# How Do You Compare?



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

I was just curious how all of you compare the same piece of music by different performers when there is more than one movement such a Sonata, Concerto, Symphony, etc.

Do you listen to one movement from performer A, then the same movement from performer B, or do you listen to the entire piece by performer A, then the entire piece by performer B?

Or does it depend on the type of piece. Obviously alternating between each movement through something like St. Mathew's Passion might get a bit tedious, so for a piece like that, would you break it down in groups?

I am just curious how the rest of you compare.

V


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Depends on how well I know the piece/performance.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

If careful comparison is really my purpose (say, for deciding what recording of something to own or get rid of), I may actually choose parts of movements to get a general idea of the performer's concept, and go on to compare complete movements or works only of those I haven't eliminated. Usually I can tell pretty quickly whether I'm going to like a performance.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Basically I compare if the music (and performance) impresses me or not that is to say, if the music has quality to appeal to my listening sensibilities.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

MarkW said:


> Depends on how well I know the piece/performance.


I go with this and always the whole piece in one .


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

I will go with the general impression and what feels right to me, along with a note of the recording quality.
However I may make a judgement after one movement rather than than the whole piece especially if that is a negative one


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Usually I can tell pretty quickly whether I'm going to like a performance.


You're very lucky there because I find the opposite is true, especially if the performance avoids attention seeking behaviour -- ie if the musician doesn't woo the listener with either obviously virtuosic effects, or by grabbing on to and emphasising attractive tunes.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Varick said:


> I was just curious how all of you compare the same piece of music by different performers when there is more than one movement such a Sonata, Concerto, Symphony, etc.
> 
> Do you listen to one movement from performer A, then the same movement from performer B, or do you listen to the entire piece by performer A, then the entire piece by performer B?
> 
> ...


I find comparing is more useful for seeing what the musician is doing rather than for evaluating what he does.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I compare movements. If if listen to the whole piece, I can't remember all the details. Plus, I usually don't have the time to sit through three whole pieces at one time with that level of concentration.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Bargain hunting aside, I'm listening for instrumental tone and articulation. If there is a solo violin for instance, I want a warm tone, not too much vibrato (depending on what the piece seems to call for). Then I listen to tempo and clarity. If I can I skip over to key moments that have thrilled me in the past, as in for instance Beethoven's 9th when the choir sings a descending "_Alle Menschen_" four times the second time around, the four soloists' voices ring out more slowly in harmony rising above everything - the choir and the orchestra alike. It speaks to me of the triumph of the few (the individual or soloists) over the overwhelming odds of the masses (the choir and orchestra). I know this probably has nothing whatsoever to do with Beethoven's intent, but it's what it conveys to_ me_. So if that part if not emphasized clearly enough the recording is probably not for me.

So it's a process with no one easy formula. Each piece has its own qualities to consider.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Manxfeeder said:


> I compare movements. If if listen to the whole piece, I can't remember all the details. Plus, I usually don't have the time to sit through three whole pieces at one time with that level of concentration.


This is usually my method as well. It's rare that I can sit and listen to a Mahler symphony twice in a row, so often I will break up the movements throughout two or three days. There are some pieces however where I will follow more of the pattern that Woodduck and Weston expressed in their methods: Listening to certain sections of a piece that will tell me quickly whether or not I like the performers interpretation.

V


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> You're very lucky there because I find the opposite is true, especially if the performance avoids attention seeking behaviour -- ie if the musician doesn't woo the listener with either obviously virtuosic effects, or by grabbing on to and emphasising attractive tunes.


Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that I can tell pretty quickly if I'm going to _dislike_ a performance. That might leave a number of "centrist" interpretations that require fuller attention.


----------



## CypressWillow (Apr 2, 2013)

Disclaimer: I'm not trained as a musician. 
My reaction is primarily emotional: I'll listen to the entire work, if it's relatively short, or compare movements, for a longer work - and whichever performance evokes more emotion in me would then be my preferred version. 
When I attended the Chopin Competitions in Miami and Warsaw, my notes on each of the competitors consist primarily of these emotional responses, with only an occasional comment that would be considered more cerebral/technical. 
For anyone who's familiar with the Enneagram, my criteria are exactly in line with my Type Four journey through life.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I listen to the whole CD of a new performance-first for technical deficiencies in the CD-whether I need to return it or not.
Once past that, I will really listen to the performance. Probably one more time after that. Then the next day, again.
Then I will listen to one of my "benchmark" performances and see how the new one stacks up against it.


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

I don't listen to compare players to say "this version is better then..." sort of thing. I'm listening to see what I'm going to pick up and start doing myself. I only do this with pieces that I play 

first, I listen to both players several times

then I will listen for a particular phrase from one of the movements and compare how both players shaped the line, note what the differences were, and what they did before and after. Then I think about it for a few days and experiment on my instrument and finally come up with an idea of how I want to play that part.


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

I would always read the score and divide each piece into smaller sections if I am going to compare recordings.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Bruckner Anton said:


> I would always read the score and divide each piece into smaller sections if I am going to compare recordings.


And do you change your recording every time?


----------



## JACE (Jul 18, 2014)

If I'm comparing, I'll usually listen to an entire work before moving on to the next one. 

For me, if I go back-and-forth movement by movement, it's too easy to lose the "arc" of the overall interpretation. It also feels like I'm cheating -- like I'm not giving the artists a fair shake by listening all the way through. 

Funny.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Fresh interp, good playing, good sound. Tempi, chance-taking with attacks, transitions. Tone, precision. Acoustics, balance of instruments, mic placements. 

Truth be known, there are probably three or four recs of most works I could live with, but life is short, so I've often boiled it down to one, or two. 

Most of my starters are reasonably secure, but I still appreciate "new stuff". A couple that've caught my ears in recent years -- Mendelssohn: Piano Trios, w. Swiss Piano Trio (Audite); CPE Bach: Cello Concerti, w. Nicolas Altstaedt (Hyperion). Cheers! :tiphat:


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

With Mahler, to save time, I set up 2 systems in 2 rooms, play the works simultaneously, then walk from room to room. This takes half as long as listening to each version separately, and by the end of it, I've gotten some exercise as well.


----------



## JACE (Jul 18, 2014)

millionrainbows said:


> With Mahler, to save time, I set up 2 systems in 2 rooms, play the works simultaneously, then walk from room to room. This takes half as long as listening to each version separately, and by the end of it, I've gotten some exercise as well.


This made me laugh.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

JACE said:


> This made me laugh.


This made me laugh too.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Earlier I did much comparative listening.

To day I contrate upon every recording, trying to understand the intentions of the performer.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

OP: I believe in listening in totality to a piece:

Bach Harpsichord Partita No. 5 to Bach Harpsichord Partita No. 5

Haydn Creation to Haydn Creation

Mahler Symphony No. 8 to Mahler Symphony No. 8

I need to hear the totality of the work and how I feel when it is completely over.

Never was a segmentalist.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

JACE said:


> This made me laugh.


I almost wet myself, knowing we supposed to believe this post you commented on.


----------



## rojaba (Nov 12, 2016)

I think Spotify is a very nifty tool for finding recordings you like. I usually pick out my favourite part/aria and compare it. Not saying this is a foolproof way of doing it (otherwise I'd never have bought that horrible Sawallisch Tannhäuser) but one has to work and pay bills too


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

For symphonies and other big orchestral pieces, I compare passages of 2 - 3 minutes. While you have a fresh idea in mind, it is easier to tell the differences. Sometimes when comparing concertos, sonata and quartets, I compare movements by movements. I like to compare arias and solo work because the focus is easier.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

hpowders said:


> I listen to the whole CD of a new performance-first for technical deficiencies in the CD-whether I need to return it or not.


The above comment surprises me. With all the thousands of CD's I've acquired over the years, I can only recall one cd that had any deficiencies. Your experience must differ.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Woodduck said:


> If careful comparison is really my purpose (say, for deciding what recording of something to own or get rid of), I may actually choose parts of movements to get a general idea of the performer's concept, and go on to compare complete movements or works only of those I haven't eliminated. Usually I can tell pretty quickly whether I'm going to like a performance.


Pretty much the way I call things as well. Strong ditto on last sentence.


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

I seldom compare performances directly against each other, instead rating them on their own merits. If I am going to compare different performances, I will listen to the whole piece, making notes about my impressions as I go along.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> The above comment surprises me. With all the thousands of CD's I've acquired over the years, I can only recall one cd that had any deficiencies. Your experience must differ.


Yes. I've had to return some. Usually they tell me to keep the CD and just send me a new CD.

Netflix DVDs are much much worse for technical disappointments than CD encounters.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I'm referring to CDs I currently own and know are terrific performances. There is no "I can tell pretty quickly if I like a performance". That factor has been completely eliminated at my chateau.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Yes. I've had to return some. Usually they tell me to keep the CD and just send me a new CD.
> 
> Netflix DVDs are much much worse for technical disappointments than CD encounters.


They sure are. I've had some come split in two.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> They sure are. I've had some come split in two.


Maybe I got your address mixed up with Netflix "returns".

Some of them are so highly fractured, you wonder if they ever check them! But they are good at sending out a replacement copy.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Maybe I got your address mixed up with Netflix "returns".
> 
> Some of them are so highly fractured, you wonder if they ever check them! But they are good at sending out a replacement copy.


Wow, you guys still get DVD's from Netflicks? I just download the rental either from Amazon, Fios, or Vudu. And *I'm* usually the technological dinosaur. Lol!

V


----------

