In Reply to: All of the above posted by Analog Scott on January 10, 2017 at 14:44:39:
However welcome the improvements to 17th and 18th and early 19th instruments may have been, they did bring about a different sound, sometimes vastly different. And many of the changes were spurred by the need for louder instruments capable of enough volume to fill larger venues, rather than just better intonation, flexibility or ease of playing, though all those come into play too as you correctly point out.
I don't think any intelligent, open-minded musician or listener would reject modern instruments as a bad thing. But I also think that a well-done recreation of the original sound can be worthwhile and enjoyable to hear. Of course, the goal must always be musical worth first and historical authenticity a distant second. And I don't mean to imply more modern instruments or approaches must be replaced by something more "authentic". There's plenty of room for all sorts of approaches.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Maybe so, but "inferior" implies different - rbolaw 16:43:45 01/10/17 (1)
- "But I also think that a well-done recreation of the original sound can be worthwhile and enjoyable to hear" - Analog Scott 22:15:58 01/10/17 (0)