
Chopin y Beethoven sobrepasan las barreras tecnicas y representan el
verdadero "asamaqudo pianiakhli". Dan Koren , quien de hecho nunca
contesto un mensaje que yo le envie, aparentemente no se ha familarizado
con este inigualable artista Paraguayo.
Baron de Charlus
Gamarjoba tkeulni niqo!
Asanurebi io mshvidova cedu, te Anglistunem nakh e shanessolni mkari.
Cindakhali indauris satsivi, io ghorme sabzi Angliste.
> >Gould's discography is large by the number of pieces recorded,
> >but not by the variety of their styles or composers. And what
> >makes it worse is the fact that a lot of it, even the *best*
> >of it, is junk,
Ara, ajapsandali iqo shashvi mgalobeli Glennunem Gouldunem e pianiakh
"junk"??? Danem Korenem shnor hagalutiun io yereq Danu Korenu pianiakhli???
> >Look, I don't care that GG made one recording of a Chopin piece
> >which he clearly did not understand even to the level of a 16
> >year old. Isolated glitches are excusable. The worst part of
> >it is that Gould methodically butchered Bach's, Mozart's, and
> >Beethoven's music.
Te ekkasuidze iqo Hammerklavierunem Sonatunem, e puri mshvidoba Glennu
Gouldu "Adagio"--ara intelligentulebi shashvi io GAREDUKHALNI!!!
Mshvidoba "16 gody" intelligentulebi saqamo te. Chopine tskha meh ekkasuize.
Dane Korene "16 gody" intelligentulis maqudo, io nakh shanessolni.
Matthew B. Tepper
Alfredo Enrique Rivas wrote:
>
> Obviamente el Baron ha senalado importantes argumentos sobre lo
> anteriormente escrito por Dan Koren. El Baron prefiere escribir en su
> idioma y yo he de continuar su strategia, por que su lenguage utiliza
> detalles y riqueza de expresion que serian dificiles de igualar en ingles:
>
Chopin Sonata #3 + Glenn Gould = el crapola!
--
Matthew B. Tepper * Management and IS Consultant
Positive Support Review Inc. * tep...@psrinc.com
World Wide Web site: http://www.psrinc.com/psr.htm
PSR's 1996 IS Compensation Study is now available!
James Michael Steffen
Tkeulni niqo Mattheve:
Didi asanurebi io mshvidoba, te Anglistunem shanessolni mkari.
Matthew B. Tepper (tep...@psrinc.com) wrote:
: Chopin Sonata #3 + Glenn Gould = el crapola!
Iqo mgalobeli mtskheta, Glennunem Gouldunem an igratie cedu Chopinu
Sonatu #3 nakh "asamaqudo pianiakhli." Iqo savadurelo Mauriziu Polliniu
(puri saqamo tan indauris absolutulebi garedukhalni!). Io mashashvi
Hammerklavierunem Sonatunem meh ekkasuidze Glennu Gouldu. Didi te
Danem Korenem mamaqudo, ara "16 gody" intelligentulis indaurioni.
Puri tsindakhali Alfredonem Rivasem mamaqudo--io pianiakhtsa Paraguaytsa
Carlosunem Quinterounem? Nakh cedu meh Hammerklavieru Sonatu
shashvinurebi (15 Avreli 1936)? Iqo nakh nemacedu shanessolni.
niqo qaosani,
Baron de Charlus
Alfredo Enrique Rivas
320766...@psrinc.com> <4u83cu$l...@curly.cc.emory.edu>
Organization: Emory University
Distribution:
James Michael Steffen (jst...@curly.cc.emory.edu) wrote:
: Tkeulni niqo Mattheve:
:
: Didi asanurebi io mshvidoba, te Anglistunem shanessolni mkari.
:
: Matthew B. Tepper (tep...@psrinc.com) wrote:
:
: : Chopin Sonata #3 + Glenn Gould = el crapola!
:
SI!!!
: Iqo mgalobeli mtskheta, Glennunem Gouldunem an igratie cedu Chopinu
: Sonatu #3 nakh "asamaqudo pianiakhli." Iqo savadurelo Mauriziu Polliniu
: (puri saqamo tan indauris absolutulebi garedukhalni!). Io mashashvi
: Hammerklavierunem Sonatunem meh ekkasuidze Glennu Gouldu. Didi te
: Danem Korenem mamaqudo, ara "16 gody" intelligentulis indaurioni.
:
: Puri tsindakhali Alfredonem Rivasem mamaqudo--io pianiakhtsa Paraguaytsa
: Carlosunem Quinterounem? Nakh cedu meh Hammerklavieru Sonatu
: shashvinurebi (15 Avreli 1936)? Iqo nakh nemacedu shanessolni.
:
: niqo qaosani,
: Baron de Charlus
Carlos Quintero es alfa y omega de la sonata Hammerklavier, verdadero
garedukhalni.
John E. Harrington
dk writes:
> It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
>illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
>seriously taken as musical performance.
>
>
A partial list of the "musical illiterates" who specifically used the
word genius in describing Glenn Gould:
Igor Stravinsky
Aaron Copland
Vladimir Ashkenazy
Leonard Bernstein
Ned Rorem
Yehudi Menuin
I wonder if other long time readers/posters in this group such as Henry
Fogel or Jim Liu would agree with Dan or whether they too are "musical
illiterates".
--
---
John Harrington (po...@hotmail.com)
-- visit my Stravinsky page at --
http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/1807/strav.html
"The worst of all deceptions is self-deception." -Plato
Matthew B. Tepper
John E. Harrington wrote:
>
> dk writes:
> > It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
> >illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
> >seriously taken as musical performance.
> >
> >
> >dk
>
> A partial list of the "musical illiterates" who specifically used the
> word genius in describing Glenn Gould:
>
> Igor Stravinsky
> Aaron Copland
> Vladimir Ashkenazy
> Leonard Bernstein
> Ned Rorem
> Yehudi Menuin
>
> I wonder if other long time readers/posters in this group such as Henry
> Fogel or Jim Liu would agree with Dan or whether they too are "musical
> illiterates".
Bosh and bother. He was a robot, playing the music with all the spirit
and feeling of a paper-folding machine. True, he did get a marvellous
separation of line in the contrapuntal works of Bach, especially. But
then so could Wendy Carlos, doing multitracking on a synthesizer.
Perhaps Gould was a "genius." May I remind you that there is in this
world, alas, such a thing as an "evil genius." Gould's perverted
recordings of the Mozart Sonatas and the Chopin Sonata #3 show him to
have been of that ilk.
Len Fehskens
On 6 Aug 1996 14:37:18 -0400, James Michael Steffen at
jst...@curly.cc.emory.edu wrote
>Tkeulni niqo Mattheve:
>Didi asanurebi io mshvidoba, te Anglistunem shanessolni mkari.
Please forgive the irrelevance of this query, but just what language is this?
len.
James C.S. Liu
>dk writes:
>> It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
>>illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
>>seriously taken as musical performance.
<po...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>A partial list of the "musical illiterates" who specifically used the
>word genius in describing Glenn Gould:
>
>Igor Stravinsky
>Aaron Copland
>Vladimir Ashkenazy
>Leonard Bernstein
>Ned Rorem
>Yehudi Menuin
>
>I wonder if other long time readers/posters in this group such as Henry
>Fogel or Jim Liu would agree with Dan or whether they too are "musical
>illiterates".
Well, as I freely acknowledge, I can't really sight-read, so I guess
I would count as musically illiterate ...
;-)
/James C.S. Liu "I have a really old word processor.
Jame...@Yale.edu It prints in pencil."
New Haven, CT -- paraphrased from Steve Wright
The contents above have nothing to do with my employer!
Christopher Norman
: >
: > > It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
: > >illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
: > >seriously taken as musical performance.
: > >
: > >dk
: >
: > A partial list of the "musical illiterates" who specifically used the
: > word genius in describing Glenn Gould:
: >
: > Igor Stravinsky
: > Aaron Copland
: > Vladimir Ashkenazy
: > Leonard Bernstein
: > Ned Rorem
: > Yehudi Menuin
: >
: > I wonder if other long time readers/posters in this group such as Henry
: > Fogel or Jim Liu would agree with Dan or whether they too are "musical
: > illiterates".
: Bosh and bother. He was a robot, playing the music with all the spirit
: and feeling of a paper-folding machine. True, he did get a marvellous
: separation of line in the contrapuntal works of Bach, especially. But
: then so could Wendy Carlos, doing multitracking on a synthesizer.
Bosh and bother. This is a stupid generalization. He has plenty of
moments of "expressive" playing (I guess you haven't heard his Schoenberg
recordings, or his "La Valse", to name a few of these moments), and no
fair survey of his work would deny it. Maybe you don't like his Mozart.
Maybe you don't like his Chopin. So what? A finer exponent of Bach and
Schoenberg there has never been existed, and that's what I prefer to
remember him for.
Christopher Norman
Matthew B. Tepper
Very well, then riddle me this: Why is it that Isacc Asimov, the
world's ultimate authority on the subject of robots (i.e., mechanical
men), who had a tremendous fear and loathing of travel, was nevertheless
persuaded to make several trips in the early 1950s from his home in New
York to, of all places, Toronto? Could Glenn Gould have been a robot?
I say yes!
--
"Robert A. Heinlein -- An incontestably great science fiction writer,
whose social philosophies were as nearly as ludicrous as his politics
were loathsome." -- from _The Tepper's Dictionary_, work in progress
Matthew B. Tepper http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm Quack!
Matthew B. Tepper
Volapük.
Baron de Charlus
On 7 Aug 1996, Len Fehskens wrote:
> >Tkeulni niqo Mattheve:
>
> >Didi asanurebi io mshvidoba, te Anglistunem shanessolni mkari.
>
> Please forgive the irrelevance of this query, but just what language is this?
My dear Sir:
At the risk of introducing an irrelevance into this newsgroup, I would be
happy to answer your question. The language in which I was writing is
Veretian, a dialect of the Kartvelian family. The few Veretians who
remain live in the Caucausus, north of the Georgian border. My mother Irina,
bless her soul, was from Veretia, but my father is American. I wrote my
response in Veretian on the remote chance that a fellow Veretian might be
subscribed to the newsgroup. Alas, it appears not to be the case. My
distinguished colleague Alfredo Rivas, who picked up a few phrases of
Veretian under my tutelage, is perhaps the only other individual in the
United States who understands a single word of that exquisite, but
rapidly dying (alas!) tongue.
To return to the topic of the newsgroup, if you care for a summary of my
posting, I was merely writing that while I greatly prefer Maurizio
Pollini's recording of the Chopin Sonata #3, it seems a little rash to
dismiss Gould's recording as not being worthy of a 16-year old. Gould was
an iconoclast, a provocateur by nature--his work is bound to stir up
controversy--but he is neither lacking in intelligence nor in pianistic
skill. Thank you for your indulgence.
With kindest regards,
Baron de Charlus
Baron de Charlus
On Thu, 8 Aug 1996, Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
> Cher Baron (a form of address I have hitherto used only towards the
> Mahler biographer Henry-Louis de La Grange),
>
> Aha! I had wondered (partly due to the changing case endings on proper
> names) if it might have been Georgian, so I suppose I was close, if only
> geographically.
My dear Matthew:
Once again, I must offer my apologies for temporarily diverting the flow
of discussion away from the topic of classical recordings. An excellent
bit of linguistic detective-work, if I do say so! Of course, Georgian is
the best-known language of the Kartvelian family. Veretian and Georgian
are not mutually intelligible, although they do share some grammatical
features and a substantial number of cognates. As you no doubt know, the
Georgian alphabet (which Veretian also employs) lacks the distinction
between upper and lower cases. When transcribing Veretian into the Latin
alphabet, I prefer to add upper-case letters at the beginnings of
sentences and to proper names, for no other reason than appearance's
sake.
During a trip to Georgia and Veretia this summer, I was quite distressed
to find that many Veretian youth speak Georgian and Russian far better than
their mother tongue. When I attempted to strike up a conversation with one
young man who seemed especially sensitive and cultivated (he was a
student of the piano at the Tbilisi Conservatory who had returned to
village of Geluria to visit his parents during the summer), he responded
scornfully that "educated" people do not speak in Veretian. I was sadly
reduced to satisfying my desire for conversation with an illiterate young
shepherd instead.
To return to the topic of classical music, which is undoubtedly of far
greater interest to our fellow readers, did you know that no less of a
composer than Stravinsky was greatly taken with Georgian polyphonic choral
music? If you haven't heard this remarkable and ancient musical tradition,
I strongly recommend any recordings by the Rustavi choir, who perform songs
from various regions in the Republic of Georgia. Unfortunately, their U.S.
releases do not include what is perhaps my favorite piece, the hymn
"shen khar venakhi" ("You are the vineyard") from Kakhetia. It is,
however, available in their older Melodiya LP box set.
Matthew B. Tepper
Actually I was referring not to the orthographic cases (upper- and
lower-case) but to the case-*endings* of nouns; Latvian names seem
always to end in "s" because the case is dative; Russian names get
changed according to the grammar of the sentence; and so on.
The music of the Republic of Georgia (I say that to distinguish it from
the state in the United States wherein lies, e.g., the city of Atlanta
which has been much in the news of late) is becoming better known here
in the "west." Several recordings of the polyphonic choral music have
been issued stateside, and the music of Giya Kancheli is attaining a
certain currency not unlike that of his Baltic neighbor Arvo Pärt.
I have to admit, though, that my Georgian composer of choice is the late
Otar Taktakishvili, who composed symphonies, concertos, operas,
oratorios, songs and chamber works, many of which were recorded by the
old Soviet label Melodiya. Taktakishvili's compositional style was
highly melodic and almost deceptively conservative, though his rich and
oriental-tinged harmonies are reminiscent of his much better-known
Armenian contemporary, Aram Khachaturian
-- not to denigrate either man, of course.
Unfortunately Taktakishvili's music has suffered from invisibility in
the CD era. The old Melodiya LPs are difficult to find, and only two of
his works are available on CD: a late and uncharacteristic violin
concerto on Orfeo, and no fewer than *four* recordings of a
French-influenced flute sonata! I'm hopeful that some recording
companies can be persuaded to offer a more balanced view of his work,
and would particularly recommend the Piano Concerto #1 (of three), and
the Violin Concertino (which exists in a fine recording by no less than
David Oistrakh).
The late Howard Taubman, in his autobiography published last year, drew
a picture of Taktakishvili as a master host and raconteur, and I wonder
if there are stories about this unjustly neglected composer that might
come to light -- although I'd be very happy if his music were to become
more easily available!
Matthew B. Tepper
> Baron de Charlus
Cher Baron (a form of address I have hitherto used only towards the
Mahler biographer Henry-Louis de La Grange),
Aha! I had wondered (partly due to the changing case endings on proper
names) if it might have been Georgian, so I suppose I was close, if only
geographically.
Baron de Charlus
My dear Matthew:
> Actually I was referring not to the orthographic cases (upper- and
> lower-case) but to the case-*endings* of nouns; Latvian names seem
> always to end in "s" because the case is dative; Russian names get
> changed according to the grammar of the sentence; and so on.
You are absolutely right, of course. In both Georgian and Veretian the
nouns are declined, although Georgian has seven cases (if I am not
mistaken) and Veretian has only five. The case endings are also markedly
different, to the extent that a Georgian speaker often can't correctly
identify the case of a noun in Veretian, and vice versa. I was referring
only to orthography in my previous posting; I should have made myself more
clear in the context of what you had written.
I am deeply flattered that you should mention Georgian and Veretian music
in the same breath (figuratively speaking), but unfortunately I can't say
that the Veretian musical tradition is nearly as developed as that of
Georgia. Virtually every example of Veretian folk music I have heard
consists of a single voice accompanied by the *tar* (a lute-type
instrument) As my mother sang some of these melodies at home, they do have a
certain sentimental value for me. The Veretians have no choral tradition on
the level of Georgia, only a number of Greek Orthodox hymns translated
into Veretian, retaining the Greek melodies.
As for classical music, I am not aware of a single composer to come from
the Veretian region. The few Veretians who have achieved any level of
education beyond secondary school have tended to become engineers,
scientists and state bureaucrats. Moreover, the budding pianist, whom I
mentioned previously, expressed no interest in pursuing a career in
composition, in spite of my generous offers to rescue him from a life of
certain poverty in Veretia or Georgia by financing his musical education in
the States and providing him with a well-appointed room in my winter
residence in San Diego. In retrospect, it seems clear that my enthusiasm
for the young man's talent was misdirected. So much for the future of
Veretian music.
The classical music of the Georgian Republic, on the other hand, is an
entirely different matter. As you know, Tbilisi was one of the major cultural
centers of the Soviet Union. In spite of the current economic and political
problems in Georgia, there is still a great deal of artistic vitality.
> I have to admit, though, that my Georgian composer of choice is the late
> Otar Taktakishvili, who composed symphonies, concertos, operas,
> oratorios, songs and chamber works, many of which were recorded by the
> old Soviet label Melodiya.
Some of my Georgian friends have mentioned Taktakishvili, but I have
had no luck locating his works in the local record stores. The
selction in Tbilisi record stores was dismal, I am sad to report.
Giya Kancheli is by far the most popular Georgian composer in the West;
one can only hope that he doesn't ultimately succumb to the same
temptation to produce lucrative New Age-tinged ethereal noodlings for
ECM records that has almost ruined Arvo Part.
One composer whom I have been enjoying recently is the late Sulkhan
Tsintsadze, some of whose pieces for string quartet ("Miniatures for
String Quartet"--a delightful series of arrangements of Georgian
folk-songs--and the more sombre and challenging String Quartet #6) have
been recorded by the Georgian State String Quartet. This recording is
readily available in the States from Sony Classical under the label of
St. Petersburg Classics. The implicit Russocentrism of the label's name
notwithstanding, it is gratifying that Sony Classical has taken the
initiative to distribute such works here.
Matthew B. Tepper
Steven Correll wrote:
>
> >In article <3208B5...@psrinc.com>,
> >Matthew B. Tepper <du...@deltanet.com> wrote:
> >>Bosh and bother. He was a robot, playing the music with all the spirit
> >>and feeling of a paper-folding machine.
>
> the Wilhelm Furtwaengler of paper-folding machines.
> --
> Steven Correll == PO Box 66625, Scotts Valley, CA 95067 == s...@netcom.com
Indeed, I have heard it. It's the perfect party record ... if you hate
your guests!
William J. Karzas
> > >In article <3208B5...@psrinc.com>,
> > >Matthew B. Tepper <du...@deltanet.com> wrote, among other profound
comments:
> > >>Bosh and bother. He was a robot, playing the music with all the spirit
> > >>and feeling of a paper-folding machine.
It is clear to me that Ducky is, if not by nature, then by design, as much
of an iconoclastic provocateur as Glenn Gould ever was; or perhaps it is
Oscar Levant who is his role model. In any case, all 3 of the above named
are/were markedly entertaining.
Regards,
--
Bill Karzas wjk...@pacificnet.net
Steven Correll
>In article <3208B5...@psrinc.com>,
>Matthew B. Tepper <du...@deltanet.com> wrote:
>>Bosh and bother. He was a robot, playing the music with all the spirit
>>and feeling of a paper-folding machine.
Have you never heard his "Siegfried Idyll" transcription? Surely it's the
Wilhem Furtwaengler of paper-folding machines.
Richard Wang
>> A partial list of the "musical illiterates" who specifically used the
>> word genius in describing Glenn Gould:
>>
>> Igor Stravinsky
>> Aaron Copland
>> Vladimir Ashkenazy
>> Leonard Bernstein
>> Ned Rorem
>> Yehudi Menuin
>Bosh and bother. He was a robot, playing the music with all the spirit
>and feeling of a paper-folding machine.
It must be nice to have such certainty in your judgment; I suppose that
way you don't have to think all that hard about your position.
It must be even nicer to know that you're a better judge of pianism than
any of the people John Harrington listed.
--
Richard Wang rw...@fas.harvard.edu
"Music is not really something I feel like I have to discuss
rationally."--James Farrell
Matthew B. Tepper
> > > >>spirit and feeling of a paper-folding machine.
>
> much of an iconoclastic provocateur as Glenn Gould ever was; or perhaps
> it is Oscar Levant who is his role model. In any case, all 3 of the
> above named are/were markedly entertaining.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Bill Karzas wjk...@pacificnet.net
Thank you, Bill, although I should point out that if I'm a new version
of Oscar Levant, it's an Oscar without the cigarettes and without the
drugs. And without the pianistic ability, either.
You're not far off about my influences -- actually my childhood idol and
role model was Groucho Marx. Not the (relatively) young Groucho of the
early Marx Bros. movies, but the old and bitter Groucho of television --
which probably explains a lot in itself.
Tord Kallqvist Romstad
: > Cher Baron (a form of address I have hitherto used only towards the
: > Mahler biographer Henry-Louis de La Grange),
: >
: > Aha! I had wondered (partly due to the changing case endings on proper
: > names) if it might have been Georgian, so I suppose I was close, if only
: > geographically.
: My dear Matthew:
: Once again, I must offer my apologies for temporarily diverting the flow
: of discussion away from the topic of classical recordings. An excellent
: bit of linguistic detective-work, if I do say so! Of course, Georgian is
You don't need to apoligize. Your Veretian post was one of the most
fascinating posts I have seen in this newsgroup. I spent hours trying
to understand what you wrote, and trying to find out what language it was.
I had little luck, but it was very amusing! Er det noen her som forstår
norsk? :-)
I guess I should also write something more relevant to this group. It was
I who started this thread, and like all threads containing the name "Glenn
Gould", it seems to go on forever :-). Beleive it or not, my intention
when asking for comments about this recording was not to start a flamewar
(though it is always fun to read dk's posts, especially about pianists he
doesn't like (even when I don't agree with him)). My problem is that I have
always loved Chopin the composer, but generally I don't like the way most
pianists interpret Chopin. I am hunting for a recording of the third
sonata without too much sentimentality, rubato and pedaling. A recording
wich highligts the structure of the music rather than trying to be very
"expressive". I thougt that the Glenn Gould recording might be a good choice.
After reading the responses to my question, however, I quickly decided to
avoid this recording. Nobody seemed to like it.
Does anyone have any better suggestions? Baron de Charlus recommends
Pollini's recording, is this a good choice?
Tord Romstad
Matthew Shou-Chung Shum
On 11 Aug 1996, Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote:
I am hunting for a recording of the third
> sonata without too much sentimentality, rubato and pedaling. A recording
> wich highligts the structure of the music rather than trying to be very
> "expressive". I thougt that the Glenn Gould recording might be a good choice.
> After reading the responses to my question, however, I quickly decided to
> avoid this recording. Nobody seemed to like it.
I hope by not being expressive you don't mean not touching. Try the
famous Kapell recording for something which certainly eschews
sentimentality, gratuitous emotion, et. al but is also increeidbly
touching to boot.
Matt
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Matthew Shum (415) 725-8929
cas...@leland.stanford.edu
http://www.stanford.edu/~castorp
Baron de Charlus
My dear Tord:
> You don't need to apoligize. Your Veretian post was one of the most=20
> fascinating posts I have seen in this newsgroup. I spent hours trying
> to understand what you wrote, and trying to find out what language it was=
.
> I had little luck, but it was very amusing!=20
If you were indeed amused, then I may consider my particular mission to=20
have been successful. After all, of what use are barons nowadays except to=
=20
amuse people? :-)
> Er det noen her som forst=E5r norsk? :-)
Norwegian is undoubtedly a rich and expressive language (like Veretian), bu=
t=20
unfortunately I am not yet acquainted with it. Perhaps I will take it=20
up after mastering Farsi and Turkish, which are closer geographically and=
=20
culturally to my homeland. Which brings me to a slight digression--this=20
summer I stayed in Istanbul for a few days on the way to Veretia. If you=20
ever have the opportunity visit that glorious center of Islamic (and=20
Christian, historically speaking) civilization, by all means don't pass=20
it up. The Hagia Sophia and the Blue Mosque were exquisite, as were the=20
legendary Turkish baths. A ravishing city, in every sense of the word.
> I am hunting for a recording of the third
> sonata without too much sentimentality, rubato and pedaling. A recording
> wich highligts the structure of the music rather than trying to be very
> "expressive". I thougt that the Glenn Gould recording might be a good cho=
ice.
> After reading the responses to my question, however, I quickly decided to
> avoid this recording. Nobody seemed to like it.=20
>=20
> Does anyone have any better suggestions? Baron de Charlus recommends
> Pollini's recording, is this a good choice?=20
I don't know how others in the group feel about Pollini's 1985=20
studio recording (DG 415-346-2, coupled with Piano Sonata #2), but I=20
admire it precisely for the reasons given above. Pollini uses rubato and=20
pedaling (after all, it is Chopin), but he does so judiciously. His=20
playing is not lacking in expressiveness, but it has a great deal of=20
elegance, grace and delicacy. The Largo in particular is exquisite. I've=20
heard other recordings (including Rubinstein's), but until I heard Pollini'=
s,=20
this particular sonata never appealed to me as much as the #2. Mind you,=20
I'm not always a fan of Pollini--his recordings of the late Beethoven=20
sonatas may be flawlessly played, but they lack sufficient passion. In=20
this case, however, he convinces. Best of luck with your CD shopping!
With kindest regards,
Baron de Charlus
=20
Tord Kallqvist Romstad
Pollini's recording seems to be exactly what I was looking for!
I think I will try it...
Thank you!
Tord
kojisato
In article <Pine.SUN.3.95.960811...@power.Stanford.EDU>,
Matthew Shou-Chung Shum <cas...@leland.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
> On 11 Aug 1996, Tord Kallqvist Romstad wrote:
> I am hunting for a recording of the third
> > sonata without too much sentimentality, rubato and pedaling. A recording
> > wich highligts the structure of the music rather than trying to be very
> > "expressive". I thougt that the Glenn Gould recording might be a good
choice.
> > After reading the responses to my question, however, I quickly decided to
> > avoid this recording. Nobody seemed to like it.
>
> I hope by not being expressive you don't mean not touching. Try the
> famous Kapell recording for something which certainly eschews
> sentimentality, gratuitous emotion, et. al but is also increeidbly
> touching to boot.
>
> Matt
I prefer Lipatti in the first movement. But Kapell in the 2nd, 3rd and
4th movements. Kapell's fourth movement will never be equalled.
K. Attwood
Igor Stravinsky
Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
:
: John E. Harrington wrote:
: : dk writes:
: : : It is a sad measure of the depth of musical
: : :illiteracy of the public at large that Gould's bullshit can be
: : :seriously taken as musical performance.
: : :
: : :
: : :dk
: :
the
: : word genius in describing Glenn Gould:
: :
: : Igor Stravinsky
: : Aaron Copland
: : Vladimir Ashkenazy
: : Leonard Bernstein
: : Ned Rorem
: : Yehudi Menuin
: : I wonder if other long time readers/posters in this group such as
Henry
: : Fogel or Jim Liu would agree with Dan or whether they too are
"musical
: : illiterates".
:
spirit
: and feeling of a paper-folding machine. True, he did get a marvellous
: separation of line in the contrapuntal works of Bach, especially. But
: then so could Wendy Carlos, doing multitracking on a synthesizer.
I don't believe Gould was a genius myself, mind; I simply am reporting
that the above musical luminaries judged him to be so, and I'm very
sure they didn't mean "evil genius".
But then I'm not given to calling much of anyone a genius. I believe
Gould was a great interpreter of Bach and he had great success in other
recordings as well (e.g., his transcription of Wagner's Meistersinger
Prelude, his Schoenberg, his recording of Strauss' Ophelialieder with
Schwarzkopf). When I say so, I stand in the above good company, any
one of whom has/had greater musical judgement and knowledge in his
worst moments than the "senior contributors" and other wanna-bes in rmc*
who feel it necessary, for no other reason than to pathetically stoke
their egos, to insult people for simply taking pleasure in Gould's
recordings.
: Perhaps Gould was a "genius." May I remind you that there is in this
: world, alas, such a thing as an "evil genius." Gould's perverted
: recordings of the Mozart Sonatas and the Chopin Sonata #3 show him to
: have been of that ilk.
--
David
Cher Baron,
Have you seen Marcel lately?
Baron de Charlus
On Fri, 16 Aug 1996, David wrote:
> Cher Baron,
>
> Have you seen Marcel lately?
My dear David:
How curious that you should inquire about Marcel! I haven't seen him for
many years, and I myself was wondering what had happened to him. The last
I heard was that he had shut himself up in his apartment in Paris and was in
the process of writing a very long novel.
With kindest regards,
Baron de Charlus
P.S.:
After this extended discussion about the Chopin Sonata #3, I pulled the
Rubinstein stereo recording (no dates or running times on the
label--thanks RCA!) out of my LP collection this weekend and listened to
it again. I think I really do prefer the Pollini recording, which is more
cleanly articulated--or perhaps this impression is due to the great
difference in recording quality. Any opinions on this matter would be
greatly appreciated.
Robert Silverman
: : : A partial list of the "musical illiterates" who specifically used
: the
: : : word genius in describing Glenn Gould:
: : :
: : : Igor Stravinsky
: : : Aaron Copland
: : : Vladimir Ashkenazy
: : : Leonard Bernstein
: : : Ned Rorem
: : : Yehudi Menuin
Add George Szell to the above list ("That nut is a genius.")
.." True, he did get a marvellous : : separation of line in the
contrapuntal works of Bach, especially. But : : then so could Wendy
Carlos, doing multitracking on a synthesizer.
It wasn't just separation he achieved. It was the tension he could elicit
between the voices that makes his playing -- at its best, and in a very
specialized repertoire -- so vibrant, so alive. I for one am willing to
forgive all the silliness, childishness, and put-ons that goes along with
it.
Robert Silverman