Discussion:
Piano or Harpsichord?
Add Reply
Ricardo Jimenez
2020-09-14 14:46:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
JohnGavin
2020-09-14 14:55:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
I have heard this CD and also Pienaar’s 2-CD set of Gibbons Complete keyboard music. I have a strong opinion about this, which is that if this music is played well on the modern piano it works wonderfully. Just because the piano wasn’t available during the time of these composers doesn’t prove that they wouldn’t have loved the sensitivity to touch, the singing qualities etc. that the piano brings to this music. I think we are at a time in history when we can shed some of the dogmatism that has plagued early music.

Try to check out a CD called “Basically Bull” on the Steinway Label. Another highly enjoyable Renaissance piano recording.
Al Eisner
2020-09-15 05:41:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
I have heard this CD and also Pienaar’s 2-CD set of Gibbons Complete keyboard music. I have a strong opinion about this, which is that if this music is played well on the modern piano it works wonderfully. Just because the piano wasn’t available during the time of these composers doesn’t prove that they wouldn’t have loved the sensitivity to touch, the singing qualities etc. that the piano brings to this music. I think we are at a time in history when we can shed some of the dogmatism that has plagued early music.
Try to check out a CD called “Basically Bull” on the Steinway Label. Another highly enjoyable Renaissance piano recording.
Oh, THAT Bull. I thought for a moment that the title might be a
remark by Steinway about the positiom that works of this vintage must
be played on the harpsichord (or whatever).
--
Al Eisner
Neil
2020-09-14 20:00:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something". It's not a travesty. Playing harpsichord music on the piano opens up a realm of opportunities for colour and touch. Not all of us have a harpsichord at home either.

I've always felt it's important to listen harpsichord recordings of music you know from a piano version. But it's; not often, at least to my ears, the harpsichord performances are superior to a the same work played by a pianist.
Neil
2020-09-15 08:56:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Neil
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something". It's not a travesty. Playing harpsichord music on the piano opens up a realm of opportunities for colour and touch. Not all of us have a harpsichord at home either.
I've always felt it's important to listen harpsichord recordings of music you know from a piano version. But it's; not often, at least to my ears, the harpsichord performances are superior to a the same work played by a pianist.
After trying to follow my own advice I've decided Scarlatti on Harpsichord is unbearable. Piano is a vast improvement.

"two skeletons copulating on a tin roof" as Sir Thomas Beecham used to say!
MiNe109
2020-09-15 16:39:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Neil
After trying to follow my own advice I've decided Scarlatti on
Harpsichord is unbearable. Piano is a vast improvement.
"two skeletons copulating on a tin roof" as Sir Thomas Beecham used to say!
I'm enjoying the links found here:

http://www.denzilwraight.com/crisdisc.htm

Examples of early pianos and Cristofori copies.
JohnGavin
2020-09-15 17:30:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Neil
Post by Neil
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something". It's not a travesty. Playing harpsichord music on the piano opens up a realm of opportunities for colour and touch. Not all of us have a harpsichord at home either.
I've always felt it's important to listen harpsichord recordings of music you know from a piano version. But it's; not often, at least to my ears, the harpsichord performances are superior to a the same work played by a pianist.
After trying to follow my own advice I've decided Scarlatti on Harpsichord is unbearable. Piano is a vast improvement.
"two skeletons copulating on a tin roof" as Sir Thomas Beecham used to say
Here is just one reason I will never give up on harpsichord Scarlatti. He is having so much fun - it’s irresistible to me. Give it a chance and listen to the end.


Mandryka
2020-09-15 18:23:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Scarlatti did have access to many fine pianos and there’s good reasons to think that some of the sonatas were written for piano.
Post by Neil
Post by Neil
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something". It's not a travesty. Playing harpsichord music on the piano opens up a realm of opportunities for colour and touch. Not all of us have a harpsichord at home either.
I've always felt it's important to listen harpsichord recordings of music you know from a piano version. But it's; not often, at least to my ears, the harpsichord performances are superior to a the same work played by a pianist.
After trying to follow my own advice I've decided Scarlatti on Harpsichord is unbearable. Piano is a vast improvement.
"two skeletons copulating on a tin roof" as Sir Thomas Beecham used to say
Here is just one reason I will never give up on harpsichord Scarlatti. He is having so much fun - it’s irresistible to me. Give it a chance and listen to the end.
http://youtu.be/GII23EbhMyg
Steven Bornfeld
2020-09-16 16:56:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JohnGavin
Post by Neil
Post by Neil
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something". It's not a travesty. Playing harpsichord music on the piano opens up a realm of opportunities for colour and touch. Not all of us have a harpsichord at home either.
I've always felt it's important to listen harpsichord recordings of music you know from a piano version. But it's; not often, at least to my ears, the harpsichord performances are superior to a the same work played by a pianist.
After trying to follow my own advice I've decided Scarlatti on Harpsichord is unbearable. Piano is a vast improvement.
"two skeletons copulating on a tin roof" as Sir Thomas Beecham used to say
Here is just one reason I will never give up on harpsichord Scarlatti. He is having so much fun - it’s irresistible to me. Give it a chance and listen to the end.
http://youtu.be/GII23EbhMyg
Besides being FUN, as you say, this doesn't suffer from the close miking
of some harpsichord recordings, where the quill noise can sometimes (to
me) be distracting.
Mandryka
2020-09-15 18:25:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
No, I think you are totally wrong. A piano, or a modern one, is a less colourful instrument than a proper harpsichord. And you lose as many opportunities for touch.
Post by Neil
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something". It's not a travesty. Playing harpsichord music on the piano opens up a realm of opportunities for colour and touch. Not all of us have a harpsichord at home either.
I've always felt it's important to listen harpsichord recordings of music you know from a piano version. But it's; not often, at least to my ears, the harpsichord performances are superior to a the same work played by a pianist.
Todd Michel McComb
2020-09-17 17:45:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mandryka
A piano, or a modern one, is a less colourful instrument than a
proper harpsichord. And you lose as many opportunities for touch.
If music is well known, people should play it however they want,
IMO. I mean, I don't have to like it. Why should I like everything?
So this all seems kind of irrelevant to me, and the more variety
in performance, generally speaking, the more music is appreciated
and the more likely something interesting is to result....

When it comes to music people are still trying to figure out, i.e.
its phrasing and the rest, there's a different factor. I mean, in
some sense, lots of the warhorses aren't "figured out" since there
are always choices, but the tunes & rhythms & just the elements of
how the lines fit together have been thoroughly examined. But if
you're still trying to figure out what's going on with some silent
notes on a piece of paper, the actual equipment the author was using
can make a big difference in figuring that out. That part is as
straightforward as can be. And then once you've rendered something
like that in sound, everyone can hear & take their own conclusions.
And then maybe render a full mass with an orchestra of people blowing
into bottles or something... whatever.

Admittedly, sometimes doing something completely different can yield
insights to apply back to a more straightforward performance. But
more often, if you try to get into the earlier performance space,
you're more likely to gain insights. Again, if the piece is already
well known, then none of this applies (or more as an alternative
to just continuing the performance history you encounter). But
most of the earlier music of interest to me has never really had a
great performance (or not in my lifetime), so there's plenty more
to do in terms of familiarity with style. (I talk about many new
performances in positive terms, but are any of them really at the
actual level of detail etc. as a typical warhorse performance? No,
not even close.)

And then for a warhorse? Play it however you want. There's always
other options for anyone who doesn't like it. Inspiration can be
anything, after all.
Ricardo Jimenez
2020-09-16 15:31:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Neil
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something". It's not a travesty. Playing harpsichord music on the piano opens up a realm of opportunities for colour and touch. Not all of us have a harpsichord at home either.
I've always felt it's important to listen harpsichord recordings of music you know from a piano version. But it's; not often, at least to my ears, the harpsichord performances are superior to a the same work played by a pianist.
The pros and cons of each are well demonstrated by listening to
Royer's Le Vertigo on the piano :

and harpsichord:


You would think that the piano would do quite well in managing the big
contrasts between piano and forte, but defiinitely not here, according
to my ears.
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-14 20:06:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
The following 1986 article begins:

- ''THERE'S this strange notion that Bach didn't compose for the piano,'' the pianist Charles Rosen said, ''and it refuses to die out.''

''Bach was familiar with the piano, you know. It was invented during his lifetime, and he not only played the piano, but actually composed at least two of his pieces specifically for the instrument,'' Mr. Rosen pointed out in a recent telephone interview. ''And yet there are people who will tell you that Bach should only be played on the harpsichord, or the clavier, or whatever.''

https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/08/nyregion/a-pianist-makes-bach-his-instrument.html
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-14 21:23:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
- ''THERE'S this strange notion that Bach didn't compose for the piano,'' the pianist Charles Rosen said, ''and it refuses to die out.''
''Bach was familiar with the piano, you know. It was invented during his lifetime, and he not only played the piano, but actually composed at least two of his pieces specifically for the instrument,'' Mr. Rosen pointed out in a recent telephone interview. ''And yet there are people who will tell you that Bach should only be played on the harpsichord, or the clavier, or whatever.''
https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/08/nyregion/a-pianist-makes-bach-his-instrument.html
And what does a certain pianist say about Bach's keyboard music being played by non-keyboardists?:

https://books.google.com/books?id=8DXnDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT53&dq=%22goldberg+variations+for+string+orchestra%22+balalaika&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi14oSxyenrAhV2A2MBHcmUCNAQ6AEwAHoECAAQAg#v=onepage&q=%22goldberg%20variations%20for%20string%20orchestra%22%20balalaika&f=false
Mandryka
2020-09-15 18:22:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Rosen is, I think, quite simply wrong to say that Bach composer two pieces for piano. He may well have improvises one piece, but that improvisation may bear no resemblance to any of his published music.

And it has to be said that the pianos Bach was familiar with at the end of his life were really very different indeed to modern instruments.
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
- ''THERE'S this strange notion that Bach didn't compose for the piano,'' the pianist Charles Rosen said, ''and it refuses to die out.''
''Bach was familiar with the piano, you know. It was invented during his lifetime, and he not only played the piano, but actually composed at least two of his pieces specifically for the instrument,'' Mr. Rosen pointed out in a recent telephone interview. ''And yet there are people who will tell you that Bach should only be played on the harpsichord, or the clavier, or whatever.''
https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/08/nyregion/a-pianist-makes-bach-his-instrument.html
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-15 20:03:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
- ''THERE'S this strange notion that Bach didn't compose for the piano,'' the pianist Charles Rosen said, ''and it refuses to die out.''
''Bach was familiar with the piano, you know. It was invented during his lifetime, and he not only played the piano, but actually composed at least two of his pieces specifically for the instrument,'' Mr. Rosen pointed out in a recent telephone interview. ''And yet there are people who will tell you that Bach should only be played on the harpsichord, or the clavier, or whatever.''
https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/08/nyregion/a-pianist-makes-bach-his-instrument.html
Rosalyn Tureck speaks out:

https://www.curtis.edu/academics/library/tureck-bach-research-institute-at-curtis-institute-of-music/documents/bachpiano-harpsichord-or-clavichord/
dk
2020-09-16 04:30:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
- ''THERE'S this strange notion that Bach didn't compose for the piano,'' the pianist Charles Rosen said, ''and it refuses to die out.''
''Bach was familiar with the piano, you know. It was invented during his lifetime, and he not only played the piano, but actually composed at least two of his pieces specifically for the instrument,'' Mr. Rosen pointed out in a recent telephone interview. ''And yet there are people who will tell you that Bach should only be played on the harpsichord, or the clavier, or whatever.''
https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/08/nyregion/a-pianist-makes-bach-his-instrument.html
https://www.curtis.edu/academics/library/tureck-bach-research-institute-at-curtis-institute-of-music/documents/bachpiano-harpsichord-or-clavichord/
Smart cookie.

dk
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-17 16:33:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
- ''THERE'S this strange notion that Bach didn't compose for the piano,'' the pianist Charles Rosen said, ''and it refuses to die out.''
''Bach was familiar with the piano, you know. It was invented during his lifetime, and he not only played the piano, but actually composed at least two of his pieces specifically for the instrument,'' Mr. Rosen pointed out in a recent telephone interview. ''And yet there are people who will tell you that Bach should only be played on the harpsichord, or the clavier, or whatever.''
https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/08/nyregion/a-pianist-makes-bach-his-instrument.html
According to Rosen's book THE ROMANTIC GENERATION:

- This characteristic of Bach's style is inescapable on any keyboard instrument, but it is brought forward with striking clarity by the piano, and it was deeply important for the Romantic composer, Chopin in particular.

https://books.google.com/books?id=e7PHS54HqykC&printsec=frontcover&dq=bach+piano+rosen&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjjv9HjzPDrAhUIDxQKHWVSCacQuwUwAXoECAAQBw#v=onepage&q=purists&f=false
Mandryka
2020-09-15 18:19:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
I think the 1 star review is right, that playing pre piano composers on a modern piano is potentially a travesty, because a piano’s characteristics - pure tone and long natural sustain - often doesn’t bring out the best the music at all. I particularly dislike the tone of a piano, the lack of interesting partials compared with a renaissance or baroque keyboard instrument. That being said, I quite enjoyed Pinaar’s recordings, this one and the Gibbons. for what they are: attractive travesties, lies.
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-17 04:34:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
Does the following have anything to do with authentic performance practice?:

- There is nothing like returning to a place that remains unchanged to find the ways in which you yourself have altered.

Nelson Mandela
Mandryka
2020-09-17 08:09:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Can I ask people to think about a claim attributed to Rosen that Bach wrote two piano pieces? Does anyone know what he was thinking of?

I expect part of it is the idea that the ricercar à 3 in opfer is for piano, because he improvised a Ricercar à 3 on a piano when the music was created. Of course, we don’t know whether the ricercar à 3 finally published is the same as the improvised one. And it’s not obviously pianistic IMO, on the contrary Hantai Leonhardt and others have shown it is admirably suited for the cut and thrust of harpsichord. Maybe Rosen addressed this.

And what is the second piano piece Rosen attributes to Bach? It can’t be the Ricercar à 6 from opfer obviously - that just fits really well on organ with pedals. So what?
MiNe109
2020-09-17 14:36:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mandryka
Can I ask people to think about a claim attributed to Rosen that Bach
wrote two piano pieces? Does anyone know what he was thinking of?
I expect part of it is the idea that the ricercar à 3 in opfer is for
piano, because he improvised a Ricercar à 3 on a piano when the music
was created. Of course, we don’t know whether the ricercar à 3
finally published is the same as the improvised one. And it’s not
obviously pianistic IMO, on the contrary Hantai Leonhardt and others
have shown it is admirably suited for the cut and thrust of
harpsichord. Maybe Rosen addressed this.
And what is the second piano piece Rosen attributes to Bach? It can’t
be the Ricercar à 6 from opfer obviously - that just fits really well
on organ with pedals. So what?
Rosen does claim the Ricercar a 6 (or "Prussian Fugue") from the Musical
Offering for the piano. The case for organ is said to be weakened by the
range of the bass part which rises above the tenor.

Baroque music is more flexible in instrument choice than the current
specificity.
Mandryka
2020-09-17 17:38:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MiNe109
Post by Mandryka
Can I ask people to think about a claim attributed to Rosen that Bach
wrote two piano pieces? Does anyone know what he was thinking of?
I expect part of it is the idea that the ricercar à 3 in opfer is for
piano, because he improvised a Ricercar à 3 on a piano when the music
was created. Of course, we don’t know whether the ricercar à 3
finally published is the same as the improvised one. And it’s not
obviously pianistic IMO, on the contrary Hantai Leonhardt and others
have shown it is admirably suited for the cut and thrust of
harpsichord. Maybe Rosen addressed this.
And what is the second piano piece Rosen attributes to Bach? It can’t
be the Ricercar à 6 from opfer obviously - that just fits really well
on organ with pedals. So what?
Rosen does claim the Ricercar a 6 (or "Prussian Fugue") from the Musical
Offering for the piano. The case for organ is said to be weakened by the
range of the bass part which rises above the tenor.
m
But it’s perfectly playable on an organ and I’m assured that the bass part fits the pedals well. It sounds great on organ! I think Rosen was mistaken.
MiNe109
2020-09-17 22:02:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mandryka
Post by MiNe109
Post by Mandryka
Can I ask people to think about a claim attributed to Rosen that
Bach wrote two piano pieces? Does anyone know what he was
thinking of?
I expect part of it is the idea that the ricercar à 3 in opfer is
for piano, because he improvised a Ricercar à 3 on a piano when
the music was created. Of course, we don’t know whether the
ricercar à 3 finally published is the same as the improvised one.
And it’s not obviously pianistic IMO, on the contrary Hantai
Leonhardt and others have shown it is admirably suited for the
cut and thrust of harpsichord. Maybe Rosen addressed this.
And what is the second piano piece Rosen attributes to Bach? It
can’t be the Ricercar à 6 from opfer obviously - that just fits
really well on organ with pedals. So what?
Rosen does claim the Ricercar a 6 (or "Prussian Fugue") from the
Musical Offering for the piano. The case for organ is said to be
weakened by the range of the bass part which rises above the
tenor.
But it’s perfectly playable on an organ and I’m assured that the bass
part fits the pedals well. It sounds great on organ! I think Rosen
was mistaken.
The piece I read (not Rosen) assumed a bass with 16' stops would sound
strange in that range. Of course, there's no requirement those stops be
used or proof they would always sound bad if they were.

I have no problem with it on the organ. The association with the
pianoforte was flattery to King Frederick the Great rather than any
special property of the music.

My view of baroque pieces isn't what instrument the music was meant for
but what music you could play on the instrument you had.
Mandryka
2020-09-17 17:56:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MiNe109
Baroque music is more flexible in instrument choice than the current
specificity.
Sometimes the texture of the music suggest the instrument strongly. A lot of baroque music has melodies which leap around wildly, and often break off suddenly, pieces which are floods of sudden inspirations which modulate violently, careening from one end of the emotional spectrum to the other and back again. All this is typical for the chameleon-like, thrust-and-parry character of the harpsichord.
MiNe109
2020-09-17 22:07:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mandryka
Post by MiNe109
Baroque music is more flexible in instrument choice than the
current specificity.
Sometimes the texture of the music suggest the instrument strongly. A
lot of baroque music has melodies which leap around wildly, and often
break off suddenly, pieces which are floods of sudden inspirations
which modulate violently, careening from one end of the emotional
spectrum to the other and back again. All this is typical for the
chameleon-like, thrust-and-parry character of the harpsichord.
Of course. I speak generally. I have read a lot about Scarlatti and was
amused how harpsichordists justified his chord-clusters for their
fierceness while fortepianists pointed to their softer instruments as
allowing them without being too barbaric.

Your characterization could also remind one of Burney's description of
CPE Bach at the clavichord.

It's all good. I also enjoy Robert Hill's Haydn sonatas played on the
harpsichord.
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-17 17:01:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.music.classical/CJ278VDdQVc
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-17 22:20:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
Wouldn't a lutenist plays the lute repertoire exclusively on the lute say that there's no way that the guitar can capture the special qualities (e.g., subtleties, nuances, delicacy, intimacy) of the lute?
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-17 22:24:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
Wouldn't a lutenist who plays the lute repertoire exclusively on the lute say that there's no way that the guitar can capture the special qualities (e.g., subtleties, nuances, delicacy, intimacy) of the lute?
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-17 22:24:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
Wouldn't a lutenist who plays the lute repertoire exclusively on the lute say that there's no way that the guitar can capture the special qualities (e.g., subtleties, nuances, delicacy, intimacy) of the lute?
g***@gmail.com
2020-09-17 22:39:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"Piano or Harpsichord?" = Guitar or Lute?

Wouldn't a lutenist who plays the lute repertoire exclusively on the lute say that there's no way that the guitar can capture the special qualities (e.g., subtleties, nuances, delicacy, intimacy) of the lute?
Mandryka
2020-09-18 04:10:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by Ricardo Jimenez
I am listening to a 2 disc set of keyboard pieces "The Long 17th
Century" performed by a superb artist, Daniel-Ben Pienaar, on a
gorgeous sounding piano. There is stuff by Couperin, Gabrieli,
Buxtehude but the majority of the tracks are by guys I never have
heard of previously. I checked Amazon for reviews. There is a 5*
review by somebody who enjoyed it as much as I am. There is a 1*
review by somebody who thinks playing these pieces on a modern piano
is a travesty. Any opinions from readers here?
"Piano or Harpsichord?" = Guitar or Lute?
Wouldn't a lutenist who plays the lute repertoire exclusively on the lute say that there's no way that the guitar can capture the special qualities (e.g., subtleties, nuances, delicacy, intimacy) of the lute?
They would be right.

Loading...