Johannes Gebauer wrote:
For me the label "historical performance" should
indicate that the performers tried to recreate
what Bach had, wanted, or did. Whether we like
it or not. There may be compromises, but there
would have to be reasons for that. Eg, a reason
not to use the church organ for the continuo
would be that it is tuned to modern pitch, which
makes it pretty useless.
Call me dogmatic if you like, I call it purist,
and I think purism to a certain degree is badly
needed for "Early Music" today.
Otherwise there is very little difference
between what we do and what the Berlin Phil do
in their baroque ensemble: modern wind, but gut
strings and bows. Played in a more or less
modern fashion, yet immitating the "Baroque
Sound" which comes to us through Concerto Köln
or the likes. It is not historical, it is
immitation if anything.
Roger Norrington, on the other hand, says that
the whole point of using original instruments and
historical practices is not to make a claim at
being "authentic" or "right", but as a way to
breathe new life into music making. By putting
things in a more balanced historical perspective
and by re-evaluating our opinions on how things
should be done, we gain valuable new insights and
experiences. It's all about excitement,
expression and beauty.
-Randolph Peters
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
