mahaberio

The recent thread about the video of Hakan Hardenberger performing Mark-Anthony Turnage's (wonderful) From the Wreckage sparked an interesting conversation that is worthy of further discussion.

As Ed and others observed, it seems that the current fan-base for music is centered around the performer rather than the music itself. Ed asks:

"How many of us go to performances to listen to the players and how many go to listen to the music?"

It's an intriguing question that we should all consider and one I hadn't previously asked myself (though once I did the answer was obvious).

It also made me ask another question:

Can a great performer exist independent of great music? I remember hearing a perfect performance by a great instrumentalist of a piece which frankly should have never been added to anyone's repertoire (both will remain nameless). Despite the high level of performance, I was unable to walk away saying "that was a great performance" because the only part worthy of my attention was the playing. I'll reserve anymore commentary until this thread (hopefully) gets going.

-Matthew

ecarroll

Matthew,

A great composer once said "audiences that simply enjoy my music are a disappointment to me. I intend for them to come away changed".

Can you guess who it was?

Best,
EC

rowuk

Matthew,
a couple of things come to mind:

The motivation to go to a concert is secondary, unless we are feeding egos.

Great music and great performers are an inseparable entity. Trying to single a factor out is like comparing NASCAR, Indy, or Formula 1 - is it the driver or the car?

If a performer has the gift of being able to bring "difficult" music to the masses, then everybody wins - the composer, the player and the audience.

I prescribe to the opinion that not all of us need to play everything to have a given worth as a trumpet player. Bach put his Brandenburg#2 in high F on purpose. Performing it in "D" (or even an octave down) so that more players can "get through" is not what I feel was intended. There is enough quality repertory for all levels of playing. The same goes for me when a brass quintet feels the urge to perform live Bachs Toccata and Fugue in d-Minor. The musical lines are butchered to make them even playable. That is not satisfactory to me, and even renouned groups come up musically short with such attempts.

Does this reduce the "difficult" repertory only for the elite? No! It means that we can all study, practice or play whatever we want, BUT what enjoyment others derive from a given performance is based on the relationship to the performer, the music, the respect between the two AND the expectations of the audience. We know that our family and friends can be more tolerant during a performance than an anonymous music major with a sharp pencil regardless of the music being played. How many of us have read a review of a community concert where the critic trashed everything. We shake our heads and demand that "context" be maintained. True, the critic missed the point - IF the community group in fact gave their best. Many times an absolute critique will "wake up" those that have been getting away with 80% though.......

Yes, the elite has their place and it is a very important position indeed!

I could go on, but this is not a monologue!

Khora

EC- That would be Handel, I think. (therefore I am?)

It seems to me that this is a logical expansion of last year's thread on "How does one Become an Artist?" Of course, one needs to be considered an artist to have the kind of star power that attracts an audience regardless of repertoire.

So how does one get to that point? One way, which I think Hakan (and several others) has shown, is to play a wide range of repertoire - and do it all well! Would Hakan have had as much success premiering Exposed Throat if no one had heard him do standard repertoire exceptionally well? The music is great in and of itself, but the first hearings of new works can be hard. If you aren't sure that the performer really knows how to play, based on a past experience hearing a piece of some familiarity - well, it can be hard to know if the piece is any good, or if it is being played well. On must first trust that the piece is being played well before one can actually listen to just the music.

Gotta run, but look forward to hearing more thoughts on this - I'm certainly still thinking on this myself....

misty.sj

If this was not a trumpet forum I would say that was Heifetz. He was so full of himself! :)

ecarroll

Misty,

No, Sandy pegged it. It's an almost Stockhausenesque quote by G. F. Handel and gives us a peek into his creative soul just before the premiere of Messiah in Dublin.

No crazy, radical, modern composer he (yes he was).

Best,
EC

Smithi20

Being involved in one extreme of the music and performance debate, I thought I´d better chip in!

Presently specialising in free improvisation, this is an area of music where there can be no division between the composer and the musician, as they are one entity in real time. Therefore the player´s performance stands or falls on the quality of their own creativity, and the relationship with the audience.

The other extreme, I suppose, would be to test the integrity of a composed piece by experiencing a performance that may be flawed but enthusiastic! Does it´s mastery and beauty still shine through? Often, yes.

And then there´s everything in between... people like Ton Koopman who´ve grabbed Baroque music by the balls and breathed new life into the repertoire by redressing the balance towards the virtuoso being idiomatic improviser. Even earlier in the century, Casals recording the Bach suites with a freshness and danger that almost gives us the impression that he was creating them himself on the spot! And then there´s Glenn Gould....

Beethoven should scare the hell out of us, Mahler should physically move inner organs, Shostakovich should bend our brains, Ian should stop generalising now!

Maybe part of the star quality of the virtuosos and conductors who feel the music so deeply is that it does bend, terrify, depress and heighten their other emotions. And that´s what communicates so well to an audience, however difficult or conventional the music is. I´m all for one believing that after the initial shock of atonality, audiences zone in on the area that the music is in, and will go along for the ride, as long as it´s worth it.

Also recording has a lot to do with having to "make your mark", I think. Why record the Hummel after Maurice and Wynton? It´s a daunting qustion for any would-be soloist... so they have to have a different spin, marketing etc, or find a niche, like Crispian, or encourage new compositions (not all of which will be great) like Hakan, it´s fair to say I subscribe to both the latter!

rowuk

Bravo Ian!
It is unfortunate when the sales people push an unfinished Hummel to market..............

clousemiester

It's not the arrow .........It's the Indian............But what about the Target?

ecarroll

Ian,

I can't agree more with both statements above. Free improvisation is highly valued at CalArts (and Chosen Vale). What can be considered more creative than composition in "real time"?

Hakan's choice of repertoire, as a true virtuoso, makes perfect sense to me. He advances our art with every commission and every piece created for his incredible voice. How many of us can make that claim?

Best and still watching this wonderful thread with great interest,
EC