Glenn Gould Bach Goldberg variations

Ross yes but have you noticed that it is not just a change in sound, the musical performance sounds slightly different althogh it is the same take.

Ross,

quote:

---

It is wonderful to have the same recording available in excellent analogue sound.

---

Are you saying that the Gould Goldberg variations have been released on LP? If so, where can I get a copy?

Joe

And is his background humming intact?

Tim Could not live without it.

quote:

---

Are you saying that the Gould Goldberg variations have been released on LP?

---

Sure, there's even a mint copy on my shelf . It is digitally recorded and remastered but it's still very much better than the CD (even though I own the Special Japan Edition, which is itself audibly better than the regular 1984ish CD release).

quote:

---

but was let down by poor early digital sound. It is wonderful to have the same recording available in excellent analogue sound.

---

This is not quite clear to me. The original recording was digital, and therefore a lot of musical information was lost already at that stage. So what's the point of remastering it in analogue ? What's lost is lost, I thought ... Or maybe it's just another case of cheating with effects to make it sound analogue

quote:

---

have you noticed that it is not just a change in sound, the musical performance sounds slightly different althogh it is the same take.

---

Huh ???

Cheese

SingalongaBach: we really need it

throb

quote:

---

Originally posted by throbnorth:
SingalongaBach: we really need it

throb

---

throb - will singalong PDQ Bach suffice?

My Bonnie Lass She Smelleth
 
My bonnie lass she smelleth,
Making the flowers Jealouth.
Fa la la (etc.)

My bonnie lass dismayeth
Me;  all that she doth say ith:
Fa la la (etc.)

My bonnie lass she looketh like a jewel
And soundeth like a mule.
My bonnie lass she walketh like a doe
And talketh like a crow.
Fa la la (etc.)

My bonnie lass liketh to dance a lot;
She’s Guinevere and I’m Sir Lancelot.
Fa la la (etc.)

My bonnie lass I need not flatter;
What she doth not have doth not matter.
Oo la la (etc.)

My bonnie lass would be nice,
Yea, even at twice the price.
Fa la la (etc.)

quote:

---

As to what jayd is on about, I can't really help you.

Ross

---

It's singalong Bach... no, not that Bach. The other Bach... ok, the OTHER other Bach.

Oh well.

I think you've got a point Fredrik. I think I prefer the Schiff, although it's a bit...chilly.

Tim

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross Blackman:
[M]uch as, at the 1956 stereo recording of Karajan's Rosenkavalier, a mono recording was also made because the engineers distrusted the new stereo technology - and similarly the mono recording sounds better than the stereo one.

---

Ah, crap, I didn't need to read this. I have the stereo version and now feel compelled to buy the mono. Since BRO has it for $18, I think I may have to splurge. This is my favorite recording of the work thus far, so the best sounding seems an imperative purchase.


"The universe is change, life is opinion." Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

I've read the Gramophone review before, and the thing that struck me was that they said the mono was better for the voices (no surprise there). The reason I write "Ah crap" is that I already have a long list of titles to buy from BRO and don't want to buy another copy of a recording I already own.

Mono LPs are out of the question, as are all LPs for the time being, as my wife is dead set against me getting a turntable lest I begin to collect hundreds (or more) LPs.

BRO is Berkshire Record Outlet (www.berkshirerecordoutlet.com), in Lee, Massachusetts (right outside of Tanglewood) that is a CD clearing house. They're starting to add a few DVDs, though it will be a while before they have a good selection of those. They have a huge selection of low priced CDs from every label imagineable. Right now they have almost the entire ASV catalog as well as some DG and Decca titles of some interest. While they mostly get close outs and deletions, sometimes they get new stuff - I picked up the Sony reissue of the Juilliard Beethoven cycle for something like half off at the same time it was released new. They do ship internationally, but the rates may not be the greatest, but the dollar is weak. I buy probably around 200 CDs a year from them.

Looks like I'll stick with my Barenboim Meistersinger on CD, but I may need a third Carlos-led Rosenkavalier.


"The universe is change, life is opinion." Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

What a load of fashion led pretentious bullshit,
it's in to knock Gould at the moment.
The idea that there is a certain way that Bach should be played really makes my blood boil.
If you don't like it fine, but to say that another human being plays it in a correct and more musical manner is just claptrap.
If you go down that road then none of your prefered versions stand up if they are played on a modern concert Grand.
Absolute Tosh.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fredrik Fiske:
If you love Gould's efforts admit that what is being discussed is so far off beam that is off the scoring board, and perhaps explain what it is that attracts you, rather than presuming my view and attacking it.

---

In my case, I appreciate the earnest and soulful presentation. I find many performances of Baroque music to be cold and mechanical, and I always appreciate a more heartfelt rendition. Gould may play with the tempo a bit, and even add a few of his own hummed improvisations, but his overall presentation makes me "feel" something. In contrast, other performances may be intellectually intriguing, but are usually emotionally bereft in comparison to Gould's efforts.

Besides, who could possible say what is a closer interpretation of Bach's intentions? Without Bach himself to query, we're all guessing. Since music is supposed to convey a message, I'll choose the performance that speaks to me the most. In this case, it's Gould's.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-
(The guy who started the "Typically Boring Baroque" thread on the old forum, many years ago)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fredrik Fiske:

quote:

---

Originally posted by central:
What a load of fashion led pretentious bullshit,
it's in to knock Gould at the moment.
The idea that there is a certain way that Bach should be played really makes my blood boil.
If you don't like it fine, but to say that another human being plays it in a correct and more musical manner is just claptrap.
If you go down that road then none of your prefered versions stand up if they are played on a modern concert Grand.
Absolute Tosh.

---

OH Dear,

Well to say I have the slightest interest in the current fashion (or any other for that matter) of Bach playing is both a presumptionon your part and certainly wrong. I have always thought Gould self-indulgent, wilful and a stuntsman since I first heard his performances on the Radio in the 1970s.

To find correct and true style and a deep vision of what Bach was trying to achieve look to other performsances. If you love Gould's efforts admit that what is being discussed is so far off beam that is off the scoring board, and perhaps explain what it is that attracts you, rather than presuming my view and attacking it.

I stick to my original assertion, for something true to the music and the composer's intention almost anything would be better than this. I can easily accept that you may be fond of these recordings, but try not to foist the idea that they are helpful in finding a deeper understanding Bach's conception. It seems interesting that the main discussion centrered not on musical issues, but some idea that the recording has changed. All re-mastering tend to have differences, but rarely are they germain to comprhending the nature of the pewrformance itself.

Fredrik Fisk

---

Fredie how do you know what JSB intended and what gives you a Gods eye view on the work?
When i listen to Glenn play i hear pure music, my hair stands on end and at times i find the pure joy of his playing life enhancing.
When i listen to most others i do not respond in the same way.
What in effect you are saying is that you know more about JSB interpretation than Glenn Gould.
Yehudi Menhuin, Leonard Bernstein both, along with many others thought Gould a great artist but you seem to know something they don,t.
What rubs me up the wrong way Fredie is not that you don't like Glenn's playing, but that your dislike is from an elitist point of view,
that you have privilged information as to how music should be played or how it should not.


[This message was edited by central on Wed 28 April 2004 at 18:17.]

[This message was edited by central on Wed 28 April 2004 at 18:35.]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fredrik Fiske:
If you want me to send you details of really great performances, I can do it here or perhaps you would prefer to send me a PM.

---

Please post a list here, as I'm quite interested myself. Although I very much appreciate Gould's renditions (and don't expect that to change), I'm not known to be narrow-minded. If I can expand my awareness and pleasure simultaneously, then I will will be very happy indeed!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fredrik Fiske:
And I am certain therefore that to get a grip on the Goldbergs requires firstly a study of the score, and then a study perhaps of half a dozen great and varied readings on record. You don't have to buy them, just get them out of the library. If a particular performance is pleasing to you then buy it and study it in depth.

---

Fredrik,

I'm certain I don't need to have a grip on the score to appreciate it any different that I have to know how to paint or sculpt to appreciate a work of art. I cannot read (ok, barely) one note of music, yet attend concerts farily regularly and listen at home without any doubts or misgivings.

As to the matter of how the notes are interpreted, I'll leave that for the intellectuals (and critics,) but it doesn't invalidate my choice. I also disagree about having to listen to lots of interpretations - I can state that it doesn't make me understand them any better. Perhaps that's because I don't read music?

By all means let us know the other great works for us to sample, but don't pooh, pooh others just because you happen to disagree. That sends out a very bad message to those who are dipping their toes in to the classical repetoire for the first time.

Does you post come across as pretentious? Sure seems like it to me and if you don't see that, ask yourself where's your humility.

tim

Fredrik, Firstly let me applogise for my brusque responses but i feel very passionate about GG.
I think the trap you are falling into is that
as you have been a profesional musician, this allows you insider information that we the uneducated are not privy to.
You paint a picture of the works of JSB as some kind of shrine that are fixed, dogmatic and holy as though you simply must have the knowledge to be off the starting block.
My understanding is that Bach was a working and in employment musician and composer, who would freely transcribe one work for say violin into a lute suite, this suggests a healthy irreverance at least for the tonality of the instrument on which the music was to be performed,and i think this gives an insight into other aspects of his music.
It is my view that Glenn Gould cared more about the real interperative issues of JSB than the historical scholars that claim to be in the know,
It has been mentioned that he played arround with tempo.
If you buy the 3 disc cd in question one of the discs is an interview with Gould in which he explains the reasons.
In brief he wanted to attain a unity to the variation's and to keep a rythmic pulse from start to finish, a purely musical consideration don't you think?
He could not give a toss about how many takes it took, what instrument was used and all the other snobish paraphanallia that is associated with classical music.
Glenn Gould's passion, fire and enthusiasm for music shines today as strongly as it did twenty years ago, and it will not be dimmed by musicians and scholars that don't have an ounce of his talent.
For me his later recording of the Goldberg's is the benchmark by which all others are judged, and as yet no one comes close.
But i don't expect you to agree.

All the Best

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vuk's son:
This is not a snipe but an observation. The three people I know who really hate Gould are all piano pro's - a player and two teachers. They keep laughing at me for liking his playing, and I laugh at them for other reasons .

---

It strikes me that Fredrik is exhibiting typical elitism. It's very easy for the illuminati to find reasons to disparage any popular thing. (We here at the Naim forum do it pretty much every day.) When the elite explain their reasoning and offer up the supposedly superior alternative, it often represents (or is represented as) something that's innately inaccessible/undesirable to the "common man". In this way, the hierarchy becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.

It is exceedingly rare for something truly impressive to be appreciated equally by the elite and hoi polloi. In the Classical world, Mozart probably comes close, although I suspect that even Mozart's repertoire isn't regularly listened to and actively enjoyed by any but Classical "buffs". The Beatles are probably the perfect example. Almost everyone acknowledges the high quality of their music, and almost everyone enjoys listening to it. (Those who claim to dislike the Beatles usually prefer the more primal presentation of the Rolling Stones, explaining that the Beatles are too intellectual.)

Most others artists that should appeal to both camps are less lucky. On one end of the spectrum you get bands like Abba. I think that their output is brilliant, but most respectable music lovers wouldn't admit this to being so. (Even I often outwardly wince at the mention of Abba, even though I secretly admire them.) Their intense popularity almost automatically relegates them to the "crap" pile.

On the other end of the spectrum are bands like XTC. Their work is extremely laudable, and most people who listen to them seem to "get it", yet XTC remains virtually unknown to most people. Tellingly, this obsurity seems to make them even more desirable to the elite listener.

Of course, this self-enforced stratification occurs in all aspects of humanity, and we aren't going to solve this epidemic problem with our discussion of Gould's renditions of Bach. However, we might just increase our understanding and potentially our musical enjoyment, and that's a worthwhile goal, in and of itself.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

[This message was edited by Mike Hanson on Thu 29 April 2004 at 12:44.]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vuk's son:
Great posts.
Central raises an interseting point.

This is not a snipe but an observation. The three people I know who really hate Gould are all piano pro's - a player and two teachers. They keep laughing at me for liking his playing, and I laugh at them for other reasons .

I also like the Tureck, Hentai (harpsichord) and others, but less.

Omer.

---

You know the old saying" Those that can do, and those that can't teach.

[This message was edited by central on Thu 29 April 2004 at 15:56.]

Well Tom i am not a profesional musician or teacher, but as you ask what i do is sell hifi for a living, and what i teach is that my new Staffordshire Bull Terrier pup is not allowed to shit on the carpet.

I know I am going off topic -- but the whole thread has stopped discussing the quality of the Gould re-issue.

A few years ago I bought a 2xCD by Deutsche Gramophone by Rosaleen Turreck that was also a computer CD. It came/comes with the full score [on the CD] midi samples, options to high-light voices etc... and you can watch the score as she plays. Super ...If it's still available I would recommend it. [Even if you dislike the performance -- which is good anyway -- you get lots of help if you want to read the score].

My experience with the Goldbergs ...

a) Heard they were super [by reading recommended lists of Bach's works] and bought Naxos version -- boring
b) Found version by Joao Martins in sale and bought it -- really found I love/loved them. His version is fairly extreme. [If you don't like Gould then ....]
c) Got Gould -- also loved his version [but he's more Gould than Bach ...]
d) Later got 2-CD harpsicord verion [Edith Picht-Axenfeld]
e) I have Algella Hewitt CD [and a few other versions] and actually heard her play them live but I prefer Gould.

James

P.S. Recently I bought a CD called 'Gould plays Mozart'. I don't particularly like Mozart but I expected I would like the Gould version and I did. Also I really like his Listz/Beethoven pastoral symphony which does not have much connection with what Beethoven specified in terms of speeds.

ends==

I know this is meant to be a site about the reissue of Glenn Gould but I think this site is worth quoting ....

http://www.bach-cantatas.com/IndexNonVocal2.htm#GV


It has a list of every [?] recording of the Goldbergs ...

James

Fredrik, My post's were not meant as an attack on you personaly, just on your attitude to music.
We will agree to disagree on this one then?

P.S I could not tempt you with the guitar version of the Goldberg's?

God Bless.

Fredrik,

Let me start by saying that I very much appreciate your insightful comments, and I'll pick up a couple more copies of the Goldberg Variations. You might find it interesting to know that I'm a pianist myself (Grade 9 in the Royal Conservatory of Canada). As a pure coincidence, I happened to purchase a copy of the manuscript about a month ago. I have been plunking my way through it, as well as following along while listening, so I have some appreciation for your arguments.

With regards to my use of the term "elitist", I rarely use it in a negative fashion. By definition, "elite" means "the best of a class", and your comments certainly indicate that you maintain this stance.

I realize that you're stressing that musicians should approach great works with earnest humility, and maintain the composers' intentions as foremost and crucial. When the players' egos grow too large, then they may deem their own viewpoints as equal to or greater than those of the composers, and this certainly may have happened with Gould.

However, that position presumes that the composers' intentions are, indeed, the most important thing. It is there that I disagree with you. I view music as a communication. As with any communiqué, there are three key elements: the originator (meaning), the conduit (message), and the recipient (interpretation). Any good communicator will recognize that the message must be couched in a manner that can be appreciated by the recipient. As a consequence, the presentation of the message itself may need to be altered slightly, depending on the potential recipient. It also means that no single version of that message will be "correct" in all situations. We are plagued by the vagaries of interpretation (by the listener), and therefore the performance itself (which is certainly part of the musical message) must be altered accordingly.

This is where I believe Gould was truly gifted. He understood how to present the music in such a way as to be more accessible to a wider variety of people. At the same time, I don't believe his performances in any way belittled or watered down Bach's original intent. It could certainly be argued that Gould added too much of himself, but the fact that he became so popular suggests that that type of stance was necessary to reach the "common man" in today's society. Perhaps this wasn't as crucial in bygone days, but it certainly seems to be the case now (like it or not).

Regarding your position on "expertise", I agree that experts are needed to help deal with complicated things, and should generally be respected as having more insight than the average individual. With the inevitable variety of applications, however, no expert's advice could possibly be construed as correct in all situations, and most experts will be correct at least some of the time. I think we can best judge someone's overall expertise by the efficacy of his or her advice. In this respect (also remembering my belief of music as communication), Gould was most certainly an "expert" on Bach's Goldberg Variations.

Nuff said!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Somwhere out in deep space, way past the outer planets of our Solar System is a spacecraft called Voyager, attatched to it is a record with elementary instruction's on how to play it.
Along with greetings in all the languages of the Earth to any intelligent lifeform who may stumble upon it,are the sounds of our planet.
Amongst those sounds there is a man playing Bach on the piano, it is Glenn Gould.