[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [F_MINOR] glenn gould's goldberg recordings
In the case of the Goldberg -81, one must not forget that the Yamaha has
a harsher, more metallic sound than a Steinway. That's something we
can't change in hindsight. Gould didn't seem to mind.
Indeed. But, in the "State of Wonder" analog issue, that Yamaha at least
sounds like a real Yamaha piano. In the standard digital issue it's
harsher than they really are.
Are you sure? One of the main charateristics of Gould's recordings is
the extreme closeup. That will no doubt enhance any instrument specific
sound. For example, the less than perfect intonation of this instrument
is clearly audible due to the close miking. The fact that the analog
version has less bass clarity doesn't make a compelling case for it
being a more "realistic" reproduction of the Yamaha at hand. Whether you
prefer the harsher sound/more bass line clarity or softer/less clear
bass is another question altogether.
The digital version
strikes me as off-putting, as if Gould didn't care much about beautiful
tone anymore. The analog one reveals that he still did, or at least that
he was *able to* produce beautiful tone.
I think that is quite a harsh view of the -81 version. I can perhaps
understand the view that this is more a Gould verison than a Bach
version (which on the other hand is a rather strange view, giving the
fact that piano playing should be regarded as more or less re-creative;
another and more far-reaching subject, I know). When I listen to -- say
variation 6 or variation 25 -- I cannot for my life understand anyone
claiming Gould to achieve an off-putting piano sound. To me the -55 is
much more forced in that department, mostly because Gould chooses such
extreme tempi. (And yes, I know var. 6 is supposed to be a gigue, which
is hardly what Gould plays)
The digital one strips away some
of his nuances, sounding (by comparison) stark and mechanical. In my
opinion, of course. That's after 20 years of listening to the digital
one
and disliking it, on the grounds that I feel it's musically shallow.
This is also an extreme exaggeration. You have all the right to dislike
the -81 recording. But to say it lacks musical depths does strike me as
very odd. Then you need to define that term very closely.
Now,
in analog, I hear more depth in the interpretation.
I still claim that the difference between the two versions isn't that
sensational (do a blindfold test yourself with adjusted soundlevels).
Also, a change in this department cannot alter the main musical content
of a performance. Gould's artistic choices -- no matter what we think of
them -- is clear no matter how we filter his recordings.
Jorgen Lundmark
**************************************************
Signoff instructions, and user preference interface:
http://email.rutgers.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=f_minor&A=1
F_minor Website (with early archive):
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~mwatts/glenn
**************************************************