Actually, my experience with Nigel North's recent recording of Dowland makes me think the opposite: that O'Dette eschews the "oh-so-lovely" Renaissance sound in favor of an absolute clarity of line and rhythm. To me, this made his Dowland sound very mechanical. North, on the other hand, is a revelation: while maintaining absolute rhythmic fidelity, he really makes it sing.
On 8/12/07, David Rastall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dear Luters, > > Just for the record, I thought I should clarify some remarks I've > made on the list recently as they appear to have been misconstrued. > > I said, light-heartedly or so I thought, that some lutenists play > Baroque music with the same "oh-so-lovely" sound that they get when > playing renaissance music. Some of you seem to have taken that to be > a criticism of Paul O'Dette's Bach CD. I was not even thinking about > O'Dette when I wrote that e-mail! If you read the message in > question, you will see that I made no reference to O'Dette, or > anybody else by name. I was gently poking fun, in a general sense, > at the way we sometimes tend to romanticize Baroque music, IMO to the > point of compromising the clarity of line and rhythm. The fact is: > I happen to think O'Dette's sound is perfectly idiomatic to Baroque > music. I've been waiting for years for him to record on the Baroque > lute, and I think his Bach CD is wonderful. > > Another remark which seems to have generated some feedback is my > reference to the "modern lute." I said something to the effect that > the lute is at its best when we approach it "with as few concessions > to modernity as possible." That's simply my opinion: please > understand that I was not criticizing anybody personally, nor > referring to anybody's lute specifically! Write me off if you want > as an irrelevant and irreverent "old guy." That's fine with me: > that's what I am. But I happen to believe that the term "modern > lute" has the flavor about it of an oxymoron, and I was simply > expressing that opinon. Once again: no personal attacks were > intended. > > The same goes for my remarks about right-hand playing technique: why > on earth should I feel personal animosity towards someone because of > the way his right hand looks!? I don't care what people's right > hands look like: just that they don't look like the right hands in > the old paintings, and I find that curious. Also I find it curious > that no-one else seems to find it curious. That's all: no personal > attacks intended here. > > I'm sorry if my remarks have offended anyone. They were not intended > to! > > David Rastall > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > --
