Dave Hurwitz reviews - love 'em or hate 'em

[gradus]

He should stick to his amateur kitchen department. His diatribe concerning the history of vibrato would get an F- in any serious academic assessment. Damn it, he even confounded flutter tongue with vibrato. Again, in relation to Mahler, he seems to ignore the fact that GM notated the need for "vibrando" in some of his brass parts but did not indicate a need for "vibrato" in string parts. No, all too often he does not know what he is talking about, He's just a third-rate shock jock masquerading as a music critic.

Its a matter of taste, but surely not third-rate. To take an example, his argument against vibrato-less playing. From memory he maintains that conductors eg Walter, Klemperer, Walter, Furtwangler, Toscanini, who were contemporaries of revered victorian/edwardian composers and were thus well informed about historic orchestral playing styles did not follow the approach of those who oppose vibrato and claim authenticity? Seems a reasonable point.

[RichardB]

His diatribe concerning the history of vibrato would get an F- in any serious academic assessment.

As we've said here before, if it were peer reviewed for a serious academic publication it would be rejected. He has decided in advance what he wants the conclusion to be, and gets there by a combination of cherry-picking, misinterpretation and sheer invention. That isn't how research is done, which he either isn't aware of or doesn't care about.

[bluestateprommer]

As we've said here before, if it were peer reviewed for a serious academic publication it would be rejected. He has decided in advance what he wants the conclusion to be, and gets there by a combination of cherry-picking, misinterpretation and sheer invention. That isn't how research is done, which he either isn't aware of or doesn't care about.

Do you mean this Hurwitz article, from Music and Letters in 2012?

https://academic.oup.com/ml/article/93/1/29/1242161

I've read this article, which clearly was peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. Music & Letters isn't exactly chopped iiver as a journal.

Whatever one may think of his video reviews, this particular article is very well argued, IMVHO. Everyone is free to disagree with him, of course, with evidence separately compiled.

[RichardB]

Do you mean this Hurwitz article, from Music and Letters in 2012?

No, I mean the considerably longer one posted on the Classics Today website, which begins with the words "There is a fraud being foisted on the music-loving public today by certain members of the 'historically informed performance practice' lunatic fringe", words which would have no place in a serious publication. The Music and Letters essay indeed takes a much more measured approach without all the sound and fury.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Its a matter of taste, but surely not third-rate. To take an example, his argument against vibrato-less playing. From memory he maintains that conductors eg Walter, Klemperer, Walter, Furtwangler, Toscanini, who were contemporaries of revered victorian/edwardian composers and were thus well informed about historic orchestral playing styles did not follow the approach of those who oppose vibrato and claim authenticity? Seems a reasonable point.

I’m no fan of Mr Hurwitz, but he isn’t always wrong. It’s Mr Norrington who likes to rewrite music history to suit his personal agenda. For this there’s much evidence. His claim that the Vienna Philharmonic didn’t use vibrato until after WW2, for example. (They did, as recordings demonstrate.)

And his school orchestra rendition of Elgar 1, supposedly to reflect the 1908 premiere, yet only 6 years later, the composer made his first recording, oozing with string vibrato. If only he could just be honest and say “I don’t like vibrato”, he would deserve greater respect.

[Bryn]

I’m no fan of Mr Hurwitz, but he isn’t always wrong. It’s Mr Norrington who likes to rewrite music history to suit his personal agenda. For this there’s much evidence. His claim that the Vienna Philharmonic didn’t use vibrato until after WW2, for example. (They did, as recordings demonstrate.)

And his school orchestra rendition of Elgar 1, supposedly to reflect the 1908 premiere, yet only 6 years later, the composer made his first recording, oozing with string vibrato. If only he could just be honest and say “I don’t like vibrato”, he would deserve greater respect.

We've been here before and I continue to maintain that both the recording technology availability at the time and the greater projection offered by the use of vibrato make any perceived deployment of vibrato in that early acoustic recording invalid as evidence, one way or the other. As to Norrington's point about the Wiener Phi, the famous Walter Mahler 9 supports his contention. Despite Norrington's deployment of hyperbole, on the matter of string vibrato*, his own recording of the same symphony employed some string vibrato, but with care and subtlety. If your ears don't hear it, try your eye with the Prom broadcast.

* Bear in mind that, prior to the voice, his principal instrument was the violin.

[RichardB]

It’s Mr Norrington who likes to rewrite music history to suit his personal agenda.

What do you think his personal agenda is? I would say it's something like "let's set our preconceptions aside and try to see what can be gained from looking at the available evidence in a new way". Hurwitz on the other hand seems to have an agenda of the form "but surely the best way to do things is the way I've always thought they should be done". As with OVPP in Bach, the counterarguments to new and challenging HIPP ideas generally take that form when reduced to their essentials.

[Ein Heldenleben]

We've been here before and I continue to maintain that both the recording technology availability at the time and the greater projection offered by the use of vibrato make any perceived deployment of vibrato in that early acoustic recording invalid as evidence, one way or the other. As to Norrington's point about the Wiener Phi, the famous Walter Mahler 9 supports his contention. Despite Norrington's deployment of hyperbole, on the matter of string vibrato*, his own recording of the same symphony employed some string vibrato, but with care and subtlety. If your ears don't hear it, try your eye with the Prom broadcast.

* Bear in mind that, prior to the voice, his principal instrument was the violin.

I just can’t see how string players would have adjusted years of learnt technique in response to the relatively new phenomenon of recording sessions. Apart from anything else how many of them would have heard the recordings when made? Gram players were expensive and so were the discs. It’s much more likely that vibrato varied from orchestra to orchestra and from piece to piece. I also can’t see how the cruder recording techniques in those days would have enhanced the vibrato sounds. It might have introduced wow but that sounds very different. Is there any documented written evidence that string players modified their vibrato playing in response to recording ? It’s more likely that they were asked to play at a consistent mf rather than piano or forte . Even if they didn’t that’s how it would emerge…

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I just can’t see how string players would have adjusted years of learnt technique in response to the relatively new phenomenon of recording sessions. Apart from anything else how many of them would have heard the recordings when made? Gram players were expensive and so were the discs. It’s much more likely that vibrato varied from orchestra to orchestra and from piece to piece. I also can’t see how the cruder recording techniques in those days would have enhanced the vibrato sounds. It might have introduced wow but that sounds very different. Is there any documented written evidence that string players modified their vibrato playing in response to recording ? It’s more likely that they were asked to play at a consistent mf rather than piano or forte . Even if they didn’t that’s how it would emerge…

And critics would surely have remarked upon such a change at the time. This would not appear to be so.

[Bryn]

And critics would surely have remarked upon such a change at the time. This would not appear to be so.

What change would that be? Recording techniques were still in their early stages and the results still bore a very tenuous relationship with what might be heard in the concert hall. That's why I wrote, "both the recording technology availability at the time and the greater projection offered by the use of vibrato make any perceived deployment of vibrato in that early acoustic recording invalid as evidence, one way or the other" (emphasis added).

[RichardB]

It’s much more likely that vibrato varied from orchestra to orchestra and from piece to piece.

Indeed. So why not have a little bit of that diversity in these times of more standardised orchestral practice? If Roger Norrington is, as Bryn points out, employing some exaggeration in his arguments, he's putting these ideas in the service of actual performances and recordings, whereas Hurwitz is sitting on the sidelines using terms like "lunatic fringe" which really have no place in intelligent discourse.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Indeed. So why not have a little bit of that diversity in these times of more standardised orchestral practice? If Roger Norrington is, as Bryn points out, employing some exaggeration in his arguments, he's putting these ideas in the service of actual performances and recordings, whereas Hurwitz is sitting on the sidelines using terms like "lunatic fringe" which really have no place in intelligent discourse.

I’ve noticed that’s what’s happening these days - it’s quite common to hear restrained or no vibrato from large symphony orchestras these days in certain works . I’m not a violinist but presumably constant vibrato is quite tiring on the fingers and finger pads? Or do players just not notice it ?
Vibrato also varies from note to note . I wonder if a vibrato fan has very tried it on the opening notes of the Berg violin concerto? Might need a bit of retuning.

[Lordgeous]

Isn't there a similar discussion to be had regarding the female voice? Is anyone here a lover of wide, uncontrolled vibrato? I know it puts many of my 'non-classical' friends off.

[Bryn]

I’ve noticed that’s what’s happening these days - it’s quite common to hear restrained or no vibrato from large symphony orchestras these days in certain works . I’m not a violinist but presumably constant vibrato is quite tiring on the fingers and finger pads? Or do players just not notice it ?
Vibrato also varies from note to note . I wonder if a vibrato fan has very tried it on the opening notes of the Berg violin concerto? Might need a bit of retuning.

As I feel sure EA can confirm, there is a range of vibrato techniques available, including bow vibrato. What Norrinton fulminates against is recourse to vibrato as the basic mode of tone production and its identification as the standard means of introducing expression to a performance.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Isn't there a similar discussion to be had regarding the female voice? Is anyone here a lover of wide, uncontrolled vibrato? I know it puts many of my 'non-classical' friends off.

Not a lover but as a frequent opera goer you have to learn to be a tolerator. I can think of one soprano who would wobble around the note (starting flat) then fine things down to an ever so slightly sharp definable note. But they can be forgiven - making yourself audible to an audience of 2,000 people over a 100 piece orchestra takes some doing.