Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2006-11-28 12:35
Ken Shaw wrote:
>>Finally, even if Stadler's instrument were to be found, complete with reed, we'd still not know what sound Mozart heard. And even if we did, we wouldn't have a room holding 200 people, with no electric background hum or ventilation whoosh. And even if we did, we couldn't purge our ears and expectations of Beethoven, Stravinsky, Boulez and rock.>>
I think very few people working in what has come to be called HIP (historically informed performance) now aspire to 'recreate what Mozart heard'. I certainly don't. (I might spell out here how I DO think of what I do sometime.)
Meanwhile, I suggest that a minimal requirement for any public performer nowadays, 'great' or not, is to play the notes that the composer wrote -- even if as in this case, we have unequivocal evidence for some of those notes, and only conjecture (though informed conjecture) for others.
It's not 'immoral' to give a defective performance of a piece by failing to play what is written because of limited personal ability, either. But it IS immoral to be complacent about the fact, or to continue to do so to a significant degree without making an effort to rectify the situation.
Tony
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
