Pianists are getting better, and recordings too.
Posted by: mikeeschman on 12 December 2009
Rather than argue the point, I'm simply going to list my evidence. Please do the same :-)
Angela Hewitt 2009 "Well Tempered Clavier" on Hyperion
Zimerman plays Debussy's "Preludes" on DGG
Angela Hewitt 2009 "Well Tempered Clavier" on Hyperion
Zimerman plays Debussy's "Preludes" on DGG
Posted on: 12 December 2009 by mikeeschman
Once again, sorry for the double post.
One of the most important characteristics of a great pianist is the absolute independence of the fingers. Once this is achieved, some pianist naturally move to exploit the opportunities this presents in terms of "color" and "shading". Even fewer pianist go a step further and formalize these notions of "color" and "shading" into their voicing, resulting in clarity and independence of line. Once that point is arrived, the pianist has the whole ball of wax.
In every generation, great pianist have reached this pinnacle. But I see every evidence that today's great pianist, at least some of them, have achieved a level of perfection only dreamed of in past time.
That is where I place Hewitt and Zimerman.
It is simply a stupendous thing to experience as a listener :-)
It gives some faith in the future of music as an art form.
One of the most important characteristics of a great pianist is the absolute independence of the fingers. Once this is achieved, some pianist naturally move to exploit the opportunities this presents in terms of "color" and "shading". Even fewer pianist go a step further and formalize these notions of "color" and "shading" into their voicing, resulting in clarity and independence of line. Once that point is arrived, the pianist has the whole ball of wax.
In every generation, great pianist have reached this pinnacle. But I see every evidence that today's great pianist, at least some of them, have achieved a level of perfection only dreamed of in past time.
That is where I place Hewitt and Zimerman.
It is simply a stupendous thing to experience as a listener :-)
It gives some faith in the future of music as an art form.
Posted on: 12 December 2009 by Dan Carney
This was written by Edna Stern, a student of Argerich, de Larrocha, Fleisher, and Zimerman.
I was talking to my physiotherapist the other day and she mentioned the fact that pianists were known as having 6 fingers. I thought it was just another one of those expressions, but she explained that the ability to move and control independently the first phalange of the finger is what they consider “the sixth finger”. This post is therefore dedicated to the best 6 finger’s pianist I know : Krystian Zimerman. The first time I tried this technique was when I came to study with him. It is a difficult technique to learn on the modern piano as the weight of the keys is rather heavy and using this only phalange means that one uses less the hand and arm and therefore the strain is greater on the muscles. On the other hand, when I started getting acquainted with pianofortes, this technique proved the best and most natural way to produce a quality sound on them, as the weight of the arm only “crushes” the sound and doesn’t let it lift and vibrate.
I was talking to my physiotherapist the other day and she mentioned the fact that pianists were known as having 6 fingers. I thought it was just another one of those expressions, but she explained that the ability to move and control independently the first phalange of the finger is what they consider “the sixth finger”. This post is therefore dedicated to the best 6 finger’s pianist I know : Krystian Zimerman. The first time I tried this technique was when I came to study with him. It is a difficult technique to learn on the modern piano as the weight of the keys is rather heavy and using this only phalange means that one uses less the hand and arm and therefore the strain is greater on the muscles. On the other hand, when I started getting acquainted with pianofortes, this technique proved the best and most natural way to produce a quality sound on them, as the weight of the arm only “crushes” the sound and doesn’t let it lift and vibrate.
Posted on: 12 December 2009 by mikeeschman
I'd like to talk on a related issue, as we are discussing the physical mechanics of making music on instruments.
For any string, when you make a note, the tuning of the string changes from the stress of making the note.
This has some onerous implications for the violinist. It means the good violinist will change his fingering to compensate for the change in tuning brought about by playing.
I am going to recommend a recording as a good example of a violinist maintaining a perfect intonation in a difficult circumstance :
Paganini : 24 Capricci
Shlomo Mintz
DGG
Dan, I think you would enjoy this very much :-)
Think about what an astounding thing that is, to be able to do ...
For any string, when you make a note, the tuning of the string changes from the stress of making the note.
This has some onerous implications for the violinist. It means the good violinist will change his fingering to compensate for the change in tuning brought about by playing.
I am going to recommend a recording as a good example of a violinist maintaining a perfect intonation in a difficult circumstance :
Paganini : 24 Capricci
Shlomo Mintz
DGG
Dan, I think you would enjoy this very much :-)
Think about what an astounding thing that is, to be able to do ...
Posted on: 12 December 2009 by winkyincanada
quote:Originally posted by Dan Carney:
This was written by Edna Stern, a student of Argerich, de Larrocha, Fleisher, and Zimerman.
I was talking to my physiotherapist the other day and she mentioned the fact that pianists were known as having 6 fingers. I thought it was just another one of those expressions, but she explained that the ability to move and control independently the first phalange of the finger is what they consider “the sixth finger”. This post is therefore dedicated to the best 6 finger’s pianist I know : Krystian Zimerman. The first time I tried this technique was when I came to study with him. It is a difficult technique to learn on the modern piano as the weight of the keys is rather heavy and using this only phalange means that one uses less the hand and arm and therefore the strain is greater on the muscles. On the other hand, when I started getting acquainted with pianofortes, this technique proved the best and most natural way to produce a quality sound on them, as the weight of the arm only “crushes” the sound and doesn’t let it lift and vibrate.
Posted on: 12 December 2009 by mikeeschman
Monkey shines from Winky :-)
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by Florestan
quote:the ability to move and control independently the first phalange of the finger is what they consider “the sixth finger”.
Hi Dan,
Could you explain what this means?
Thanks,
Doug
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by graham55
Can't really agree with the premise here.
There is no-one alive today (with the possible exception of Maurizio Pollini and Radu Lupu) who comes close to Dinu Lipatti, Sviatoslav Richter or Emil Gilels.
And modern recording technology is pants by comparison with what John Culshaw and Walter Legge were doing in the 1950s and 1960s.
Graham
There is no-one alive today (with the possible exception of Maurizio Pollini and Radu Lupu) who comes close to Dinu Lipatti, Sviatoslav Richter or Emil Gilels.
And modern recording technology is pants by comparison with what John Culshaw and Walter Legge were doing in the 1950s and 1960s.
Graham
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by u5227470736789439
Is this real?
Could bring a good deal of potential for almost all music making!
GM musicians! Whatever next?
ATB from George
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by graham55:
Can't really agree with the premise here.
There is no-one alive today (with the possible exception of Maurizio Pollini and Radu Lupu) who comes close to Dinu Lipatti, Sviatoslav Richter or Emil Gilels.
And modern recording technology is pants by comparison with what John Culshaw and Walter Legge were doing in the 1950s and 1960s.
Graham
You should give Zimerman's Debussy a try. Musical performance is a living thing. If you spend too much time idolizing the dead, you'll get moldy, musically speaking.
What better way to expand your horizons, than to follow the recommendations of a young and up-and-coming pianist? (That would be Dan Carney).
Have you listened to either the Zimerman or the Hewett?
Sorry, but I have to trust to my ears. They tell me things continue to advance.
Graham, sometimes I think you are talking about a football team, rather than a musician!
You are robbing yourself of one of the great thrills of music, which is to discover and appreciate new artists.
Open your mind a bit :-)
One final note. About recordings, you are simply wrong. Overtones and articulations, as well as dynamic range, including both large and tiny changes in volume, are being more faithfully captured today than ever before, at least in some recordings, including the Zimerman Debussy and the Hewitt WTC.
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by Florestan
I do have mixed feelings about this statement that, "Pianists are getting better, and recordings too."
I agree with this statement in a broad sense, however, it is for the same reason that I do not agree with it since it is a generalization.
Concerning the recording quality, I can easily pull beautifully recorded, top drawer recordings from the later 1950's, 60's 70's, 80's, 90's as well as the last decade. The last ten years or so has been quite good though in particular for recording quality. My next favorite would be the 1960's / 70's. I'd have trouble saying that the same would apply to ANY pre-1950's recordings. Bare in mind this has nothing to do or say about the capabilities or artistry of the person who is recording. To my ears, recordings from pre 1950's were unfortunately a distortion of what is supposed to be. Something gets lost in the translation and this makes it pointless. If I could have heard any of the greats of this period live, then I would imagine that I'd be hearing the same quality as I hear today - that is, a great pianist playing a grand piano.
As for pianists getting better? I maintain that no mortal man walks on water. No one has ever played perfectly or at some unearthly level day after day consistently. People who believe this are dreamers and need to have a reality check (and stop listening to just one or two recordings). Typically, someone who doesn't play an instrument buys recordings based on a recommendation from some self proclaimed guru or Penguin Guide and thinks this perfection they are hearing is common, easily achieved, and reproducible only by these immortals. If you heard every performance by any of the greats that people often mention in these parts (as the one on only's to listen to etc.) you realize that these people had slips and memory lapses too. They did not play with the same level and energy night after night. Most spent 50 or 60 years playing and still would admit that they aren't there yet. Most rest on a handful of performances that carry them through their career and onto immortality. We should never lose sight of the fact thought that they are still human after all.
What I would suggest though is that today we have more choice than ever before. It might be easier for a young musician to grow quickly than in the past. What I am suggesting is that a huge chunk of history is available to any young person now to hear and take it to the next level. It's easier to build on something that has already been done. In the past I believe you heard more of the character of the performer because they weren't influenced so much as to what was out there? They would have mostly been influenced by their teachers or a small handful of the big name performers available.
Still, I'd encourage everyone to be supporting the current crop of musicians out there. Despite what I inferred above, I value what today's musicians / artists have to say just as much as I do from those of the past because art and music is about searching for something unknown. You do not grow if you only listen to only the ideas of two or three interpreters or composers for that matter. Technically, I believe the younger generations (those in their 40's and 50's and younger (ie, Zimerman, Perahia, Hewitt, Hamelin, Lewis etc.)) may technically be better than those before them
Mike, I'm glad you are finally getting acquainted with Krystian Zimerman. If Debussy's Prelude are becoming an interest to you I would highly recommend the following trio of musicians that really strongly represent the past 30 or 40 years in stellar Debussy recordings/performances: Michelangeli, Zimerman, and Bavouzet. I'm very familiar with Michelangeli and Zimerman. The recent recordings of the complete piano works of Debussy by Jean-Efflam Bavouzet really reinforce your notion that pianist are getting better, and recording too. For a complete series I couldn't imagine being without this set now. Maybe Zimerman is more than enough for you but if you ever want to expand again for something new again I'd strongly recommend Volume 1, Bavouzet which has both books of Preludes.
What I would like to stress here is that all my comments would apply to any instrument (such as Violin or Violincello etc) as equally as for just Pianist.
Best Regards,
Doug
I agree with this statement in a broad sense, however, it is for the same reason that I do not agree with it since it is a generalization.
Concerning the recording quality, I can easily pull beautifully recorded, top drawer recordings from the later 1950's, 60's 70's, 80's, 90's as well as the last decade. The last ten years or so has been quite good though in particular for recording quality. My next favorite would be the 1960's / 70's. I'd have trouble saying that the same would apply to ANY pre-1950's recordings. Bare in mind this has nothing to do or say about the capabilities or artistry of the person who is recording. To my ears, recordings from pre 1950's were unfortunately a distortion of what is supposed to be. Something gets lost in the translation and this makes it pointless. If I could have heard any of the greats of this period live, then I would imagine that I'd be hearing the same quality as I hear today - that is, a great pianist playing a grand piano.
As for pianists getting better? I maintain that no mortal man walks on water. No one has ever played perfectly or at some unearthly level day after day consistently. People who believe this are dreamers and need to have a reality check (and stop listening to just one or two recordings). Typically, someone who doesn't play an instrument buys recordings based on a recommendation from some self proclaimed guru or Penguin Guide and thinks this perfection they are hearing is common, easily achieved, and reproducible only by these immortals. If you heard every performance by any of the greats that people often mention in these parts (as the one on only's to listen to etc.) you realize that these people had slips and memory lapses too. They did not play with the same level and energy night after night. Most spent 50 or 60 years playing and still would admit that they aren't there yet. Most rest on a handful of performances that carry them through their career and onto immortality. We should never lose sight of the fact thought that they are still human after all.
What I would suggest though is that today we have more choice than ever before. It might be easier for a young musician to grow quickly than in the past. What I am suggesting is that a huge chunk of history is available to any young person now to hear and take it to the next level. It's easier to build on something that has already been done. In the past I believe you heard more of the character of the performer because they weren't influenced so much as to what was out there? They would have mostly been influenced by their teachers or a small handful of the big name performers available.
Still, I'd encourage everyone to be supporting the current crop of musicians out there. Despite what I inferred above, I value what today's musicians / artists have to say just as much as I do from those of the past because art and music is about searching for something unknown. You do not grow if you only listen to only the ideas of two or three interpreters or composers for that matter. Technically, I believe the younger generations (those in their 40's and 50's and younger (ie, Zimerman, Perahia, Hewitt, Hamelin, Lewis etc.)) may technically be better than those before them
Mike, I'm glad you are finally getting acquainted with Krystian Zimerman. If Debussy's Prelude are becoming an interest to you I would highly recommend the following trio of musicians that really strongly represent the past 30 or 40 years in stellar Debussy recordings/performances: Michelangeli, Zimerman, and Bavouzet. I'm very familiar with Michelangeli and Zimerman. The recent recordings of the complete piano works of Debussy by Jean-Efflam Bavouzet really reinforce your notion that pianist are getting better, and recording too. For a complete series I couldn't imagine being without this set now. Maybe Zimerman is more than enough for you but if you ever want to expand again for something new again I'd strongly recommend Volume 1, Bavouzet which has both books of Preludes.
What I would like to stress here is that all my comments would apply to any instrument (such as Violin or Violincello etc) as equally as for just Pianist.
Best Regards,
Doug
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by graham55
Well, Mike we all have our opinions, which is great, and what makes us human.
I didn't even think of Michelangeli, which is inexcusable, or Friedrich Gulda, equally bad, when I posted earlier.
These were titans, formed in a different age from those that we hear today. I can just as much expand my horizons by trying to discover what Gulda was recording in the 50s or 60s as I could by hearing what Hewitt is doing today. And I know which I prefer.
I have Zimmerman's Debussy, but he doesn't come close to Michelangeli. Nor could anyone, though.
And the older producers/sound engineers knew how to balance a recording on the spot. Unlike today's lot, who record it on 64 tracks, then rely on a mix down after the event to get it sounding OK.
No offence intended.
Graham
I didn't even think of Michelangeli, which is inexcusable, or Friedrich Gulda, equally bad, when I posted earlier.
These were titans, formed in a different age from those that we hear today. I can just as much expand my horizons by trying to discover what Gulda was recording in the 50s or 60s as I could by hearing what Hewitt is doing today. And I know which I prefer.
I have Zimmerman's Debussy, but he doesn't come close to Michelangeli. Nor could anyone, though.
And the older producers/sound engineers knew how to balance a recording on the spot. Unlike today's lot, who record it on 64 tracks, then rely on a mix down after the event to get it sounding OK.
No offence intended.
Graham
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by Ian G.
Apropos Zimerman, I find this very beautiful...
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by graham55:
Well, Mike we all have our opinions, which is great, and what makes us human.
I didn't even think of Michelangeli, which is inexcusable, or Friedrich Gulda, equally bad, when I posted earlier.
These were titans, formed in a different age from those that we hear today. I can just as much expand my horizons by trying to discover what Gulda was recording in the 50s or 60s as I could by hearing what Hewitt is doing today. And I know which I prefer.
I have Zimmerman's Debussy, but he doesn't come close to Michelangeli. Nor could anyone, though.
And the older producers/sound engineers knew how to balance a recording on the spot. Unlike today's lot, who record it on 64 tracks, then rely on a mix down after the event to get it sounding OK.
No offence intended.
Graham
No offense taken.
I have both the Michelangeli and the Zimerman playing the Debussy preludes.
I love both equally well, but my love of the Zimerman is a "hot" love.
He has achieved a clarity I think Michelangeli didn't even consider.
That clarity lays bare harmonic implications that seem coincidental in the Michelangli, but seem structural and important in the Zimerman.
I hadn't considered anyone but Michelangeli for these preludes for more than two decades.
Having Dan open my mind and heart to a new interpretation has made this music fresh and electrifying. That's what I am always after.
And Zimerman's technique is an evolutionary advance, that benefits the music in every way concievable.
My view of the progress of music is that each new generation carefully studies with infinite love and attention, the efforts that preceded them. Then, with infinite patience and devotion, they "grow" a new interpretation that encompasses everything they learned by study and reflection. The end result being that they throw new light on what has been known and accepted.
That doesn't mean I don't love what came before. But what proceeds from the present gives new blood to the old and familiar.
If you think about my attitude for a minute, you will see it maximizes the motivation for new performers to do what their heart dictates, because it lets those performers know in the most direct fashion possible that their listeners have faith in their judgment and are willing to lend them a fresh ear, no matter where these choose to go.
How else are you going to provide a friendly and encouraging base to those who have the courage to use their minds and hearts to find the new in material already known so well?
Yes, I love and admire the performer.
In my opinion, that's where it must begin for the performer. His audience must love him and release him from constraint.
The performer needs us to listen, in the same spirit that informed his execution.
Long live performers!
And considering recordings, if you can hear partials, the Zimerman Debussy Preludes will be a real treat. Everything is present :-)
I can't resist saying this. The difference in our views is that I think the music community works where it has to, and that things are improving. You think its past it's prime.
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by u5227470736789439
The marvel of recordings of great artists is that we can enjoy the current front rank of artists in the concert hall, and on records, and still enjoy the front rank from previous times, without having to rely on their legend alone, as they left some remarkable legacies.
Sometimes the old recordings can bring us up a little short in musical and even technical quality, and sometimes one can be aware of a current artist who would be regarded as great in whatever era they happened to be born.
The point is that the gramophone gives us this time radar glimpse into the past, and for that I am very grateful.
I am not much interested in a sort comparison between performances, old and old, old and new, or even new and new. The point for me is whether the performance in question gets into the spirit of the music or not. Whether it does or not, is likely to remain a person response as well!
I cannot think of a violinist I prefer to Rachel Podger nowadays - though she is a Baroque expert, and so comparing her to the fulsome quality of Fritz Kreisler would be useless - but there again I can think of no conductor who so consistently illuminates for me the music he left in his best recordings as Otto Klemperer. He died at a great age in 1973, and some of his later recordings show that his form could be variable and sometimes not illuminating at all. But his greatest recorded achievements show the music as well as any I know.
Do I prefer his great recordings to those of his near contemporary Erich Kleiber? The answer is a definite no, as I don't care to rank them in order. I would not want to be without either! Preferring neither to the other! I could follow this with a list of great conductors of previous generations who I admire just as much, but it is pointless to post a list.
The point for me is to find illuminating performances, new and old, of my favourite music. Often in the Baroque repertoire I think the art of performance has moved on significantly since 1945, to pick a fairly arbitrary date. Rachel Podger's presentation of the Partite is preferable IMV to almost anything from Heifetz, Kreisler, or Adolf Busch in the same repertoire, but I would not want to be without these old masters of the violin either!
The great choice offered by recordings is something we should relish!
Best wishes from George
Sometimes the old recordings can bring us up a little short in musical and even technical quality, and sometimes one can be aware of a current artist who would be regarded as great in whatever era they happened to be born.
The point is that the gramophone gives us this time radar glimpse into the past, and for that I am very grateful.
I am not much interested in a sort comparison between performances, old and old, old and new, or even new and new. The point for me is whether the performance in question gets into the spirit of the music or not. Whether it does or not, is likely to remain a person response as well!
I cannot think of a violinist I prefer to Rachel Podger nowadays - though she is a Baroque expert, and so comparing her to the fulsome quality of Fritz Kreisler would be useless - but there again I can think of no conductor who so consistently illuminates for me the music he left in his best recordings as Otto Klemperer. He died at a great age in 1973, and some of his later recordings show that his form could be variable and sometimes not illuminating at all. But his greatest recorded achievements show the music as well as any I know.
Do I prefer his great recordings to those of his near contemporary Erich Kleiber? The answer is a definite no, as I don't care to rank them in order. I would not want to be without either! Preferring neither to the other! I could follow this with a list of great conductors of previous generations who I admire just as much, but it is pointless to post a list.
The point for me is to find illuminating performances, new and old, of my favourite music. Often in the Baroque repertoire I think the art of performance has moved on significantly since 1945, to pick a fairly arbitrary date. Rachel Podger's presentation of the Partite is preferable IMV to almost anything from Heifetz, Kreisler, or Adolf Busch in the same repertoire, but I would not want to be without these old masters of the violin either!
The great choice offered by recordings is something we should relish!
Best wishes from George
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by mikeeschman
I refuse to rank performers, as I consider it disrespectful of their efforts.
But to say the Zimerman does not have me head over heels in love with him would be a lie.
He has me studying the music and listening every chance I get.
What better recommendation?
These Debussy Preludes are an illuminated miracle of musical achievement!
But to say the Zimerman does not have me head over heels in love with him would be a lie.
He has me studying the music and listening every chance I get.
What better recommendation?
These Debussy Preludes are an illuminated miracle of musical achievement!
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by u5227470736789439
Same for me with Walcha playing Bach at the keyboards. Not the only great Bach keyboard player, but one whom I find exactly does have me head over heals!
ATB from George
ATB from George
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by mikeeschman
Yea George, long live recordings!!!
How spoiled we all have become!
How spoiled we all have become!
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by Dan Carney
Mike,
The Shlomo Mintz is on its way!
Many thanks,
Dan
P.S. I've managed to get my hands on Zimerman's Brahms Sonatas. They were not really officially released per se.... I'll report back when I've listened in greater detail.
The Shlomo Mintz is on its way!
Many thanks,
Dan
P.S. I've managed to get my hands on Zimerman's Brahms Sonatas. They were not really officially released per se.... I'll report back when I've listened in greater detail.
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by mikeeschman
George, Dan and Graham, I have an issue with quality of recording I would like to discuss,
as I think it important and overlooked.
When I listen to a really good LP, one that is really sucking me in, so that I just sit back and receive a transmission, the partials can "flicker" (i.e. the pitch fluctuates) in a most unnatural fashion. This never happens live or on CD, no matter how cheap the player. I invested about $9000 in my TT front end, and have gotten everything serviced.
To me this is a major concern, but I don't see it discussed.
To my ear, this "warble" is quite disturbing and damages the experience, especially as it is noticeable in the partials, but not the note itself, which will be completely stable.
On a piano, this can reflect on the tuning and regulation, but the effect extends uniformly to winds, strings, and even timpani! That makes it look like a mechanical fault in the replay ...
Advice to go buy a $15,000 TT to fix it is laughable, as the problem doesn't exist on CD, even when using a $100 player.
It may well be that I am hearing the wow and flutter of the tape machine that cut the master, but why would I care?
I just do not want to hear that. It does not enhance the musical experience.
Once you have heard perfect intonation (OK George, with a slip-up here and there, but good often enough that the listener grasps the intent :-) you develop a craving for it. This "warble" or better yet "flutter" makes perfect intonation impossible.
as I think it important and overlooked.
When I listen to a really good LP, one that is really sucking me in, so that I just sit back and receive a transmission, the partials can "flicker" (i.e. the pitch fluctuates) in a most unnatural fashion. This never happens live or on CD, no matter how cheap the player. I invested about $9000 in my TT front end, and have gotten everything serviced.
To me this is a major concern, but I don't see it discussed.
To my ear, this "warble" is quite disturbing and damages the experience, especially as it is noticeable in the partials, but not the note itself, which will be completely stable.
On a piano, this can reflect on the tuning and regulation, but the effect extends uniformly to winds, strings, and even timpani! That makes it look like a mechanical fault in the replay ...
Advice to go buy a $15,000 TT to fix it is laughable, as the problem doesn't exist on CD, even when using a $100 player.
It may well be that I am hearing the wow and flutter of the tape machine that cut the master, but why would I care?
I just do not want to hear that. It does not enhance the musical experience.
Once you have heard perfect intonation (OK George, with a slip-up here and there, but good often enough that the listener grasps the intent :-) you develop a craving for it. This "warble" or better yet "flutter" makes perfect intonation impossible.
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Ian G.:
Apropos Zimerman, I find this very beautiful...
This looks great, my favorite conductor and pianist!
It's on the list.
No it's not, it's on the way.
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by u5227470736789439
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
When I listen to a really good LP, one that is really sucking me in, so that I just sit back and receive a transmission, the partials can "flicker" (i.e. the pitch fluctuates) in a most unnatural fashion. This never happens live or on CD, no matter how cheap the player. I invested about $9000 in my TT front end, and have gotten everything serviced.
To me this is a major concern, but I don't see it discussed.
To my ear, this "warble" is quite disturbing and damages the experience, especially as it is noticeable in the partials, but not the note itself, which will be completely stable.
On a piano, this can reflect on the tuning and regulation, but the effect extends uniformly to winds, strings, and even timpani! That makes it look like a mechanical fault in the replay ...
Advice to go buy a $15,000 TT to fix it is laughable, as the problem doesn't exist on CD, even when using a $100 player.
It may well be that I am hearing the wow and flutter of the tape machine that cut the master, but why would I care?
I just do not want to hear that. It does not enhance the musical experience.
Once you have heard perfect intonation (OK George, with a slip-up here and there, but good often enough that the listener grasps the intent :-) you develop a craving for it. This "warble" or better yet "flutter" makes perfect intonation impossible.
This why I have always hated LPs:- Pitch stability. No LP replay is pitch stable enough for me.
I have mentioned it many times, and the vinyl brigade don't like me for it because I call it is a crucial failing that makes LP replay unsatisfactory on a most significant musical level, however nice the actual tone-quality might be. Without pitch stability by definition, there is no rhythm stability, which as is apparently the calling card of the Linn LP12 TT - called PRaT.
No TT that does not address this issue is worth more than perhaps £200, tops.
I agree that this pitch-instability is first apparent on the partials, but can be soon become obvious on the fundamental notes as well once the irritation of faulty pitch creeps in. It can take as little as 30 seconds for me.
Advice to spend £15K on a TT is indeed laughable, because it is not just faulty speed regulation of the replay machine, but also of the actual cutting process that guarantees the fault is not fixable.
I find that the best restorations of analogue tape [always in the digital domain] address the pitch problem almost always, but I don't want to hear it. Indeed, I cannot concentrate if it intrudes. 78s were better than LPs in terms of pitch stability as a rule.
This "warble" or better yet "flutter" makes perfect intonation impossible.
Completely agree! Sometimes an LP can very occasionally be superb, but so often it is not, and the costs of trying to rectify the basic flaws are crazy and 95 pro cent ineffective.
ATB from George
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by mikeeschman
Completed the fourth listen through on the Zimerman Debussy Preludes. It is still revealing new secrets :-)
I thought I knew this music ...
I thought I knew this music ...
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by Mat Cork
Never mind all that hifi mumbo jumbo Mike...what about the hairs on the arms, that cd's leave so flat...and the lonely toe, so bereft of the tap? 
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Mat Cork:
Never mind all that hifi mumbo jumbo Mike...what about the hairs on the arms, that cd's leave so flat...and the lonely toe, so bereft of the tap?
That doesn't happen to me.
What about the falling of the veil, so that listener, performer and composer come to stand together in some shared space, time material, the centuries falling away into the here and now?
Posted on: 14 December 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Florestan:
Mike, I'm glad you are finally getting acquainted with Krystian Zimerman. If Debussy's Prelude are becoming an interest to you I would highly recommend the following trio of musicians that really strongly represent the past 30 or 40 years in stellar Debussy recordings/performances: Michelangeli, Zimerman, and Bavouzet. I'm very familiar with Michelangeli and Zimerman. The recent recordings of the complete piano works of Debussy by Jean-Efflam Bavouzet really reinforce your notion that pianist are getting better, and recording too. For a complete series I couldn't imagine being without this set now. Maybe Zimerman is more than enough for you but if you ever want to expand again for something new again I'd strongly recommend Volume 1, Bavouzet which has both books of Preludes.
Best Regards,
Doug
I will order the Bavouzet for my next round of CD purchase. I am quite taken with the Zimerman at the moment, and he has sent me into the sheet music.
I do think that pianists and recordings are getting better, but caution that the opinion is based on fewer than two dozen cds. I am relying on a basic principle of mathematics that assumes if you throw a rock in a lake at random, and it lands on top of a submerged rock so it sits above the water line, then that lake is probably full of submerged rock, as the odds of striking the only one in the lake are vanishingly small.
As for the quality of older recordings, I am pretty much with your opinion, but must remark that both the Hewitt WTC and the Zimerman Debussy Preludes display a fidelity of the pianist' touch that I find both striking and unique in my collection. The voicing is also quite remarkably reproduced, and the partials are clear and pronounced to a degree new in my experience (from recordings).