I don't really agree with that critique Beat.  You seem to be listening in a basically hostile way to pick it apart, trying to find each detail that you can ennumerate as wrong, but if you just start listening fresh, getting the whole impression of the music, you immediately hear a great deal of energy and expressive articulation that sounds very good in purely musical terms.   I simply did not react the way you are so fixated upon.  For example - you castigate the dryness of the fast accompaniment - and yet that is precisely what adds to the energy of this very energetic music.   If one compares this to the usual bad MIDI, with the common crudities encountered, it is so far above that, it is in another dimension.  So your open hostility toward this music  I find somewhat strange. 

Of course because of this fragmented presentation mixed with lecture it is difficult to evaluate because never can you sit down and just hear the whole thing straight through, which I always need to do.   

Thanks Beat for your post, and William and PaulR for the support

Much more articulated, Beat, and interesting to read.

The comments Bert have are fully valid if you think it’s important which, as you may guess, I don’t think it is, not to me. Some are about taste and some are about instrumental playability. When they are as constructive as this time I can understand them.
To me this is not a “war”, to me it’s an interesting discussion.

I think the comment from Beat is a very important knowledge:

“I admit that I do not listen with "neutral ears" to music which is produced with samples after all the years using samples as well.”

It’s what I wrote about being a (VSL) “nerd”, something that I could call myself. It can severely limits your musically and artistically. We listen to how it’s done more than what is done. And I do think this is something we all have to be constantly aware of.

Music first!

In my youth I did play cello and double base and I have a fair knowledge of how to play these instruments but I don’t put much attention on the instruments limits when working with VSL, I find it much more interesting to explore the possibilities.

I don’t compare myself in any way with Nancarrow but I think he can serve as an example. Hi wrote for the mechanic piano making music that was said to be impossible to play…..and then came a guy Yvar Mikashof and played it and other followed him. Expanding the expressiveness of the piano.
Technology has always changed art, and if there is an artform that desperately needs changes, its traditional classical music, that’s so encapsulated in its own beliefs and standards.

Most parts of my version of the prelude will be hard for real musicians to play, but to me it sounds really god and to me it’s musically interesting, which I think are two important things in music. When writing for living musicians I would put all attention to if was possible to play, when it comes to VSL, I don’t even think about it, why should I?

In my reference group one person sad my version could probably be played by (and then naming the most brilliant Norwegian violinist), but I’m not sure that this will be practicaly (financially) possible, as it would require a lot of ensemble practice time. Just listen to the accompaniment it’s very “detailed”. I don’t think, as a couple of guys have written, it’s about the tempo in the prelude. There are several versions recorded that is faster than mine.

I really appreciate Beat:s honest offer to help and I fully respect Beat:s ideas, but as I said musically and how we work with VSL, I think we are on opposite sides (I’m repeating myself again….). And I think that’s great; there are so many different sides to music…..

all the best

matsc

PS sorry about the italics, wasent possible to change that........................

Hi Mats

Thanks a lot for your kind words!

Kind Regards

Beat

@yguddal said:

[...] PS sorry about the italics, wasent possible to change that........................

I changed it back for you.

Avilable on:

http://www.lawostore.no/cd/mats-claesson-interprets-holberg-suite-mats-claesson-3847

And on iTunes and  Spotify 

Videos about the project:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49KgWo9eojg

Mr Claesson,

I want to thank you for your work.  You've inspired me to undertake some similar experimentation.  

1.  As you imply, it's really not possible to achieve the kind of music experience provided by a trained ensemble of professional performers with hundreds of years of combined experience, playing in venues which are acoustical masterpieces, recorded by highly paid engineering experts with incredibly expensive microphones and recording equipment.  Why do I continue pounding my head against this brick wall?

2. Even if I could achieve the kind of technical mastery needed to duplicate the experience provided by a professional ensemble in a fine venue... so what?  What have I added to the musical millieu of the world by doing this?  There are many fine recordings available, as you say, that provide this experience, all for the low price of less than a buck.  What's the point of my adding to this, other than the self-satisfaction of doing it?  At the very bottom measure, what's the intellectual legitimacy of replication of classical ensembles by utilization of technology?

You can record a piece and slavishly try to achieve similitude to some ideal version, but "how do you make it your own?" (to paraphrase Duke Ellington).  What you've done is taken Grieg's composition, the raw notes, the rhythmic and tonal concepts, and made it truly and uniquely your own.

Classical music has always had a love/hate relationship with technology.  Bach's work was advanced by embracing a new technology, the piano-forte.  Grainger wrote his "Immovable Do" when his harmonium stuck with the C key depressed, so he used that C drone as the foil of the composition against which the rest of the piece develops.  Why not explore the technology available to push the envelope regarding performance of familiar pieces?

You've provided me some insight to approaching a set of pieces that I'm currently planning for release.  Now I'll continue working not only on technical issues, which are always important, but I'll start to really consider how I can make these pieces "my own."

In other words, how do I own them?

Thanks again for your work and keep it coming!

Michael Myers

Tensivity.com

never mind - I'll avoid commenting on the previous statement.  That CD is great - congratulations. 

Even if I could achieve the kind of technical mastery needed to duplicate the experience provided by a professional ensemble in a fine venue... so what?  What have I added to the musical millieu of the world by doing this?

I would say that the contribution to the 'musical milieu of the world' was made by the composer iso of the interpreter. Many composers go to great length to see their musical thought conveyed and many conductors try to get to the bottom of this. (You can witness this process today when you visit a rehearsal with composer present). Because most composers before WW do not communicate that well, you have this tradition combined with research thing.

So to answer your question: If achieved, your addition would be to keep the (often significant) musical contribution alive. The means by which this is achieved is secondary.

Kind regards,

Martijn 

@MWE said:

Even if I could achieve the kind of technical mastery needed to duplicate the experience provided by a professional ensemble in a fine venue... so what?  What have I added to the musical millieu of the world by doing this?

Well yes I somewhat agree with that, but what about someone who uses samples to perform a piece of music simply for the joy of doing it? Is that worthless?  that adds something. 

Are only GREAT PERFORMANCES BY MASTERS the sole criterion of musical expression? 

Everyone today seems to think that only the greatest performance by the greatest orchestra in the world is the standard.  That is hopelessly out of touch with reality.  Reality is normal orchestras, struggling to play in tune,  let alone play perfectly at every second - the only defintion of musical value that seems to be accepted now.  Probably because of recordings - everyone can listen to a recording done by incredible virtuosos of the greatest music of all time, any time he wishes to.  But to assume that is normal music is completely wrong.  Though maybe you despise normal music.  

So this is why I appreciate people who create a straightforward musical interpretation of a piece with MIDI just for the fun of it, and think it is perfectly valid to do. They are doing something normal in music - a performance of a piece that realizes certain qualities of the composition and is thus fulfilling as an expression of the performer - whether or not it is adding to the sum total of great musical utterances recorded on the stone tablets of the musical eons.   Whatever that may be.  Ludwig Spohr thought he had written on those and is now totally forgotten.  Whereas most blues men who thought they were nothing special as they recorded a 78 rpm of their vocals with guitar are now the greatest sources of musical inspiration of the last century. 

William, that is one of most inspired posts I've read for quite some time - if only everyone could put away their "puffy chests" for a while and see things this way. Music is a human endeavour at all levels. I have sat listening to the most amateurish live music at times and watched the faces of so many in the audience who were thoroughly enjoying it. Who loses? Me, not them.

I'm curious why you focused on Pre WWI music?

Sorry to get off topic - anyway, it is a great project.

Thanks for all nice comments