mgh

you would rather hear Vivaldi on a computer sythn midi triggered piano than a world class orchestra  like CSO?  okaaaay then.

nah he was saying that pre-1750 music should be performed in a more 'authentic' style; basically a smaller orchestra playing with no vibrato, generally faster tempi than is currently fashionable. there are several profesional companies doing this such as the Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment. personally being used to modern, romantic-style orchestras, it sounds a bit dry and strange like that, but lots of people like it.
and anyhow, i woujldn't mind listening to it if programmed by someone expert like Rolifer (ron). and lots of music you hear on tv and cinema is now 'played' by samples...

Yes, that's pretty much what I was trying to say.  But instead of "dry", I'd suggest the term "transparent".  The delicate textures in this music can be obscured by rich sound of a modern symphony, especially if a Brahms-sized orchestra is used.  I'm not a totally fussy purist in this.  I love Bach as played on the piano by Glenn Gould and Murry Periah (sp?) for example.  I also loved Bach as interpreted by Walter Carlos.  Switched On Bach rocked my world when it first appeared in the late 60s (or was it early 70S?).
 
 

dmbaer

Mooch4056




How old an orchestra's history have to be to keep the essence of a Vivaldi Piece? Just curious to your taste. WHAT!?

Actually size is arguably more important than authenticity of instruments.  Having a orchestra of a size that would play late romantic era fare is what really kills it when applied to Baroque orchestral music.  But the period instruments do have a distinct sound that's different.  In many cases, they are more difficult to play (or simply keep in tune).  It depends on the instrument.  Forerunners of the piano (I mean forte pianos, not harpsichords) sound vastly different than our modern (and magnificent) concert grands, whereas violins, etc. have much less obvious differences.
 
The more interesting question is when should one transition from period instrument ensambles to modern?  I have some Schmann symphonies played by a group call the Hanover Band that make a convicing case that earlier insturments are valid for Romantic era music.  I have two complete sets of Mozart piano concertos, one with Murry Pariah on a piano and one with Malcom Bilson on a forte piano (and orchestra to match).  I love them both. 
 
There are no hard and fast rules, but the generalization that Baroque orchestral music should be avoided by large modern orchestras wouldn't be too far off the mark.

ohh. We used to talk about this in Music History class on occasion.

The question I would have about this is ..... would you agree that if the musicians of the baroque era had access to current instruments that are easier technically to play, as well as have a different timbre, probably brighter..... (not sure)...would you say if they could......would they have used a modern instrument back then -- OR was what the composers in the Baroque period ....what composers had in their head was the timbre of the instruments of the baroque period... and that's the timbre we today should go after -- even if musicians of the later period would have refereed today modern instruments?

Hopefully the question makes sense and is clear.

Really I am not arguing.. I am just wondering.

 I am more of a pop/ smooth jazz musician than a classical musician - and beginning/intermediate grade school band director. Most of my classical knowledge comes from a couple of years of music  history/listening classes we had to take to be educators in the school system - 

so .....thoughts if its not too much of your time.... 


WHAT!?

dIntresting point here...

However i have my preference....I have a hard time listening to music with Period correct instreumets....because of the intonation problems....it really works on my nerves so much so that I really do not enjoy the music anymore.....so wrong or not. I would much prefer to listen to music played on modern instruments vs. period instruments....

Just my 2 cents.

As an aside, although Mendelssohn was not a Baroque composer, I'm convinced he would have totally embraced the synthesizer sound.

Thanks for your reply Dmbaer - and the Mendelssohn thing - funny - he should have been born in the 80's then it was all synthiesizer all the time that there decade HA! WHAT!?

Hi,

The question I would have about this is ..... would you agree that if the musicians of the baroque era had access to current instruments that are easier technically to play, as well as have a different timbre, probably brighter..... (not sure)...would you say if they could......would they have used a modern instrument back then -- OR was what the composers in the Baroque period ....what composers had in their head was the timbre of the instruments of the baroque period... and that's the timbre we today should go after -- even if musicians of the later period would have refereed today modern instruments?

I think, that comparing today to yesterday is ... nice in a comparative way ... like we did this and they did that. The hard part is displacing them to today and placing us yesterday! That is good fodder and bapu for a movie, but ... it's all it is!

Music in those days was not as wide and prevalent as it is today, in terms of the number of instruments and availability of instruments, which made for a completely different set of possibilities for teaching music to anyone. You almost had to be lucky, or rich! Of course, today, this is not an issue!

Speaking about the tones and what modern technology has done for music, which is allows music to be created by non-musical people, which never happened before that we are aware of in the history of the art form, is strange ... I almost think, and this is based on reading and movies and all that ... that in those days if you were pitch perfect, you were automatically a "musician" and immediately placed by whatever instrument, which of course got you to meet a few teachers and whatever.

Today, the instrumentation building and design is much more detailed and "perfect" than it has ever been. What is difficult to disseminate is if someone like Mozart was a genius, since he had nothing to work with ... a veritable childs piano if we want a parallel ... and yet he could visualize things that had more lines of music than ever before ... no one was doing that many instruments or things at the time ... and yet ... here it is! And today, we consider a single rock'n'roll person just doing some blues scales a genius on his instrument.

The ability, more than likely, is quite comparable. Any other idea, I would imagine tends to screw up the equation and make us look smarter than the neanderthal man! And I'm not sure that is a good comparison to make at all ... but I think that we can make a chart that gives you a good idea of how good this person or that was with what they had compared to the Salieri's (for example -- specially!!!!!) and some of the other ones before them like Handel and Bach, who are almost mathematicians ... that helped define and probably make sure that the instruments were built correctly ... which I think is where their importance probably needs to be, instead of outstanding composers.

Funny thing ... I have been reading "Sobre Teoria e Critica Literaria" written by my dad and published by my mom. It's considered a master work in the subject matter and was one of the things that helped my dad found the Comparative Literature programs for the University of California systems in the early 70's. And one of the biggest things in the first sections is how things can be compared in time, and ... another that I found myself discussing in the music board, that music, art and the time period are not separated ... there almost always is a link! And I find myself saying the same thing ... weird!