# Perferred Style of Conducting: Show vs. Analytics



## Rondo (Jul 11, 2007)

*Show vs Analytics*

Now that Chi_Town's _Survivor_ game  is getting down to the wire, some 'true colors' are beginning to show concerning whom TC members like best and what style(s) of interpretation/conducting they prefer.

On the one hand, there are those whose conducting emphasizes the overall enjoyment of the piece by experimenting with tempos, dynamics, etc.. Sometimes even adding in or changing percussion instruments or making enough changes to the score so as to be one small step shy of reorchestrating the piece. I am not saying this is necessarily a _bad_ thing. Depending on my mood, I am often craving a very boisterous Bruckner 8 or Mahler 2. 

On the other hand, there are those who give more scrutiny to the details of the score, and often bring out certain small aspects of the score which are often clouded over by other less meticulous interpretations. Often, the goal here is to interpret the piece according to how it is _meant_ to be performed, as opposed to how it _could_ be performed.

On the _third_ hand, there are those who find a "middle" ground. In some places, more attention is given to detail and the idiosyncrasies of the score, while at other times there is more elasticity.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Certainly, many of the readers of this thread have already placed names under each of the above categories. 

Which style do you prefer? Feel free to give some names and examples of their conducting.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

Im not the kind of listener who buys many different interpretations of the same piece, so I may not have much to offer in that respect.

However if you market something with a name, i.e. Dvoraks 9th symphony, I think it is important to be as close as possible to the composers original intentions. If the conductor decides to add his own details to it, it becomes a slightly different piece and while this may be good for variety or as an alternative - I think to really enjoy the piece itself you need a historically accurate interpretation, with as little interpretation as possible really.


----------



## Zuo17 (Jul 8, 2009)

> Im not the kind of listener who buys many different interpretations of the same piece, so I may not have much to offer in that respect.


emiel,

I am exactly in the same position as you are. I don't buy different interpretations of the same piece as well(_why waste that money, when I can buy other CDs?_) For me, I think the downside to that, is I get too attached to one recording or interpretation of a piece. I get so attached, that I sometimes refuse to listen to a different recording, because I'm afraid or I get too disgusted by the difference. *Case in point:* I listened to a Ricardo Mutti recording of Vivaldi's _Four Seasons._ I enjoyed it, I liked the tempos and the articulation of the strings. However, when I heard a different recording with the strings slurring in some parts, I didn't like it.

I would consider the conducting of the second choice. However, I wouldn't want to depend too much on the details of the score, since the score could not even be the exact thing the original composer had in mind. So often, the music copyists and publishers take a score and without even having the experience of playing it in an orchestra, they change details or add things into the score. This really changes the whole intention of the composer!

Another responsibility that the conductor is responsible for is trying to interpret the piece and play the _"spirit"_ of the music. I find it okay if the conductor does experiment, but not to a degree where it sounds too much like the conductor's piece, rather than _the composer's piece._

I'm a sucker for drama and romance(no, I'm not a girl), so I actually like the conducting style of *Lenny*. Leonard Bernstein has got quite a charisma when conducting, I especially liked his interpretation of Gershwins' _Rhapsody in Blue._ Now, now, I do understand that Bernstein's style should be questioned, since he did all these crazy, outlandish moves that made the audience focus too much on him, rather than on the composer's music. But I like a conducting style with over-exaggerated moves; it shows passion, expression, and freedom.

That's just my humble opinion. I apologize if I've said too much and rambled on about information which might be completely wrong....

Until again,
Zach


----------



## Rondo (Jul 11, 2007)

Zuo17 said:


> Now, now, I do understand that Bernstein's style should be questioned, since he did all these crazy, outlandish moves that made the audience focus too much on him, rather than on the composer's music. But I like a conducting style with over-exaggerated moves; it shows passion, expression, and freedom.


I'm sure many members here have some "guilty pleasures" for often criticized conductors. I am sometimes in the mood for a _unique _performance conducted by those such as Ozawa, Barenboim, or Carlos Kleiber (a recording of Beethoven's Fifth springs immediately to mind). Does that mean I think all of their recordings are the best or quintessential, _NO_!...but I still like them.


----------



## Guest (Jul 11, 2009)

emiellucifuge said:


> i.e. Dvoraks 9th symphony, I think it is important to be as close as possible to the composers original intentions. If the conductor decides to add his own details to it, it becomes a slightly different piece .


But how do we know what those "intentions" were to have been?

The notes on the page remain the same, nothing is removed or added. But a conductor can unlock the potential in those notes which has remained latent. And in doing so he falsifies and changes none of the composer's intentions, because he is simply playing the notes the composer wrote.

Misreadings only occur if a specific rubric of the composer's is ignored or contradicted - a tempo-marking, a dynamic indication etc. Similarly you could claim misinterpretation if a historic style is purposely ignored... for example double-dotting in an C18th "French Overture" movement, which isn't notated, but is nevertheless expected by convention. And all those grim ritardandos in Handel that conductors used to insert, making the music sound like the clockwork engine ran out 16 bars before the end


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

As long as the music that results is good, I don't really mind what is a conductor's style.

Having said that, I've recently been enjoying Ansermet's interpretations of Bartok, probably because he sticks to the point and doesn't really aim to do anything too flamboyant or dramatic. So I quite like the straightforward, no-frills style in that case. It has it's own power & appeal...


----------



## Guest (Jul 13, 2009)

Quite honestly I enjoy most conductors but especially those that take a liberty or two with the score, not to over do it you understand, just enough to make you hear a familiar piece with fresh ears


----------

