Report Blog Entry
I was listening to a recording of a harpsichord piece, written by a composer named Jean-Philippe Rameau, who the classically musical among you may have heard of. I looked up his piece called Les Cyclopes, and saw the that the first thing that came up was a recording performed by Grigory Sokolov, one of the greatest pianists still living. I could hardly recognize the piece as it was performed by him, because he played it with the expertise of a piano player. Crescendos, changes in volume, a slow, soft and composed (lol) approach to playing. While no doubt Sokolov's playing was beautiful, it is not how Les Cyclopes was intended to sound.
Les Cyclopes was written for harpsichord, a musical instrument which is not capable of changing in volume. It is a harsh instrument with a very particular sound. The approach to playing a harpsichord differs from that of a piano. Pianos have heavier keys, but harpsichords do not. I have seen piano players press down on piano keys, while harpsichord players can almost scratch at the key for it to produce the note. The performance of Les Cyclopes by Virginia Black, on a harpsichord, sounds very different from Sokolov's rendition. It is loud, harsh, violent even. It all flows together evenly, and the notes run at a breakneck pace down the page. That is Les Cyclopes.
This brings me to my greatest issue on the modern perspective of classical music. First, one must understand that the term classical is a single era of composition style, and more to my point, instruments used. For an example of the scope I'm talking about, (and give some music recs as well) the Baroque era, you've got Bach (Concerto in D Minor, BWV 1043), Scarlatti (Fandango in D Minor), Vivaldi (Four Seasons is a great example), Couperin (Les Baricades misterieuses), Handel (Sarabande, Suite 11 for Harpsichord, also the theme from Barry Lyndon), Jean-Baptiste Lully (Marche dour la ceremonie des Turcs, one of my favorites), all of these written before the invention of the piano, or even its predecessor. The next era is Classical, Mozart (Here's a link to a period accurate performance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mXCQZOYMcU), Salieri (Piano concerto in C Major, II Larghetto), Haydn (String Quartet No. 62, C Major), Boccherini (Just look up Master and Commander duet, music piece names are really long and I'm tired spelling Italian and French words wrong). During the Classical era, the Fortepiano was developed, which is the predecessor of our modern Piano. Throughout the Classical period, the Fortepiano was employed, but still sounded much different than a modern piano.
Toward the end of Classical and on the threshold of the era of Romantics, comes Beethoven, and properly Romantic Schubert (Ave Maria), Brahms, Paganini, Schumann, Mendelsson, Saint-Saens, and of course, Tchaikovsky. These are the composers you'll find in YouTube music playlists with a classical painting thumbnail and the title "Playlist for an Evil Prince planning a Tea Party" or "POV you're a freaking Evil Villain" or something along those lines. Piano pieces during this time are now properly for our modern pianos, though Beethoven and Schubert may have stumbled just over the edge from Classical to Romantic.
To me, composers compose for specific instruments, the ones they have in mind to perform their piece. If Bach composes for an organ or a harpsichord, he's making it for the organ or harpsichord. Doesn't mean music can't sound great on modern instruments, and once again, Sokolov's rendition of Les Cyclopes was sublime, but it wasn't what Remeau had in mind, or what anyone during the time of his life would have heard. That, is to me, very important. I want to hear it how the composer intended it to be heard.
Further, although a bit pedantic, I like to keep in mind that most pieces from the Renaissance to the Classical were not expressly made to be performed to an audience, rather, it's music to dance to. Specific court dances with stages and music to match those stages. It's not anything too important, but I like to keep it in mind. Bach composed religiously, and religiously. Most of his music is choral, and meant for church services.
At the heart of it all, music is just a bunch of sounds that may or may not be pleasing to the ears, so however anybody likes those sounds to be put in their ears is what matters. You like organ music on the piano? Go ahead, if you think it sounds good. You don't like how harsh harpsichords are? Cool, we've got other instruments for you. Hell, you want to hear Bach on '70s synthesizers, we've got that too.
At the heart of it, for me, it's simply a pet peeve. I view it in the same way as listening to Opera without knowing the words, which destroys the original point of Opera, unless, like I said, you want to enjoy the music without knowing the words. It's the same annoyance I have with people who decorate with items that have purposes and aren't meant for decoration. (My Aunt has a ball jar full of paint brushes on a desk in her house, mind you, nobody in the family, much less anyone living in that house, paints.) I don't know if it's undiagnosed autism, or just a strangely strong opinion I've picked up, but there you go. Hopefully you got something out of my rant.
Also, with any strong opinion one chooses to make public, I probably got some things wrong, and if you'd like to blast me in the comments about something I said inaccurately, please, go ahead.
(If you want to learn more about really specific instruments, go to the Orchestra for the Age of Enlightenment, everything I just yelled about is like their whole deal. If you want any recommendations for instruments or composers even earlier than Baroque, like Renaissance, tell me.)
Comments
Displaying 1 of 1 comments ( View all | Add Comment )
k
i really like reading your take on this. i listened to the harpsichord version and wow it sounds totally different from the piano one! i guess that's the beauty of performing arts though, to have as much interpretation as you want since there is no way of knowing how the composer played it (other than what's on the sheet music haha). but i do like it the most when performers have the historical context in mind, like understanding the perspective of the composer and the pieces of other composers in that same era. it kills me when anything chopin is played a bit differently than what i had in mind. but death of the author i guess
it's funny because for several of the pieces i learned, my piano teacher was always strict about sticking to how the piece should be played. but then for the performances i always just winged it and did it my own way, because the stage was all mine. it was fun, but obviously shostakovichs waltz no 2 on piano cannot beat shostakovichs waltz no 2 in a live jazz orchestra.