Understanding baroque music

[Barnadine]

Punishment consists of stern use of the rolling eyes emoticon.

[Hink]

Punishment consists of stern use of the rolling eyes emoticon.

look I'm the punisher...I can't help it...

[kevvvvv]

There is probably no finer starting point to the Baroque than listening to Trevor Pinnock conducting the English Concert. Almost any piece will do.

The sound is wonderful.

Pinnock has established hiumself as arguably the greatest interpreter of authentic Baroque ever.

He plays harpsichord and leads the orchestra - made of like-minded authentic Baroque experts all playing authentic instruments.

Here's some info http://www.englishconcert.co.uk/biogtp.htm

In complete contrast, listen to Glenn Gould playing Bach on the piano.

His interpretations are very personal and distinctly non-authentic - but also remarkable.

Try the Goldberg Variations - it's a masterpiece written afresh in his hands.

For years the 23rd variation (I think) was considered one of the most difficult and chromatic pieces to understand ever.

But to hear Glenn Gould do it - it sounds so beatiful eternal and agonising - and so simple. The man was a genius.

More details here http://www.glenngould.com/

[blitze]

To be brutally honest, all we have is sheet music and our interpretations of it. Like with any style, interpretations will vary with the fashion of the day. More recently, as with current thought on Classical music, tempi are quicker and the playing more "precise" but also keep in mind, like with staged plays of the day, there was a lot of improvisation in those genres of music. Only in the 20th Century with the rise of recording technology did "classical" musicians start to sticking stricktly to the notes on the page. Before that it was more like Jazz, where the artist was free to explore within the harmonic structures of the written music.

Anyway stay away from The older recordings and just get what you enjoy listening to. Baroque Music was the coming of age for Harmony pioneered by Bach and technology of the day that allowed for consistant tuning of instruments.

Jazz is easier to write guides on as it developed in a period of time where you have recordings to illustrate it. Still some good reading is with the Prentice Hall History of Music Series of books. I would advise getting the 2 books that lead up to Baroque (Medieval and Renaissance) so you have an idea as to how and why Baroque composers did what they did. All music is formed in a Socio/Historical context and reflects the events and achievements of man around it.

Personally, I like Bach. One of the few composers that treats the Human Voice as an instrument and he is a pleasure to sing. Also get Farinelli on DVD and have a look, a great look at Castrati Singers and also a fun look at G F Handel who has also written some great Music for the period. Only the French were civilised and refused to cut balls of their young male singers or write music for such singers

[tee boy]

I've been listening to some baroque music lately; a little Scarlatti, Telemann and others if I think Bach on it. I was listening for about a month when someone told me that I wasn't listening to "traditional" or "purist" baroque music: they provided me with some examples which used a great deal of harpsichord and sounded a little mechanical.

So what was I listening to, and more to the point when I go to buy a CD, what should I look for to know if I am actually purchasing different orchestrations and , uh, more expressive interpretations of the originals? I am having a hard time getting a Handel on this.

Im not expert, but I was under the impression that Scarlatti was more an early classical composer. Maybe you need to look into some earlier Baroque (Bach, Vivaldi, Prucell, Handel etc).

Sorry, probably not much help. But as with modern styles, I think the 'purist' style is more the earlier stuff (before all these new fangled ideas ruined it ).

[kevvvvv]

tee boy

I was under the impression that Scarlatti was more an early classical composer

Domenico Scarletti was born in 1685, the same year as Bach and Handel, which makes him High Baroque, as his contrapuntal style reveals.

Early classical didn't really emerge until Bach's eldest son's time - and it was a very non-contrapuntal style - all single line melody and lots of dash.

For the astrologers here, Bach was a Pisces, Handel a Leo, and Scarlatti a Sagittarian.

As a further footnote, Guiseppe Torelli was born in 1658, a generation before.

He wrote some terrific trumpet concertos - just the sort of thing to play on Miroslav when it comes out.

Uh oh ... and Corelli rhymes with Torelli.

Archangelo Corelli wrote the most exqusite string pieces for the Pope. He is even credited with inventing the Concerto Grosso (of which Handel's Water Music is a suite of)

And if you ever hear Trevor Pinnock playing a Corelli Concerto, you'll know the style is authnetic.

Serendipitous stuff.

[ouroboros]

There is probably no finer starting point to the Baroque than listening to Trevor Pinnock conducting the English Concert. Almost any piece will do.

The sound is wonderful.

Pinnock has established hiumself as arguably the greatest interpreter of authentic Baroque ever.

He plays harpsichord and leads the orchestra - made of like-minded authentic Baroque experts all playing authentic instruments.

Here's some info http://www.englishconcert.co.uk/biogtp.htm

In complete contrast, listen to Glenn Gould playing Bach on the piano.

His interpretations are very personal and distinctly non-authentic - but also remarkable.

Try the Goldberg Variations - it's a masterpiece written afresh in his hands.

For years the 23rd variation (I think) was considered one of the most difficult and chromatic pieces to understand ever.

But to hear Glenn Gould do it - it sounds so beatiful eternal and agonising - and so simple. The man was a genius.

More details here http://www.glenngould.com/

Thanks, Kevvvvvv. I was looking for someone who could Telemann what he should check out! Apreciate your recommendations and am going to check them out.

The baroque music I've listened to has been really fascinating. The contrapuntal nature - dare I say it - is almost trance inducing. Music is often described as "weaving" melodies and textures, but recently this music has felt like watching a real weaving! (Pardon the mixed metaphor)

[Barnadine]

I was looking for someone who could Telemann what he should check out!

You were warned...

[ouroboros]

Vival-di eye rolling, I hope vee don't go ovv topic.

[VicDiesel]

To be brutally honest, all we have is sheet music and our interpretations of it.

That is of course nonsense. We don't have any recordings of the old masters, but we have surviving instruments, so we know that the flutes, oboes &c in the 18th century sounded very different from the current Boehm flute.

We have the bills of the churches and concert halls showing exactly how many musicians got paid, and so how big (or not) the orchestras were, which is a lot smaller than the current orchestra.

We have zillions of theory manuals describing various performance practices.

Of course, chasing all these sources is considerably harder than putting on a record, but we do have just a bit more of a notion than if all we have was sheet music.

To the original poster: the keyword is HIP: Historically Informed Performance practice. Google around a bit and you'll find who the big names are.

Earlier suggestions of Trevor Pinnock, Ton Koopman are not bad at all. Also check out the brothers Kuyken (Sigiswald & Wieland).

It's quite remarkable how different various performances of the same piece can be.

[blitze]

Most of those bills and posters are more after the fact as are most of the zillions of "theory" manuals. As to actual perfomance interpretations and styles of the day, they are more a case of guess work than fact. Also remember that printing was still nothing compared to modern times so documentation could be thin. Crap, most of the music of the era has been lost so don't presume to think that most of the documentation survives. What we have today is a fraction of what was created.

Shit most performances aren't even taking into account that instruments were tuned lower than they are today and that orchestral instruments are tuned as they are today because the sound of the strings carries better at A440.

All a bit of a wank really, just enjoy the music and appreciate it for what it is. Nothing more fun as a performer than having two conductors for a string of performances with pig headed differing ideas about music tempo and style. That's what we get in opera in Melbourne, great fun to work with.

[mandolarian]

Vivaldi rocks like it's 1699!

[P.T.]

Hearing music as it was meant to be played can be very interesting.

I once heard a recording of Straus waltzes played by a small chamber orchestra as they were meant to be played. They were, after all, meant to be danced to not listened to in a concert hall with a huge modern orchestra.

After all the bombast of a large orchestra the small orchestral version was incredibly charming and a delight.

Baroque and Renaissance music are very engaging. The counterpoint is an amazement.

Also try 13th century French music. There is a group called The Florilegium Musicum of Paris that does vocal and instrumental music from this era.

[fitch]

listen to Kevvvv... he knows his stuff.


trevor pinnock... last i knew he's with magnatune as well

http://magnatune.com/artists/pinnock

[Hovmod]

For Italian Baroque on period instruments, you can't do much better than Il Giardino Armonico. They revived that stuff for me.
Italian Baroque is wondrously confusing. A flowing, wispy, unstructured spider's web of harmonies and virtuosity. Don't try to understand. Enjoy.

These two recordings have both been among my most played CDs the last ten years:

The musical voyage, a collection of Italian Baroque composers
and
The Four Seasons, a full-on kick ass version