Re Rooley/Unrooley When I first starting recording in the 70s, there was a realism movement (Direct Metal Mastering, and so on--yikes) People wanted the real sound. Now, no one wants the real sound. All recordings are processed by limiters, spectral enhancers, convolvers, acoustic modeling, etc. Even recordings that are "unprocessed" are processed (unbeknownst by the original engineer) by goofballs at the pressing plant who don't know how the machines work.
And so, lutes sounded soft--they are soft--and attempts to make them really loud was not the style of the time--with some exceptions. 2nd--we recorded in stereo, so to make the lute louder we had to sit closer to the mikes, which was not real, but some people did that. There was a big debate at that time. I think some of Tony's recordings are in the realism camp, and softer; some--for example his "sheep may safely graze" are "closer". I think those of us who opted for "real" basically heard endless, endless complaints that the lute was not loud enough. And after awhile we got really tired of that. And so it goes. It's not a tuba. A really interesting thing to do is get the Emma Kirkby signature disk--her highlights. There were two main engineers. Same musicians, often same acoustic (St Jude on the Hill) Yet the recordings are very different from the two engineers--but both firmly in "real" camp. I think the Faulkner engineered tracks are from a technical point of view among the most interesting and innovative recordings from that time period. We are really lucky to have those tracks. The D'India, with theorbo and voice, is very special. It is real, but slightly balanced. A contrast to that style is the Kate Bott virtuoso italian disk, which has an early example of "beefed up" lute sound. Also a very interesting disk, for repertory, style & meantone. And Kate Bott. Those are some difficult pieces. I think Anthony Rooley's contribution to early music both as a player and a director is quite exceptional, and it is cool to be able to hear him play. On the other hand, Emma is revolutionary, a carminum post quem. No question Emma's performances changed my interpretation forever. And Rooley was part of that ensemble. dt .At 03:06 PM 9/24/2007, you wrote: >No one who has heard the recordings Tony and Emma have done over the >years would be surprised at how soft he is. Even in the studio, >where he could easily control the balance, he tends to be soft. > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
