Gershwin CD (My Opinion)
By Rob DeLand
There's been a lot of dissing lately regarding the Nonsuch CD's of Gershwin piano rolls, and I want to put in a word to their defense. I realize it's fun to trash someone for doing something differently from the way you would (this is meant in general and not at any one person), but that doesn't automatically mean their work doesn't have value. The liner notes clearly say these performances are "realized" by Artis Wodehouse, in much the same way that the Switched-On Bach recordings were "realized" by Walter/Wendy Carlos. It is the artist's privilege to interpret the material in his/her own way, and I see nothing wrong with Artis doing that. Especially when they come right out and say so. The CD does not attempt to demonstrate how a vintage reproducing piano plays these rolls, so GET OVER IT!! Has anyone on this list seen the folio of transcriptions Artis published from Gershwin audio recordings? It's wonderful, with faithful notation of George's performances in vintage recordings. Try playing them yourself, then listen to the source. Artis obviously knew what she was doing!
We reproducing piano enthusiasts are so close to the sound our mechanical pianos in our own living rooms that I think we lose sight of the fact that there are concert instruments in the world that sound different on a stage or recording studio. That's my opinion of the sound of these CD's. And since Artis was up-front about her interpretation of the music rolls, it becomes a matter of taste. If you don't like the dynamics she recorded, that's your privilege. It doesn't mean you're right and she's wrong, or that she's right and everybody else is wrong, etc.
Another problem I have with this whole thing is our tendency to treat our rolls as sacred, and the dynamics contained therein as something handed down from the gods which must be worshipped and catered to. I remember Dave Junchen saying to me that "a reproducing piano doesn't reproduce ANYTHING except what the editor chose to code into the roll." Who says that the Duo-Art rolls are closer to Gershwin's actual performances than the Nonsuch CD's? Maybe the Disklavier version is closer to the way George played!! I'm not trying to argue that point, I'm simply trying to MAKE a point. Maybe the Duo-Art editors deliberately exaggerated the dynamics on the rolls because they knew some (or most?) customers' pianos needed regulation of both the piano action and the player action, so they wouldn't sound any good otherwise. Who knows?!!
I love historical roll performances, and I go out of my way to recut historical reproducing rolls. I'm not trying to trivialize them here, because I really enjoy them both musically and as historical artifacts. However I'm not so naive as to assume that they are the perfect reproduction of the artist whose name is on them, and I think it is poor judgement to assume otherwise. Sit back and try to enjoy the music. If you don't care for this roll or that CD, put on something else. There's a fine library out there waiting to be heard and enjoyed...
BTW, does anyone know of any CD recordings of actual reproducing pianos which they really like? There are quite a few out there; perhaps we can shift this thread to a more positive vein by focusing on the CD's we like the most. Maybe we just don't like recordings at all and want nothing other than to listen to our own pianos in our own living rooms! I still haven't heard any opinions on the Denis Condon CD's - I would expect them to be among the best out there, based on what I've heard about Denis and his roll collection & vorsetzer. Anybody heard any of them yet?
Regards,
Rob DeLand |
(Message sent Tue 15 Oct 1996, 17:48:58 GMT, from time zone GMT-0800.) |
|
|
Mechanical
Music Digest™ Archives
