Audio Asylum Thread Printer

In Reply to: Holding HIP Feet To The Fire posted by Severius! Supremus Invictus on April 15, 2005 at 12:59:17:

The concept of HIP is an interesting one, because it is, in fact, all conjecture. Well, not all. Certainly we have the evidence of the instruments themselves, which can be used to assume a certain sound picture. However, in the absence of aural evidence, we really have no provable idea of how music was performed, how well (or not) it was played, etc.
And, even the aural evidence can be misleading. Do we really think performers played in the studio when recording 4 and a half minute takes for 78's the same way they played live? Did Haydn play his symphonies the same way in London as he did at Esterhaza? Listen to the performances of Mahler's 4th by Mengelberg, Walter, and Klemperer - do they give a consistent idea of how Mahler conducted the 4th? And, does that matter? Should a conductor study the Mengelberg recording and try to replicate it, or should he (and the orchestra) return to the score to try to make it live for the audience?
An analogy can be given for performances of Shakespeare. Watch the two filmed versions of Henry V-Olivier and Branagh. Both actors are distinguished Shakespeareans, and yet are utterly different. I'll wager (though we'll never know, will we) that the actor portraying Henry V back in Will's day was different yet again. It is interesting, but ultimately futile to try to attempt to declaim Shakespeare in the way it was done in 1600.
So what we have are performers making great works come alive for their generation. Harnoncourt once elaborated what he was doing with the Concentus Musicus Wien sort of as follows" I'm trying to give an 18th century performance to contrast with all the 19th century performances we hear-I'd love to hear a 20th century performance of Bach" .
But that's what Harnoncourt (who I respect quite a lot) was doing-giving a late 20th century performance of Bach. These things follow trends-someone like Karl Richter seems hopelessly outdated these days, but in 1960 his performances were considered to be aware and informed, in contrast to the previous generation of performers.
So, I have my preferences. I prefer Baroque music on "original" instruments - gut strings, yes, steel,no harpsichord yes, piano no-but starting with Mozart and Haydn, I generally prefer modern instruments-however, I want a performance that makes the music come alive, not one that embalms it. I like the sound picture of Baroque music on "original" instruments, but can accept non originals (actually, I really don't like Bach on piano-to me it sounds all wrong-but I don't think there is something immoral with playing Bach on piano).
Landowska said "You play Bach your way, I'll play him HIS way"-but obviously she was playing Bach her way-and I don't think Bach would have had it any other way.

Music Lane

An interesting discussion to have