Aldo Ciccolini's Nocturnes

Dear Joel:

No, I had ordered it, but I received the Binchois instead! The Binchois is good, but the females (the alto almost sounds like a male alto), especially the the sopranos are too soft and sweet.

Nevertheless a quite interesting record.

I hope I will get the Hilliard next week.

Many thanks for the suggestion: I will investigate it. By the way, Buxtehude, if well played is plain awesome!

Best, RdS
 
P E R O T I N U S

This thread is so confusing by know that I'm no longer sure what hás been said here and elsewhere. It started with Chopin, went back to Bach, and now we are discussing Perotinus!

Well, never mind, but if someone comes here and looks for Pérotin he will never find it. Might I suggest we find a moderator (Tones would be my bet)?

I finally have the Binchois and the Hilliard versions. The Binchois's is extremely beautiful, very poetic, and, to my mind at least, much more in keeping with the general spirit of the 12th Century (severe, but poetic): And, what is more, it shows a kind of melismatic concern that we would expect: do not forget these people were used to Gregorian chant. True, the girls voices can feel wrong; but then they are so marvellously beautiful. In fact, all the voices are extraordinary.

The Hilliard's - I got it yesterday - are extremely angular and the rhythms are all strongly beaten. I found it very fatiguing to listen to. Even the almost trance inducing rhythmic modes are too present. I confess I was relieved when the record reached its end.

Perhaps I will change my opinion later, but I don't think so. The Binchois' version has a kind of graceful waving of phrases that I find very beautiful, whereas the Hilliards seem to be making war music and pounding the rhythmic modes throughout. There are exceptions (chiefly in the anonymous organa and in a very beautiful Pérotin one, written as if there was a chord on which the superius sings, very freely.
 
B A C H : T E M P E R A M E N T

Bach and Temperament.

This is a very thorny issue. There are several sources that suggest that Bach liked a full circulating temperament and, indeed, his last organ works suggest that he did. Nevertheless one must take a more nuanced position here.

THE YOUNG BACH certainly was used to mean tone temperament. All his early work seems based on it (sometimes in a very crude manner: long sections on the tonic and then up to the dominant and back to the tonic). He even used f minor for his «Ich ruf zu dir», a very early work (it is to be found in the Neumeister chorales). Now f minor, in mean tone temperament, is quite desperate, which is in keeping with the words (I call for you, Lord Jesus Christ).

THE MATURE BACH. By the Leipzig years he asked for a more tempered - perhaps something like Neumeister - in the organs. Now the organ certainly poses a problem: when tuned, it will stay like that because you actually have to modify the flues in order to retune them. So I think that, at least on the organ, he liked to have a circulating temperament (his disputes with Gottfried Silbermann are well known).

This is important, because the organ, perhaps even more than the harpsichord, sounds best in mean tone temperament (for specialists: because the quints and tierces are tuned pure and therefore strongly beat with the wrong intervals of a circulating temperament).

Regarding the harpsichord, the question is quite different. A harpsichord may be tuned in about 20 minutes, and therefore it may be retuned at will. Nevertheless, I still think that Bach was experimenting with some kind of circulating temperament. He is said to have played the whole of the WTC to his pupils, and nothing was said about retuning. That aid, it is a fact that equal temperament is very ugly on a bright harpsichord. Perhaps he chose the temperament for the individual pieces? This may well have been the case, because his harpsichord works seldom stray too far in modulation terms and use more or less «usual» keys («usual» in terms of a modified mean tone temperament).

Be this as it may, I am convinced that Bach used a rather strongly modified temperament, but perhaps - indeed, almost certainly - not equal tuning. I think it was more strongly modified than Werckmeister's, perhaps the equivalent of a Valotti?

Let us not forget that, with mean tone temperament, even e minor sounds odd ...
 
Dear RdS
Originally I had planned to aquire the Perotin/Hilliard CD, but your words about it make me doubt that I shall invest in it (I suppose it is the ECM-CD from 1990).
I own a Harmonia Mundi Fr.-CD with Theatre of voices/P.Hillier (his american ensemble) called "The Age of Cathedrals" containing two works by Perotin and a handful of anonymus pieces. This is not at all performed warlike, rather very distinguished in an almost too english manner (one is reminded of Nigel Rogers and the like). A pity that the repertoire on the CD is of rather dubious quality.
I really agree with your words about the Binchois Ens/Vellard, a most beautiful and charming performance, and crystalclear sound and ensemble. Their Machaut Mass on the same label (Cantus) is much like it.
But I think that attention too must be drawn to the doubleCD "Music of the Gotic Era" (Archive Codex-serie) made by The Early Music Consort of London/ David Munrow (ca 1973). It contains some works of Leonin, and Perotins two for me most important works (the two great fourpart organa "Viderunt omnes" and "Sederunt principes" performed with malevoices (incl. countertenor) and a discrete organpositive(!), and also some Ars Antiqua, and Ars Nova works by Vitry (whom I have read more about than heard of his few surviving works) and Machaut (where the opposite is true).
The performances are emphatic, insistent, energetic, often even extatic (Imagine a Klemperer of medieval music, a most unusual thought). Surely three later members of the Hilliard ensemble participate (James,Covey-Crump,Potter) but I wouldnt say the result is warlike.
Thank you for your informative letter about tuning.

Venlig hilsen
 
Dear pe-zulu:

I think I will have a little free time tomorrow, and I will listen to the Munrow record. I listened to it only once - I felt I was not prepared to Pérotin (let alone Léonin) without first understanding Machault (I like this spelling: I learnt a little old French several years ago - I could actually read Chrétien de Troyes! - which I quite forgot, but MachauLt seems more in keeping... It's just a fancy, really).

So I set up to listen to Machault, and as I found that Munrow overstressed the rhythmic modes I tried to get a more modern version.

The trouble is: they were used to Gregorian, which is free flowing, almost aethereal. How could they change tastes so quickly? That is why I am convinced (I may be quite wrong, here) that we make perhaps too much of the rhythmic modes (Guido d'Arezzo, and so forth).

But I am quite ignorant in that field, as you know.
 
Dear RdS

As long as some well-defined rhytmic mode is prescribed, which as far as I know, is the case for the three upper voices of the two four-part organi I mention (except for the homophonic sections), I am convinced that the music must have a strong rhytmic character, but nobody probably knows exactly how much the strong beats were stessed. In my opinion the doubtless extatic character of the music is realized better when the beats are strong. This is why I really like the Munrow-interpretation. I think his monumental approach gives the music a new dimension, not at the expence of the emotional content, but the emotional content is realized on another level.

I like the Binchoisensemble very much too, because of the extremely beautiful and clear rendering.

Concerning gregorian chant: I dont know if it has been proved that the rhytm was defined by the metrum of the words, or if some basal rhytmic cadence was used, I think different points of view exists.

Venlig hilsen
 
PS..
Much of the first part of one of Perotins four-part organa (Viderunt Omnes) has a strong similarity with one of the few surviving dances from the thirteenth century (A two part Stantipes, British Museum Harley 978). The Stantipes certainly has a strong rhytmic character, but perhaps it is questionable
how much this says about the Organum.

Venlig hilsen
 
RdS said:
Bach and Temperament.

This is a very thorny issue. There are several sources that suggest that Bach liked a full circulating temperament and, indeed, his last organ works suggest that he did. Nevertheless one must take a more nuanced position here.

THE YOUNG BACH certainly was used to mean tone temperament. All his early work seems based on it (sometimes in a very crude manner: long sections on the tonic and then up to the dominant and back to the tonic). He even used f minor for his «Ich ruf zu dir», a very early work (it is to be found in the Neumeister chorales). Now f minor, in mean tone temperament, is quite desperate, which is in keeping with the words (I call for you, Lord Jesus Christ).

THE MATURE BACH. By the Leipzig years he asked for a more tempered - perhaps something like Neumeister - in the organs. Now the organ certainly poses a problem: when tuned, it will stay like that because you actually have to modify the flues in order to retune them. So I think that, at least on the organ, he liked to have a circulating temperament (his disputes with Gottfried Silbermann are well known).

This is important, because the organ, perhaps even more than the harpsichord, sounds best in mean tone temperament (for specialists: because the quints and tierces are tuned pure and therefore strongly beat with the wrong intervals of a circulating temperament).

Regarding the harpsichord, the question is quite different. A harpsichord may be tuned in about 20 minutes, and therefore it may be retuned at will. Nevertheless, I still think that Bach was experimenting with some kind of circulating temperament. He is said to have played the whole of the WTC to his pupils, and nothing was said about retuning. That aid, it is a fact that equal temperament is very ugly on a bright harpsichord. Perhaps he chose the temperament for the individual pieces? This may well have been the case, because his harpsichord works seldom stray too far in modulation terms and use more or less «usual» keys («usual» in terms of a modified mean tone temperament).

Be this as it may, I am convinced that Bach used a rather strongly modified temperament, but perhaps - indeed, almost certainly - not equal tuning. I think it was more strongly modified than Werckmeister's, perhaps the equivalent of a Valotti?

Let us not forget that, with mean tone temperament, even e minor sounds odd ...
Click to expand...
Perhaps Bach used two harpsichords, each tuned differently, with no retuning? Perhaps both tuned in mean tone? Superb idea!
 
Dear Pe-Zulu:

I didn't know about the 'popular' influence. But I agree with you on one point: we really don't know how to sing Gregorian.

I learnt gregorian in the Solemnes tradition, and sang it when I was young (one had to participate at the choir). The way it was tought to me it is wonderful, even if somewhat speculative. But the rythms are probably rather free - otherwise one would not need the various kinds of groups of notes - scandicus, porrectus, kilisma and so forth.

Also, as far as I could gather from the Hilliard record, when there is one melismatic voice and the others act like long chords, the rythmic variety is much greater (well - I would need the score). The logic conclusion seems to be that the rythmic rigour was introduced because of the difficulty of keeping more than one voice independent and yet synchronized into the whole.

As a matter of fact, that is the whole problem with counterpoint: how to keep the voices flowing and yet keep the music together. That is, each voice must be sung independently but it is also co-dependent on the other voices.

Indeed, up to a point, the hoquetus is a way of achieving independence within co-dependence (but, of course, that's Machault). Josquin is more homophonic, but both Dufay and Ockeghem managed, to my mind, to maintain independence and co-dependence. That is why I sometimes wonder if they are not the two most elevated exponents of counterpoint.

Well, I am rambling...

pe-zulu said:
Dear RdS

As long as some well-defined rhytmic mode is prescribed, which as far as I know, is the case for the three upper voices of the two four-part organi I mention (except for the homophonic sections), I am convinced that the music must have a strong rhytmic character, but nobody probably knows exactly how much the strong beats were stessed. In my opinion the doubtless extatic character of the music is realized better when the beats are strong. This is why I really like the Munrow-interpretation. I think his monumental approach gives the music a new dimension, not at the expence of the emotional content, but the emotional content is realized on another level.

I like the Binchoisensemble very much too, because of the extremely beautiful and clear rendering.

Concerning gregorian chant: I dont know if it has been proved that the rhytm was defined by the metrum of the words, or if some basal rhytmic cadence was used, I think different points of view exists.

Venlig hilsen
Click to expand...
 
bat said:
Perhaps Bach used two harpsichords, each tuned differently, with no retuning? Perhaps both tuned in mean tone? Superb idea!
Click to expand...

Dear Bat.

There are one or two instances when it is stated that he played the first book throughout in the same instrument.

I think Bach did not want equal temperament. It must have been something akin to it, but still with some differenciation of tonal tipicity.

That said, and referring only to the harpsichord, not the organ, most of Bach's works do not modulate very far from the original tonality, which means that the WTC is a case in point and not what he usually used. For instance, Leonhardt played the WTC using different sets of tuning for groups of tonalities. And one can play the Partitas in mesotonic temperament. Indeed this is what Gilbert does (modified mesotonic, at least).
 
Dear RdS

As to Estampittas I think the minstrels got their inspiration from the well known music in the church, not the opposite way round.


Surely the need for strong controlled rhytm was a consequence of the polyphony when two or (as in the four-part organa) three upper voices moved around on their own often resulting in sharp mutual dissonances and dissonances in relation to the
organ(um)-point in the bottom. But the two part organa with only one upper voice permitted to greater extent a free style
(organum purum). But I would need the score too.

To me Dufay (and Landini) give a rather homophonic impression.
It is true that the voices are relative independent in the whole, but they seem to a great extent (at least in the secular compositions) to be constructed from harmonic points of view - the voices often having no thematic relationship, to the point of fill-out voices in the middle of the texture (no imitation).
On the contrary Josquin and his school uses much imitation,
this is to me more polyphonic, because the individuality of the voices is stressed by that way, even if arranged in a convincing whole. In the same way I regard Bachs fugues to be more contrapunctal than his chorale-harmonisations.

Well perhaps I am rambling too.

Venlig hilsen
 
Estampitta, Masculinity and Drones

A very interesting discussion.
As RDS points points out, it seems no one really knows how Gregorian never mind Perotin was really sung at the time.
My own observation is that modern ecstatic vocal music, such as that of various sufi sects in Egypt and Turkey, has a very strong rhythmic component, and that this plays a vital role in bringing the participant to the ecstatic state (which although different from a sufi ecstatic state is possibly not far off - the modern Christian Church has lost many things I feel).
I was listening to Peres' Organum last night, and it has to my ears by far the most satisfying and deep vocal mix. It is also strongly rhythmic - pulsing would be a better word almost, with what I guess we could call a "warlike" drone (appropriate for the Ecclesia Militans somehow?). Very masculine in other words - which makes sense in the context of much of this music.
As far as Estampitta goes, modern interpreters of this music take their cues from Arab music, which does seem the obvious place to start.
I am very sad that when I was at (RC) school, we had no Gregorian chant, only god-awful folk music. Bring back the Latin Mass and Gregorian chant I say. In fact these days I occasionally feel the pull of Greek Orthodoxy...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear Joel

Though I have only attended Luteranian services to any extent, I always shared the opinion, that the function of much of the music in the church is to bring the congregation into some sort of extasis (in our countries nowadays some civilized extasis). This applies in the lutheranian church most to the singing of hymns. In Perotins Paris the Gregoriam chant and the organa might have had this function.

Dance in the secular life probably had the same function. True is that already around 1960 did the leading historical performance groups practicise historical dance performance (E.g. Estampittas) in a clearly arabian inspirated way (E.g. Studio der Frühen Musik München) with much succes. To day even more groups do the same, e.g. Henri Agnel and his group, as you certainly know. It is difficult to deny that the core of this approach might contain a grain of truth, since the results are utterly convincing.

As to Marcel Pérès I dont care for his new style with shouting corsicanian singers, they sound quite simply too ugly, but in earlíer times when people like Josep Cabre and Malcolm Bothwell were more dominating, his CDs were astonishing and I think often very extatic thanks to the strong rhytm and the dark almost organlike sound of the voices, e.g. Missa Tournai, but his two CDs with Ecole de Notre Dame pieces are in my opinion not his best.

The trouble is that everyone can say almost anything, since so few facts are known.

Venlig hilsen
 
Hi PZ
pe-zulu said:
In Perotins Paris the Gregoriam chant and the organa might have had this function.
Click to expand...
 It's rather tempting to think so. Certainly when I was very young and the mass was still of the traditional kind, the metronomic rhythm of the service, singing, light and shade, smell and even physical discomfort (you spent a lot of time on your knees in those days) all seemed designed to induce a very trance-like state.

To day even more groups do the same, e.g. Henri Agnel and his group, as you certainly know. It is difficult to deny that the core of this approach might contain a grain of truth, since the results are utterly convincing.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am quite familiar with Agnel's work. I assumed that this music *must* be Arab-inspired, but your notion of Church music being an inspiration is very interesting. Do you know Micrologus? I think they are coming more from your direction, and are certainly very convincing in their interpretation of the trecento (gosh, how pretentious of me :D ) Italian repetoire.

but in earlíer times when people like Josep Cabre and Malcolm Bothwell were more dominating, his CDs were astonishing and I think often very extatic thanks to the strong rhytm and the dark almost organlike sound of the voices, e.g. Missa Tournai, but his two CDs with Ecole de Notre Dame pieces are in my opinion not his best.
Click to expand...
I like that description of Organum as being dark almost organlike. Very accurate I think.
In fairness, the Corsican album seems to have been but a single adventure, and the latest CD (available from the website, and which is on order) seems like a return to from. We shall soon see.

The trouble is that everyone can say almost anything, since so few facts are known.
Click to expand...
 Very true, and I can see why classical music fans might find that a bit intolerable. But as a jazz fan, I see the endless possibilities and freedom this allows. It can be very liberating, in the right hands...
 
Just a quick butt in:

I once participated (as a spectator) in an Ortodoz Mass. It was copmpletely mind bogling: I left totoally transformed.

Lutheran masses are in the same vein, butvrather less intense. Catholic Masses are simply too boring.

Yes, as you can gather from the Sainte Chapelle or St Dennis, the result waqs meant to be awe inspiring and trance inducing.

I read in a Clemencic text that there were histeric phenomena in the performance of the mass in the GOthic period.

Nevertheless, one must remember that the Mass proper was performed in a place which was actually separated from the Congregation (there was a kind of wall). What people witnessed was, indeed, a mistery being performed from a secretbplace.

All thatmust have added to the 'tremendum' and 'numinous' (Rudolf Otto) character of the ceremony.

I really think one cannot easily grasp Cothic religuiosity. One must know a lot of Gothic (Gotick, Gott, and so forth) culture.

And, Pe-Zulu: Yes, Bach chorales seem to me less counterpointy than fugues proper (of course there are many exceptions - Aus tiefer Nott (homophonal but strictly counterpointal), Von deinen Thron and many others).

Dufaÿ: I agree, but his masses are more strictly counterpointal. Josquin may be counterpointal or more homophonic. I think they had these two choices. But then, one may consider Victoria very homophonic. It is a difficult matter. Just take the really complex counterpoints of Bach: WTC 1 c#minor: you can play it counterpointally (Walcha, Gilbert) or more vertically (Leohnardt); or the WTC1 h minor: It must be played vertically (Leonhardt), but then it spoils the effect (you can glimpse it through Walcha II). And also the e major WTC II, although perhaps not so difficult. The WTCII h minor is, indeed, counterpointal. But you also have places where it becomes somewhat homophonic. As a matter of fact, that is one of the beauties of counterpoint: the possibility of imitation or chord progression.

Excuse my typing and even my spelling, today.
 
Dear Joel

I own two Opus111-CDs with Micrologus playing trecentomusic, among others three or four of the early italian istampittas as far as I remember. I got them several months ago, and havent found the time for listening to them more than once, because I have a queue of CDs waiting. Ensemble Unicorn (on Naxos) are wery good to my taste too in the "extemporized repertoire" (Cantigas de Santa Maria, Carmina Burana besides the italian istampittas for example).
 
Dear RdS

It is new to me, that the singing monks in the medieval catholic church stayed behind a wall. Was this the practice
in Perotins time too?

I have intended a Machault mass thread, but I have suspended my intensive Machault-listening, until I get the score. I dont think I can get further without it.

Surely I did not intend to compare Bachs fugues with his organchorales, but with his choraleharmonizations, you know the pieces with BWV-numbers 300-400-on , between the cantates and the organworks. These harmonizations are surely the most vertical music he wrote.

But your words made me listen to Leonardts complete WTC and Walchas as well (his second wersion for DG - just got it on CD), and I do not understand your words that Leonhardt is playing more vertically than Walcha. He articulates and phrases surely shorter than Walcha, but his choosen articulation is at least as detailled and meticulous carried through in all voices, and I think the result is very horizontal/contrapunctal, and that his articulation is almost ideal since it stresses the character of the fuguethemes as well as the natural rhytm of the music.

On the other hand I was very disappointed with the Walcha second recording, which I think is not a tenth as good as his older recording. They have in common the lack of expression, but I find the style of the second recording more un-Bachian than ever, perhaps it just seems more annoying because of the discrepancy between his style and the instruments. His pre-period instrument suited his preinformed style better, but you expect someone playing period instruments (Jan Ruckers bd.1 and Hemsch bd.2 as far as I remember) to play in a much more informed style. In my opinion he did not even play in idiomatic harpsichord style, but treated the harpsichord as an organ, without much attention to delicate nuances of attack. As if he would deny that the french clavicinists constituted an important background for Bachs harpsichord-style.
Some of the same mistake a pianist makes when he thinks he can master the harpsichord from the beginning (e.g. Badura-Skoda or Martin Galling, the latter much Walchainfluenced by the way).

Venlig hilsen
 
Dear Pe-Zulu:

I'll answer more fully if I can, but you are being too strict with Walcha, I think.

I'll investigate the wall thing, but I am almost sure of it.
 
Have spent the past couple of weeks trying to get through most of the Bach related material here, and highly informative it has been.
Just wanted to pick up a few points.

Angela Hewitt's Goldbergs and Toccatas are both on a Steinway (not my ears, it says so on the sleeve) so I would guess is the rest of her Bach output. But (as was stated here earlier ) I also had in mind that she favoured Fazioli.

Sony did a re-issue of both of Glenn Goulds Goldbergs a couple of years ago. It comes with a disc of interviews and out takes, the point of interest here is that Mr Gould, in criticising his own earlier playing, calls it Chopinesque ie. too much 'piano playing' going on. So, back on topic (nearly)

My interest in ploughing through the threads here is that I have never really liked the piano as an instrument (too percussive and detached as opposed to strings or woodwind) but do like Bach keyboard works. I find it difficult to listen to organ music at all in a domestic setting, though fine in a church. The harpsichord which is therefore the logical answer I only associate with being a somewhat twiddly accompaniment (eg Handel opera) and not a solo instument.
I currently have (and enjoy very much, despite what I have just said) from Gould Goldbergs and French Suites, from Hewitt Goldbergs and Toccatas. The disc I currently play most is probably the Toccatas. As I result of what has been said here I shall most likely look to Gilberts WTC as a next step. If any of the pro-harpsichord lobby think this is a bad move please say so now, as I would like to like it. I do sometimes feel overwhelmed by the amount of information in Bach and fear that the harpsichord will compound this. I came to Bach through the cello suites which, to me, are far more accessible.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top