Its a bit of a battle I've had on facebook and a few other forums. Why does the classical music or 'art' music world have such a resistance to electronic instruments?
Myself, I play clavichord, harpsichord, and a bit of organ. I almost exclusively work on keyboard music from the Renaissance to early baroque periods. I've experimented a fair bit with using synthesizers to play this music. I personally find nothing wrong with this, as long as its.....'tastefully' done. By tastefully, I mean:
1. Not with exotic complex timbres - as I find they become fatiguing when there are 'lots of notes' going on. they obliterate the melody and get old real quick.
2. One still is faithful to 'historically informed performance' - that is, interpreted as close as possible to the style of the time it was composed.
My justifications for accepting synthesizer as a legitimate instrument is:
1. Must of the music from that era was not necessarily targeted explicitly for a single type of instrument, it was more like, whatever is available, be it harpsichord, clavichord, organ, regal.
2. Organs were and are constantly driving to have more and more variety of stops, more and more different sound timbre options.
3. New instrument experiments were always being explored, like the Lautenwerk for example.
If I try to bring any of this up in 'serious' classical music circles, I get anger, sarcasm, mockery, etc. Like there is some sort of wall where instrument evolution MUST stop. These are the same folks though who magically thing its ok to play Mozart, Bach or Scarlatti on a 9 foot Steinway though.
WTF.
Thoughts?
Myself, I play clavichord, harpsichord, and a bit of organ. I almost exclusively work on keyboard music from the Renaissance to early baroque periods. I've experimented a fair bit with using synthesizers to play this music. I personally find nothing wrong with this, as long as its.....'tastefully' done. By tastefully, I mean:
1. Not with exotic complex timbres - as I find they become fatiguing when there are 'lots of notes' going on. they obliterate the melody and get old real quick.
2. One still is faithful to 'historically informed performance' - that is, interpreted as close as possible to the style of the time it was composed.
My justifications for accepting synthesizer as a legitimate instrument is:
1. Must of the music from that era was not necessarily targeted explicitly for a single type of instrument, it was more like, whatever is available, be it harpsichord, clavichord, organ, regal.
2. Organs were and are constantly driving to have more and more variety of stops, more and more different sound timbre options.
3. New instrument experiments were always being explored, like the Lautenwerk for example.
If I try to bring any of this up in 'serious' classical music circles, I get anger, sarcasm, mockery, etc. Like there is some sort of wall where instrument evolution MUST stop. These are the same folks though who magically thing its ok to play Mozart, Bach or Scarlatti on a 9 foot Steinway though.
WTF.
Thoughts?
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1Ov3oJT
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire