VIDEO: Prelude in C Minor BWV 999 by J.S. Bach

[michael_sayers]

Hi Everyone,

Here is one more.  This is a home recording with the lid down.

[perfect_pitch]

This is absolutely awful... it's like listening to someone play Petrushka but at a quarter of the speed, but worse because it's a simple Bach prelude.

You're treatment of the bass in octaves is just WRONG compared to the semiquavers that alternate (which are not octaves), and your excessive and drastic changes in dynamics are just hideous. There is NO excuse - you just like beating the S@#$ out of pianos. Plain and simple.

To post as your signature that your YouTube username is 'Pianist' Michael Sayers cheapens the entire profession and mocks everything it stands for. Please learn at least some basic concepts about the history of music, and the characteristics of the periods of music and realise that a combination of what's written on the page and making your performances subtly different is what separates a musician from everyone else, and that making extravagant, idiotic, clunky changes makes you sound like an amateur... no, that's not the right word... NOOB.



PS. I heard what you did to the Chopin Prelude No. 20 - if you played it like that in Poland - You'd be SHOT FOR IT!!! You're lucky you're hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.

[michael_sayers]

This is absolutely awful... it's like listening to someone play Petrushka but at a quarter of the speed, but worse because it's a simple Bach prelude.

You're treatment of the bass in octaves is just WRONG compared to the semiquavers that alternate (which are not octaves), and your excessive and drastic changes in dynamics are just hideous. There is NO excuse - you just like beating the S@#$ out of pianos. Plain and simple.

To post as your signature that your YouTube username is 'Pianist' Michael Sayers cheapens the entire profession and mocks everything it stands for. Please learn at least some basic concepts about the history of music, and the characteristics of the periods of music and realise that a combination of what's written on the page and making your performances subtly different is what separates a musician from everyone else, and that making extravagant, idiotic, clunky changes makes you sound like an amateur... no, that's not the right word... NOOB.



PS. I heard what you did to the Chopin Prelude No. 20 - if you played it like that in Poland - You'd be SHOT FOR IT!!! You're lucky you're hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.

Hi perfect_pitch,

Let's review the facts about and surrounding this composition and the recording:

1) The composition is without any tempo or dynamics markings, leaving such decisions entirely to the decision of the performer without any guidance from the composer

2) Harpsichords even in 1725 often had pedals for such things as doubling in octaves.  There also was the pedal clavichord.  Later on, one of Beethoven's pianos had five pedals.

3) Keyboard playing style in the 1700s was far less smooth than with the later development of thoroughly systematized fingering of keyboard music.  Much has been written about this, in relation not only to J.S. Bach, but also to Mozart and Beethoven [and Beethoven himself did some of the writing on it   ].

4) These compositions are in the public domain, which guarantees with it in much of the world freedom of expression, including within the country of Poland.  I am a believer in freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

I am sorry you dislike these recordings so strongly.  As with the images for the video of Bach's Prelude in C Minor BWV 999 which were chosen to make a particular sentiment palpable, meditate on Leonardo da Vinci's awareness of the universal interconnectedness of all things, and how well this sensibility finds expression in the music of J.S. Bach.  It isn't a light and flippant subject, and neither should music be played lightly or flippantly which evokes such an awareness so powerfully as with this J.S. Bach composition.  The composition might be "little" in its number of measures and notes, yet it is quite large in spirit and power.  The music might be in 3/4 time, but the emotional and spiritual focus transcends our feeble notions of time, and is timeless.

[chopinlover01]

Aside from the appaling according, you appear to be making an approach that is somewhat similar to old faulty_damper's. If he even still hangs around here anymore. You claim to be doing what's best, like he did. Though, unlike him, you do have a recording In any case, you're trying to make yourself sound knowledgable by turning this little prelude into something greater by being very esoteric in your language.

[michael_sayers]

Aside from the appaling according, you appear to be making an approach that is somewhat similar to old faulty_damper's. If he even still hangs around here anymore. You claim to be doing what's best, like he did. Though, unlike him, you do have a recording In any case, you're trying to make yourself sound knowledgable by turning this little prelude into something greater by being very esoteric in your language.

I think there is someone over at P.W. with a user name of faulty_damper.  It could be a different person than the faulty_damper here.  Or maybe they are one and the same.

[lostinidlewonder]

Known as the Lute prelude generally taken a lot faster of course. It would sound strange on a lute playing it so slow as it does on keyboard. The top note of the Rh has interesting voice which is obscured playing so slow and with such heavy bass so with this interpretation we are losing musical value. There is also no touch difference between quavers and semi quavers which would produce interesting musical quality if considered.

[outin]

Aside from the appaling according, you appear to be making an approach that is somewhat similar to old faulty_damper's. If he even still hangs around here anymore. You claim to be doing what's best, like he did. Though, unlike him, you do have a recording In any case, you're trying to make yourself sound knowledgable by turning this little prelude into something greater by being very esoteric in your language.

And IIRC Faulty thought everything should be played FASTER...

[stoat_king]

Aside from the appaling according, you appear to be making an approach that is somewhat similar to old faulty_damper's. If he even still hangs around here anymore. You claim to be doing what's best, like he did. Though, unlike him, you do have a recording In any case, you're trying to make yourself sound knowledgable by turning this little prelude into something greater by being very esoteric in your language.

I dont entirely agree. To my mind, Mr Sayers isn't lecturing, pontificating or trying to push his ideas down our throats, merely explaining and defending his position.
You must admit, these versions are surprising - who knows - maybe something great could come out of this 'ignore the conventions and rules' approach.

These recordings aren't to my taste, but he gets points for thinking outside the box.
A bit closer to the box would also be good lol

[chopinlover01]

Fair enough. What I meant by the "Faulty_damper" approach was, justifying the argument by using very esoteric language, such as, and I quote "meditate on Leonardo da Vinci's awareness of the universal interconnectedness of all things, and how well this sensibility finds expression in the music of J.S. Bach.  It isn't a light and flippant subject, and neither should music be played lightly or flippantly which evokes such an awareness so powerfully as with this J.S. Bach composition."

[michael_sayers]

Fair enough. What I meant by the "Faulty_damper" approach was, justifying the argument by using very esoteric language, such as, and I quote "meditate on Leonardo da Vinci's awareness of the universal interconnectedness of all things, and how well this sensibility finds expression in the music of J.S. Bach.  It isn't a light and flippant subject, and neither should music be played lightly or flippantly which evokes such an awareness so powerfully as with this J.S. Bach composition."

How is the language esoteric?  I studied the work of film maker Andrei Tarkovsky, who explores as one of the motifs in his work the connection between J.S. Bach and Leonardo da Vinci.  If someone isn't interested in such things, then maybe the subject would be esoteric - the language, however, is not, and neither is the spiritual motivation of the music and its interpretation with the video.

This music is a compelling work of art, not merely a trifle or some sort of exercise to be played without a deep connection to the composition.

[dcstudio]

This music is a compelling work of art, not merely a trifle or some sort of exercise to be played without a deep connection to the composition.

then for Pete's sake please tune your instrument and have it serviced.  Again, I beg of you, kind sir.

your piano is no trifle either...

either that or please consider a digital instrument...   You will receive much more positive feedback from your posts and people may actually take your opinions and suggestions seriously.

How does that sound NOT bother you?  please help me to understand...  You are not a student, right?  Didn't you claim to be a pro--or going pro?  Composer?  something like that... 

[michael_sayers]

then for Pete's sake please tune your instrument and have it serviced.  Again, I beg of you, kind sir.

your piano is no trifle either...

either that or please consider a digital instrument...   You will receive much more positive feedback from your posts and people may actually take your opinions and suggestions seriously.

How does that sound NOT bother you?  please help me to understand...  You are not a student, right?  Didn't you claim to be a pro--or going pro?  Composer?  something like that... 

It doesn't bother me because whenever I play a piano I am listening much more to the music as it is heard in my mind rather than as it emerges physically from whatever instrument is at hand.

[dcstudio]

It doesn't bother me because whenever I play a piano I am listening much more to the music as it is heard in my mind rather than as it emerges physically from whatever instrument is at hand.

wait a minute let me get this straight --

What you are saying basically is that  you don't listen to yourself play?  yet you prefer a piano with issues because you have to work to control the sound?   Sorry that is what you said to me in the other string--How can you tell if you are overcoming the issues of your piano if you are as you say "listening much more to the music as it is heard" in your head?   If you are not focused on the sound "as it emerges physically from whatever instrument is at hand." how do you know?

sir, these statements really don't jive...

again I mean no disrespect...but all we hear is the sound as it emerges from your instrument.   

so...you hear it differently in your mind... well ok--

now I understand

[michael_sayers]

wait a minute let me get this straight --

What you are saying basically is that  you don't listen to yourself play?  yet you prefer a piano with issues because you have to work to control the sound?   Sorry that is what you said to me in the other string--How can you tell if you are overcoming the issues of your piano if you are as you say "listening much more to the music as it is heard" in your head?   If you are not focused on the sound "as it emerges physically from whatever instrument is at hand." how do you know?

sir, these statements really don't jive...

again I mean no disrespect...but all we hear is the sound as it emerges from your instrument.  

so...you hear it differently in your mind... well ok--

now I understand

Hi dcstudio,

Of course one listens to a piano for a feedback, it is to help achieve a desired sound - and this comes from the inside.  

I philosophically wouldn't take anything from you (or anyone else here) as disrespect even if it were intended that way.  The obtuse nature of criticism in this forum though is a cause for concern.  As an example, the arpeggio I played with alternating hands at the end of J.S. Bach's B-flat Major Invention was "critiqued" - but the critique didn't say if I had played the arpeggio well or not, or if a break in the sheen of the sound was heard, or anything like that.  It basically just said that my playing of the arpeggio was "wrong" which doesn't provide any pianistically useful information.

I always value input from a second set of ears, but the technical things I listen for in piano playing aren't things that most of the other members here seem to listen for or care much about.

Very strange.

[dcstudio]

Hi dcstudio,



I always value input from a second set of ears, but the technical things I listen for in piano playing aren't things that most of the other members here seem to listen for or care much about.

Very strange.

forgive me, but my only issue is that you refuse to care for your instrument--you don't state that you can't afford it--only that it feels violating--so you just don't do it.

that is what I find so strange...

I have just never heard anyone give that reason...

Your language gets so flowery when you explain yourself... 

methinks thou art trolling, good sir.   

[michael_sayers]

forgive me, but my only issue is that you refuse to care for your instrument--you don't state that you can't afford it--only that it feels violating--so you just don't do it.

that is what I find so strange...

I have just never heard anyone give that reason...

Your language gets so flowery when you explain yourself...  

methinks thou art trolling, good sir.  

What about the recording I last uploaded, on a 1940 N.Y. Steinway D with very nice microphones and a very low noise pre-amp, of Franz Liszt's Resignazione?  The impression I get is that no setup is good enough for a recording that can be critiqued at Piano Street.  That 1940 D was tuned an hour before I played it.  The traveling was not without expense.

I am sorry if I appear as trolling, perhaps because the tenor of my posts has shifted toward the pessimistic.  Not only is the aforementioned set up not good enough but also things are being said that the music also has to be played as originally notated, yet - as with another thread - I don't own or have access to a pipe organ for recording the Bach organ chorale preludes.  Long ago, as a music student, maybe I could have done that.  But back then there wasn't any indication it would be necessary in the future.

I am very pessimistic about the odds of me getting a real and technical critique at Piano Street.  At this moment it appears that no circumstance is good enough to be worthy and it is always the instrumentation, or the piece title, or the microphones, or notational issues, et c. - there is always some such reason to give.  In some instances, as with the issue over a composition's title, the reason appears arcane.  Issues with poorly tuned pianos and dim microphones - I can respect those issues.

When I post an exceptionally nice Liszt recording with a just tuned N.Y. Steinway concert grand piano and great microphones, et c. - and on a great sounding stage - and someone starts asking me about a "music garage", that member's response is what I call trolling.

[lostinidlewonder]

I am very pessimistic about the odds of me getting a real and technical critique at Piano Street.

This to me skinks of delusions of grandeur.

[michael_sayers]

This to me skinks of delusions of grandeur.

You are quite right.

Reality is that my chronic and acute fatigue has gotten the better of me in this environment where - if we are honest in assessment - many observations are way over the top and are not intended to be valued, constructive criticism.  Please take it at face value and from the heart that I do apologize to the members here for my lapse in appropriate response.

[dcstudio]

sir, all of us have posted and been critiqued here...well most of us anyway.   You are presenting yourself as an established pianist yet you seem to have no pride in your presentation.   I will agree that some comments you have received are just plain mean...no doubt about that.   There is a standard here and I will admit it is a bit lofty--but that is just the nature of the beast.

We have also had many trolls here. 

I would suggest posting a video...   it doesn't have to be fantastic... just something that shows you playing....  a better instrument.

here...  this is a vid of me.  this is an 8 yr old vid just like yours.  I keep it around to remind myself that I have improved since then.

 

  this is a vid I posted 2 years ago when I had delusions of grandeur...lol...it was not well received.

we are not all bad.

[michael_sayers]

sir, all of us have posted and been critiqued here...well most of us anyway.   You are presenting yourself as an established pianist yet you seem to have no pride in your presentation.   I will agree that some comments you have received are just plain mean...no doubt about that.   There is a standard here and I will admit it is a bit lofty--but that is just the nature of the beast.

We have also had many trolls here.  

I would suggest posting a video...   it doesn't have to be fantastic... just something that shows you playing....  a better instrument.

here...  this is a vid of me.  this is an 8 yr old vid just like yours.  I keep it around to remind myself that I have improved since then.

 

  this is a vid I posted 2 years ago when I had delusions of grandeur...lol...it was not well received.

we are not all bad.

Thanks for the jazz one - I really enjoyed it.  About the other, I wouldn't criticize it.  Maybe if I were Van Cliburn, then I would feel worthy to be a critic . . . but he didn't seem to have critical things to say about his fellow musicians, at least I can't think of any such statement from him.

Maybe I should do a little bit of bio here . . .

I am not an established pianist by any means.  My peak in technical proficiency was probably during my teenage years and into my days as a music student, maybe peaking in around 1994-95.  In 1995 I stopped practicing though I did continue to do some public performing but not at any major venues.  This included one time when I was requested on three days notice to replace an injured performer at a Bach festival, and it would not have been very nice to leave them without any pianist for the slot.  I am told that the performance caused a lot of discussion afterwards, and the musical director encouraged me to do more of such Bach performances.  So I do have a great deal of confidence, bolstered by these sorts of comments from pianists, composers, music directors, audience members, et c., throughout the years.  At the same time I have a great deal of humility.  I know that I am not a great pianist or anything remotely close to it - of course, here at Piano Street it is just assumed that any pianist who doesn't perform the music exactly as notated in the original is an incompetent, which basically means any pianist who retired before the 1950s.  I am not possessed by that view, and I admire a very wide range of pianists from Pollini to Glenn Gould to Nyiregyhazi to Martha Argerich to de Pachmann to Cortot to Helene Grimaud - I could go on and on.  I believe that great music is of transformative power through a very wide range of performance styles.

I am in practice nowadays.  Not back to 1994-95 condition but very close, and perhaps will be able to go beyond it.  It depends on how hard I can work again, how consistently and with how much stamina.  I am 40 years old, not 17 or 18, and I can't do 20 hour manic practice sessions as I sometimes did in the quite distant past.

My agenda this summer is to do some recording of music by living composers who I am in touch with, and later on to do some full length performances to raise money for charitable and community uniting causes.  Most of these will be in Sweden and Norway with all-Liszt programmes ending with the Two Legendes - and there also would be some highly varied one hour programmes because not every audience will be up to the standard 1 hr. 50 min. of music with a 10 min. intermission.  There is a special programme devised for performance in December months with Liszt's Christmas Tree Suite, his Italy related music (Apres une Lecture du Dante, the Petrarch Sonnets) and other material.

I am finishing up the notation of two very long piano compositions, and some other things . . .

I'll post new videos this summer and of music by living composers.  This will not involve a N.Y. Steinway D, however.  This is Sweden . . . the land of Renner hammers . . .

This is enough about me.  What about you?  What is your background?  I know it is none of my business, and feel free to keep it to yourself.  You seem to be a very good jazz pianist.

[dcstudio]

cool...  now that makes sense thank you.     I will be interested to know how you feel about these recordings in another 10 years--if you stay in practice, that is.   I mean that in the nicest possible way.   It's obvious that you love to play...

I have always played the piano--well since I was 4...   I was really awful as a teenager...so I have never felt my best work was behind me...lol.

I am 50 years old--and I play better now then I ever have.   I went to music school but dropped out in my senior year for a better gig.   I had a GPA of 3.6--but I really couldn't play worth a crap.

I became a dice dealer in a casino and I was very successful.  I left that industry and a full time jazz piano gig just fell in my lap. I made a living playing the piano until my daughter was born.  Since then I have worked as a piano teacher and taken jobs as an accompanist or praise band pianist or cocktail piano/singer--whatever came my way. I am currently taking a break from teaching but I still book a few gigs. 

My only claim to fame is that in the early days of youtube I was featured and so some of my vids have a lot of views.   It makes for a nice calling card when I promote myself.

It was my presentation that got me noticed by the folks at youtube...not necessarily my playing.

 

[michael_sayers]

Hi dcstudio,

Given your gifts in the jazz department maybe I could share a little 20 measure sketch for jazz improvisation.  If so, just let me know by email.  You might think it is garbage, which is okay.

On the lofty standards subject mentioned earlier, I am all for lofty standards.  There is the human dimension to consider as well.  We all have our flaws and our limitations - including limited finances, and maybe there can be more pressing matters in life than keeping a piano tuned or the notes played accurately.  The spirit of the playing is another and the dominant aspect of music performance, as is the fact that at the end of the day (and in my belief) how we are remembered by others is important.  It is a sign of our net contribution on the human level to this world.

We all have our limits outside of which we are not nice - the present Pope even admitted that this applies to him - and yet I think it is best strive within ourselves, and to work together, to avoid behaviour which says another person is not valued.

And this is not intended to cast blame, just to express a desire for everyone here including me to move forward in that respect in a positive way.

It would be great if we could all go through life in return being valued and loved as here in a very special and little known Van Cliburn video.

[dcstudio]

As a teacher I have encountered many adult piano students who, like you, have returned after a long hiatus.  Some are very successful--others give up, just like they did before. 

this is what I've learned--from a teaching perspective..

most think about coming back for years and  formulate a set of expectations that often times is... not realistic. 

For some, they think it's going to be way too hard--and for them it is...everything is over analyzed and impossible. these people are often times adept readers--relatively speaking

--others have this idea that people are going to react with the same enthusiasm that their parents had when they were kids...      like divas...lol. they lash out when that doesn't happen.  They are usually the best players

and a few others come back because they truly love it and missed it...     for the record--  they are so often the least talented...  but they are the most committed students.

surprisingly, the reason doesn't seem to matter, really...each group has an equal success rate..


about 1 in 5 stick with it more than a year

 

you can send me the jazz improv by PM if you like   

[cometear]

This is absolutely awful... it's like listening to someone play Petrushka but at a quarter of the speed, but worse because it's a simple Bach prelude.

You're treatment of the bass in octaves is just WRONG compared to the semiquavers that alternate (which are not octaves), and your excessive and drastic changes in dynamics are just hideous. There is NO excuse - you just like beating the S@#$ out of pianos. Plain and simple.

To post as your signature that your YouTube username is 'Pianist' Michael Sayers cheapens the entire profession and mocks everything it stands for. Please learn at least some basic concepts about the history of music, and the characteristics of the periods of music and realise that a combination of what's written on the page and making your performances subtly different is what separates a musician from everyone else, and that making extravagant, idiotic, clunky changes makes you sound like an amateur... no, that's not the right word... NOOB.



PS. I heard what you did to the Chopin Prelude No. 20 - if you played it like that in Poland - You'd be SHOT FOR IT!!! You're lucky you're hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.

I kind of liked it.

[michael_sayers]

Thanks cometear.

[ahinton]

It doesn't bother me because whenever I play a piano I am listening much more to the music as it is heard in my mind rather than as it emerges physically from whatever instrument is at hand.

But you can't post that in the form of a video here! You can only post (as you have) the actual recording of the physical sound that you make.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I am very pessimistic about the odds of me getting a real and technical critique at Piano Street.

Boy, but that doesn't stoip you continuing to try, does it! I have no patience with rudeness of response, but what I believe that you are really saying here is tht are very pessimistic about the odds of your geting the kinds of thing that youu'd like to read in response to videos that you post.

Sorry, but that's the way that the evidence suggests to me that it is.

Best,

Alistair

[michael_sayers]

All of this which is contained in your last two posts has, I think, been adequately discussed here and/or at other Piano Street threads, Alistair.

All issues are or were resolved, as far as I am aware.


Mvh,
Michael

[ahinton]

All of this which is contained in your last two posts has, I think, been adequately discussed here and/or at other Piano Street threads, Alistair.

All issues are or were resolved, as far as I am aware.

Where and when, pray? I responded today to your remarks about your thinking internally of the sound as a priority over the actual sound having only just read them for the first time. Likewise, I responded today to your apparent despair at getting "a real and technical critique" here having only just read them for the first time. In so doing, I was not especially aware that these particular issues have been adequately discussed in this and other threads on this forum and I do not think it unreasonable to report (and it is only reporting, not passig value judgement or offering critiques of any kind) that you seem to persist in posting videos here regardless of the kinds of response that you get; that's all. What is you hope in this? - that such persistence eventually pays off by your persuasion of respondents to offer you something different - i.e. much more positive and to your liking?

These particular issues are therefore neither resolved nor unresolved, it would seem, since they have not, as far as I am aware, been discussed here previously, unlike certain others.

Anyway, you did say on several recent occasions that you were departing; have you changed your mind about that?

Best,

Alistair

[michael_sayers]

Where and when, pray? I responded today to your remarks about your thinking internally of the sound as a priority over the actual sound having only just read them for the first time. Likewise, I responded today to your apparent despair at getting "a real and technical critique" here having only just read them for the first time. In so doing, I was not especially aware that these particular issues have been adequately discussed in this and other threads on this forum and I do not think it unreasonable to report (and it is only reporting, not passig value judgement or offering critiques of any kind) that you seem to persist in posting videos here regardless of the kinds of response that you get; that's all. What is you hope in this? - that such persistence eventually pays off by your persuasion of respondents to offer you something different - i.e. much more positive and to your liking?

These particular issues are therefore neither resolved nor unresolved, it would seem, since they have not, as far as I am aware, been discussed here previously, unlike certain others.

Anyway, you did say on several recent occasions that you were departing; have you changed your mind about that?

Best,

Alistair

Hi Alistair,

I recall the issues having been resolved - and maybe some issues were not resolved, and if so, this is okay.

If all of this is of sufficient importance to you, you are welcome to go through the threads and post back here with your findings.


Mvh,
Michael

[ahinton]

I recall the issues having been resolved - and maybe some issues were not resolved, and if so, this is okay.

If all of this is of sufficient importance to you, you are welcome to go through the threads and post back here with your findings.

It isn't.

To return to the topic, I found this recording ponderous, turgid, lifeless, way too slow for any sense of flow or connectivity to manifest itself, the recording poor and the piano, once again, not properly tuned.

Sorry!

Best,

Alistair

[michael_sayers]

It isn't.

To return to the topic, I found this recording ponderous, turgid, lifeless, way too slow for any sense of flow or connectivity to manifest itself, the recording poor and the piano, once again, not properly tuned.

Sorry!

Best,

Alistair

Hi Alistair,

Thanks for your observations about the playing, the recording and the piano.  If the observations are sincere - and I take it that they are - then there is nothing for which to apologize.

Having given it some thought, there do seem to be some unresolved issues, one of which is the question of why I post these recordings to Piano Street.  To this my non-revealing reply is, why does one need to have a reason to post a recording to Piano Street?

And the question about music in the mind versus heard and expressed with pianos (or other instrumentation) maybe wasn't addressed anywhere.  It is hard to describe, yet in the mind there is the "music", i.e. a concept of the music intellectually and with the attached vibratory emotion.  I can only speak for my self when I say that what I experience as music and in the mind is of such fulness that any performance in audible sound is but a pale image of the inner experience.  And, as such, I am not too particular about pianos.  I do have a preference for N.Y. Steinway D grands, and from certain years and with the knuckles in the action positioned further from the hammers than with the 1984 and later instruments - the 1930s instruments up through 1968 in particular can be great pianos depending on the condition, the piano technician, and the set of hammers and shanks [the N.Y. hammer "formula" changes frequently, and also one does not always find the D pianos with N.Y. hammers installed at the location] - and yet, any half-way decent piano will do for me.  I don't think music is about sound in a way that makes choice of a piano, or its date and time of most recent tuning/regulation/voicing, to be of particular importance.


Mvh,
Michael

[ahinton]

Hi Alistair,

Thanks for your observations about the playing, the recording and the piano.  If the observations are sincere - and I take it that they are - then there is nothing for which to apologize.

Having given it some thought, there do seem to be some unresolved issues, one of which is the question of why I post these recordings to Piano Street.  To this my non-revealing reply is, why does one need to have a reason to post a recording to Piano Street?

And the question about music in the mind versus heard and expressed with pianos (or other instrumentation) maybe wasn't addressed anywhere.  It is hard to describe, yet in the mind there is the "music", i.e. a concept of the music intellectually and with the attached vibratory emotion.  I can only speak for my self when I say that what I experience as music and in the mind is of such fulness that any performance in audible sound is but a pale image of the inner experience.  And, as such, I am not too particular about pianos.  I do have a preference for N.Y. Steinway D grands, and from certain years and with the knuckles in the action positioned further from the hammers than with the 1984 and later instruments - the 1930s instruments up through 1968 in particular can be great pianos depending on the condition, the piano technician, and the set of hammers and shanks [the N.Y. hammer "formula" changes frequently, and also one does not always find the D pianos with N.Y. hammers installed at the location] - and yet, any half-way decent piano will do for me.  I don't think music is about sound in a way that makes choice of a piano, or its date and time of most recent tuning/regulation/voicing, to be of particular importance.

Well, that tells us a lot, whatever any of us here might think of any of it.

To take just one aspect of what you'e done here and isolate it -the sheer distendedness of what you've done and the lack of momentum and flow renders the whole lifeless - and lifelessness is about as out of place in J S Bach as it could be anywhere - witness Casals, rehearsing one of Bach's orchestral suites, when he stopped the players at the end of the first bar and declaimed "the first note has no life!" (OL, so what did Casals know about Bach and how to perform his work?)...

You may be familiar with the fact of my work on the music of Sorabji, whose literary executor I am. Many years ago (I won't say when for fear of the possible risk of giving too much away), I was asked by a pianist (whose name I will likewise refrain from divulging) if I could arrange for him to play some of Sorabji's work to the composer and I agreed to do this provided that he came to play it to me first. This turned out to be a most serendipitous precautionary measure since, when he did this, he presented "interpretations" that bore almost no resemblance whatsoever to the composer's intentions; imagine Le Jardin Parfumé stretched out into no shape at all and a duration of just over three quarters of an hour when the piece calls for something just either side of 25 minutes! The other pieces that he played were likewise pulled out of shape by excessive dilatoriness of approach and painfully ponderous and lifeless playing. The pianist nevertheless was determined to insist that his view of this music was appropriate, though to quite whom he did not reveal. It gave me no pleasure at all, following this ghastly experience, to have to tell him that there was no way that I could introduce him to Sorabji and have him play his work to him in this utterly incompetent and insensitive manner, but I was face with no alternative but to do so; likewise, it was as embarrassing to cancel at such short notice with the composer as it had been to listen to this dreadful playing. The pianist had said that, with Sorabji's sanction, he would perform these piece in a recital; despite his not receiving this, he went ahead anyway. I did not attend the event myself (indeed, I simply couldn't face doing so after what I'd heard him do in my own studio), but someone on whose good judgement I have every reason to rely did so and reported to me afterwards that, although there had been many concerts that he's queued up to get into, this was the first that he'd queued up to get out of. Fortunately, Sorabji's work has very rarely been subject to so humiliating a treatment in public.

I hope that you find this informative and helpful.

Best,

Alistair

[michael_sayers]

Well, that tells us a lot, whatever any of us here might think of any of it.

To take just one aspect of what you'e done here and isolate it -the sheer distendedness of what you've done and the lack of momentum and flow renders the whole lifeless - and lifelessness is about as out of place in J S Bach as it could be anywhere - witness Casals, rehearsing one of Bach's orchestral suites, when he stopped the players at the end of the first bar and declaimed "the first note has no life!" (OL, so what did Casals know about Bach and how to perform his work?)...

You may be familiar with the fact of my work on the music of Sorabji, whose literary executor I am. Many years ago (I won't say when for fear of the possible risk of giving too much away), I was asked by a pianist (whose name I will likewise refrain from divulging) if I could arrange for him to play some of Sorabji's work to the composer and I agreed to do this provided that he came to play it to me first. This turned out to be a most serendipitous precautionary measure since, when he did this, he presented "interpretations" that bore almost no resemblance whatsoever to the composer's intentions; imagine Le Jardin Parfumé stretched out into no shape at all and a duration of just over three quarters of an hour when the piece calls for something just either side of 25 minutes! The other pieces that he played were likewise pulled out of shape by excessive dilatoriness of approach and painfully ponderous and lifeless playing. The pianist nevertheless was determined to insist that his view of this music was appropriate, though to quite whom he did not reveal. It gave me no pleasure at all, following this ghastly experience, to have to tell him that there was no way that I could introduce him to Sorabji and have him play his work to him in this utterly incompetent and insensitive manner, but I was face with no alternative but to do so; likewise, it was as embarrassing to cancel at such short notice with the composer as it had been to listen to this dreadful playing. The pianist had said that, with Sorabji's sanction, he would perform these piece in a recital; despite his not receiving this, he went ahead anyway. I did not attend the event myself (indeed, I simply couldn't face doing so after what I'd heard him do in my own studio), but someone on whose good judgement I have every reason to rely did so and reported to me afterwards that, although there had been many concerts that he's queued up to get into, this was the first that he'd queued up to get out of. Fortunately, Sorabji's work has very rarely been subject to so humiliating a treatment in public.

I hope that you find this informative and helpful.

Best,

Alistair

Hi Alistair,

I found your post to be of much interest.  And, of course, Sorabji's concerns about the performances of his own music are known and even to persons (such as myself) who are not well read on the composer.  What I do wonder is how this connects with this recording of the Bach Prelude BWV 999.  It isn't clear if it is about the notion of Sorabji in relationship to J.S. Bach's intentions, re. which there is an item which some persons might consider as "Bach-Sorabji", and which is not identical to the intentions of J.S. Bach and which is far more different than the original composition than what is heard with the recording here.  Or maybe this is about differences of piano performance style?  I can respect someone disliking a performer's style, this doesn't mean, however, that what is heard is musicologically unsound.

I have benefited in some ways from our discussions here, and I am hoping that you can be kind enough to provide some clarity on what is being observed about a connection between Sorabji and J.S. Bach, or between Sorabji and the Prelude BWV 999 recording, because it isn't clear exactly what it is that I am supposed to take away, as it were, from this discussion and in which of the different applications as it relates to the music of J.S. Bach.


Mvh,
Michael

[ahinton]

I found your post to be of much interest.  And, of course, Sorabji's concerns about the performances of his own music are known and even to persons (such as myself) who are not well read on the composer.  What I do wonder is how this connects with this recording of the Bach Prelude BWV 999.  It isn't clear if it is about the notion of Sorabji in relationship to J.S. Bach's intentions, re. which there is an item which some persons might consider as "Bach-Sorabji", and which is not identical to the intentions of J.S. Bach and which is far more different than the original composition than what is heard with the recording here.  Or maybe this is about differences of piano performance style?  I can respect someone disliking a performer's style, this doesn't mean, however, that what is heard is musicologically unsound.

I have benefited in some ways from our discussions here, and I am hoping that you can be kind enough to provide some clarity on what is being observed about a connection between Sorabji and J.S. Bach, or between Sorabji and the Prelude BWV 999 recording, because it isn't clear exactly what it is that I am supposed to take away, as it were, from this discussion and in which of the different applications as it relates to the music of J.S. Bach.

I cannot help but form the impression that you are being deliberately abstruse here. I cited the Sorabji incident merely as an example of the kind of thing that I observe in your "interpretations" and what I take to be your confident and arrogant sounding attitude towards them, not to seek to forge some kind of contextual relationship between Sorabji and Bach, any more than I am attempting to do the same when referring to the article on the great French song composers in which, as a footnote to his glowing account of Ravel's Trois Poème de Stéphane Mallarmé, Sorabji notes that he had unfortunately never heard these wonderful songs sung - he had only heard them "interpreted", adding "it was very unpleasant"...

Best,

Alistair

[michael_sayers]

I cannot help but form the impression that you are being deliberately abstruse here. I cited the Sorabji incident merely as an example of the kind of thing that I observe in your "interpretations" and what I take to be your confident and arrogant sounding attitude towards them, not to seek to forge some kind of contextual relationship between Sorabji and Bach, any more than I am attempting to do the same when referring to the article on the great French song composers in which, as a footnote to his glowing account of Ravel's Trois Poème de Stéphane Mallarmé, Sorabji notes that he had unfortunately never heard these wonderful songs sung - he had only heard them "interpreted", adding "it was very unpleasant"...

Best,

Alistair

Hi Alistair,

I am not being abstruse at all.  As far as my interpretations go, the one of Bach's Prelude in E-flat Major BWV 852 is an interpretation of Franz Liszt which I, admittedly, played quite imperfectly.

With the Prelude BWV 999, while it is slower than is palatable for your taste, objectively there is nothing musicologically amiss with it.  Composers have been arranging Bach's music for centuries, and Bach even rearranged and reused his own music.

When it comes to Sorabji's music, and though Sorabji might have wanted his music played with particular interpretations, this does not mean that another (and different) interpretation might not succeed.  Sorabji's music is, in my opinion, under valued by the public, and maybe how it is interpreted has something to do with this.

And this gets back to the declining public interest in classical music as a whole.  Though complicated, and with many factors involved, the fall from the historic heights down to about 3% of the music market does, it seems, have a connection with rigidity of interpretation.  This is not to say that these interpretations are flawed - but all interpretation in the professional classical music world is confined to a narrow range of variation, and this narrows the scope of relevance to diverse persons and also the size of the potential audience for classical music.  Just consider "pop" music and all its "covers" - and ask yourself how popular specific items of material would be if no variance of interpretation or instrumentation had ever been allowed.

And consider this: Steinway and Sons' all time peak year of sales was 1926.  That is the same decade when music critics began to oppose the interpretive freedoms of Ferruccio Busoni.

Thus, and though one often is tempted to pin the musicological rigidity to origination in the 1950s, in reality it began earlier but only in the 1950s achieved the institutional upper hand.

And thus now, in 2015, we have  - even with recent changes in design - in my opinion one maker of REAL American grand pianos (no Renner hammers, et c.), which is Steinway and Sons, and a world with classical music occupying 3% of the music market.

As you are an admirer of Franz Liszt - and I would assume, as well, an admirer of Ferruccio Busoni - I am surprised that your views on musicology would be so different either from their views or from my own view.

Of course, you haven't said any of what I assume about your musicological views, yet in response to my invitation to you to provide clarity you declined and seemed to think I was being abstruse.

These are important matters, in my opinion, Alistair.

Would it be nice, in a world of failing orchestras and of music departments within educational institutions near time-wise to a crisis and financially banking on a future premised heavily on loans that will not be adequately serviced - would it be nice to see classical music go from 3% down to .5%, or maybe become a highly specialized interest akin in level of applicants and interest to classical Greek?

I think it would not be nice.  But the way classical music is done today, this is where it is headed.

You might want to reconsider your musicological perspectives if they are what I have supposed here (and as you would not elaborate), and bring them more into alignment with those of Franz Liszt and Ferruccio Busoni.

Fact is, I think classical music is headed toward a resurgence into public greatness in this century, but it will have to completely bottom out first in order to dislodge all persons who are keeping the lid on it by enforcing a highly rigid 1950s-style musicology.  And when this transpires it would be much better to be riding the wave back up, and even to be getting on board now, than to be stuck in 1950s thinking about classical music.  Because once this boat gets moving, everyone will want to get on it and many will compete for this just due to the economics signal alone, and if you aren't already on board then swimming to catch up with it will be well-nigh impossible.


Mvh,
Michael

[ahinton]

I am not being abstruse at all.  As far as my interpretations go, the one of Bach's Prelude in E-flat Major BWV 852 is an interpretation of Franz Liszt

Two sentences in nigh perfect contradiction with one another...

With the Prelude BWV 999, while it is slower than is palatable for your taste

It's quite clearly not only my taste...

When it comes to Sorabji's music, and though Sorabji might have wanted his music played with particular interpretations, this does not mean that another (and different) interpretation might not succeed.  Sorabji's music is, in my opinion, under valued by the public, and maybe how it is interpreted has something to do with this.

Sorabji's music has fortunately only suffered from such travesties of performance very rarely; again, this pianist's near-demolition of some of it didn't just conflict with "my taste", given that, as I mentioned, audience members walked out during the performance, some of whom expressed astonishment at the sheer incompetence, insensitivity and woefully unidiomaitc nature of the playing.

And consider this: Steinway and Sons' all time peak year of sales was 1926.  That is the same decade when music critics began to oppose the interpretive freedoms of Ferruccio Busoni.

...

As you are an admirer of Franz Liszt - and I would assume, as well, an admirer of Ferruccio Busoni - I am surprised that your views on musicology would be so different either from their views or from my own view.

I am indeed an admirer of both; however, the issue here is that there's a world of difference between reasonable variation of interpretation and playing music badly on an inferiorly cared for instrument in a way that listeners feel that the life has been drained from it - this is not about "views on musicology".

Of course, you haven't said any of what I assume about your musicological views, yet in response to my invitation to you to provide clarity you declined and seemed to think I was being abstruse.

I suggested that simply because it seemed that your misreading of the context of the Sorabji reference that I had provided to you was wilful.

Would it be nice, in a world of failing orchestras and of music departments within educational institutions near time-wise to a crisis and financially banking on a future premised heavily on loans that will not be adequately serviced - would it be nice to see classical music go from 3% down to .5%, or maybe become a highly specialized interest akin in level of applicants and interest to classical Greek?

I don't see that poorly prepared and played videos will stop that.

You might want to reconsider your musicological perspectives if they are what I have supposed here (and as you would not elaborate), and bring them more into alignment with those of Franz Liszt and Ferruccio Busoni.

I do not know what you might suppose but, as I already stated, this is about unacceptable performance presentation, not "musicological perspectives", be they mine or those of Busoni or Liszt.

Best,

Alistair

[stoat_king]

Would it be nice, in a world of failing orchestras and of music departments within educational institutions near time-wise to a crisis and financially banking on a future premised heavily on loans that will not be adequately serviced - would it be nice to see classical music go from 3% down to .5%, or maybe become a highly specialized interest akin in level of applicants and interest to classical Greek?
...
Fact is, I think classical music is headed toward a resurgence into public greatness in this century, but it will have to completely bottom out first in order to dislodge all persons who are keeping the lid on it by enforcing a highly rigid 1950s-style musicology.  And when this transpires it would be much better to be riding the wave back up, and even to be getting on board now, than to be stuck in 1950s thinking about classical music.  Because once this boat gets moving, everyone will want to get on it and many will compete for this just due to the economics signal alone, and if you aren't already on board then swimming to catch up with it will be well-nigh impossible.

Well I couldn't agree more that this is important.
I know very few people irl who have any interest in classical music whatsoever.
Those that do have an interest have a knowledge that they would admit was rather shallow - mostly coming from listening to things like 'the 20 greatest classical pieces of all time' on the radio.
So what can be done? Do you have any thoughts on the way the footprint of classical music might be increased?

[michael_sayers]

Two sentences in nigh perfect contradiction with one another...
It's quite clearly not only my taste...
Sorabji's music has fortunately only suffered from such travesties of performance very rarely; again, this pianist's near-demolition of some of it didn't just conflict with "my taste", given that, as I mentioned, audience members walked out during the performance, some of whom expressed astonishment at the sheer incompetence, insensitivity and woefully unidiomaitc nature of the playing.
I am indeed an admirer of both; however, the issue here is that there's a world of difference between reasonable variation of interpretation and playing music badly on an inferiorly cared for instrument in a way that listeners feel that the life has been drained from it - this is not about "views on musicology".
I suggested that simply because it seemed that your misreading of the context of the Sorabji reference that I had provided to you was wilful.
I don't see that poorly prepared and played videos will stop that.
I do not know what you might suppose but, as I already stated, this is about unacceptable performance presentation, not "musicological perspectives", be they mine or those of Busoni or Liszt.

Best,

Alistair

Fact is, Alistair, you are too focused on me and everything about me, and on my recordings, to see the big picture.  A musicology which embraces freedom and the spirit of creativity will, no doubt, enable many absurdities.  And this pianist's Sorabji performance, and which you keep mentioning - maybe it was substandard.  I wasn't there to hear it, so how would I know?

The musicology of Franz Liszt and Ferruccio Busoni is for ALL music from the alpha to the omega, and to the very end of time.  Sorabji's music is not an exception to this.  Absence of hearing a successful demonstration of performing Sorbaji's music and with this musicology in mind does not mean it is impossible.

Once again, I am very surprised at you, considering our shared admiration for Franz Liszt and Ferruccio Busoni.

And I know a lot about Busoni, including all the stuff that is out of print and also not in any of the biographies which have been published.  I have read in full music journalist Arthur Abell's reviews of Ferruccio Busoni's mighty series of six consecutive all-Liszt recitals which in many ways were the artistic high point of Busoni's career as a pianist and an interpreter of music.  And Arthur Abell - intimate of Busoni, and many of the great 19th century composers - should in no way be dismissed as you have done in another thread and in regard to his book Talks With Great Composers.  The words of great composers are there, and about the sources and processes of music inspiration, and your response is only that you read it long ago and got nothing out of it?  Though under valued, this is one of the most important texts in music history, and you dismiss it as being without significant implication either for composers or for performers.

And what of Busoni's Sketch for a New Aesthetic of Music?  Do you think it has no bearing upon the performance of music, and also including the music of Sorabji?

This is not about any particular recording or performance, which may or may not be or have been a failure.  These documents are about the musicological big picture - which includes Sorabji's music within that context, and which needs accordingly to be performed freely and with a spirit of creativity.


Mvh,
Michael

[michael_sayers]

Well I couldn't agree more that this is important.
I know very few people irl who have any interest in classical music whatsoever.
Those that do have an interest have a knowledge that they would admit was rather shallow - mostly coming from listening to things like 'the 20 greatest classical pieces of all time' on the radio.
So what can be done? Do you have any thoughts on the way the footprint of classical music might be increased?

Hi stoat_king,

The situation with classical music today is very depressed - I think this is one thing everyone here can agree on!

What it needs is to be performed in a way that almost no one can ignore, and that from the first tone to the last is of transformative power.  It is up to performers to make this change and save classical music.  History shows that it is possible, as with the Lisztomania of the 1800s, and with the Callas craze which continues even today to smoulder.  And with Ervin Nyiregyhazi's performances - whatever one may think of his playing - in the 1940s he would have audiences stomping their feet, cheering him on and shouting his name, and doing the "wave" before anyone knew what the "wave" was.  There isn't any solution in the sense of different marketing, or budget increase, or different planning/organization of the concerts that can do it.

It has to come from the performers.

I am sure it will happen once those in power within the classical music world are dislodged, and this will happen when classical music bottoms out and the present approach to it is finally revealed to have been a total failure with the general public.  When the orchestras finally go under, and the concert hall doors need to be kept open, and the music schools can not financially justify themselves, then, somehow, there will be change.

And maybe even rock music will fill the concert halls significantly then as the doors must be kept open.

Starting from very bottom, classical music will have to fight its way back to the top and on a new basis that the general public wants to hear.

Many years ago - and I mentioned this as no credit to myself, it is just what happened - I met up with a very famous cellist.  I accompanied him in some of Nyiregyhazi's dark music for cello and piano . . . and I played very well thanks to the pressure, accompanying a musician like him, that is pressure!!! . . . and afterwards I played some of Nyiregyhazi's music for him solo and did not hold back on the tone.

He said it reminded him of a few rock concerts he had been too.

That is the kind of excitement and atmosphere people need from classical music.  It doesn't mean the other things won't be there, too, but the ultimate power and excitement is missing in 2015.

The maximum size tone that is possible with a piano needs to be embraced.  And if I can do it, or come close to it - and I am no Magnus Samuelsson - then anyone can do it.  It isn't about strength, it is about accelerating the keys from key surface, and pulling the sound out of a piano instead of pressing or banging it out which actually makes the tone contract relative to the energy expended and induces stridency into the sound instead of focusing the energy directly into the wanted resonances and with maximum purity.  Anyone, man or woman, can do it, and whether one weighs 200 pounds or 120 pounds is of no difference.  It is all about technique and is not about anything else.  An optimal sitting position relative to the piano, maybe lower and further back than one sees most of the time, can help greatly with the employment of the back muscles and with much deeper sources of acceleration.

The general principle applies to orchestras, too.  One can read about how an orchestra would become "transformed" when Liszt conducted.  It didn't become transformed because he could beat time more accurately than other conductors.  It was due to something else, and something that is very much more than just balancing and shaping the timbres, or keeping synchronicity of the performers, managing the bowing of the strings, et c.

I am not worried about the outcome.

There is a saying that when the student is ready, the teacher arrives.

Once classical music bottoms out, it will be a much more democratic market, and many courageous performers, and also the audiences, will reap the benefits.

I just wish I could live long enough to hear more than the beginning of this.

I don't have a specific time line, but I do know from experience that even when one knows something is inevitable, it can take a lot longer to transpire than one might be inclined to suppose, sometimes years or even decades longer.

For now there are performers like Fazil Say who one can hear . . . just listen to the communicativeness of the playing, and the asynchonization of the voices, in the first movement of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata here . . .

 . . . and notice the tremendous communicative power in how he plays the Liszt Sonata . . .

It is going to happen.

And I, for one, am not going to just sit back with a bowl of popcorn, twiddle my thumbs, and watch the show as it unfolds.  I am getting into better technical pianistic condition than ever before in my life, much better than anything heard on my YouTube recordings, and better than how I played back in 1994-95 when for instance the fastest leaps in Scriabin were no issue of accuracy in notes or in any other aspect.  When in good condition I can play fast, not only slow, and way out in the far and Busonian extreme of fast - you just don't hear any of it with these recordings.

The crisis which, with every day that passes is one day closer to entering into full force - this crisis that will be the catalyst to bring all of this to a head will be very similar to the crisis of the late 1700s which overthrew the power of the aristocracies and paved the way for the romantic era in music.

What is approaching isn't just about classical music.  It is about governments and our rights and our democratic say relative to the (undemocratic and evil) things they are doing, currencies, new technologies and industries, financial systems of debt without end . . . but there will be an end to the debt without end and thanks to the dislinear function of interest rates . . . it is a big thing that is coming, so you - and especially if you are young - need to think about how to make it through this not only unimpaired and undamaged, but as a "winner" as there will be many winners and successes.

This will be bigger than the Industrial Revolution, the French Revolution or the Great Depression which finally allowed dislodgement of the massive agriculture sector of the U.S. economy to make way for something very different.  If it hadn't been for the Great Depression, the people who work at Google today might be growing tomatoes.  But it all had to happen as it did and due to a confluence of many factors.

So think about this and your life in it.

What is approaching is way bigger than just about classical music, and is both a grand crisis and also a grand opportunity for those who are equipped and able to seize upon it.

It is a very rarely achieved level of opportunity, historically.  

Think and act positive.

Passivity and inaction in this environment is not wise.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

The situation with classical music today is very depressed - I think this is one thing everyone here can agree on!

What it needs is to be performed in a way that almost no one can ignore, and that from the first tone to the last is of transformative power.  It is up to performers to make this change and save classical music.  History shows that it is possible, as with the Lisztomania of the 1800s, and with the Callas craze which continues even today to smoulder.  And with Ervin Nyiregyhazi's performances - whatever one may think of his playing - in the 1940s he would have audiences stomping their feet, cheering him on and shouting his name, and doing the "wave" before anyone knew what the "wave" was.  There isn't any solution in the sense of different marketing, or budget increase, or different planning/organization of the concerts that can do it.

It has to come from the performers.

Yes, from the performers, but I think that for a return to anything like Liszt's days a lot has to change, not least in the way concerts are presented. Your idol is Nyireghazi; mine is Cziffra, and whilst he briefly set the piano world alight, the critics soon got their teeth into him. If I believed in the transmigration of souls, I truly would believe he was (as a rather more friendly critic wrote "the reincarnation of Liszt"). He was far from academically correct, but a more communicative pianist with a greater technique I have never seen nor heard. And yet even someone of that charisma and talent did not return classical music to the mainstream, despite existing under more favourable conditions than we have now. I firmly believe the way concerts are presented has a lot to do with it. This silent veneration of the dead, as though classical music is a museum piece to be inspected, examined with a microscope, dissected, but never appreciated in any visceral manner, is why it is seen as so aloof, so distanced from today's world, and, frankly, so up its own behind. Liszt wouldn't believe the manner of today's performances. It is the act of an art signing its own death warrant.

[michael_sayers]

Yes, from the performers, but I think that for a return to anything like Liszt's days a lot has to change, not least in the way concerts are presented. Your idol is Nyireghazi; mine is Cziffra, and whilst he briefly set the piano world alight, the critics soon got their teeth into him. If I believed in the transmigration of souls, I truly would believe he was (as a rather more friendly critic wrote "the reincarnation of Liszt"). He was far from academically correct, but a more communicative pianist with a greater technique I have never seen nor heard. And yet even someone of that charisma and talent did not return classical music to the mainstream, despite existing under more favourable conditions than we have now. I firmly believe the way concerts are presented has a lot to do with it. This silent veneration of the dead, as though classical music is a museum piece to be inspected, examined with a microscope, dissected, but never appreciated in any visceral manner, is why it is seen as so aloof, so distanced from today's world, and, frankly, so up its own behind. Liszt wouldn't believe the manner of today's performances. It is the act of an art writing its own death warrant.

Hi ronde_des_sylphes,

Conditions were not favourable in Cziffra's day, and a change in presentation is not what is needed.  Girls with ever shorter skirts, and exposing ever increasing square inches of skin, are not going to save classical music.  This is what is has come down to now, and it isn't working.

Conditions will enable change, eventually.

A world of music critics who would not adequately praise one such as Cziffra (or Busoni, or Franz Liszt, or Nyiregyhazi, et al.) and in contrast to many other performers, is not one that is ready for change.

It will happen though and this will be when classical music finally bottoms out, in which circumstance its near-total failure in recent decades with the public due to it being conducted on a musicological basis that in fact REPUDIATES the musical needs of the public as being of any value whatsoever, is acknowledged.

The same goes for music composition and composers since the early 20th century.  Webern wrote that if Mozart were alive today, Mozart would have to be considered an amateur.  Thus, we are to believe that the public, in what would be their desire to hear a Symphony No. 42 by Mozart, are unqualified to have any say in what is heard, and are merely to be placated with Mozart's great music like a baby with a pacifier - music is only supposed to be about the needs of a small number of qualified elite, according to Webern, and what non-elite persons think about music is supposed to be viewed as garbage.  These 20th century composers have participated in the REPUDIATION of the public.  And thus Piano Performance Majors, and also participants in piano competitions are FORCED in this system to do 20th century music, and now even early 21st century music, regardless of its origins in REPUDIATION of people's needs and lives.

A revolution in classical music is on the way, and it is inevitable, and it will happen no matter what you or I do or don't do, or what you or I think or don't think, about it.

p.s. - I dread to think of what performers may be wearing (or not) in the final days of decline and before the later resurgence of classical music to public greatness!

[stoat_king]

Hi ronde_des_sylphes,
It will happen though and this will be when classical music finally bottoms out, in which circumstance its near-total failure in recent decades with the public due to it being conducted on a musicological basis that in fact REPUDIATES the musical needs of the public as being of any value whatsoever, is acknowledged.

...

Thus, we are to believe that the public, in what would be their desire to hear a Symphony No. 42 by Mozart, are unqualified to have any say in what is heard, and are merely to be placated with Mozart's great music like a baby with a pacifier - music is only supposed to be about the needs of a small number of qualified elite, according to Webern, and what non-elite persons think about music is supposed to be viewed as garbage.  

Interesting. Imo you are entirely correct, but only up to a point.
From my point of view, many of the 'non-elite' explicitly want what is, in this context, garbage.

Jazz suffers from the same thing - like classical music, it requires some effort to appreciate.
This is contrary to what many seem to want from music these days.

Isn't there a sense in which classical music is, by its very nature, somewhat elitist?

I am hoping to have enough time later to respond to an earlier post of yours about 'a coming crisis'.

[ahinton]

Fact is, Alistair, you are too focused on me and everything about me, and on my recordings, to see the big picture.

I am focused on you and what you present and write here (not "everything about you" as you say, which I do not in any case know, of course), so the size of picture that I can and need to see is of necessity and by definition confined to that.

A musicology which embraces freedom and the spirit of creativity will, no doubt, enable many absurdities.

I'm not sure what you mean by this but I would still ask whether you mean "eable" or "encourage" as though "anything goes".

And this pianist's Sorabji performance, and which you keep mentioning - maybe it was substandard.  I wasn't there to hear it, so how would I know?

I've mentioned this only twice and would have done so just once had you not taken it out of context and misunderstood my reason for so doing. His performances were indeed so woefully substandard as to be barely recognisable. I wouldn't expect you to "know" that but, as it was the general consensus of opinion among those who heard him and I personally ought to have at least some idea as to its qualities, you might at least consider taking my own and others' word for it!

The musicology of Franz Liszt and Ferruccio Busoni is for ALL music from the alpha to the omega, and to the very end of time.  Sorabji's music is not an exception to this.  Absence of hearing a successful demonstration of performing Sorbaji's music and with this musicology in mind does not mean it is impossible.

Again, your meaning is unclear. Most Sorabji performances have been excellent. There are now many recordings of it that are shining examples of this.

Once again, I am very surprised at you, considering our shared admiration for Franz Liszt and Ferruccio Busoni.

And I know a lot about Busoni, including all the stuff that is out of print and also not in any of the biographies which have been published.  I have read in full music journalist Arthur Abell's reviews of Ferruccio Busoni's mighty series of six consecutive all-Liszt recitals which in many ways were the artistic high point of Busoni's career as a pianist and an interpreter of music.  And Arthur Abell - intimate of Busoni, and many of the great 19th century composers - should in no way be dismissed as you have done in another thread and in regard to his book Talks With Great Composers.  The words of great composers are there, and about the sources and processes of music inspiration, and your response is only that you read it long ago and got nothing out of it?  Though under valued, this is one of the most important texts in music history, and you dismiss it as being without significant implication either for composers or for performers.

You mention just this one work, which is at best a somewhat bizarre (look at its chapter titles!) account of meetings between its author and a number of composers in which little evidence for their content or sources is provided and which hardly stands as a significant work of scholarship, yet to ignore (or at least omit mention of) as you do works of true Liszt and Busoni scholarship - Walker, Howard, Dent, Searle, Beaumont, Sitsky et al sounds not dissimilar to the dismissal of someone who prefers to rely solely upon Abell. I suppose that I ought to be surprised at you for that, but sadly I cannot say that I am.

And what of Busoni's Sketch for a New Aesthetic of Music?  Do you think it has no bearing upon the performance of music, and also including the music of Sorabji?

It has bearing upon many things.

This is not about any particular recording or performance, which may or may not be or have been a failure.  These documents are about the musicological big picture - which includes Sorabji's music within that context, and which needs accordingly to be performed freely and with a spirit of creativity.

What isn't? If by "it" you mean this thead topic, it's surely about exactly that!

Whilst Urtext fetishism has indeed wreaked havoc at times in the past, there is the world of difference between strict and unyielding adherence to that and the kind of thing that you appear to believe falls into the category of "freedom and creative spirit" in performance which, as I wrote previously, smacks almost of an "anything goes" attitude to which you invariably resort when seeking to justify your own interpretations when they're challenged.

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Hi ronde_des_sylphes,

Conditions were not favourable in Cziffra's day, and a change in presentation is not what is needed.  Girls with ever shorter skirts, and exposing ever increasing square inches of skin, are not going to save classical music.  This is what is has come down to now, and it isn't working.

Conditions will enable change, eventually.

A world of music critics who would not adequately praise one such as Cziffra (or Busoni, or Franz Liszt, or Nyiregyhazi, et al.) and in contrast to many other performers, is not one that is ready for change.

By presentation, I was really referring to the context and manner of performances (ie events to be distantly respected, rather than enjoyed). I maintain it was better in Cziffra's time: specifically I would contrast the almost complete absence of classical music now (other than the Proms) from national TV, with, going back to c 1970, the fact that my teacher interviewed Boulez, Argerich, made a programme on Alkan with Ronald Smith, etc, etc - and these were nationally broadcast on primetime TV. I remain suspicious that the critical attack on Cziffra was partly because audiences were enjoying themselves TOO MUCH, threatening ossified recital conventions. I condemn the attitude that pianism is about regurgitation of the printed text and the attitude that recreative pianism is an act of narcissism by the performer.

[ahinton]

A world of music critics who would not adequately praise one such as Cziffra (or Busoni, or Franz Liszt, or Nyiregyhazi, et al.) and in contrast to many other performers, is not one that is ready for change.

Cziffra, Busoni and Liszt are widely admired by critics, scholars, performers and listeners alike - more so, indeed, than was the case half a century or so ago when there were nothing like the number of recordings of Liszt and Busoni as there are now!

The same goes for music composition and composers since the early 20th century.  Webern wrote that if Mozart were alive today, Mozart would have to be considered an amateur.  Thus, we are to believe that the public, in what would be their desire to hear a Symphony No. 42 by Mozart, are unqualified to have any say in what is heard, and are merely to be placated with Mozart's great music like a baby with a pacifier - music is only supposed to be about the needs of a small number of qualified elite, according to Webern, and what non-elite persons think about music is supposed to be viewed as garbage.  These 20th century composers have participated in the REPUDIATION of the public.  And thus Piano Performance Majors, and also participants in piano competitions are FORCED in this system to do 20th century music, and now even early 21st century music, regardless of its origins in REPUDIATION of people's needs and lives.

You do love painting with the broadest of brushes in primary colours, don't you?! (not to mention splashing the paint around indiscriminately). Would you care to cite the specific Webern references? Webern conducted Mozart on occasion; his teacher Schönberg revered Mozart so much that he famously once chided someone who described him (Schönberg) as an auto-didact (which to a large extent he actually was) with "I am a pupil of Mozart!" Where and when did this alleged REPUDIATION (love the capitals!) commence and to what would you ascribe it? Speaking as a 20th/21st century composer myself, I presume that you include my work in this accusatory dismissal, but what of much of Busoni's which was composed in the 20th century - or Sorabji's? - or that of any number of the tends of thousands of composers active during the past 115 years or so whose music is performed, broadcast and recorded? Sweeping generalisations without a shred of evidence or even any effort to provide some does you no favours whatsoever.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

By presentation, I was really referring to the context and manner of performances (ie events to be distantly respected, rather than enjoyed). I maintain it was better in Cziffra's time: specifically I would contrast the almost complete absence of classical music now (other than the Proms) from national TV, with, going back to c 1970, the fact that my teacher interviewed Boulez, Argerich, made a programme on Alkan with Ronald Smith, etc, etc - and these were nationally broadcast on primetime TV.

Agreed about the primtime TV aspect. Who was your teacher, by the way? Sounds fascinating!

I remain suspicious that the critical attack on Cziffra was partly because audiences were enjoying themselves TOO MUCH, threatening ossified recital conventions. I condemn the attitude that pianism is about regurgitation of the printed text and the attitude that recreative pianism is an act of narcissism by the performer.

There might indeed have been something of this in those days, yet Cherkassky didn't seem to suffer from it!

All that said, there's a world of difference between the imaginative interpretations of Cziffra, Cherkassky et al and the apparent MS "anything goes" situation!

Best,

Alistair

[michael_sayers]

Interesting. Imo you are entirely correct, but only up to a point.
From my point of view, many of the 'non-elite' explicitly want what is, in this context, garbage.

Jazz suffers from the same thing - like classical music, it requires some effort to appreciate.
This is contrary to what many seem to want from music these days.

Isn't there a sense in which classical music is, by its very nature, somewhat elitist?

I am hoping to have enough time later to respond to an earlier post of yours about 'a coming crisis'.

Yes, are right, I am correct only up to a point.  Nonetheless, much of 20th (and now 21st century) music is conceived of with REPUDIATION and INDIFFERENCE toward the public in mind, and Piano Performance Majors and piano competition competitors are FORCED to play such music even though it can not benefit their careers long term unless they only care about the 3% and reducing portion of the population who participate in the commercial classical music market.

Classical music has been made elitist by persons in power.  I get great responses from audience members who are NOT part of that 3%, and this was true even when I was out of shape . . . the future of classical music will - eventually - be determined by that much larger 97%.

I look forward to what you have to say about the coming and historic crisis which is not just about classical music.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Agreed about the primtime TV aspect. Who was your teacher, by the way? Sounds fascinating!

https://www.morgensternsdiaryservice.com/Kenneth.Van.Barthold/Kenneth.TV.shtml TV credits listing - makes the point graphically imo!

[ahinton]

https://www.morgensternsdiaryservice.com/Kenneth.Van.Barthold/Kenneth.TV.shtml TV credits listing - makes the point graphically imo!

Ah! Many thanks for this!

Best,

Alistair