The role of perfection in classical music
Posted by: mikeeschman on 28 March 2009
When you first develop an interest in classical music, and begin the search for the music that speaks to your soul, one of the issues that is brought into stark relief is the issue of performance practice. If a performer's execution is less than perfect, but his conception of the piece is illuminating, how does that affect the value and the meaning of the work itself?
In other types of music, this issue is generally not paramount, because performers of other musics typically do not develop the range of technical mastery that is typical of classical musicians.
But it is a central issue in performances of classical music, precisely because some performers have literally achieved perfection. In achieving that perfection, have these performers diluted, distorted or otherwise damaged the musical meaning of what they play?
The first thing that occurs to me is that a player who plays perfectly has the option of playing any music they like, any way they see fit, whereas a player with technical deficiencies must craft an interpretation with his deficiencies in mind, so that his flaws inflict the least amount of damage to the message of the music. The performance habits of all musicians quickly become second nature, and stamp there character on every performance.
As a listener, i am excited to hear a flawless performance, in part because perfection is an exciting concept that is rarely encountered in human life. I am stunned and elevated to a high state of hopefulness and joy at the appearance of the pristine and flawless.
If I have a central belief that colors and guides every one of my listening sessions it is this : a good performance stands outside time and space in its own sphere of influence, and puts your being in direct spiritual contact with the composer at the moment of creation, with the performer acting as the medium that establishes and allows this communication.
Technical flaws stain that communication. If you attended a performance of Hamlet, and the actor portraying Hamlet spoke with a lisp, you might conclude that the lisp added to the power and the emotion of his performance. If you did, i would call that a wrong-headed idea. For me, clarity in speech is central to the character of Hamlet. It is important for me to hear what Hamlet says.
One of the things that happens when you hear a perfect performance is that your idea of what is possible emotionally in that piece of music is expanded. Broad, dramatic strokes that had moved may seem trite and overblown in the light of perfection. Nuance and subtlety can achieve a finer level of graduation, and stand out clear and undistorted in the perfect performance. This is simply not so otherwise.
For these reasons, the recordings that I cherish most are the perfect performances. Anytime I want to hear a flawed reading, it is available to me. I want to taste, and bask in the presence of the perfect while I can. These perfect performers have elevated their understanding and emotion to a higher plane.
It takes everything to the next level.
Long live perfection :-)
In other types of music, this issue is generally not paramount, because performers of other musics typically do not develop the range of technical mastery that is typical of classical musicians.
But it is a central issue in performances of classical music, precisely because some performers have literally achieved perfection. In achieving that perfection, have these performers diluted, distorted or otherwise damaged the musical meaning of what they play?
The first thing that occurs to me is that a player who plays perfectly has the option of playing any music they like, any way they see fit, whereas a player with technical deficiencies must craft an interpretation with his deficiencies in mind, so that his flaws inflict the least amount of damage to the message of the music. The performance habits of all musicians quickly become second nature, and stamp there character on every performance.
As a listener, i am excited to hear a flawless performance, in part because perfection is an exciting concept that is rarely encountered in human life. I am stunned and elevated to a high state of hopefulness and joy at the appearance of the pristine and flawless.
If I have a central belief that colors and guides every one of my listening sessions it is this : a good performance stands outside time and space in its own sphere of influence, and puts your being in direct spiritual contact with the composer at the moment of creation, with the performer acting as the medium that establishes and allows this communication.
Technical flaws stain that communication. If you attended a performance of Hamlet, and the actor portraying Hamlet spoke with a lisp, you might conclude that the lisp added to the power and the emotion of his performance. If you did, i would call that a wrong-headed idea. For me, clarity in speech is central to the character of Hamlet. It is important for me to hear what Hamlet says.
One of the things that happens when you hear a perfect performance is that your idea of what is possible emotionally in that piece of music is expanded. Broad, dramatic strokes that had moved may seem trite and overblown in the light of perfection. Nuance and subtlety can achieve a finer level of graduation, and stand out clear and undistorted in the perfect performance. This is simply not so otherwise.
For these reasons, the recordings that I cherish most are the perfect performances. Anytime I want to hear a flawed reading, it is available to me. I want to taste, and bask in the presence of the perfect while I can. These perfect performers have elevated their understanding and emotion to a higher plane.
It takes everything to the next level.
Long live perfection :-)
Posted on: 28 March 2009 by JamieL
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
In other types of music, this issue is generally not paramount, because performers of other musics typically do not develop the range of technical mastery that is typical of classical musicians.
Long live perfection :-)
Typically no, but some/many do. Classical music was not an option open to African Americans in the first half of the last century, so many expressed their abilities in jazz.
There are also certain instruments that virtuosity in classical music is far behind other types of music, drums (as opposed to percussion) and to an extent the guitar.
I collect a lot of live recordings, and it is the flaws, not necessarily with the playing, often the equipment, or the stage set-up, that bring forward unheard aspects in the music.
In painting this was a process employed by Picasso, he would sketch a scene, or person, and then make a number of sketches from that, sometimes up to 80. As each sketch picked out elements in the character of what he saw, marks, the texture of the paper, etc. gradually became prominent elements as the process moved towards completion.
This is a similar process to the jazz bands who took a basic chord structure for a piece, but the performance was down to the interpretation of the assembled musicians, under the direction of the band leader.
Certainly lack of technical ability can lead to a disappointing performance, but beyond a certain (professional) level of ability of the musicians, different interpretations can be very rewarding.
Yes striving for a perfect rendition of a piece of music is a good thing, but also allowing space for accidents, imperfections opens up interesting interpretations.
Posted on: 28 March 2009 by pe-zulu
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
One of the things that happens when you hear a perfect performance is that your idea of what is possible emotionally in that piece of music is expanded. Broad, dramatic strokes that had moved may seem trite and overblown in the light of perfection. Nuance and subtlety can achieve a finer level of graduation, and stand out clear and undistorted in the perfect performance. This is simply not so otherwise.
No, not always. The modern urge for technical perfection may often occupy that much of the musicians attention when recording, that it leads to general cautiousness in playing, and this may in the end detract from the natural expression. This issue was, as you remember, the cause of my objection to Pollini´s late Beethoven Sonatas.
Posted on: 28 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by pe-zulu:quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
One of the things that happens when you hear a perfect performance is that your idea of what is possible emotionally in that piece of music is expanded. Broad, dramatic strokes that had moved may seem trite and overblown in the light of perfection. Nuance and subtlety can achieve a finer level of graduation, and stand out clear and undistorted in the perfect performance. This is simply not so otherwise.
The modern urge for technical perfection may often occupy that much of the musicians attention when recording, that it leads to general cautiousness in playing, and this may in the end detract from the natural expression.
I do not detect the slightest hint of restraint or of indecision or a lack of focus, at any parts per million, or billion for that matter, in Pollini's reading of the last three Beethoven piano sonatas. In fact, I find an almost reckless abandon in the readings, that brings emotion of such depth and breath that it makes me reconsider everything in life; it is an experience unequaled in my 59 years.
So, before you ask, the answer is yes, Pollini elicits an emotional response from me that is broader and wider than any such response that I have ever had to a performance of music. To date, these performances have provided my most meaningful response to music in 59 years.
I consider such a response to be filled to overflowing with genuine, heart-felt emotion.
Do you beg to differ?
Posted on: 28 March 2009 by u5227470736789439
This whole thing about perfection in recordings is an odd one.
I actually can find perfection quite startling as it is not possible in real life. Never! No perfect performance has yet been given, so to find edited perfection in recordings is invariably deeply disturbing for me!
I cannot listen twice to such a recording, and indeed only ever owned one Pollini recording [Schubert Wanderer Fantasy], which was duly listened to once and given away.
Absolutely incredibly fine piano playing ruined by the removal of the few human msitakes that even Pollini would have made in it!
I have Edwin Fischer's priceless and fairly technically flawed recording, which I prefer on almost ever level!
ATB from George
I actually can find perfection quite startling as it is not possible in real life. Never! No perfect performance has yet been given, so to find edited perfection in recordings is invariably deeply disturbing for me!
I cannot listen twice to such a recording, and indeed only ever owned one Pollini recording [Schubert Wanderer Fantasy], which was duly listened to once and given away.
Absolutely incredibly fine piano playing ruined by the removal of the few human msitakes that even Pollini would have made in it!
I have Edwin Fischer's priceless and fairly technically flawed recording, which I prefer on almost ever level!
ATB from George
Posted on: 28 March 2009 by mikeeschman
George, I love that Wanderer Fantasy!
You give humans far too little credit.
I have attended many live performances that were perfect in every detail.
Of course, I could never do that myself, but that's not the measure I prefer to use on the world at large!
I hope the world is a bigger place than me and my thoughts!
Pollini is one of the greats.
each to his own ...
You give humans far too little credit.
I have attended many live performances that were perfect in every detail.
Of course, I could never do that myself, but that's not the measure I prefer to use on the world at large!
I hope the world is a bigger place than me and my thoughts!
Pollini is one of the greats.
each to his own ...
Posted on: 28 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by GFFJ:
I actually can find perfection quite startling as it is not possible in real life.
actually, i think the norm here in new orleans is to expect perfection in every sort of music. i know players who feel defective because they have made two mistakes in a decade. slipping up that often makes them think they are losing it :-)
i have heard R & B bands here play rhythm with such perfection, i have not heard it equaled live or in recordings by anyone.
it's like anything else that requires love, attention and concentration. you can do whatever it is you expect of yourself, if you can really throw yourself into it.
i'm glad these fellows didn't hear your message about perfection. they would have learned to make mistakes. much better as things are, than that.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by Mat Cork
Offthread Mike, since I know the title says 'classical', but I agree with GFF, humans are incapable of perfection...and I love that. It defines humanity.
I love on records like John Coltranes 'Ballads' album, that he was playing with a sore lip and you can hear the whispyness of it, for me, it makes it far more emotive.
So, I don't have anything like your knowledge of classical Mike, but I'm unlikely to agree. If I hear Kempf playing Beethoven...I love the fact that you can hear tape hiss. It makes it more human and I can identify with it...and love it.
I love on records like John Coltranes 'Ballads' album, that he was playing with a sore lip and you can hear the whispyness of it, for me, it makes it far more emotive.
So, I don't have anything like your knowledge of classical Mike, but I'm unlikely to agree. If I hear Kempf playing Beethoven...I love the fact that you can hear tape hiss. It makes it more human and I can identify with it...and love it.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Mat Cork:
I love the fact that you can hear tape hiss. It makes it more human and I can identify with it...and love it.
enjoy your tape hiss, i enjoy hearing musicians play. like writers (Thomas Hardy) they can produce perfection.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by Whizzkid
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:quote:Originally posted by GFFJ:
I actually can find perfection quite startling as it is not possible in real life.
actually, i think the norm here in new orleans is to expect perfection in every sort of music. i know players who feel defective because they have made two mistakes in a decade. slipping up that often makes them think they are losing it :-)
i have heard R & B bands here play rhythm with such perfection, i have not heard it equaled live or in recordings by anyone.
it's like anything else that requires love, attention and concentration. you can do whatever it is you expect of yourself, if you can really throw yourself into it.
i'm glad these fellows didn't hear your message about perfection. they would have learned to make mistakes. much better as things are, than that.
Mike,
I'd like for you to give or point me in the direction of the "perfection blueprint" so that I can use it in reference to my collection or when I attend a concert.
For me perfection is a honourable pursuit but ultimately a flawed one which can lead to a dehumanising of Art if pursued obssesively I feel you are confusing perfect with right. At any time a piece of Music or Art can seem spot on or right to you but leaves others cold and feeling wrong. Many things come together to produce a great performance and if all them come together at the same time this can be perceived as perfection but perfect to what its just the fact that they seem that way if you were to relive those moments again you would I'm sure find flaws that were not noticed on the first experience. To me its the unexpected that makes Art Art and this is even more pertinent with music there are many people who can sing perfectly and appear on "talent shows" but some of the best singers voices don't have great range or depth of tone what they do have is the ability to convey the emotion and meaning in the lyrics of the song which many of the so called great singers of this world fail to do. There is no such thing as perfection and even more so no real way to quantify it even if it did exist.
Dean...
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Whizzkid:
I'd like for you to give or point me in the direction of the "perfection blueprint" so that I can use it in reference to my collection or when I attend a concert.
let's stick with the recording that got all this started. Maruizo Pollini playing Beethoven Piano Sonatas No. 30/31/32 Op. 109/110/111.
these sonatas were written as a group the same time that Beethoven was working on the Missa Solemnis, and presumably preoccupied with writing for the human voice.
In many places, he indulges in a practice called part writing. This has a pianists play multiple voices in a single hand, frequently over a trill (rapidly repeating two notes adjacent to each other). Of all things, that is possibly the hardest for a pianist to execute successfully.
Pollini's part playing is so perfect, the voices literally sound as if they were each a separate performer. He maintains this level of playing throughout.
Some feel this perfection washes the music of all meaningful emotion, and leaves it a trite and empty hulk. I think playing those voices with absolute independence brings Beethoven's musicial intent and meaning in sharp focus.
I can't comprehend an attitude which establishes errors as the currency of musical meaning. When a piece is performed with the highest possible technique, a layer seperating the listener from the composer is removed.
In Pollini's case, the listener is treated to a level of polish unequaled by any of the living, and precious few of the dead. To me that is a very special quality to be savored and enjoyed.
You can choose to look at the human condition as a rat's nest of fumbles and unintended gaffs that interrupt the discourse, imbuing them with meaning. Or you can look at the human condition as a striving towards a radiant future, where an overwhelming sense of hope brings a sure, clear voice to the discourse.
I am continually amazed and delighted by the capacity of musicians to produce music. When I am treated to a performance in which the performer's hand never falters, I swell with pride in that performer's accomplishment.
Classical music, and especially piano music, is at least in part an athletic event - it is part of what Beethoven intended, that these last three piano sonatas be an athletic event.
So there is no glory in dropping the ball.
But the central point is really this : Pollini executes his part playing perfectly, and I am excited and happy for the privilege of having heard it. He doesn't have to gum anything up for me to appreciate what he does.
I say hurray for him! and it gives me hope for the rest of us. After all, if hope does not spring eternal in Beethoven, then it can not spring forth anywhere.
To look forward to other music and classical music in general, if the listener is able to count well enough to hear two against three and three against four, and to hear the subdivisions of the beat, to hear the intonation and overtones, and to hear the articulation, then many other details of the interpretation will become clearer.
in that enhanced clarity, the story often finds a different meaning.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by Whizzkid
Mike,
That still does not make the performance perfect it makes it right to your ears, now to George's ears it is not right because it is missing one important ingredient and that is soul or emotion if you will. This would to me mean that the performaer has not completed his job in conveying what the composer intended as most if not all music is a realisation of the emotions in sound.
Mike though your threads are thought provoking there comes a time when you have to switch off the intellect and appreciate the music on a visceral/emotional level this is the school that I come from, that being modern club/rave culture, Classical music does stimulate the intellect for me but when you switch it off any flaws that appear in a performance cease to be of significance and the whole becomes the main focus.
Dean...
That still does not make the performance perfect it makes it right to your ears, now to George's ears it is not right because it is missing one important ingredient and that is soul or emotion if you will. This would to me mean that the performaer has not completed his job in conveying what the composer intended as most if not all music is a realisation of the emotions in sound.
Mike though your threads are thought provoking there comes a time when you have to switch off the intellect and appreciate the music on a visceral/emotional level this is the school that I come from, that being modern club/rave culture, Classical music does stimulate the intellect for me but when you switch it off any flaws that appear in a performance cease to be of significance and the whole becomes the main focus.
Dean...
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by Mat Cork
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
enjoy your tape hiss, i enjoy hearing musicians play. like writers (Thomas Hardy) they can produce perfection.
The point is though Mike, the imperfections are the human. In literature too, I love Hardy as you know, but I'd never call it perfection, I can think of quite a few flaws in the way he develops characters - love him all the more for it. Proust on the other hand is polished to the point of near perfection - and it's why I prefer Hardy.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Mat Cork:
I can think of quite a few flaws in the way he develops characters
i don't write well enough to say this about Thomas Hardy. Please detail your improvements to what he wrote, or the flaws in what he did. any old short story will do.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Whizzkid:
Mike though your threads are thought provoking there comes a time when you have to switch off the intellect and appreciate the music on a visceral/emotional level
OK. Tell me when switching my brain off and using my gut will increase my appreciation of music.
if that's what it takes, i have no interest.
my thought is an integral part of my enjoyment of music. i don't see that its absence would improve anything for me.
how can people be so particular about how equipment sounds, but glory in flaws in what they listen to?
it is beyond my ability to comprehend.
but that's what we are really discussing. i think i am offering a different scale to measure things on, not the only way, just a "new" way. i know i am not the only one who feels this way.
give it a try. i certainly listen the way you do, it's just not the only way i listen.
that diversity of styles in listening breathes new life into everything i hear :-)
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by Mat Cork
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
OK. Tell me when switching my brain off and using my gut will increase my appreciation of music.
Said in earnest as a mate, but Mike you are missing so very, very much with that approach.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Mat Cork:
Said in earnest as a mate, but Mike you are missing so very, very much with that approach.
actually, i think i hear everything you do, but that's a small subset of what i hear.
it's you who miss a bigger picture.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by Mat Cork
We'll definately disagree there Mike, I do think my listening is more discerning. I couldn't confine myself to listening like you do...and I'd suspect that my library would be far more eclectic as a result.
I really couldn't stick to genre's. I love classical, but much of it (imo) is over rated dross (english term = mediocrity). Schubert being a good example. Lot's of dross in every genre imo. For me, the joy is picking stuff that moves me emotionally, sometimes it's with the head, most times the heart.
I can see why, with the approach you have, 'world' music fails to move you for example. Equally there may be technical aspects of Schubert which escape me - but if he were alive today, he'd be knocking out tunes to sell soap powder (imo) - not that that isn't a nice little lifestyle career.
I really couldn't stick to genre's. I love classical, but much of it (imo) is over rated dross (english term = mediocrity). Schubert being a good example. Lot's of dross in every genre imo. For me, the joy is picking stuff that moves me emotionally, sometimes it's with the head, most times the heart.
I can see why, with the approach you have, 'world' music fails to move you for example. Equally there may be technical aspects of Schubert which escape me - but if he were alive today, he'd be knocking out tunes to sell soap powder (imo) - not that that isn't a nice little lifestyle career.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Mat Cork:
We'll definately disagree there Mike, I do think my listening is more discerning.
i think in a single weekend, i could write out all the tunes on your ten favorite recordings, just by listening over and over again.
could you do the same for me :-)
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by Mat Cork
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:quote:Originally posted by Mat Cork:
We'll definately disagree there Mike, I do think my listening is more discerning.
i think in a single weekend, i could write out all the tunes on your ten favorite recordings, just by listening over and over again.
could you do the same for me :-)
No Mike...I'd be too busy raiding your beer fridge and checking out your Naim kit ;o)
I see your point, it's relevant to you, but totally irrelevant to me. I want emotion.
I'd love to see you write out some Einsturzende tho.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
you'd be drinking with me :-) no one can listen to any music without a beer, when a mate is happily chugging right next to you.
all i've been saying is that if you hear what is being played, and i mean the notes that are being played, you are getting more of what you payed for.
a little effort to hear the beat and the meter, along with the intonation and the key, is 100 times more likely to increase your enjoyment than a new pre-amp. and if you get the new pre-amp, so much the better.
all i've been saying is that if you hear what is being played, and i mean the notes that are being played, you are getting more of what you payed for.
a little effort to hear the beat and the meter, along with the intonation and the key, is 100 times more likely to increase your enjoyment than a new pre-amp. and if you get the new pre-amp, so much the better.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by Mat Cork
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
a little effort to hear the beat and the meter, along with the intonation and the key, is 100 times more likely to increase your enjoyment than a new pre-amp.
We'll agree on that...and don't get me wrong Mike, if I didn't think your thoughts weren't interesting, I would bother reading the threads.
I don't doubt more understanding, can help increase the enjoyment Mike. I just think there's also a flipside equally valid, where just letting go and enjoying the ride can be fun, in another way. Both approaches are needed to unlock some music (of all genre's).
I was classically trained from a young age Mike, and I've been in lot's of bands where I've been technically lots better than other folk, but I've been the worst musician in those same bands as well. Some folk are blessed with being able to connect and communicate and it doesn't always boil down to technical ability...not by a long shot.
BTW - my top 10 would include numerous pieces of classical, a lot of jazz, some world and some modern.
Get the beers in mate...
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Mat Cork:quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
a little effort to hear the beat and the meter, along with the intonation and the key, is 100 times more likely to increase your enjoyment than a new pre-amp.
We'll agree on that...and don't get me wrong Mike, if I didn't think your thoughts weren't interesting, I would bother reading the threads.
I don't doubt more understanding, can help increase the enjoyment Mike. I just think there's also a flipside equally valid, where just letting go and enjoying the ride can be fun, in another way. Both approaches are needed to unlock some music (of all genre's).
I was classically trained from a young age Mike, and I've been in lot's of bands where I've been technically lots better than other folk, but I've been the worst musician in those same bands as well. Some folk are blessed with being able to connect and communicate and it doesn't always boil down to technical ability...not by a long shot.
BTW - my top 10 would include numerous pieces of classical, a lot of jazz, some world and some modern.
Get the beers in mate...
well for the classical and the jazz, i would resort to a copy machine if at all possible :-)
i was classically trained as well, but also exposed to new orleans street music, jazz,
R & B and rock. i got all the common new orleans styles in my head and heart pretty quickly, as did almost everyone else.
i've never had to study to get loose and wild, that just happens on its own. lots of fun, but not very interesting to read about.
the classical was not so quick. there was a lot more to take in. i am only now getting the sound i want into my head. to play well and truly, you have to hear it in your head before you play it. that is not as easy as it sounds. now after 40 years, i am getting there.
it's a lifelong pursuit, getting the sound of music into your head and heart. just like any other language.
how's carlsberg elephant malt liquor?
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by fred simon
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
In many places, [Beethoven] indulges in a practice called part writing. This has a pianists play multiple voices in a single hand, frequently over a trill (rapidly repeating two notes adjacent to each other). Of all things, that is possibly the hardest for a pianist to execute successfully.
Not quite accurate, Mike. Part writing, or voice leading, is a practice evolved from choral music; it can be applied to any combination of instruments, or to a single instrument capable of playing multiple independent lines, such as a keyboard or guitar.
When used in keyboard music, it can involve either one hand or both hands ... any Bach fugue is a perfect example of this. It needn't be limited to just one hand. And although there are certainly examples of part writing accompanied by a trill to be found in the piano music of Beethoven (and of other composers), it's definitely not a required component of part writing ... it's just an ornamental accompaniment for extra texture and dramatic tension.
To be sure, successfully delineating multiple voices in either one or two hands on a piano is quite difficult, as you say.
Best,
Fred
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by fred simon:quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
In many places, [Beethoven] indulges in a practice called part writing. This has a pianists play multiple voices in a single hand, frequently over a trill (rapidly repeating two notes adjacent to each other). Of all things, that is possibly the hardest for a pianist to execute successfully.
Not quite accurate, Mike. Part writing, or voice leading, is a practice evolved from choral music; it can be applied to any combination of instruments, or to a single instrument capable of playing multiple independent lines, such as a keyboard or guitar.
When used in keyboard music, it can involve either one hand or both hands ... any Bach fugue is a perfect example of this. It needn't be limited to just one hand. And although there are certainly examples of part writing accompanied by a trill to be found in the piano music of Beethoven (and of other composers), it's definitely not a required component of part writing ... it's just an ornamental accompaniment for extra texture and dramatic tension.
To be sure, successfully delineating multiple voices in either one or two hands on a piano is quite difficult, as you say.
Best,
Fred
i guess my point fred is that in these last three sonatas part playing is indulged in almost to excess, which i attribute at least in part to the parallel work on the missa solemnis, which is a choral work.
it is often over a trill in these last three sonatas. it is often in both hands in these last three sonatas. i think these trills serve a structural purpose, rather than ornamental.
all of my comments were directed specifically to pollini's technique in these last three sonatas - not to music or part playing in general.
and i think he is an undisputed master of part playing in these particular recordings.
Posted on: 29 March 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by munch:
Mike,
I can understand what Fred says.
Your posts go right over my head.
Stu
???