David Zinman LIVE! Anyone?

[Suzie]

Originally posted by ~Leslie:
It means:

Rolling on floor laughing my (pentatonic)axe off.~

Les,

I'll have what you're having.

Suz

[Suzie]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by euphony131:
[B]LOL! Rod, us two "cheeky" guys just need to sit down, have a coupla' stiff ones and laugh this out. You bring your Hanover, I'll bring my Zinman and together we'll "rock" the whole bar! Sound good?

BTW, what does "ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!" mean?

Uhhh...and now about Zinman's concert program? Anyone?

Leo suggests http://www.kulturinfo.ch/

Good luck.

Suz

[Serge]

Very interesting....

So, Rod, dare I presume that you have banished from your existence any form of recorded medium involving an instrument dating past 1850 or so? I can't understand your deep and hostile reactions to anything played on modern instruments. It would be okay to say you prefer period performances, but you in the same breath tend to claim that new performances aren't worth the time or energy spent complaining about them. That, of course, is deeply imposing on those who actually find worth in new recordings. Come on. If music does not evolve, it dies. I don't particularly enjoy period performances, but I don't claim them worse than modern ones.

You must know that Bach was a strong adherent to the advancement of musical technology, that Beethoven wrote for the most advanced pianos of the day and crazy, messed-up things like Panharmonicums, and that Berlioz and Wagner both enjoyed scoring for orchestras beyond the normal size. The variety available now in the choice of how we listen to music is incredible. Don't denigrate modern instruments just because you have hard feelings for them.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Serge:
Very interesting....

So, Rod, dare I presume that you have banished from your existence any form of recorded medium involving an instrument dating past 1850 or so? I can't understand your deep and hostile reactions to anything played on modern instruments. It would be okay to say you prefer period performances, but you in the same breath tend to claim that new performances aren't worth the time or energy spent complaining about them. That, of course, is deeply imposing on those who actually find worth in new recordings. Come on. If music does not evolve, it dies. I don't particularly enjoy period performances, but I don't claim them worse than modern ones.

First of all I want to say something about Gardiner, I never said I hated him, and have recommended his Beethoven Masses on many occasions, a few of the B symphonies are good also, but the remainder is very lack lustre (his 6th is one of the worst I have heard, the 3rd have lame tempi in the last 3 movements whilst the 1st movement is quick but heavy handed, the 1st symphony is recorded in a vacuum, the 4th's adagio is very slow, the 7th's allegretto is bland, the 9th's adagio and scherzo are bland. But No 5 and 2 and 8 are pretty good). It was just that I expected more from this darling of the concert hall. His B concertos are unimaginative also.

No to your point, I have no problems with music of whatever ear being played on instruments it was written for - you can't play jazz on a Walter, whereas Mozart and Haydn sound rather lame on a Steinway. I take it as a basic concept that composers write in general for instruments as they know them, regardless of their opinions of these instruments. B praised highly some pianos of his own time - he remained loyal to Streicher from his youth to the end of his days. B did write for the very best pianos only, and it took time for the best to become the standard, but I would say that B was at most only about 5-7 years ahead of manufacturers as a whole in his ideal for the piano. I simply suggest that the notes he wrote suit the nuances of the old instruments rather than that of instruments 200 years later. I have heard a Streicher of 1854, now with iron frame and English action, in a Beethoven museum that sounds nothing like a Steinway whatsoever - so are you assuming that B's intentions just jumped over this period to the begining of the 20th Century? B's music was written to be performed when it was written, thus common sence would dictate he would write for the best instruments on offer, and that if he by some mirace had access to a modern piano he would have wrote quite differently for it. There is nothing radical in this position.

Originally posted by Serge:

You must know that Bach was a strong adherent to the advancement of musical technology, that Beethoven wrote for the most advanced pianos of the day and crazy, messed-up things like Panharmonicums, and that Berlioz and Wagner both enjoyed scoring for orchestras beyond the normal size. The variety available now in the choice of how we listen to music is incredible. Don't denigrate modern instruments just because you have hard feelings for them.

Perhaps you should bare in mind that the vast majority of orchestras used gut stringing throughout the Romantic period, the introduction of steel strings being a C20th invention - the introduction of which was cursed by many comentators. I don't have hard feelings for modern instruments, but they weren't designed for Beethoven's music primarily in mind. The technical advances made in woodwind instruments had nothing whatsoever to do with Beethoven, for example. Don't denigrate old instruments just because they conflict with your preconceptions - the music always must come first, inconveniences to musicians second.

Rod


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 01-15-2001).]

[Serge]

I don't denigrate period instruments.

[euphony131]

Hey Serge! How's it going! Been meaning to call you or you call me whichevers.

Anyway, I don't think we ought to press this issue out any further with Rod. It becomes a matter of banging your head against the wall. LOL!

Rod -- For the record, I never dismissed Period recordings per se, on the contrary I've heard some spectacular ones a' la Gardiner's Bach (which you have not listened to). I just feel it's unfair to so callously dismiss ALL modern instrument playing (including some Period -- via Gardiner!) as something heinous and deserving "extinction." You implied as much when you summarily dismissed the likes of Gardiner, Previn and Haitink as so much worthless trash whose recordings we would be better off without (see your replies in the "ULTIMATE Beethoven concert..." thread).

I feel that maybe a little more "open-mindedness" might be in order. That's all. Particularly from a person who "jams" on electric guitar to the tunes of AC/DC! And no, I'm not "trashing" pop music, I'm just pointing out the disparity in your own position.

It's true I feel WELL-DONE modern instrument performances (such as Zinman's) are generally more dynamic and crisper than Period ones, however I still have great respect for those who have performed miracles with period playing (like -- again -- Gardiner). Though I sometimes wonder what they could've achieved had they used Modern instruments. But needless, I understand the "scholarly" importance of Period research which in turn translates to better "Modern" playing, and sometimes even visa-versa! You see? We're not that far apart after all!

Ultimately of course it all comes down to what YOU prefer. If you like the "aged" sound of Period-style playing -- than POWER to you! Bravo! You go for it! You prefer aged Scotch over a fresh Guinness -- ok, fine. But please don't assume everything else is pure rubbish destined for the fire. Didn't you yourself admit to enjoying Von Karajan? Goodness! So you do occasionally like Modern instrument playing after all!

Well that is THAT. Finito! Rod -- we're just asking you lighten up a little. Why does it have to be ALL OR NOTHING? Is there not room for both? (Even I like "aged Scotch" once in awhile!) If ain't the Hanover Band then just toss it on the fire??? Come on! Why is any other interpretaion utter Blasphemy??? Zinman himself poured over the very latest in musicology research and reams of notes (some from Beethoven's own conversation books and letters) to get to the heart of the maestro -- you're going to tell me that has no merit whatsoever just because he didn't have the "gumption" to use instruments that were antedulivian?

We can go on and on and on and on and on about the semantics of musical Integrity, Authenticity, Intentions and blah-blah. But I won't. In fact, I don't think I want to even follow this thread any further.

Now Rod, let's you and me hold hands -- yes, you too Serge -- let's all hold hands and tell each other what a wonderful, sunny and happy day it's going to be and how we're all going to get along and be nice to one another and do one good thing today because "It's Good to be Good."

Ahhhhhh..wasn't that nice?


[This message has been edited by euphony131 (edited 01-16-2001).]

[This message has been edited by euphony131 (edited 01-16-2001).]

[Rod]

Originally posted by euphony131:
Hey Serge! How's it going! Been meaning to call you or you call me whichevers.

Anyway, I don't think we ought to press this issue out any further with Rod. It becomes a matter of banging your head against the wall. LOL!

Rod -- For the record, I never dismissed Period recordings per se, on the contrary I've heard some spectacular ones a' la Gardiner's Bach (which you have not listened to). I just feel it's unfair to so callously dismiss ALL modern instrument playing (including some Period -- via Gardiner!) as something heinous and deserving "extinction." You implied as much when you summarily dismissed the likes of Gardiner, Previn and Haitink as so much worthless trash whose recordings we would be better off without.

What deserved extinction was not some particular style of playing, but rather some compositions!! I dismiss playing that is simply incorrect for this particular music. Most Beethoven recordings are pretty forgetable, so if we could remove these from the shelves the better ones would gain more attention.

Originally posted by euphony131:

I feel that maybe a little more "open-mindedness" might be in order. That's all. Particularly from a person who "jams" on electric guitar to the tunes of AC/DC! And no, I'm not "trashing" pop music, I'm just pointing out the disparity in your own position.

It's true I feel WELL-DONE modern instrument performances (such as Zinman's) are generally more dynamic and crisper than Period ones, however I still have great respect for those who have performed miracles with period playing (like -- again -- Gardiner). Though I sometimes wonder what they could've achieved had they used Modern instruments. But needless, I understand the "scholarly" importance of Period research which in turn translates to better "Modern" playing, and sometimes even visa-versa! You see? We're not that far apart after all!

I suggest it is YOU who needs to have his mind opened, you are simply following the status quo wheras I am trying to inject some realism. Modern instruments simply do not sound right for music such as Beethovens, and modern playing techniques exasserbate this situation. We are not all that far appart - Zinman is a move in the right direction, but why didn't he go one step further and find a period orch to conduct? Why all the excitement about these recordings which are not particularly revolutionary to my period experienced ears?

Originally posted by euphony131:

Ultimately of course it all comes down to what YOU prefer. If you like the "aged" sound of Period-style playing -- than POWER to you! Bravo! You go for it! You prefer aged Scotch over a fresh Guinness -- ok, fine. But please don't assume everything else is pure rubbish destined for the fire. Didn't you yourself admit to enjoying Von Karajan? Goodness! So you do occasionally like Modern instrument playing after all!

Period performance does not sound 'aged'!! It is the modern style that makes the music sound old fashioned!! Imagine a great painting covered in layers of dirt, then seeing it restored to its original freshness and glory.

Originally posted by euphony131:

Well that is THAT. Finito! Rod -- we're just asking you lighten up a little. Why does it have to be ALL OR NOTHING? Is there not room for both? (Even I like "aged Scotch" once in awhile!) If ain't the Hanover Band then just toss it on the fire??? Come on! Why is any other interpretaion utter Blasphemy??? Zinman himself poured over the very latest in musicology research and reams of notes (some from Beethoven's own conversation books and letters) to get to the heart of the maestro -- you're going to tell me that has no merit whatsoever just because he didn't have the "gumption" to use instruments that were antedulivian?

If people put words into my mouth, I always have to come back to put matters straight, who said the Hanover Band were beyond reproach? There set is not perfect either, but there is a spirited freshness about them and the I like the sound. I just expect more after 15 years. Zinman's research it to be credited, but he has not taken it to its logical conclusion. You can get the essence of the master on modern instruments, but I want more than the essence, I want the whole picture! Authenticity is not a side-show issue, its the biggest, indeed the ONLY issue.

Originally posted by euphony131:

Now Rod, let's you and me hold hands -- yes, you too Serge -- let's all hold hands tell each other what a wonderful, sunny and happy day it's going to be and how we're all going to get along and be nice to one another and do one good thing today because "It's Good to be Good."

Ahhhhhh..wasn't that nice?

If we are only here to sit around and pat each other on the back, what's the point of being here, nothing new or interesting would ever come of it and we'd end up in a sickly guey soup of sentimentality. I'll happily argue the authentic cause until one of you can provide a better argument to the contrary. So you better start thinking if all this bores you!

Rod


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin