[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
**************************************************