Daft question of the week

[Guest]

Hi. I'm mainly to be found on the world music forum. I have some knowledge and understanding of quite a wide range of music. However, I don't generally feel very confident in discussing classical music and am only aware of bits and pieces.

This means that I have some fairly vague ideas about likes and dislikes. I don't tend to choose work by the Germanic heavyweight composers that I get the impression is regarded as the real stuff.

I veer towards the English, French, Spanish and Italian, Eastern European and Russian, American, the 19th and 20th century, the romantic, folky and experimental. I could name certain pieces that I like - eg A London Symphony by Vaughan Williams - but not large numbers of them.

What I have never understood is how one performance of a classical piece on record or cd can be heard as far better than another of the same music. Yes, I understand how instruments are played by some with more emotion. There are also recordings of historical significance and live performances obviously vary.

However, I should have thought that there was far less scope for a unique interpretation than in popular music. There one "version" of a song can be quite different from another not only in arrangement but in tempo.

My question then is how can one tell what is a great classical recording and what is simply run-of-the-mill?

If I am deciding, I mainly choose the most well known conductors and orchestras or perhaps performers who share the same country of birth as the composers. But I feel sure that there is more to it and I am looking for a few signposts!

[Philidor]

My question then is how can one tell what is a great classical recording and what is simply run-of-the-mill?

That's actually a very good, highly controversial, question. In the baroque field it's slightly easier to answer because so many performances used to be so bl*ody awful. Modern instruments and modern - mostly 19th century - techniques tended to obscure the music. Once people read the Treatises, rebuilt the instruments, and learned them afresh, the scores were revealed.

So it's relatively easy to take a 1950s recording of, say, a Bach violin & keyboard sonata and show, objectively, what's wrong with it compared to a period instrument performance.

[mathias broucek]

The differences are far more obvious where you know the piece well or at least the idiom.

Clearly for music after about 1800 differences are more subtle than differences in popular music which typically involve some rearrangement or even recomposition.

Give us a list of some recordings you have of pieces you know quite well. We'll try and pick an alternative that shows the piece in a completely different light!

[Don Petter]

The problem is that there is really no right or wrong, great or not great, but it's a personal thing about what the music and performance does for you. Not a helpful answer, and of course do use others' general and specific recommendations as a starting point - that makes complete sense. But don't be afraid if what you feel doesn't reflect what you've been told you should feel, either way.

I'm sidestepping the issue of good or bad relating to such things as historically informed performances (HIP), or the lack of them, or gross distortion of the composer's intentions, which could be classed as objective, rather than subjective. Even so, there should be no feeling of guilt if we thrill to the sound of Stokowski's modifications or a bit of Beecham's extra percussion.

Another thing you may find, which is quite normal (pleez to relax on zee couch), is that you get to particularly like the first recording you acquire of a work, against which others are subsequently judged. This imprinting, as the Americans call it, is almost impossible to avoid, unless you have the resources and self discipline to buy several versions at the outset, which most of us don't. It really doesn't matter, but bear it in mind if you get to discuss performances with others - that your opinions might just be coloured and not the universal white that you had hoped.

I've rattled this off without much leisured consideration. Others will contribute more cogent advice, I'm sure, but the main thing is not to be put off by the aura of 'classical music'. Try it here and there, and you'll soon find things to delight you.

[french frank]

I agree that it's not a daft question at all. There is often a mystery about this. Reading J Swain's biog on the R3 website - it says: "The musical bent got the better of him, especially a fascination with why the same piece of music can move you in the hands of one performer, and leave you stone cold in the hands of another. " Yes, and the problem is that the next indiwiddle who comes along will take exactly the opposite view.

It's infuriating, but some of the most disappointing CD purchases for me have been when I've relied on a rapturous review from someone else. It is this combination of listening a lot to become familiar with a piece and clarifying in your own mind what you 'like' most.

[Gordon]

Not a daft question at all!! In short it has to do with subtlety of expression. It may also be down to interpretation involving historically informed performance practice thatwill alter the sound of a piece. Whilst all the notes are written down and so apparently leaving little scope for the performers [there are textual issues in classical music especially some of the heavyweights you are having trouble with, Bruckner in particular] not everything is in black and white - the skill and artistry of performers and interpreters is in finding the nuances that are expressed through rubato [[altering the rhythm on a micro-level, eg bar by bar or even within a bar] and the attack on notes [sforzandi can be harsher or less so] the shaping of melodic line, balance between the various choirs of instruments in a symphony orchestra and the unanimity of the playing [or not - Stokowski supposedly deliberately made violins play with unsynchronised bowing to get the sheen he wanted]. Sometimes the instruments themselves are a tell tale to a style of playing - French wind [and Russian and old Easten bloc] esp horns use [or used to] more vibrato than further west. There is also the very important issue of understanding the scale and architecture of the work and presenting this structure clearly so that the composer's intentions are fully realised. The big heavy classical pieces are often long and so a pacing through the structure is vital otherwise it sounds disjoint rather than have the thematic material and the key plan make their marks as they are altered and developed. It has to do with managing complexity. It also has to be said that a certain amount of stage presence and charisma from a conductor on the podium is often significant in marking out a great performance!!

This is just a few of the differences between the "heavy" stuff and the more relaxed. I'm sure that others here that are or were professionals can give a better response. Some jazz and some of the edges of the popular music field eg the so called "standards" [Ella Fitzgerald, Sinatra era say] can, due to the artistry of particular performers, achieve similar sublety in delivering the music as written, but that is probably contentious!!

[sigolene euphemia]

lateralthinking1,

Good day,

Hardly daft. I as well am very new to classical music and have striven to understand how Inspector Morse, himself, can distinguish between the recordings of the same composition.

Release all linear thinking and listen with your soul.

I have listened solely to CBC radio2 [Canadian Broadcating Corporation] when it was purely classical - to KUSC [Radio Service of the University of Southern California] and when CBC radio2 changed their format I rather drifted through streaming round the globe and settled right here.

BBC radio3 has been a joy of learning and learning to listen to MY passion. And figuring out just what that might be.

For instance because I listened to Jim Sjveda host of KUSC evening program seven to midnight for many years, I came to know he does not play nor care for Baroque.

So I remain, in encouraging you to listen to your soul.

kind wishes,
Sigolene

[Lateralthinking1]

Many thanks for these considered, helpful, replies. The imprinting makes a lot of sense to me.

Mathias says: "Give us a list of some recordings you have of pieces you know quite well. We'll try and pick an alternative that shows the piece in a completely different light!" This is an offer that is hard to resist so here goes.

I have Pascal Roge on Decca performing Satie's 3 Gymnopedies.

Copland conducts Copland - Fanfare, Appalachian Spring, Old American Songs, Rodeo - That is CBS Masterworks.

Julian Bream - RCA Red Seal - Rodrigo, Concierto de Aranjuez

Debussy - La Mer, Images, L'Apres Midi - Deutsche G. - Bernstein, Orchestra dell'Academia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia

Rachmaninov - Piano Concerto 2 - Decca - Ashkenazy, Previn, London Symphony Orchestra

Delius - Cuckoo, Paradise Garden etc- Classics For Pleasure, Vernon Handley, London Philharmonic Orchestra

These were the first ones I grabbed from the rack. I might come back to you with (just) a couple more at a later time.

I would also particularly like recommendations for Faure's Requiem, which I love, a substantial starting point for Gorecki which I have only dipped into briefly, and Puccini - the well known stuff - but something less commercial than the Three Tenors.

[Lateralthinking1]

......while I have been writing, and taken a phone call (!), I have read the other really nice replies. I do accept that musical appreciation comes from the soul. That has always been true for me and I can't imagine what life would have been like without it. I am still less sure footed in the classical arena and would benefit from others' knowledge and experience.

[Philidor]

This imprinting, as the Americans call it...

[johnb]

Lateralthinking1,

It is a very good question.

It is often surprising the extent to which one performance (or recording) can touch your heart and another leave you unmoved.

I've got an example of two pianists playing the same, short piece. To my ears there is quite a difference, others might disagree.

Satie Gymnopedie No 1 - Pianist A

Satie Gymnopedie No 1 - Pianist B

Both pianists are highly regarded and both are French. Have a listen (it is only a very short piece) and tell us what you think.

(If anyone is interested in who the pianists are, send me a PM.)

[Daring Tripod]

Not a silly question at all. I have often wondered the same about my likes and dislikes. Like ff, I have bought so many CDs which were highly recommended and been bitterly disappointed. Also, with me, the first performances I bought were always my yardsticks.

The sadly departed Smittens once wrote that ‘the more you listen the more you learn’ and so it has proved over some 65 years of listening to classical music.!

I often ask myself ‘Why did you like or dislike this performance so much?’ and frequently fail to explain it to myself. There are those rare great occasions when one comes across a ‘great performance’ which can, so-to-speak, ‘lift one out of one’s seat’. The most recent example of this was listening to the reissue of Mahler’s second symphony conducted by Klaus Tennsteadt. Why? I just felt it was such a great and intense performance and I could feel the complete devotion of all the participants which came across the speakers to me. So, my advice is ‘just go on listening’ and you’ll soon get the hang of it.

I’m sure the musical professionals would violently disagree with the above!

[Don Petter]

Yes - I forgot, imprinting is particularly a problem with Swan Lake.

[Lateralthinking1]

JohnB - I would say that the first was stately and heavier in touch, the second lighter and more graceful, even slightly whimsical. I prefer the second. How have I done? Should I leave now? - Lat.

[mikealdren]

Well you've been pretty lucky with your grabs from the rack.

Probably the best way to start to appreciate the differences is to compare them yourself. Take one of the recordings you have and listen until you know it quite well then listen to a different performance or two. In some cases you will immediately hear large differences, in others less so. The question is then the same as with all music, which do YOU prefer.

Try listening to CD review's building a library. It's sometimes fascinating and it can be a good introduction to a piece you don't know too.

Mike