# Wrong notes in recordings!



## quietfire

Have you ever listened to a record, and as you are starting to enjoy the music, blam! a wrong note plays to ruin it?

I was listening to Andras Schiff's recording (ECM, 2012) of the Well-tempered Clavier (WTC) as people in thie forum have suggested it, and of course I listened to the pieces that I was most familiar with to judge whether it is a good recording or not.

I chose the d minor from Part 1 of the WTC, and something was wrong immediately. I couldn't tell exactly what it was until I checked the score, and yep, the *12th note of the RH in the second bar* was supposed to be a D not an F!!!

Damn, how I was rooting for this record to be good. Not perfect, just good. This note D is so important to the harmony of the prelude, that it isn't justifiable. And this is a recording, not a real life performance!

And supposedly Andras Schiff played the WTC every morning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I guess he is human after all. But I blame the editors too that they didn't pick this up. They really should hire me lol.

So... have you ever heard a wrong note from a recording that was not intentional? Which record? Which note?


----------



## tdc

quietfire said:


> Have you ever listened to a record, and as you are starting to enjoy the music, blam! a wrong note plays to ruin it?
> 
> I was listening to Andras Schiff's recording (ECM, 2012) of the Well-tempered Clavier (WTC) as people in thie forum have suggested it, and of course I listened to the pieces that I was most familiar with to judge whether it is a good recording or not.
> 
> I chose the d minor from Part 1 of the WTC, and something was wrong immediately. I couldn't tell exactly what it was until I checked the score, and yep, the *12th note of the RH in the second bar* was supposed to be a D not an F!!!
> 
> Damn, how I was rooting for this record to be good. Not perfect, just good. This note D is so important to the harmony of the prelude, that it isn't justifiable. And this is a recording, not a real life performance!
> 
> And supposedly Andras Schiff played the WTC every morning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I guess he is human after all. But I blame the editors too that they didn't pick this up. They really should hire me lol.
> 
> So... have you ever heard a wrong note from a recording that was not intentional? Which record? Which note?


Generally one wrong note like this not enough to ruin a recording for me, even the greats play wrong notes on occasion. That said I'm not sure if what you are referring to in this case is an actual wrong note or an intentional variation on the melody. A certain amount of improvisation was not only common but expected in performance in Bach's time, so there is quite possibly a legitimate reason Schiff plays the phrase in that way. Bach's style is improvisational, I don't think he was the kind of musician that always performed his works exactly the same way every time. There are cases where there are also some discrepancies between different manuscripts of his works as well.

In this case, regardless of whether that note was intentional or not, it is not enough to render the performance less than good to me.


----------



## DavidA

There is a famous recording of Strauss' Domestic symphony in which Karajan passed the recording despite it being pointed out to him the trumpets were out of tune at one point


----------



## quietfire

tdc said:


> Generally one wrong note like this not enough to ruin a recording for me, even the greats play wrong notes on occasion. That said I'm not sure if what you are referring to in this case is an actual wrong note or an intentional variation on the melody. A certain amount of improvisation was not only common but expected in performance in Bach's time, so there is quite possibly a legitimate reason Schiff plays the phrase in that way. Bach's style is improvisational, I don't think he was the kind of musician that always performed his works exactly the same way every time. There are cases where there are also some discrepancies between different manuscripts of his works as well.
> 
> In this case, regardless of whether that note was intentional or not, it is not enough to render the performance less than good to me.


It was definitely not intentional. Even in Schiff's previous recordings, and EVERY other recording - hear me out - EVERY single recording of that piece - and there are more than a hundred - that note is played a D.


----------



## jegreenwood

I agree generally with tdc that this does not ruin the recording for me, but I don't think this is a manuscript error. I looked at three versions of the sheet music, and they all had a D. I'm studying music theory (far from an expert), and we've been looking at Bach's techniques. The D is part of the first statement of a 12 note sequence beginning with the high A that is then repeated (down a step).

I study the clarinet, and I have two recordings of Mozart's Kegelstatt Trio. In the clarinet part (as written for B Flat clarinet), bar 148 of the second movement contains an F. On one recording I hear an F natural; on the other I hear F#. I have seen Mozart's handwritten manuscript online, and he clearly marked the F as natural. However, my teacher agrees with those who believe it should be F#.

Edit - I heard Schiff play the WTC in recital (all of it from memory) in support of the ECM release. I'm almost sure that was recorded for archive purposes. There's a chance might be able to listen to it at some point.


----------



## quietfire

jegreenwood said:


> I agree generally with tdc that this does not ruin the recording for me, but I don't think this is a manuscript error. I looked at three versions of the sheet music, and they all had a D. I'm studying music theory (far from an expert), and we've been looking at Bach's techniques. The D is part of the first statement of a 12 note sequence beginning with the high A that is then repeated (down a step).
> 
> I study the clarinet, and I have two recordings of Mozart's Kegelstatt Trio. In the clarinet part (as written for B Flat clarinet), bar 148 of the second movement contains an F. On one recording I hear an F natural; on the other I hear F#. I have seen Mozart's handwritten manuscript online, and he clearly marked the F as natural. However, my teacher agrees with those who believe it should be F#.
> 
> Edit - I heard Schiff play the WTC in recital (all of it from memory) in support of the ECM release. I'm almost sure that was recorded for archive purposes. There's a chance might be able to listen to it at some point.


Yes, please do listen to it, and tell me I am not crazy!

Edit: Actually I found way many more mistakes after longer hearing of this WTC, because after I heard the first mistake, I have decided to PLAY ALONG with Mr Schiff and see exactly where the mistakes were and long and behold - there are too many. I have a feeling that either Schiff is just actually a bad piano player and/or he is trolling with us.

I mean just with the d minor prelude, there is ANOTHER mistake, on *bar 7, RH 17th note, he plays G when it should have been a B flat*.

Just this single piece alone, there are more than 5 unintentional mistakes, not just in pitch, but in unevenness of rhythm. I mean I am tempted to say I play much better and I am not even a good piano player.

Is Schiff trying to hide wrong notes in this album to make fun of us not knowing Bach's music? Because this just makes him seem like an idiot if that's the case.


----------



## bigshot

There are a lot of pianists that dream of being able to play as "poorly" as Schiff. Only God is perfect. If you're taking an inventory of individual notes, you're probably listening for the wrong thing in the music.


----------



## quietfire

Hmmmm.... I'm listening to Angela Hewitt's interpretation of Bach, hoping to see if she plays less mistakes than Schiff. Nope! She plays quite a lot of mistakes too.

I've seen some of her performances, and she does make quite a lot of mistakes too (hesitates a lot, showing she is not comfortable with Bach's material) and this shows in her recordings.

I think Gould is the only piano player so far that I have found zero mistakes in Bach's keyboard music.


----------



## quietfire

bigshot said:


> There are a lot of pianists that dream of being able to play as "poorly" as Schiff. Only God is perfect. If you're taking an inventory of individual notes, you're probably listening for the wrong thing in the music.


I think they just have very low expectations or have set the standards fairly low, which is quite in line with today's musical standards. I don't think we bother any more.


----------



## realdealblues

I honestly think you're hearing the ornamentations and improvisations. They are not intentionally wrong notes per say. Many pianists do not follow the score exact when it comes to these works. Bach himself improvised and added ornamentations as did Mozart when performing his own works. This has become more common these days in recordings as historians have done more research and pianists have been more free to add these ornamentations. If you were to listen to Schiff's Mozart Piano Sonatas you would hear the same thing. He adds notes and changes parts, especially during the repeats.


----------



## quietfire

realdealblues said:


> I honestly think you're hearing the ornamentations and improvisations. They are not intentionally wrong notes per say. Many pianists do not follow the score exact when it comes to these works. Bach himself improvised and added ornamentations as did Mozart when performing his own works. This has become more common these days in recordings as historians have done more research and pianists have been more free to add these ornamentations. If you were to listen to Schiff's Mozart Piano Sonatas you would hear the same thing. He adds notes and changes parts, especially during the repeats.


I honestly hope this is the case, because the "mistakes" are a bit disconcerting. Maybe I am just used to Bach's original score, that I cannot stand any deviations from it, to the point that I find the original notes more beautiful than any other deviations.

I wished that the interpreter at least made some effort to point out which notes they intend to change, and at least give some reason as to why they think it would make it sound better. If they don't give any reason as to why it would sound better, then why do they do it? They need to give at least some words as to why if they don't think it would be better, what they intend to achieve by doing so.

Edit: on second thought, are you saying this casually, or have you actually heard his recording of the WTC in question and gave some thought about his "mistakes/deviations"? Because if you were making a non-serious casual response, you can forget my post.

Sorry if I come across as an annoying person who probably doesn't know anything about music, but I am actually a very chill and forgiving person and could care less about "mistakes". However, when it comes to Bach, one really needs to be a bit more careful and think about what he is trying to achieve with every piece he created.


----------



## Guest

quietfire said:


> Hmmmm.... I'm listening to Angela Hewitt's interpretation of Bach, hoping to see if she plays less mistakes than Schiff.


*fewer mistakes...


----------



## quietfire

Kontrapunctus said:


> *fewer mistakes...


Thanks for the correction. I will keep that in mind from now on. (Sorry, English is not my first language. I make way fewer errors in my mother tongue.)

And you made a good point. *Language.*

I feel like if you speak the language of Bach, you will understand even more how disconcerting the "mistakes" are. I feel like one needs to converse in the language of Bach well (say, play the pieces and absorb it) in order to know the difference between a *grammar* mistake and a *communication* mistake.

In the case of Schiff, he made both types of mistake in the piece that I covered.


----------



## DavidA

This thing of no wrong notes only happens when recordings are made in the studio. I have some of Horowitz's concerts and the wrong notes are legion!


----------



## realdealblues

quietfire said:


> I honestly hope this is the case, because the "mistakes" are a bit disconcerting. Maybe I am just used to Bach's original score, that I cannot stand any deviations from it, to the point that I find the original notes more beautiful than any other deviations.
> 
> I wished that the interpreter at least made some effort to point out which notes they intend to change, and at least give some reason as to why they think it would make it sound better. If they don't give any reason as to why it would sound better, then why do they do it? They need to give at least some words as to why if they don't think it would be better, what they intend to achieve by doing so.
> 
> Edit: on second thought, are you saying this casually, or have you actually heard his recording of the WTC in question and gave some thought about his "mistakes/deviations"? Because if you were making a non-serious casual response, you can forget my post.
> 
> Sorry if I come across as an annoying person who probably doesn't know anything about music, but I am actually a very chill and forgiving person and could care less about "mistakes". However, when it comes to Bach, one really needs to be a bit more careful and think about what he is trying to achieve with every piece he created.


I have not heard that particular recording but I have read several in depth reviews with pianists who have mentioned his ornamentations in detail so I know they are there. Most mentioned how they enjoyed them and felt they did not distract from the original work at all. Obviously you disagree with that and that's fine but most musical scholars will tell you if you were to have heard Bach himself play them live, he would have very likely added ornamentations to them just like Schiff did. It's something that was very common.

I do have and own Schiff's Mozart Piano Sonatas and if you were to listen to his and compare it to Uchida or Haebler you would hear many differences of notes hear and there.

It doesn't bother me to hear things like that but I'm a musician. I've been a professional guitarist for over 25 years and I will take any melody and improvise on it. That's one of the fun things about being a musician. I can take something someone else wrote and create and express my own feelings and personality over it. Doesn't mean everyone else will like it, but it's very releasing as a musician.


----------



## quietfire

realdealblues said:


> I have not heard that particular recording but I have read several in depth reviews with pianists who have mentioned his *ornamentations* in detail so I know they are there. Most mentioned how they enjoyed them and felt they did not distract from the original work at all. Obviously you disagree with that and that's fine but most musical scholars will tell you if you were to have heard Bach himself play them live, he would have very likely added ornamentations to them just like Schiff did. It's something that was very common.
> 
> I do have and own Schiff's Mozart Piano Sonatas and if you were to listen to his and compare it to Uchida or Haebler you would hear many differences of notes hear and there.
> 
> It doesn't bother me to hear things like that but I'm a musician. I've been a professional guitarist for over 25 years and I will take any melody and improvise on it. That's one of the fun things about being a musician. I can take something someone else wrote and create and express my own feelings and personality over it. Doesn't mean everyone else will like it, but it's very releasing as a musician.


Yeah, ok, except the "mistakes" are *not* ornamentations, they are *substitution* of notes and hence changing the *harmonies* and so the structure of the piece is also changed.

Ornamentations are fine. Changing the harmonies and structure of the music is not fine in my book, because if you want to do that, why not just compose your own music.

Anyways I have given up on this discussion, because I guess this might be after all my subjective opinion. If everyone else thinks Schiff is great, then maybe he is (for everyone else).


----------



## Bill H.

When one listens, as many of us do, to recordings of performances captured on stage (operas or symphonic/chamber concerts), there will always be wrong notes, missed entrances, rough ensemble work that isn't quite together etc. It happens, but doesn't detract from a great overall performance. 

Even studio recordings aren't immune, though there's less of that in the digital age. But definitely it occurs in older recordings, when session tapes of different takes and passages had to be physically spliced together to make the "master" for the final product. Sometimes you couldn't "fix" a slipup, depending on the passage of music that's involved. I recently heard a part of the Heifetz/Munch recording of the Mendelssohn Violin Concerto, and in the finale you can definitely hear a slipup on the soloist's part. But it was in such a rapid stream of notes that it couldn't be fixed by tape splicing, and was probably judged to be the best "take" overall, so it is there for posterity. There's an early Decca LP performance by Ricci of the Tchaikovsky Concerto that also has mistakes in it that would probably never pass muster in today's world of digitally spliced perfection. And so forth.


----------



## tdc

quietfire said:


> Yeah, ok, except the "mistakes" are *not* ornamentations, they are *substitution* of notes and hence changing the *harmonies* and so the structure of the piece is also changed.
> 
> Ornamentations are fine. Changing the harmonies and structure of the music is not fine in my book, because if you want to do that, why not just compose your own music.
> 
> Anyways I have given up on this discussion, because I guess this might be after all my subjective opinion. If everyone else thinks Schiff is great, then maybe he is (for everyone else).


I'm quite certain Schiff is just using Baroque style improvisation in his interpretations, and personally I think when done well this practice adds a vitality to the works you won't encounter by performers who always play the notes exactly as notated every time. It is also in line with performance practice in the Baroque era and by Bach himself.

I think you are incorrect in saying he is actually altering the fundamental structure of the works though. I think he is following rules to ensure that he does not do this. For example the D and F notes mentioned in the OP are both notes found in a D minor chord.


----------



## quietfire

tdc said:


> I'm quite certain Schiff is just using Baroque style improvisation in his interpretations, and personally I think when done well this practice adds a vitality to the works you won't encounter by performers who always play the notes exactly as notated every time. It is also in line with performance practice in the Baroque era and by Bach himself.
> 
> I think you are incorrect in saying he is actually altering the fundamental structure of the works though. I think he is following rules to ensure that he does not do this. *For example the D and F notes mentioned in the OP are both notes found in a D minor chord.*


Interesting you say this, because then why did such a uncomfortable feeling come across me when I heard this substitution? It's because I am not talking about the relationship between D and his substitution F, but the relationship between D and the surrounding notes and F and the surrounding notes.

And okay, people keep on talking about Baroque style improvisations. Exactly where is this evidence of Baroque style improvisations? My evidence comes from the music itself, and it is evident the complexity of Bach's music doesn't really allow for much improvisation, especially when it comes to substitution of notes.


----------



## realdealblues

quietfire said:


> Interesting you say this, because then why did such a uncomfortable feeling come across me when I heard this substitution? It's because I am not talking about the relationship between D and his substitution F, but the relationship between D and the surrounding notes and F and the surrounding notes.
> 
> And okay, people keep on talking about Baroque style improvisations. Exactly where is this evidence of Baroque style improvisations? My evidence comes from the music itself, and it is evident the complexity of Bach's music doesn't really allow for much improvisation, especially when it comes to substitution of notes.


Bach actually wrote his own ornamentation on some works to add if you wanted. There are tons of books and letters from the time period mentioning it. There are countless books from musical historians, musicians, scholars, etc. talking all about improvisation and ornamentation in Baroque music.

Try this site:
http://www.idrs.org/publications/controlled/Journal/JNL16/JNL16.Nagel.Baroque.html

Here is a nice Introduction as well as resources listed at the bottom from books and articles dealing with Improvisation and Baroque music performance.


----------



## quietfire

realdealblues said:


> Bach actually wrote his own ornamentation on some works to add if you wanted. There are tons of books and letters from the time period mentioning it. There are countless books from musical historians, musicians, scholars, etc. talking all about improvisation and ornamentation in Baroque music.
> 
> Try this site:
> http://www.idrs.org/publications/controlled/Journal/JNL16/JNL16.Nagel.Baroque.html
> 
> Here is a nice Introduction as well as resources listed at the bottom from books and articles dealing with Improvisation and Baroque music performance.


Thanks for this. I will have a read at the materials you provided me.


----------



## realdealblues

quietfire said:


> Thanks for this. I will have a read at the materials you provided me.


No problem.

Also just doing a google search for "improvisation in baroque music" will yield many results. Here's another one from a professor at Middlebury College.

[url]http://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/MusicPapers/baroque.html
[/URL] 
From what I've read over the years it was very common for composers to improvise whole sections when performing their works from the Baroque period up till the Classical period. When Mozart was playing one of his Piano Concerto's he would just improvise the cadenza right there on the spot. He didn't write it out and practice it or perform it the same way every time. He would just create something based on whatever he felt like at that moment. From other readings Bach was also a master of this.


----------



## tdc

quietfire said:


> Interesting you say this, because then why did such a uncomfortable feeling come across me when I heard this substitution?


The unfamiliar can be uncomfortable for some people, especially if you've imprinted on a different version and then want to hear the piece that way every time. There is nothing wrong with preferring a different approach, but Schiff's interpretations are well thought out and played with a high amount of respect for performance practices of the time.

Baroque translates as 'rough pearl' and many people living in this era thought this music strange and uncomfortable. I think it can be easy to lose context of what this music was really like and how it was perceived in the 18th century.


----------



## quietfire

tdc said:


> The unfamiliar can be uncomfortable for some people, especially if you've imprinted on a different version and then want to hear the piece that way every time. There is nothing wrong with preferring a different approach, but Schiff's interpretations are well thought out and played with a high amount of respect for performance practices of the time.
> 
> Baroque translates as 'rough pearl' and many people living in this era thought this music strange and uncomfortable. I think it can be easy to lose context of what this music was really like and how it was perceived in the 18th century.


Alright. Ok, sorry if I was perceived to be rude earlier. I was just in a fit of passion. I actually love Baroque music. You have to understand I have always been taught to abide by rules, by my music teachers, by my parents, by society. Laws and rules give you freedom apparently and too much freedom is actually a jail that kind of thing.

One note wrong and my teacher would yell at me and I would be traumatised. Apparently keeping strict pitch and rhythm allows you to be free in other areas of the music, like the "music" itself.

I am torn. On the one hand, I understand the value of improvisation and freedom in music. On the other hand, I do agree with my teachers and why they want to put such strict rules, so that the foundations are set for freedom to be put in the actually important areas.


----------



## realdealblues

quietfire said:


> I am torn. On the one hand, I understand the value of improvisation and freedom in music. On the other hand, I do agree with my teachers and why they want to put such strict rules, so that the foundations are set for freedom to be put in the actually important areas.


That's why I always enjoy multiple recordings. I can have it any way my mood strikes me


----------



## quietfire

realdealblues said:


> That's why I always enjoy multiple recordings. I can have it any way my mood strikes me


I see I see 

Oh and another thing, and this is totally just my opinion. I feel like Bach has created something greater than himself, i.e. an inventor who has created inventions that have become more important than the inventor. So sometimes, even if Bach did improvise or if that was what the customs were, I do not think I care so much because my intuition is that the music itself has become greater than Bach the composer, Bach the organist, whatever. Whenever I mention Bach and how much I love Bach, I really mean the music he created rather than the man himself.

He created music for God, and thanks to his devotion, he has created something that even he himself can no longer control. Only through the test of time have we understood his music's importance.

So in this vein, I believe in no improvisation or substitution of notes, and that is the final verdict for me. The music, not the man.

I feel like I can adapt to this philosophy easier than others because I am not a professional musician. In fact I am not any label. I am just a human being struggling to connect to the rest of the world. To best suit my goals in life, I have decided that is how I am going to view this masterwork.


----------



## Bulldog

I understand how quietfire feels about this subject. I had a similar situation, must have been at least 20 years ago. I bought a Telarc disc of Beethoven piano concertos played by the aging Rudolf Serkin. I don't recall the particular concerto, but there was a passage I loved where Serkin's wrong note really bothered me; actually, it killed the performance for me. Also, I can't say that the rest of the performance was anything special. So I got rid of that disc real fast and never acquired anything else from Serkin.


----------



## jegreenwood

In defense of quietfire with respect to the first note he mentioned (F instead of D), I do believe that's a wrong note. It is part of the first statement of the sequence which is then repeated. It seems a strange place to improvise. Perhaps as both notes are part of a D Minor chord it would not stand out so much to someone who did not know the work intimately (such as me).

However it is also true that elsewhere Schiff adds his share of embellishments, trills, ritards etc. As others in this thread have noted, this is in keeping with the Baroque tradition, and Bach would have expected it.


----------



## bigshot

I'm sure someone could invent a machine that played every note exactly as indicated on the score, but that wouldn't be much fun, would it?

God > Bach > Piano Players. Nothing wrong with that.


----------



## quietfire

bigshot said:


> I'm sure someone could invent a machine that played every note exactly as indicated on the score, but that wouldn't be much fun, would it?
> 
> God > Bach > Piano Players. Nothing wrong with that.


1. It is still a long way until technology can emulate a person playing a score, at least I think so.
2. I am not always asking for fun, I sometimes do just want to listen to the music as it is written.
3. I do not really believe God should even be judged in relation to other things.
4. Bach is dead.


----------



## quietfire

jegreenwood said:


> In defense of quietfire with respect to the first note he mentioned (F instead of D), I do believe that's a wrong note. It is part of the first statement of the sequence which is then repeated. It seems a strange place to improvise. Perhaps as both notes are part of a D Minor chord it would not stand out so much to someone who did not know the work intimately (such as me).
> 
> However it is also true that elsewhere Schiff adds his share of embellishments, trills, ritards etc. As others in this thread have noted, this is in keeping with the Baroque tradition, and Bach would have expected it.


Thanks for confirming this .

Ok, I have read some analyses on this piece more properly so I don't just put out my personal opinion on this substituted note. (I didn't know a SUBSTITUTED note can be called an ornamentation - I always thought ornamentation was adding notes to the original note, not substitution - can someone please confirm this for me... people keep on mentioning ornamentation is okay, but is substition of an entire note even an ornamentation?!)

All the analyses I have read that one should play the triplets as given, with a constant grip of harmonic detail and melodic outline.

Also, this isn't exactly a hard piece. Either the piano player is in a really bad mental and physical state while recording this, or he really just wanted to change the notes in his interpretation and if it is the latter... good riddance.

Let's compare this with, in the same recording, his playing of the C# major prelude. He didn't change a note there, or did I perceive any kind of ornamentation in that prelude. So his interpretation style and ornamentation is not really consistent even if he did "ornamentation" in the d minor prelude.

I think I care about this so much because it is the WTC. If it were any other recording, I think I wouldn't have cared as much. To me, this is like the material from which I can learn everything about music. To just be able to substitute any notes at will and interpret it however one likes would be a bit cruel to a music student who just happens to use this for their studies.


----------



## tdc

quietfire said:


> Thanks for confirming this .
> 
> Ok, I have read some analyses on this piece more properly so I don't just put out my personal opinion on this substituted note. (I didn't know a SUBSTITUTED note can be called an ornamentation - I always thought ornamentation was adding notes to the original note, not substitution - can someone please confirm this for me... people keep on mentioning ornamentation is okay, but is substition of an entire note even an ornamentation?!)
> 
> All the analyses I have read that one should play the triplets as given, with a constant grip of harmonic detail and melodic outline.
> 
> Also, this isn't exactly a hard piece. Either the piano player is in a really bad mental and physical state while recording this, or he really just wanted to change the notes in his interpretation and if it is the latter... good riddance.
> 
> Let's compare this with, in the same recording, his playing of the C# major prelude. He didn't change a note there, or did I perceive any kind of ornamentation in that prelude. So if his interpretation style and ornamentation is not really consistent even if he did "ornamentation" in the d minor prelude.


Wrong note or not I still think his version sounds excellent. Out of curiosity what is your preferred version of the D minor prelude?


----------



## quietfire

tdc said:


> Wrong note or not I still think his version sounds excellent. Out of curiosity what is your preferred version of the D minor prelude?


Besides my own playing? 

My preferred version of this D minor prelude will have a steady rhythm without the feeling of being rushed. And able to play the triplets evenly in the RH, yet still bring out the melodic lines in both the LH and RH, with evenness in playing taking precedence.

In a lot of recordings of the WTC I have heard, the triplets are not even close to even. It feels extremely uncomfortable to listen to some of the recordings actually. If the piano player is supposed to be a guide to the labyrinth that is this piece, I would feel extremely vulnerable in their hands.

That being said, Glenn Gould did quite a good job. I will feel safe in his hands.


----------



## tdc

quietfire said:


> That being said, Glenn Gould did quite a good job. I will feel safe in his hands.


Gould is quite idiosyncratic. The irony here is I feel his playing is actually much farther removed from Bach (at least my own idea of Bach) than Schiff even if he plays every note 'correctly'. I can certainly appreciate his clarity and level of skill, but I feel the personality in his playing comes out more than what I generally enjoy. When I listen to Gould I hear Gould, when I listen to Schiff (or on harpsichord Kenneth Gilbert) I hear Bach.


----------



## quietfire

tdc said:


> Gould is quite idiosyncratic. The irony here is I feel his playing is actually much farther removed from Bach (at least my own idea of Bach) than Schiff even if he plays every note 'correctly'. I can certainly appreciate his clarity and level of skill, but I feel the personality in his playing comes out more than what I generally enjoy. *When I listen to Gould I hear Gould, when I listen to Schiff (or on harpsichord Kenneth Gilbert) I hear Bach.*


I feel the opposite way  I feel less distracted from the music if the piano player is competent in the way I see it.

(at least in the piece that we were talking about, I cannot say much about the rest, as I haven't really listened properly to his other recordings...)


----------



## tdc

quietfire said:


> I feel less distracted from the music if the piano player is competent in the way I see it.


So to sum up, you think Schiff is incompetent and you prefer your own playing of Bach to virtually all professional pianists except maybe Gould.

Ok then.


----------



## quietfire

tdc said:


> So to sum up, you think Schiff is incompetent and you prefer your own playing of Bach to virtually all professional pianists except maybe Gould.
> 
> Ok then.


Did I really say that? You are drawing a lot of inferences that seem to make me look like an idiot.

I wasn't specifically referring to Schiff when speaking about "incompetence". I was speaking about a lot of the WTC recordings I heard were not to the standard to which I liked. I also didn't mention I could play better than them in every instance of the recording. I am perhaps talking about the pieces that I have played a lot.

And is incompetence such a bad thing?


----------



## premont

quietfire said:


> My preferred version of this D minor prelude will have a *steady rhythm *without the feeling of being rushed. And able to *play the triplets evenly in the RH*, yet still bring out the melodic lines in both the LH and RH, with evenness in playing taking precedence.
> 
> *In a lot of recordings of the WTC I have heard, the triplets are not even close to even*. It feels extremely uncomfortable to listen to some of the recordings actually. If the piano player is supposed to be a guide to the labyrinth that is this piece, I would feel extremely vulnerable in their hands.


What do you mean by using the word "even"? Your preference for Gould makes me think, that you mean "strictly mechanical"

So you do not count with the expressive device called "agogic accents"?


----------



## quietfire

premont said:


> What do you mean by using the word "even"? Your preference for Gould makes me think, that you mean "strictly mechanical"
> 
> So you do not count with the expressive device called "agogic accents"?


Even in rhythm and dynamics. Piano players tend to play unevenly in Bach because there are more than two voices - they tend to accent wrongly in one voice because they are affected when playing the other voice.

As a concrete example, say there are 1/8 notes on the RH, and 1/4 notes on the LH, it is tempting to accent the notes on the RH when it coincides with the notes on the LH, and that would usually make no sense at all - it could break the melodic line of the RH.


----------



## premont

quietfire said:


> *Even in rhythm and dynamics*. Piano players tend to play unevenly in Bach because there are more than two voices - they tend to accent wrongly in one voice because they are affected when playing the other voice.
> .


I am more concerned about the rhythm. An even, mechanical rhythm makes the music lifeless and inexpressive.

But I agree that dynamic accents, whether they are intended or not, are disturbing. This music was after all written for instruments with little dynamic potential.


----------



## Ethereality

I like when I hear wrong notes. For example, *7:24* the clarinet dips too low, playing the note twice and I think it sounds way more endearing! :angel:






And, for a second I swear I heard F major addressing the coda development instead of F minor at *6:09*:


----------



## Barbebleu

I’m not playing all the wrong notes. I’m playing all the right notes but not necessarily in the right order! (With apologies to Eric Morecambe!)


----------



## Krummhorn

Amateurs practice until they get the notes right ... ... Professionals practice until they can't get the notes wrong. 

I've had some major bloopers over my career ... a high ranking Lutheran Bishop once told me "if you have to sin, sin loudly and get it out of your system - then move on"!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I was so certain Sviatoslav Richter’s live 1958 Pictures at an Exhibition from Sofia would have appeared in this thread.

Great performance, flubbed note and all!


----------



## Chatellerault

quietfire said:


> Also, this isn't exactly a hard piece. Either the piano player is in a really bad mental and physical state while recording this, or he really just wanted to change the notes in his interpretation and if it is the latter... good riddance.


He was not in a bad physical state when recording, actually, he's still playing this wrong note.

The Prelude in D minor that you mentioned begins at 38:37 in the video below, from Wigmore Hall two months ago:





We can still wonder if:
(a) he chose to play that different note. I can understand the harmonic/counterpoint meaning of that note he does and it make sense, while I agree with you that it's not simply an ornamentation but a change in the musical progression.
or (b) a mistake when he was memorizing the piece, that he kept in his memory and nobody (editors, friends) ever told him it's written otherwise in the score. I can understand it if some of his friends don't dare tell him, the famous musician, that he's wrong. Big ego and so on.

Anyway I'm happy that you mentioned it. It doesn't ruin the performance for me, I still think Schiff is one of the best living pianists.


----------



## Bruckner Anton

Wrong notes are more likely to ruin a recording than a live performance. If I listen to something only once in my life, I do not bother myself with minor mistakes. But when I do repeat listening to a recording, I cannot stand that the same mistake happens again and again which at the end makes me even get use to it.


----------



## RobertJTh

When I was young I used to record a lot of music off the radio - and one of those tapes was Sviatoslav Richter's performance of Beethoven's Diabelli Variations, live from the Concertgebouw. Great performance, but Richter completely butchered a fortissimo chord in the "Don Giovanni" variation, and it stood out like a sore thumb every time I listened to that tape. In the Philips cd release of that same concert, the passage of course was "doctored".


----------



## Heck148

Krummhorn said:


> Amateurs practice until they get the notes right ... ... Professionals practice until they can't get the notes wrong.
> 
> I've had some major bloopers over my career ... a high ranking Lutheran Bishop once told me "if you have to sin, sin loudly and get it out of your system - then move on"!


Everybody misses notes, at one time or another...it's unavoidable....funny thing about musicians, they are truly perfectionists, they want it all right, all the time, every concert...during a performance they'll play thousands, 100s of thousands of notes!! all correct, all right, right pitch, right rhythm, clean attack/release...but they'll remember those 5 notes that they missed!!

I can remember concerts where I missed only half a dozen notes, but they were all hidden in loud, tutti sections...never heard....you feel great!!
other times missed only 1 or 2 notes, but in solos, or exposed parts....you feel like crap!! lol!!
[some notes are more important than others ]


----------



## JTS

Heck148 said:


> Everybody misses notes, at one time or another...it's unavoidable....funny thing about musicians, they are truly perfectionists, they want it all right, all the time, every concert...during a performance they'll play thousands, 100s of thousands of notes!! all correct, all right, right pitch, right rhythm, clean attack/release...but they'll remember those 5 notes that they missed!!
> 
> I can remember concerts where I missed only half a dozen notes, but they were all hidden in loud, tutti sections...never heard....you feel great!!
> other times missed only 1 or 2 notes, but in solos, or exposed parts....you feel like crap!! lol!!
> [some notes are more important than others ]


There is a famous recording of Lipatti playing the Schumann concerto live with Ansemet with a glaring wrong note. The pianist was a dying man at the time so is excused.


----------



## fluteman

American pianist William Kapell died young in 1953 in a plane crash returning from a concert tour of Australia, and much of what survives of his playing on record comes from live radio broadcasts. So a few slips here and there are inevitable. I grew up with his 1946 recording of the Beethoven B-flat concerto no. 2 with the NBC Symphony that no doubt was sourced from one of these broadcasts. The fluffed notes are minor, but hearing the same ones repeatedly as one replays the record becomes annoying.

The great American flutist Julius Baker was at his youthful best when he played the Ibert Concerto with the (Lewisohn) Stadium Symphony aka the NY Philharmonic in a 1948 radio broadcast. Even just from a technical perspective, his performance has yet to be topped. Yet, there are one or two slight slips, and some brief ensemble problems with the orchestra. 

Those musicians were amazing experienced virtuoso professionals who could put on a great live performance of these virtuoso concertos after only minimal rehearsal. But absolute note perfection is really a product of sophisticated modern editing and never existed in live performance or single-take studio recording. Richter, who insisted on live performance and avoided the studio, has numerous slips in his recordings despite an almost unbelievably strong technique.


----------



## Heck148

fluteman said:


> ......Those musicians were amazing experienced virtuoso professionals who could put on a great live performance of these virtuoso concertos after only minimal rehearsal. But absolute note perfection is really a product of sophisticated modern editing and never existed in live performance or single-take studio recording. Richter, who insisted on live performance and avoided the studio, has numerous slips in his recordings despite an almost unbelievably strong technique.


I'm actually amazed at how few wrong notes, mistakes are heard in some of those older live and broadcast performances...
back in the 78rpm days they didn't have the luxury of modern day editing....one of my favorite Beethoven Violin Concerto performances is Heifetz/Rodzinski/NYPO from 1945....in the first mvt cadenza, Jascha makes a little finger slip....pretty nit-picky, but it's there, but so what?? he sounds so great!!

The thing is, there are always mistakes in any recording, if you listen really carefully...maybe not wrong notes, but imprecise entrances, shaky intonation, sloppy ensemble execution....but they're generally no big deal, and certainly don't detract from the overall effect of the performance. 
It's not a gymnastic or figure skating competition, where the listener is the judge, subtracting tenths of a point for each minor infraction....


----------



## Merl

Heck148 said:


> I'm actually amazed at how few wrong notes, mistakes are heard in some of those older live and broadcast performances...
> back in the 78rpm days they didn't have the luxury of modern day editing....one of my favorite Beethoven Violin Concerto performances is Heifetz/Rodzinski/NYPO from 1945....in the first mvt cadenza, Jascha makes a little finger slip....pretty nit-picky, but it's there, but so what?? he sounds so great!!
> 
> The thing is, there are always mistakes in any recording, if you listen really carefully...maybe not wrong notes, but imprecise entrances, shaky intonation, sloppy ensemble execution....but they're generally no big deal, and certainly don't detract from the overall effect of the performance.
> It's not a gymnastic or figure skating competition, where the listener is the judge, subtracting tenths of a point for each minor infraction....


Aye, as Heck says, unless it's really bad mistake I can live with it. Horrific intonation I can't live with, though. No excuse for being out of tune (especially in chamber performances, where there's no hiding place). A few spring to mind.. ..


----------



## fluteman

Heck148 said:


> I'm actually amazed at how few wrong notes, mistakes are heard in some of those older live and broadcast performances...
> back in the 78rpm days they didn't have the luxury of modern day editing....one of my favorite Beethoven Violin Concerto performances is Heifetz/Rodzinski/NYPO from 1945....in the first mvt cadenza, Jascha makes a little finger slip....pretty nit-picky, but it's there, but so what?? he sounds so great!!
> 
> The thing is, there are always mistakes in any recording, if you listen really carefully...maybe not wrong notes, but imprecise entrances, shaky intonation, sloppy ensemble execution....but they're generally no big deal, and certainly don't detract from the overall effect of the performance.
> It's not a gymnastic or figure skating competition, where the listener is the judge, subtracting tenths of a point for each minor infraction....


Absolutely right. And with a concerto with soloist and orchestra, absolute perfection under live performance conditions would be all but impossible. Even if the soloist could somehow manage it, there is the issue of the ensemble between the soloist and a large symphony orchestra, and within the orchestra itself. It is amazing how the top pros get everything so close to perfect so much of the time, often with little rehearsal.

OTOH, there is something to be said for the artificial perfection of edited studio recordings (really only near-perfection, even there). If you listen to the same live recording a dozen times, you begin to anticipate even the most minor clinkers, and they become much worse than they would be in live performance.

But I wouldn't push that argument too far. There is a famous recording of Chopin's Ballades and Scherzos by Artur Rubinstein on RCA that has been reissued in audiophile formats with great sound quality. Listen carefully with good speakers or especially good headphones, and you can hear some of the artificial editing 'tricks'. Editing technology has advanced greatly since then, but is the note-perfect result less artificial? I'll let you experts mull that one over.


----------



## Heck148

Merl said:


> Aye, as Heck says, unless it's really bad mistake I can live with it. Horrific intonation I can't live with, though. No excuse for being out of tune (especially in chamber performances, where there's no hiding place). A few spring to mind.. ..


with orchestra recordings, intonation may be instantaneously shaky, but is quickly corrected....esp when playing at extreme dynamic levels both soft and loud....chronic , consistent poor intonation is unlistenable

I have an old VOX CD - Renaissance Brass Music - Eastman Brass 5tet [fabulous!! amazing!!] and a Paris Group....the Eastman selections are awesome, so beautifully played....then the French group comes on, and instantly, my ears go nuts, it's so out of tune...I can't take more than minute or so....


----------



## fluteman

Heck148 said:


> with orchestra recordings, intonation may be instantaneously shaky, but is quickly corrected....esp when playing at extreme dynamic levels both soft and loud....chronic , consistent poor intonation is unlistenable
> 
> I have an old VOX CD - Renaissance Brass Music - Eastman Brass 5tet [fabulous!! amazing!!] and a Paris Group....the Eastman selections are awesome, so beautifully played....then the French group comes on, and instantly, my ears go nuts, it's so out of tune...I can't take more than minute or so....


One thing you have to watch for with old European recordings from the 1940s and 50s, and Vox probably was reissuing the French performance from an older European label. That is, many were recorded with an equalization curve other than the RIAA curve that ultimately became standard. They can sound very bad, though not out-of-tune per se, played back through a phono pre-amp not designed for them. Of course, these old recordings can be digitally re-equalized. If the Vox recording, which I assume was originally a vinyl LP, wasn't re-equalized, it could still sound bad on CD.


----------



## Heck148

fluteman said:


> One thing you have to watch for with old European recordings from the 1940s and 50s, and Vox probably was reissuing the French performance from an older European label. That is, many were recorded with an equalization curve other than the RIAA curve that ultimately became standard.


It was recorded c '62. It's not an EQ issue, it's just f*cking out of tune....painful...


----------



## fluteman

Heck148 said:


> It was recorded c '62. It's not an EQ issue, it's just f*cking out of tune....painful...


But how do you really feel about it? :lol: George Szell was famously a stickler for intonation at precisely a=440. He even had an electric tuner, not common in his day, custom made and brought it to rehearsals and recording sessions. For laughs, I checked out the Szell/Cleveland circa 1964 Pictures at an Exhibition. Sure enough, the opening trumpet fanfare is exquisitely in tune at a=440. But if you keep listening, the pitch begins to creep upwards, exactly what Szell didn't want. So with intonation, as with wrong notes, the best are very good, but not perfect.


----------



## Merl

Some of the old string quartet recordings have really iffy intonation. Some think this "lends authenticity", "doesn't matter" , is "spontaneous", "quirky" or "charming". I just think it sounds like crap. Throw in some wiry sounding violins and I'd rather listen to nails on a blackboard or scousers having an argument.


----------



## Heck148

fluteman said:


> But how do you really feel about it? :lol: George Szell was famously a stickler for intonation at precisely a=440. He even had an electric tuner, not common in his day, custom made and brought it to rehearsals and recording sessions. For laughs, I checked out the Szell/Cleveland circa 1964 Pictures at an Exhibition. Sure enough, the opening trumpet fanfare is exquisitely in tune at a=440. But if you keep listening, the pitch begins to creep upwards, exactly what Szell didn't want. So with intonation, as with wrong notes, the best are very good, but not perfect.


I've always found that orchestras will go up in pitch as the concert begins....we always tuned to A =440.....after a few minutes into the program, it would go up to c 442 or so....but it was ok, because the entire ensemble would go up together, then it would level off and maintain....several reasons I think - instruments get thoroughly warmed up, players' efforts warm them up, and the temperature of the hall will usually go up as well - a lot of energy being produced, large audience helping to warm the hall...

The problem occurs when the rising pitch does not level off, but keeps increasing!! that's a mess...the strings will go on up, and up, no problem...the woodwinds however, encounter serious problems if the pitch raises too much....the instruments aren't built to play ay 445, 446 or even higher!! they become out of tune with themselves, and the musicians are trying to sound the notes that are now "out of the window" - too high, and the instrument simply won't produce those notes at extreme pitches...the players are "biting" up to pitch, instead of relaxing, down to pitch.....notes crack, the intonation goes all over the place...

One of the most difficult concerts I ever played was like this - Mozart 38 "Prague" - I was playing 2nd bassoon, and the students playing principal woodwinds just kept going up and up...it was excruciating....by mvt II they were cracking notes all over the place because the pitch was so high....the idiot playing first told me to bring the pitch up. I told her I couldn't play at 448, that they had to relax and bring it down....for naught....the uptight "biting fest" persisted....it was pretty brutal.

PS - as of the early 90s, BostonSO tuned to A = 442...when I was invited to submit a recording for the principal job, the first requirement was to sound an A = 442 for c 10" or so....


----------



## Heck148

Merl said:


> Some of the old string quartet recordings have really iffy intonation. Some think this "lends authenticity", "doesn't matter" , is "spontaneous", "quirky" or "charming". I just think it sounds like crap. Throw in some wiry sounding violins and I'd rather listen to nails on a blackboard or scousers having an argument.


LOL!! for sure, it quickly becomes distracting.


----------



## fluteman

Heck148 said:


> I've always found that orchestras will go up in pitch as the concert begins.


Yes, thanks for those anecdotes. I've long heard that kind of thing from reliable sources. As I'm sure you know, since the late 1980s or thereabouts, most flutes have been made to play at a=442. And well before that, in 1969, when James Galway joined the Berlin Philharmonic, he had flutes made for him pitched at a=444 or 445. European orchestras have long tuned sharp, you can hear it on records going back at least to the 1960s.

The George Szell story is only one of many stories I've heard about some of his amusing quirks (amusing for us, probably less so for his players). He was never going to succeed in enforcing his strict a=440 rule, even with the great Cleveland Orchestra. Another one was how he insisted all the trombonists play exactly the same make and model instrument. Maybe you've heard that one.


----------



## Heck148

fluteman said:


> Yes, thanks for those anecdotes. I've long heard that kind of thing from reliable sources. As I'm sure you know, since the late 1980s or thereabouts, most flutes have been made to play at a=442. And well before that, in 1969, when James Galway joined the Berlin Philharmonic, he had flutes made for him pitched at a=444 or 445. European orchestras have long tuned sharp, you can hear it on records going back at least to the 1960s.


yes, many orchestras tuned considerably higher than A = 440....the idea was that sharper pitch added more brilliance to the strings, esp the violins....but string players were not all that happy with this, because increased tension on the strings to tune higher put more stress on the instrument itself and could damage the neck, bridge, etc....also, this higher pitch causes the woodwinds to lose lower and mid-range overtones, producing a thin, harsh, "glassier" tone....The VPO, iirc, actually had instruments built to play at this higher pitch level....



> The George Szell story is only one of many stories I've heard about some of his amusing quirks (amusing for us, probably less so for his players). He was never going to succeed in enforcing his strict a=440 rule, even with the great Cleveland Orchestra. Another one was how he insisted all the trombonists play exactly the same make and model instrument. Maybe you've heard that one.


there are jillions of Szell stories - he was an ultra-control freak....yes, he got on the trombones to all play identical brand instruments....one of the trombonists switched horns, without telling Szell....they played concerts and did some recordings, and Szell expressed his pleasure at the sound of the section....upon learning that the miscreant had changed horns, he blew his stack!! not because it sounded bad, or didn't blend, but because the player had switched horns without his approval!! :lol:

His nit-picking over intonation [Prokofiev 5/III] was, iirc, the final spark that caused the major explosion between Szell and Marc Lifschey, the fine principal oboist, who left in a rage, never to return [He went to SFSO]....Szell and Lifschey had a stormy relationship for years, but this was the final straw....


----------



## fluteman

Heck148 said:


> yes, many orchestras tuned considerably higher than A = 440


Yes, perfect intonation is tougher to achieve than the typical listener may realize. It's easy to forget that a=440 wasn't the formally accepted international standard until 1939. Before that, pitch was all over the place, and most French wind instruments were made to be played at the French diapason normale, or a=435. In Germany, a=440 already was more common. In the case of French flutes, thanks to the decision of the leading 19th century French maker to increase the size of the tone holes, actual pitch was closer to a=438. Alas, this "French" model became the international standard in the early 20th century, and nobody bothered to redesign the scale in 1939. This became an even bigger problem with pitch inflation. So wind intonation has long been an issue.


----------



## Knorf

There are next to zero recordings, no matter the ensemble size or reputation, where I don't notice intonation problems here and there. 

There are some string quartets that come the closest to truly "perfect" intonation, but even that's a chimera, because perfect in accordance with which intonation system?

The best orchestral conductor I ever played for said it best, in talking about pitch in the orchestra. You have to imagine a charming, cultured Hungarian accent in the tenor-range "Ladies and gentlemen. Whatever we do, we do it together, and they will believe it!"

Obviously this applies to much more than pitch!

Wrong notes happen all the time, even with the most seasoned, focused, professional players. The overwhelming majority of them are never noticed, since they're a different note in the chord, or it's too quiet, or it's part of a loud sound with so many partials you just miss it. One of the worst ever wrong notes I've heard in a professional recording, one so shocking I can hardly believe it was allowed to go to press, is a wrong oboe note in Nielsen's Fourth Symphony, Leonard Bernstein and the NYPO. It's not sufficient in itself to disqualify the recording (tons of sloppiness all over the place including in the interpretation are sufficient for that), but it would drive me nuts to try to live with.

For something more fun, a wrong note I find incredibly endearing is in Mahler's Third Symphony, again with Bernstein and the NYPO (1962). In the coda of the last movement, the first trumpet hits a high note entrance on the incorrect partial at a whole step above the right note, but quickly moves to the right note, creating a little appoggiatura. I like it and more than half wish Mahler had written it that way!


----------

