[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [F_minor] Zenph Goldbergs



How interesting that there are Glenn Gould impersonators out there! Surely the '81 recordings are enough to inspire anyone to try to reproduce it, but only a truly un-creative person will stop at that. It must have been fun though, watching this impersonator try his best to copy Glenn Gould, and finally not being able to.

Singh


From: Bill Larson <william.larson@yahoo.com>
To: "F_MINOR@EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU" <F_MINOR@EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject: [F_minor] Zenph Goldbergs
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 12:40:21 -0700 (PDT)

After two listens, I'm not sure where to start-- I'm rather disappointed.

The overall sound quality is murky and does not remotely resemble any acoustic in which Gould ever recorded. The piano sounds like the Yamaha that it is (why couldn't Zenph have adapted an actual Steinway to the purpose??). The hammers make a sound which actually becomes more velvety and neutral as the "playing" becomes louder, I think. This is noticeable on the binaural recording in particular (which has somewhat of a hole in the middle-- with headphones, I feel as though there are soundboards on either side of me). Overall, it sounds like a digital piano, with digital echo.

On to the performance. It's remarkable that the technology was able to recover as much information as it did. But I don't think this should have been released until further refinements were made. I hear occasional missing notes and clumsy phrases that I don't recall from the original recording. In a few instances, notably var. 17 (simultaneous 16th-note scale passages in both hands, staccato), the synchronization between the hands is off, with the left hand generally in the lead. Also, there is none of the human touch regarding hammer speeds and adding tiny bits of pedal bloom, which would give the melodic material more sustain and carrying power.

Considering both the sound and the playing, it sounds like the performance was prepared by engineers, not musicians. It appears that the performance was approved by someone who does not personally play the piano very well, therefore unperceptive to nuance; and it sounds like the microphone setup and room acoustic were chosen to sound inoffensively pretty, rather than with the aim of serving the music. Superficially I think it's quite an achievement, but it's not ready for prime time. I'm rather glad that the $18.99 didn't come out of MY pocket. It sounds to me like a recording of someone who doesn't play the piano very well, imitating Glenn Gould.

(P.S.--This last sentence ties in to the recent discussion of godlike versus human perspectives on Gould. I was once playing in a competition in Washington D.C. in which the only required piece was Goldbergs. Another competitor was basically a human Zenph of Gould: he was balding, he hummed and swayed, I believe he brought a low chair, and he copied Gould's performance to the letter-- every ornament and every repeat was exactly what Gould did in 1981. I truly mean EXACTLY. Like the Zenph, a few erroneous notes crept in.)
_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor

_________________________________________________________________
Share More On Messenger with a Windows Live Space http://spaces.live.com/?mkt=en-ca


_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor