robison@eosp1.UUCP (Tobias D. Robison) (04/30/84)
References: If you have access to recordings stretching back over the last 100 (YES! 100) years, or even longer if you count music boxes and barrel organs (yielding two "recordings" at least from Mozart's time), you will inevitably be struck by the fascinating evolution of performing standards and styles. Some of the most interesting changes, I believe, were heavily interested by the evolution of recordings. For example: We all know that there has been an incredible improvement in technique on all instruments in the 20th Century. Some of this is doubtless due to the remorseless recordings which: - make it obvious how many mistakes a performer makes - (contrarywise!) set new artifically high standards when editors edit out mistakes from the recording. Editing out mistakes goes back at least to the duo-art (?) piano rolls of the 20's (?), which recorded both the notes, and also the touchstrength of each note. If you listen, for example, to Wilhelm Friedemann's fine piano roll of the Beethoven 16th sonata, you will notice that the fast 16th note runs, at incredible speed, are somewhat wooden and were doubtless edited in. In the early 20th century, fine ensemble was highly prized but rare. Mono recordings, bringing all sounds to a point source, made it easy to hear any raggedness in ensemble. Up to the 1950's, performers rose to the challenge and produced recorders of remarkable ensemble, even better than the acclaimed early recordings of the Sousa band. (Ensemble is that extraordinary ability of musicians to play notes precisely together, or precisiely not together, in both rhythm and expression, as they wish.) Fine ensemble is now rapidly becoming a lost art because (I believe) of the rise of stereo recordings. These allow the ear to hear sounds as NOT coming from a point source. It is now much more dificult to hear the quality of ensemble playing, even though it is at the same time easier to hear any one instrument. Less perfection in ensemble is now acceptable to the great majority of listeners. I'll be adding other notes on this topic. Please join in... - Toby Robison (not Robinson!) allegra!eosp1!robison decvax!ittvax!eosp1!robison princeton!eosp1!robison
mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (05/02/84)
There was a piano-recording technique by Welte(?) which captured the
finger movements on the keys, enabling any piano to be replayed by
a "vorsetzer(sp)" that emulated the pianist's fingers. The Book of the
Month Club had a set of recordings made this way by composers and
virtuosi around the turn of the century. I don't remember all the
performers, but they included Saint Saens, Hoffman, Paderewski,
Debussy, Ravel(?) and quite a few more.
My impression of the performing styles in comparison with today's
fashion was that the virtuosi sounded terrible whereas the composers
were great pianists. The virtuosi put in their own ideas of rubato
and idiosyncratic (mis)emphases, whereas the composers played the
music in such a way as to bring out what was implied by the notes.
Wouldn't is be great to find out how Liszt REALLY played? Berlioz
was death on pianists who took unwarranted liberties, but thought
Liszt was superb; yet these virtuosi whose performances now seem so
idiosyncratic were mostly pupils of Liszt or his pupils.
--
Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt