# Anyone else obsessed with Glenn Gould at the moment?



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

Since some months ago I literally can't stop listening to Gould's Bach recordings. I'm now convinced he is the greatest pianist that ever lived. He's just pure genius. I think his revolutionary philosophy for playing Bach is ultimately a mixture of clear and dry sound, and a lot of analysis of Bach's music together with plenty of creativity, all of that, I believe, results in an extremely pure and satisfying way to experience Bach's polyphony.

I've been trying to find current pianists that take a similar approach towards playing Bach but I haven't found anything satisfying. Of course I was very interested when I read that the pianist Víkingur Ólafsson was called “Iceland’s Glenn Gould”, and when hearing some of his Bach recordings I sensed a little bit of Gould influence, however, after seeing him in a video using the sustaining pedal while playing the WTC Prelude and Fugue in E Minor I think he either totally misunderstands Gould's style or is not interested in it. Of course, András Schiff and Angela Hewitt, however admirable, are completely different from Gould.

I could go on and on. 

What do you think about Glenn Gould?


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

If you use the Advanced Search on the from on the forum, put in Glenn Gould you get a lot of topics 
This is one:
https://www.talkclassical.com/32917-people-who-dislike-glenn.html?highlight=Glenn+Gould


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Arrau1233 said:


> Since some months ago I literally can't stop listening to Gould's Bach recordings. I'm now convinced he is the greatest pianist that ever lived. He's just pure genius. I think his revolutionary philosophy for playing Bach is ultimately a mixture of clear and dry sound, and a lot of analysis of Bach's music together with plenty of creativity, all of that, I believe, results in an extremely pure and satisfying way to experience Bach's polyphony.


I love a lot of Gould's playing, and yes the clarity is great, but...sometimes he seems to want to be different just for the sake of being different. Clear playing though was hardly "revolutionary". Rosalyn Tureck was there before him and frankly I prefer Tureck's recordings.


> I've been trying to find current pianists that take a similar approach towards playing Bach but I haven't found anything satisfying.


But then no pianist probably wants to sound just like Glenn Gould, although any pianist playing Bach today is going to be influenced by Gould to a certain extent. I think among living pianists Perahia and Schiff are just as "musical" and sensitive, probably more so. The one complaint I've always felt about Gould's playing is that it often seemed too mechanical and cold.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Arrau1233 said:


> Since some months ago I literally can't stop listening to Gould's Bach recordings. I'm now convinced he is the greatest pianist that ever lived. He's just pure genius. I think his revolutionary philosophy for playing Bach is ultimately a mixture of clear and dry sound, and a lot of analysis of Bach's music together with plenty of creativity, all of that, I believe, results in an extremely pure and satisfying way to experience Bach's polyphony.
> 
> I've been trying to find current pianists that take a similar approach towards playing Bach but I haven't found anything satisfying. Of course I was very interested when I read that the pianist Víkingur Ólafsson was called "Iceland's Glenn Gould", and when hearing some of his Bach recordings I sensed a little bit of Gould influence, however, after seeing him in a video using the sustaining pedal while playing the WTC Prelude and Fugue in E Minor I think he either totally misunderstands Gould's style or is not interested in it. Of course, András Schiff and Angela Hewitt, however admirable, are completely different from Gould.
> 
> ...


It's nice to see someone express such an admiration of Glenn Gould, without any reservations at all. I feel the same way. The only similar figure I can think of is Sviatoslav Richter, a contemporary of Gould's and who shared a mutual respect. The recording I'm thinking of which shows this similarity is Richter's recording of Handel's Keyboard Suites.










I of course love Gould's Bach. His slow, profound interpretation of the Sinfonia No. 9 in F minor (posted below) stands alone; no other pianist takes it this slow, and by comparison it sounds like they're typing.

I like Gould's Mozart, and any "fantasy" pieces he recorded. His versions of modern music are great as well; Schoenberg's piano works, Hindemith, and Berg's Opus 1 Sonata.

I've heard all the criticisms, and am now immune to them. A pianist like Glenn Gould only comes along every millennium or so, if the genetics are right.

Has anybody heard the big Complete Columbia Recordings box? The cost is too prohibitive for me at this time. Is the mastering really better? I read that the source tapes used are different than previous tapes, and are the originals.











BTW. you can hear one of the piano keys 'stutter' from the way Gould had the action radically adjusted to make the piano more like a harpsichord.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

millionrainbows said:


> ...
> I've heard all the criticisms, and am now immune to them. A pianist like Glenn Gould only comes along every millennium or so, if the genetics are right.
> ...


Well that's hard to say, given that the piano has only been around 300 years or so.  Gould was a unique character for sure.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

As far as genetics go--I mean, if we include odd type of behaviors that make up the total person, then all his eccentricities add to his musical makeup. One Glenn Gould is enough. Let other performers have their say.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

asdasfasadscsdjajdasjhdjasdjashdasd


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Sometimes he can seem really emotionally detached from the music, as in his Moonlight sonata (only heard the first movement), and Bach's prelude in C.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

consuono said:


> I love a lot of Gould's playing, and yes the clarity is great, but...sometimes he seems to want to be different just for the sake of being different. Clear playing though was hardly "revolutionary". Rosalyn Tureck was there before him and frankly I prefer Tureck's recordings.


I have never heard of her before, I'm now listening to some of her recordings, very interesting, thank you.

I do agree with what you wrote about Gould wanting to be different just for the sake of being different, but only if you are talking about his recordings of Mozart, Beethoven or Romantic composers, not Bach. I think that is because he wasn't very interested in those composers, maybe he considered them inferior. That's why I prefer other pianists when it comes to them.



consuono said:


> But then no pianist probably wants to sound just like Glenn Gould, although any pianist playing Bach today is going to be influenced by Gould to a certain extent. I think among living pianists Perahia and Schiff are just as "musical" and sensitive, probably more so. The one complaint I've always felt about Gould's playing is that it often seemed too mechanical and cold.


I admire Perahia and Schiff very much, but don't you think that Gould's recordings display Bach's polyphony more? I feel like when I'm listening to Schiff or Perahia I'm hearing 4 voices mixed together while with Gould it's each voice separately moving forward.

About complaints, I do think that sometimes Gould played Bach too quickly. Like some preludes and Fugues from the WTC, Book II (with the exception of the Fugue in C-Sharp Minor, of course :lol.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

It's indeed incredible. I have the Richter recordings of the Händel Suites, but haven't listened to them yet, now I can't wait.

What other slow and reflective recordings of Gould do you enjoy? I still have a lot to listen to, but for example the Contrapunctus I and XIV from the Art of Fugue comes to mind. Gould plays them so profoundly and reflectively. Shame that he didn't record the complete Art of Fugue.

What else do you know about Gould's piano? I'm very interested in it and in why it sounded like it did, because I feel like a big part of his style comes from the particular piano that he chose. Also I feel like the microphones were put very close to the strings when they were recording.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

Phil loves classical said:


> Sometimes he can seem really emotionally detached from the music, as in his Moonlight sonata (only heard the first movement), and Bach's prelude in C.


I don't think he really liked Beethoven or Mozart very much, which is why he may sound emotionally detached from the music in that case, but not with Bach IMO.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

consuono said:


> I love a lot of Gould's playing, and yes the clarity is great, but...sometimes he seems to want to be different just for the sake of being different. Clear playing though was hardly "revolutionary". Rosalyn Tureck was there before him and frankly I prefer Tureck's recordings.
> 
> Never heard of her, I'm now hearing some of her recordings, very interesting, thank you.
> 
> ...


I admire Perahia and Schiff very much, but don't you think that Gould is better at displaying Bach's polyphony? In my case when I listen to Perahia or Schiff I feel like I'm listening to 4 voices mixed together while with Gould it's each voice separately move forward.

About complaints, I do think that sometimes Gould played Bach too quickly, like in some Preludes and Fugues from the WTC, Book II.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

consuono said:


> I love a lot of Gould's playing, and yes the clarity is great, but...sometimes he seems to want to be different just for the sake of being different. Clear playing though was hardly "revolutionary". Rosalyn Tureck was there before him and frankly I prefer Tureck's recordings.


Never heard of her, I'm now hearing some of her recordings, very interesting, thank you.

I agree with what you said about playing differently just for the sake of being different, but only if you are talking about his interpretations of Mozart, Beethoven or Romantic composers, which he had little interest in. I prefer other pianists in that case.



> But then no pianist probably wants to sound just like Glenn Gould, although any pianist playing Bach today is going to be influenced by Gould to a certain extent. I think among living pianists Perahia and Schiff are just as "musical" and sensitive, probably more so. The one complaint I've always felt about Gould's playing is that it often seemed too mechanical and cold.


I admire Perahia and Schiff very much, but don't you think that Gould is better at displaying Bach's polyphony? In my case when I listen to Perahia or Schiff I feel like I'm listening to 4 voices mixed together while with Gould it's each voice separately move forward.

About complaints, I do think that sometimes Gould played Bach too quickly, like in some Preludes and Fugues from the WTC, Book II.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Glenn Gould is _the_ guy who converted me once and for all from a rock, rap, soul, jazz, metal & electronic fan to the die-hard classical music guy that I am today. There was something about his approach to music making that spoke to me in a way that no other classical artists could have. There is something "punk rock" to him-aggressive, antiestablishment, contrarian-that really spoke to me. You can just tell that he rubbed a lot of people the wrong way on his way to building his immense legacy. He is far from my favorite pianist today, but still he is absolute top-tier for me, and I'll always have him to thank for "breaking through" for me and getting me started on a whirlwind of a journey through the massive world of classical music.

My favorite recordings of his are Goldberg '55 (the one that started it all for me), Brahms 10 Intermezzi (perhaps the greatest thing he's ever done), & Schoenberg op.11. I also really like his Hindemith and his Beethoven op.31 sonatas. I'm not so big on his Mozart but it has its fans.

@OP... re: Vikingur Olafsson, it's not like _he_ is going around calling himself the Icelandic Glenn Gould, that's just a label the press has slapped on him. I'm sure he's not consciously emulating Gould's style and his recordings prove that. That being said, I'm of the opinion that he's nothing special.


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

I'm not anti-Gould at all, but I've never been able to deal with his extraneous vocalizations, which make me feel like I'm in the middle of a nightmare. Also, I'm a HIP and harpsichord guy, so I listen to Bach on that instrument. But recently I've gotten interested in Víkingur Ólafsson, who has his own vision and doesn't seem to me to imitate Gould, yet I now feel like I want to revisit Gould. I'm wondering which recordings are the most free of the vocalizations. I just tried the 1981 _Goldberg Variations_ and had to bail out, though the playing was fascinating.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

consuono said:


> I love a lot of Gould's playing, and yes the clarity is great, but...sometimes he seems to want to be different just for the sake of being different. Clear playing though was hardly "revolutionary". Rosalyn Tureck was there before him and frankly I prefer Tureck's recordings.


Never heard of her, I'm now hearing some of her recordings, very interesting, thank you.

I agree with what you said about playing differently just for the sake of being different, but only if you are talking about his interpretations of Mozart, Beethoven or Romantic composers, which he had little interest in. I prefer other pianists in that case.



> But then no pianist probably wants to sound just like Glenn Gould, although any pianist playing Bach today is going to be influenced by Gould to a certain extent. I think among living pianists Perahia and Schiff are just as "musical" and sensitive, probably more so. The one complaint I've always felt about Gould's playing is that it often seemed too mechanical and cold.


I admire Perahia and Schiff very much, but don't you think that Gould is better at displaying Bach's polyphony? In my case when I listen to Perahia or Schiff I feel like I'm listening to 4 voices mixed together while with Gould it's each voice separately move forward.

About complaints, I do think that sometimes Gould played Bach too quickly, like in some Preludes and Fugues from the WTC, Book II.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Arrau1233 said:


> It's indeed incredible. I have the Richter recordings of the Händel Suites, but haven't listened to them yet, now I can't wait.
> 
> What other slow and reflective recordings of Gould do you enjoy? I still have a lot to listen to, but for example the Contrapunctus I and XIV from the Art of Fugue comes to mind. Gould plays them so profoundly and reflectively. Shame that he didn't record the complete Art of Fugue.
> 
> What else do you know about Gould's piano? I'm very interested in it and in why it sounded like it did, because I feel like a big part of his style comes from the particular piano that he chose. Also I feel like the microphones were put very close to the strings when they were recording.


I know that he liked an old Chickering.He liked certain model Steinways. I got most of this from reading the Columbia LP liner notes, if you can find them.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Some of you know already I'm a Glenn Gould fan. One who actually hums along when listening to Gould play, or to his handful of compositions, my favorite of which remains his "So You Want To Write A Fugue?" to which I sing along. You can find his original music on the album _Glenn Gould: The Composer_ (Sony Classical ‎- SK 47184) which features, among other pieces, a Madrigal, a String Quartet, a Sonata for Bassoon and Piano, and an unfinished Piano Sonata.









My devotion shows as well by my current Gould disc collection. A few years back I invested in the mega-box _Glenn Gould Remastered - The Complete Columbia Album Collection_ (Sony Classical ‎- 88875032222), 81 CDs, even though I had most of the material from its original release. But the word "remastered" sold me on the set. Afterall, maybe the humming was even clearer in the remastered set, and with Gould you get two performances, the one he plays and the one he hums, and I don't want to miss a thing.









A real favorite disc of Gould's in my collection is his _The Young Maverick / Le Jeune Original_ (CBC Records ‎- PSCD20306) a six disc collection with a set of _Goldberg Variations_ and other Bach works, Beethoven concertos and sonatas and other works, and even music from the 2nd Viennese School -- you know, those guys Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern. These are Canadian broadcast recordings. Special stuff!









I especially like the cover of that disc set. It shows Gould in his famous chair.

There's no finer way to experience Glenn Gould's music than to have your own special chair.









I found a somewhat look-alike at a flea market a while back, paid the two dollars, brought it home, sawed off a couple inches of the legs, and outfitted it with an old, worn stadium cushion with the logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs still (barely) visible. Now I lounge on the chair in front of my stereo speakers whenever I listen to a Glenn Gould disc. Really, there's nothing like the experience. When you really get down low, like Gould did when he played, you can actually soak in the vibes so much better. In any case, it works for me!

Okay, okay … I may be fibbing a bit in one section of this post. But I _do_ like Glenn Gould!


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

Wow, just wow. So nice to know that there are other Glenn Gould addicts in this world. Thank you.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

millionrainbows said:


> I know that he liked an old Chickering.He liked certain model Steinways. I got most of this from reading the Columbia LP liner notes, if you can find them.


I sometimes wonder if GG would be a big fan of digital pianos today with their customization possibilities.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

SONNET CLV said:


> Some of you know already I'm a Glenn Gould fan. One who actually hums along when listening to Gould play, or to his handful of compositions, my favorite of which remains his "So You Want To Write A Fugue?" to which I sing along. You can find his original music on the album _Glenn Gould: The Composer_ (Sony Classical ‎- SK 47184) which features, among other pieces, a Madrigal, a String Quartet, a Sonata for Bassoon and Piano, and an unfinished Piano Sonata.
> 
> View attachment 137917
> 
> ...


Now that's what I call a post! You cheered up my day no end. I love Glenn's playing so much. So much so that I spent an afternoon of my honeymoon in a record shop in Edinburgh that had some Gould recordings that I didn't have at the time. I'm not sure my new bride was terribly impressed!


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

I should point out that this was back in 1975! We are almost back on speaking terms. :lol:


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

I'd say that my two favorite concert pianists are Glenn Gould and Vladimir Horowitz, though as I understand it their approaches as musicians poles apart, and I read once where Gould told friends that he really disliked Horowitz's approach. I also like Rudolf Serkin. Then again, my tastes are sort of stuck stuck in the 1980s and those budget Columbia and RCA reissues that I first purchased on LP and featured those luminaries, though Gould was already no longer with us, and Horowitz and Serkin were elderly (albeit still recording on DG) at the time.

That is not to say that there aren't great concert pianist around today such as Lang Lang, Yuja Wang, and Khatia Buniatishvili; it's just that Gould, Horowitz and Serkin were the ones that I happened to hear first and it was through them that I got to know the classical piano repertoire.

Someone here indicated that Gould didn't like Mozart and had mixed feelings on Beethoven, and while that may be true, I find his interpretations of the Mozart and Beethoven sonatas to be the most original and interesting. While Gould's Bach is legendary, he also did very good in Brahms, Richard Strauss, Hindemith, and Schoenberg. Even though Gould seemed to avoid the really pretty music of the High Romantic Era (most of Chopin, Schumann, and Mendelssohn), he made a wonderful recording of Grieg's _Sonata_. Likewise, Gould avoided much of the Russian repertoire, some Scraibin and one or two things by Shostakovich and Prokofiev, with probably by Tchaikovsky or Rachmaninoff. He did, however, do a handful of Debussy and Ravel, and did them quite well, especially Ravel's _La Valse_. While coughing, sneezing and sniffling from a live audience can ruin a recording for me, Gould's humming and singing, never bothered me. The first time I played a Gould recording, it sounded like a ghost to me, and then I thought there might be something wrong with my stereo, or maybe I was hallucinating; so I was relieved to learn that, no, it's just something Gould did while he was playing.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Barbebleu said:


> Now that's what I call a post! You cheered up my day no end. I love Glenn's playing so much. So much so that I spent an afternoon of my honeymoon in a record shop in Edinburgh that had some Gould recordings that I didn't have at the time. I'm not sure my new bride was terribly impressed!





Barbebleu said:


> I should point out that this was back in 1975! We are almost back on speaking terms. :lol:


I just hope you didn't marry her because you thought she _resembled_ Glenn Gould. In that case, I'd feel sorry for the both of you.

All the best ....


----------



## Caryatid (Mar 28, 2020)

Gould was certainly one of the most talented pianists ever, but he had poor taste. His iconoclastic philosophy of music (the Emperor Concerto is "banal") may be compelling, but at the end of the day it is nonsense. Nor do I like the unpleasant custom pianos he took to using. I prefer his early live recordings, when he was still somewhat constrained by convention.

Here's fun:


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

SONNET CLV said:


> There's no finer way to experience Glenn Gould's music than to have your own special chair.
> 
> View attachment 137920


That chair looks like a wedgie waiting to happen! :lol:


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Caryatid said:


> Gould was certainly one of the most talented pianists ever, but he had poor taste.


Like Charlie the Tuna, I don't want a pianist with good taste; I want a pianist who tastes good! :lol:


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I'm afraid I think that there must be something unhealthy about Gould because he seems to cause monomania and obsession. He was a genius and made many excellent records and he was unique. He could also be a bit hit and miss. An obsession with him strikes me as a little like an obsession with Karajan - it is harmful if it stops you hearing the merits of other great performers.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I used to dislike Gould's interpretations, his humming exacerbated this significantly. But I've come to enjoy some of his Bach, I can even appreciate some of his eccentricities. I've never had an obsession though, and I still don't consider him my preferred performer for any music in particular.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> I'm afraid I think that there must be something *unhealthy* about Gould because he seems to cause *monomania and obsession*. He was a genius and made many excellent records and he was unique. He could also be a bit hit and miss. An *obsession* with him strikes me as a little like an *obsession* with Karajan - it is *harmful *if it stops you hearing the merits of other great performers.


Oh, stop it, Enthusiast, and let me go ahead and self-destruct! :lol: When I get the "big box," you'll probably have to send the paramedics!


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

tdc said:


> I used to dislike Gould's interpretations, his humming exacerbated this significantly. But I've come to enjoy some of his Bach, I can even appreciate some of his eccentricities. I've never had an obsession though, and I still don't consider him my preferred performer for any music in particular.


Gee, you've got such a balanced and healthy outlook! I wish I could be normal like other people! I will definitely include this information in my recommendation of you to the accounting office.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

millionrainbows said:


> I wish I could be normal like other people!


Let's face it MR, never going to happen.

Anyway what on earth makes you think that anyone who posts on TC is remotely "normal". Surely it's our lack of normality that keeps us here day after livelong day. :lol:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Barbebleu said:


> Let's face it MR, never going to happen.
> 
> Anyway what on earth makes you think that anyone who posts on *TC is remotely "normal".* Surely it's our lack of normality that keeps us here day after livelong day. :lol:


Normal? Who's not normal? It's everyone else who's not normal surely! :lol:

As the old joke goes:

As a senior citizen was driving down the freeway, his car phone rang. Answering, he heard his wife's voice urgently warning him, "Herman, I just heard on the news that there's a car going the wrong way on 280. Please be careful!"
"One?" said Herman, "It's not just one car. It's hundreds of them!" :lol:


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I listened to Gould's '55 Goldberg's a while ago and I really liked it. Then I watched him do a Bach Partita on youtube, and it sounded good to me, it was interesting watching him conduct his own playing in places and attempt to vibrato the piano keys.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

millionrainbows said:


> Oh, stop it, Enthusiast, and let me go ahead and self-destruct! :lol: When I get the "big box," you'll probably have to send the paramedics!


You could always try Gould rehab.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> You could always try Gould rehab.


Hi, I'm millionrainbows, and I am a Glenn Gouldaholic.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

I listened to Gould playing a couple of Mozart sonatas. It has been some time and my first impression was he was playing it as if Bach wrote it. The problem with this is that a performer has to be able to be interchangeable with the composer they are playing and in this case, it was Mozart. It was OK but this type of performance cannot rise to the best of them when there are so many good ones out there.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Gould’s Brahms disc is one of the greatest piano albums of all time IMO. Shows he really could be a true poet of the piano when he wanted - I just want to wallow in his playing. His treatment of the counterpoint is a revelation.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

tdc said:


> I listened to Gould's '55 Goldberg's a while ago and I really liked it. Then I watched him do a Bach Partita on youtube, and it sounded good to me, it was interesting watching him conduct his own playing in places and attempt to vibrato the piano keys.


It's so great watching him play, one gets to understand the performance better.

This fugue is glorious, the way he sort of jumps at the end when he accentuates the notes is so satisfying to me.


----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)




----------



## Arrau1233 (Jun 12, 2020)

Sorry (I'm new to this)


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I find him, his playing, and his singing (or moaning) repellent.


----------



## Superflumina (Jun 19, 2020)

EdwardBast said:


> I find him, his playing, and his singing (or moaning) repellent.


I agree. He's pretty much the reason I couldn't get into keyboard Bach sooner. Everyone sang his praises and I was befuddled until I discovered other pianists and especially harpsichordists who are much better to my taste.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Not at this moment. I was pretty obsessed in the 1970s.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I just bought the big box.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

He says it at 13:15.


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

Glenn Gould's humming is annoying, and so were his so called "eccentricities", which were a very well marketing plan, in a world that focus more on image than art.

He is actually totally anti-Bach in essence. Bach did not care for image, only for his diligent work and producing his amazing music, which became a brilliant milestone of human creation. Gould deprave Bach's art, trying to pass the image of a "eccentric genius pianist", humming, showing that ugly broken chair and making stupid videos singing to animals, becoming more of a character than a true messenger of Bach's music.
If he wants to do a work focused on himself, rather than the composer, fine! But do it in the challenging and honest way: by actually composing something good and then may be fine to put his "marketing image" over all it. And not only the easy "OMG I AM SOOOO KRAAAAZY BUY MY RECORDSSSS SEE ME LIIIIVEEE PLAYIN BAAAACCHHH" way.

I might add that I have nothing against Bach played on piano. In fact, I love the piano versions (even if I prefer than on harpsichord), I think they add an interesting character to Bach's music. The problem in my opinion is when an average interpreter so much spoils some of the most incredible musical monuments just to focus on his own image.

He would have no place in Bach's time. He is not worthy of Bach's legacy.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Simplicissimus said:


> I'm not anti-Gould at all, but I've never been able to deal with his extraneous vocalizations...


He is infamous for this, but not even close to the noisiest pianist I have recordings of. That honor probably goes to Friedrich Gulda!

As my home system has gotten better, I notice extraneous performer noise much more, sometimes surprisingly so. Who knew Szell grunted so much on the podium? But oddly enough, though you might think improving fidelity might make Guild's vocalizations more noticeable, for me that hasn't been the case. Other conductors' and pianists' noises bother me much more than his.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

aioriacont said:


> Glenn Gould's humming is annoying, and so were his so called "eccentricities", which were a very well marketing plan, in a world that focus more on image than art.
> 
> He is actually totally anti-Bach in essence. Bach did not care for image, only for his diligent work and producing his amazing music, which became a brilliant milestone of human creation. Gould deprave Bach's art, trying to pass the image of a "eccentric genius pianist", humming, showing that ugly broken chair and making stupid videos singing to animals, becoming more of a character than a true messenger of Bach's music.
> If he wants to do a work focused on himself, rather than the composer, fine! But do it in the challenging and honest way: by actually composing something good and then may be fine to put his "marketing image" over all it. And not only the easy "OMG I AM SOOOO KRAAAAZY BUY MY RECORDSSSS SEE ME LIIIIVEEE PLAYIN BAAAACCHHH" way.
> ...


I don't think that's quite fair. Yes Gould was eccentric, but I don't think it was a marketing act. I think actually he was just an unusual individual. I think there's been speculation over whether he was autistic. I don't think it matters. The thing is Gould could play intricate polyphonic lines beautifully and clearly, as transparent as clear glass sometimes. My gripes about his playing have more to do with the overall effect: sometimes it's too icy and mechanical and sometimes he was kind of wacky in his choices of tempo apparently just to be different. He even said that approaching a piece differently was what being a musician was all about. Well there's good "different" and bad.

All that said, I believe I'd prefer Rosalyn Tureck's recordings as an entire "recorded legacy", although with certain Bach works I do prefer Gould's take (e.g. BWV 831).


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

We often idolize iconoclasts, as long as we don't have to deal with them personally.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Knorf said:


> He is infamous for this, but not even close to the noisiest pianist I have recordings of. That honor probably goes to Friedrich Gulda!
> 
> As my home system has gotten better, I notice extraneous performer noise much more, sometimes surprisingly so. Who knew Szell grunted so much on the podium? But oddly enough, though you might think improving fidelity might make Guild's vocalizations more noticeable, for me that hasn't been the case. Other conductors' and pianists' noises bother me much more than his.


Pianist Fazil Say is a great one for vocalising while he plays. It doesn't bother me personally when a pianist or conductor does this. It gives a feeling that they are inspired and not just going through the motions and that's a price worth paying for a great performance.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

aioriacont said:


> Glenn Gould's humming is annoying, and so were his so called "eccentricities", which were a very well marketing plan, in a world that focus more on image than art.
> 
> He is actually totally anti-Bach in essence. Bach did not care for image, only for his diligent work and producing his amazing music, which became a brilliant milestone of human creation. Gould deprave Bach's art, trying to pass the image of a "eccentric genius pianist", humming, showing that ugly broken chair and making stupid videos singing to animals, becoming more of a character than a true messenger of Bach's music.
> If he wants to do a work focused on himself, rather than the composer, fine! But do it in the challenging and honest way: by actually composing something good and then may be fine to put his "marketing image" over all it. And not only the easy "OMG I AM SOOOO KRAAAAZY BUY MY RECORDSSSS SEE ME LIIIIVEEE PLAYIN BAAAACCHHH" way.
> ...


It's not nice to make fun of retarded people.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Beethoven: Piano Sonata Op. 106 "Hammerklavier"; Glenn Gould, piano & vocals


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Honestly, Glenn Gould is not even in the top 5 of noisiest performers I know. It's baffling to me it's always the first thing people mention about him. Why? I've heard Argerich making more noise! So, wtf?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Yes, I like it when Martha moans.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

aioriacont said:


> Glenn Gould's humming is annoying, and so were his so called "eccentricities", which were a very well marketing plan, in a world that focus more on image than art.
> 
> He is actually totally anti-Bach in essence. Bach did not care for image, only for his diligent work and producing his amazing music, which became a brilliant milestone of human creation. Gould deprave Bach's art, trying to pass the image of a "eccentric genius pianist", humming, showing that ugly broken chair and making stupid videos singing to animals, becoming more of a character than a true messenger of Bach's music.
> If he wants to do a work focused on himself, rather than the composer, fine! But do it in the challenging and honest way: by actually composing something good and then may be fine to put his "marketing image" over all it. And not only the easy "OMG I AM SOOOO KRAAAAZY BUY MY RECORDSSSS SEE ME LIIIIVEEE PLAYIN BAAAACCHHH" way.
> ...


I read in a biography of Gould by his one-time producer, Andrew Kazdin, that Gould was well aware of his vocalizations and attempts were made in the studio to reduce the noise. It was, I guess, involuntary. Gould stopped playing live during the 1960s, and saw the studio as the ideal surroundings for classical music making. I think I remember reading that Gould saw live preformances as a kind of blood sport (who can play Mozart's _Turkish Rondo_ the fastest with the audiance just waiting that the artist will mess up the way that sports fans might want to see the players get hurt).


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

aioriacont said:


> Glenn Gould's humming is annoying, and so were his so called "eccentricities", which were a very well marketing plan, in a world that focus more on image than art.
> 
> He is actually totally anti-Bach in essence. Bach did not care for image, only for his diligent work and producing his amazing music, which became a brilliant milestone of human creation. Gould deprave Bach's art, trying to pass the image of a "eccentric genius pianist", humming, showing that ugly broken chair and making stupid videos singing to animals, becoming more of a character than a true messenger of Bach's music.
> If he wants to do a work focused on himself, rather than the composer, fine! But do it in the challenging and honest way: by actually composing something good and then may be fine to put his "marketing image" over all it. And not only the easy "OMG I AM SOOOO KRAAAAZY BUY MY RECORDSSSS SEE ME LIIIIVEEE PLAYIN BAAAACCHHH" way.
> ...


I find the above to be total baloney.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Coach G said:


> ... I think I remember reading that Gould saw live preformances as a kind of blood sport (who can play Mozart's _Turkish Rondo_ the fastest with the audiance just waiting that the artist will mess up the way that sports fans might want to see the players get hurt).


Or the way some go to auto races to see a spectacular crash. I think Gould might've been essentially right about that. It's like what I perceive to be the "competition mindset": music becomes a gymnastics routine and you're seeing who can nail that landing without falling on their butt.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Performers like Gould make classical music performance more interesting, I think. If everyone acted the same way, and attempted never to stray from composers intentions wouldn't that get kind of one dimensional and boring? Gould spices things up. Having a variety of approaches spices things up. Besides if you've got chops like that I think one should be forgiven for some eccentricities. The guy was a genius.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

He had a big personality and wasn’t afraid to take a personal approach to the music, and I admire him for that. I just don’t connect with his personality most of the time, especially in Bach which IMO requires more warmth, flexibility of phrasing, and variety of touch to bring out the human aspects of it rather than just performing it as mechanical academic exercises in counterpoint.


----------



## PierreN (Aug 4, 2013)

Simplicissimus said:


> I'm wondering which recordings are the most free of the vocalizations. I just tried the 1981 _Goldberg Variations_ and had to bail out, though the playing was fascinating.


In that case, the version that's for you is the Zenph Re-performance of Gould's 55 performance. The audio from the original tapes was analysed by computer, turned into a MIDI file, re-performed on a robotic piano and recorded in glorious surround (or stereo). No humming, of course, since that part wasn't MIDI-fied. This was released by Sony in 2007 as a hybrid SACD. This amazing technology has also been used to rejuvenate vintage recordings of Oscar Peterson, Art Tatum and Rachmaninoff.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

> I'm a very conservative listener who takes pride in being very rational and normal. I don't like the way Gould was eccentric and did controversial things, and I don't want to be associated with any of that.


Aha! Just as I suspected!


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I just received the "big box." my my, where to start?


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

millionrainbows said:


> I just received the "big box." my my, where to start?


In the words of Julie Andrews, let's start at the very beginning, a very good place to start!:lol:


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Gould is undoubtably a genius and a heretic. He has transcendetal pianistic skills and impeccable rhythmic precision (no wonder he plays good Prokofiev). He was searching for the abstract, the absolute, the structural perfection in Bach. I think that the dry sound does add to that austere aesthetic of his sound and amplifying the attention to the structure of music.

Víkingur Ólafsson, on the other hand, is very different from Gould, he has a keen ear for tone/color in his Bach. I don't think his play as "thoughtful" or as "inspired" as Gould. I wouldn't associate the two in anyway.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Speak of the devil, I'm listening to Gould play Scriabin and Prokofiev from the big box. The book that comes with it is very entertaining.

Gould is very good at Prokofiev, but I can't let go of Barbara Nissman's very romantic readings; also Gary Graffman's muscular "biceps of steel" renderings.


----------



## CC301233 (Jul 14, 2020)

I actually like the piece he wrote that explains the "fugue" process to the uneducated.

It's called "So you want to write a fugue..." I'd post the video itself but, apparently, I can't post videos yet....


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

I don't 'get' GG. His extreme tempos, rediculous vocalisations, and type-writer approach to playing Bach almost comes across as post-modern 'irony' to me.

And his performances of Mozart and Beethoven make me think he's trolling.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

RogerWaters said:


> I don't 'get' GG. His extreme tempos, rediculous vocalisations, and type-writer approach to playing Bach almost comes across as post-modern 'irony' to me.
> 
> And his performances of Mozart and Beethoven make me think he's trolling.


You're entitled to opinions like this on a "I Don't Get Glenn Gould" thread, should you decide to start one.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

millionrainbows said:


> You're entitled to opinions like this on a "I Don't Get Glenn Gould" thread, should you decide to start one.


Are you available for children's parties?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I wonder if he'd have continued sitting in that crummy chair if he'd lived for another 25-30 years?


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

starthrower said:


> I wonder if he'd have continued sitting in that crummy chair if he'd lived for another 25-30 years?


Most definitely without a doubt on that squeaky chair.

Bernstein was really annoyed by him adjusting the chair when they collaborated.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

^I always find the infamous Gould/Bernstein Brahms 1st concerto, with Lenny delivering the in-person address to the crowd basically saying, “I bear no responsibility for the interpretation you’re about to hear!” pretty amusing.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I kinda have a thing for the chair myself. That's why I collected all of my Glenn Gould on the 2012 editions with the chair icon. And amazingly everyone single one of these arrived in perfect condition with not a broken spindle or cracked case anywhere.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

millionrainbows said:


> You're entitled to opinions like this on a "I Don't Get Glenn Gould" thread, should you decide to start one.


You are a caution!
:lol:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Maybe one of those public domain labels will release a cleaned up box set of Glenn with vocal chords removed so you whiners can buy it.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

As he aged, Glenn Gould would have at least needed a pad for the chair. Your rear gets bonier as you age.

Bernstein? Maybe he made Glenn Gould nervous, and resented it. Well, he payed back Gould *real good,* didn't he?

Ah, Bernstein was a piano player, and was jealous of Gould's ability.

Plus, Gould shed new light on Bach, and this also irked Bernstein, since *HE* was supposed to be the 20th century figure to "shed light on music for the masses," with all his TV shows and lectures.

And Glenn Gould was a *celebrity,* too. Bernstein no doubt resented this.

In short: Bernstein was extremely insecure and narcissistic. Gould had been raised in the extreme isolated North, and had a self-sufficient identity which was the polar opposite of Bernstein's New York, claustrophobic, frantic, over-achieving, competitive, high-strung yankee mentality.

Bernstein wanted to be liked by everyone, and to be in the status quo, belong, and not be controversial. He wanted to suppress any perceivable differences he had *at all costs,* and assimilate completely into the "popular" crowd of New York.

I'm reminded of those horrible, garish socialite portraits that Andy Warhol was doing for money, trying to socially climb and fit in.

Gould was not at all like this.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> Gould is undoubtably a genius and a heretic. He has transcendetal pianistic skills and impeccable rhythmic precision *(no wonder he plays good Prokofiev)*. He was searching for the abstract, the absolute, the structural perfection in Bach. I think that the dry sound does add to that austere aesthetic of his sound and amplifying the attention to the structure of music.
> 
> Víkingur Ólafsson, on the other hand, is very different from Gould, he has a keen ear for tone/color in his Bach. I don't think his play as "thoughtful" or as "inspired" as Gould. I wouldn't associate the two in anyway.


What Prokofiev did he play well?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> As he aged, Glenn Gould would have at least needed a pad for the chair. Your rear gets bonier as you age.
> 
> Bernstein? Was he gay back then? Maybe he made Glenn Gould nervous, and resented it. Well, he payed back Gould *real good,* didn't he?
> 
> ...


Thanks for the analysis, Dr. Fraud.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

It's obvious, when you look at Bernstein compared to Gould. It doesn't take a psychoanalyst to figure it out. Bernstein was so flighty by comparison. Gould was stoic, and secure in his "eccentric" ways (he simply did what he wanted to do).
Bernstein's whole life revolved around New York and his Broadway success of West Side Story, and his attempts to be "hip" and current (dancing gang fights, etc). A real social flower-hopper.

Gould's concern was with serious music, not Broadway stuff, and being "hip."


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

​

​


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

re: Gould and Bernstein

Long ago, I read somewhere how the music critic, Harold Schonberg, castigated Bernstein for the public disclaimer he made prior to collaborating with Gould on the Brahms _Piano Concerto #1_ where Bernstein "disowned" it as Gould's conception. Years later, when that recording was made available on CD, I think taken from a radio broadcast, it featured Lenny's opening remarks, along with the performance, and then a follow-up of a brief interview where Gould explains his side of the story.

What I took away from it was the great respect, admiration, and friendship that must have existed between Gould and Bernstein. I sense that their differences in musical interpretation were expressed with humor and affection, and not a hint of malice. The performance is dynamic, possibly the greatest interpretation of the Brahms _PC #1 _I've have in my vast music collection. I don't listen to it, though, because the sounds of coughing and sniffling from the audience ruin the slow movement.

The Bach _Piano Concerto #1_ featuring Gould with Bernstein and the Columbia Symphony Orchestra is the one to get.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Coach G said:


> re: Gould and Bernstein
> 
> Long ago, I read somewhere how the music critic, Harold Schonberg, castigated Bernstein for the public disclaimer he made prior to collaborating with Gould on the Brahms _Piano Concerto #1_ where Bernstein "disowned" it as Gould's conception. Years later, when that recording was made available on CD, I think taken from a radio broadcast, it featured Lenny's opening remarks, along with the performance, and then a follow-up of a brief interview where Gould explains his side of the story.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the analysis, Dr. Sunshine.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> ​
> 
> ​


I saw Gould play the Prokofiev 7th Sonata on video. He didn't bother to memorize it correctly and left out important melodic notes.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

EdwardBast said:


> I saw Gould play the Prokofiev 7th Sonata on video. He didn't bother to memorize it correctly and left out important melodic notes.


That would not surprise me even if it's on record. I would be cautious comparing this to any Prokofiev specialist (that's why I didn't use the word "great").

His evenness in tone and dynamic (especially his left hand) and his rigorous rhythmic control (and sense of pulse), all contribute to a revelatory and memorable performance of the 7th for me.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

millionrainbows said:


> As he aged, Glenn Gould would have at least needed a pad for the chair. Your rear gets bonier as you age.
> Bernstein? Maybe he made Glenn Gould nervous, and resented it. Well, he payed back Gould *real good,* didn't he?
> Ah, Bernstein was a piano player, and was jealous of Gould's ability.
> Plus, Gould shed new light on Bach, and this also irked Bernstein, since *HE* was supposed to be the 20th century figure to "shed light on music for the masses," with all his TV shows and lectures.
> ...


That's a nice revisionist picture of Gould, the stable, secure person vs. the insecure Bernstein. Gould was an extreme neurotic at best (as per a woman who had a long-term affair with him) and at worst, someone with severe OCD. People with that level of OCD are not ordinarily at peace mentally and can be difficult to work with and have relationships with. He had several strict requirements, actually demands, that made it very difficult for the recording engineers and musicians including the conductor if present.

Though it doesn't give me some special expertise on Gould's mental status, I believe I'm the only one here who saw him play live which included the mittens, the scarf, the chair and sitting very low at the piano.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

DaveM said:


> Though it doesn't give me some special expertise on Gould's mental status, I believe I'm the only one here who saw him play live which included the mittens, the scarf, the chair and sitting very low at the piano.


I don't know the veracity of Lenny's jealousy but Gould clearly suffers from severe OCD. That's what makes his idea of sound so unique. For me, it's a feature, not a bug. There is no need to paint him as the noble radical against the establishment.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Listened to his 1954 Goldbergs last night. Terrific, with less vocalising, but not quite eclipsing his 1955 one. Of course both are essential listening for Gould aficionados as is the 1981 essay.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

consuono said:


> I love a lot of Gould's playing, and yes the clarity is great, but...sometimes he seems to want to be different just for the sake of being different. Clear playing though was hardly "revolutionary". Rosalyn Tureck was there before him and frankly I prefer Tureck's recordings.
> 
> But then no pianist probably wants to sound just like Glenn Gould, although any pianist playing Bach today is going to be influenced by Gould to a certain extent. I think among living pianists Perahia and Schiff are just as "musical" and sensitive, probably more so. The one complaint I've always felt about Gould's playing is that it often seemed too mechanical and cold.


"I love a lot of Gould's playing, and yes the clarity is great, but...sometimes he seems to want to be different just for the sake of being different."

Gould said in more than one interview that the only reason to make a recording for posterity was if you can find something new and original (and valid) in the work (and he often did). This makes so much fundamental sense to me that I don't know why people are confused about his stance. Especially when you look back at the times in which he was talking about, because the new offerings were starting to come out in volume! with the new recording improvements.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Coach G said:


> I'd say that my two favorite concert pianists are Glenn Gould and Vladimir Horowitz, though as I understand it their approaches as musicians poles apart, and I read once where Gould told friends that he really disliked Horowitz's approach. I also like Rudolf Serkin. Then again, my tastes are sort of stuck stuck in the 1980s and those budget Columbia and RCA reissues that I first purchased on LP and featured those luminaries, though Gould was already no longer with us, and Horowitz and Serkin were elderly (albeit still recording on DG) at the time.
> 
> That is not to say that there aren't great concert pianist around today such as Lang Lang, Yuja Wang, and Khatia Buniatishvili; it's just that Gould, Horowitz and Serkin were the ones that I happened to hear first and it was through them that I got to know the classical piano repertoire.
> 
> Someone here indicated that Gould didn't like Mozart and had mixed feelings on Beethoven, and while that may be true, I find his interpretations of the Mozart and Beethoven sonatas to be the most original and interesting. While Gould's Bach is legendary, he also did very good in Brahms, Richard Strauss, Hindemith, and Schoenberg. Even though Gould seemed to avoid the really pretty music of the High Romantic Era (most of Chopin, Schumann, and Mendelssohn), he made a wonderful recording of Grieg's _Sonata_. Likewise, Gould avoided much of the Russian repertoire, some Scraibin and one or two things by Shostakovich and Prokofiev, with probably by Tchaikovsky or Rachmaninoff. He did, however, do a handful of Debussy and Ravel, and did them quite well, especially Ravel's _La Valse_. While coughing, sneezing and sniffling from a live audience can ruin a recording for me, Gould's humming and singing, never bothered me. The first time I played a Gould recording, it sounded like a ghost to me, and then I thought there might be something wrong with my stereo, or maybe I was hallucinating; so I was relieved to learn that, no, it's just something Gould did while he was playing.


Gould recorded some Songs Without Words, but this is a recent find, Mendelssohn's Variations Sérieuses

"This tape was found in Gould's personal belongings by his personal secretary Mr.Ray Roberts. The mystery surrounding this recording goes deep. It was intended for a CBC broadcast but is nowhere to be found in the CBC Archives department, nor is it listed as an actual broadcast. The only mention of a possible date including Variations Sérieuses is February 6, 1961 for a TV show titled "The Subject Is Beethoven" in which Gould played the Eroica Variations, op.35, the Sonata for Cello and piano no.3 in A Minor, op.69 with Leonard Rose and an excerpt of the Mendelssohn Variations.
The reason for the very poor quality of the sound: It was a quarter inch tape badly damaged and obviously not intended for broadcast. The only purpose of releasing it resides in Glenn's exceptional playing of this much admired work. Gould greatly respected Mendelssohn as a composer of orchestral works, not so much his piano output, Variations Sérieuses excepted.
One can only hope that one day with advanced technology this tape will be restored to its original quality.
Gould played Mendelssohn's Variations Sérieuses only 3 times (that we know of) during his public career:
- in Toronto, on March 6, 1949 (he was 16 years old)
- in Hamilton, on November 28, 1956 (he was 24)
- in Spokane, on December 5, 1956 (he was 24)"


https://slippedisc.com/2019/11/unheard-tape-glenn-gould-plays-mendelssohn/


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

If you can’t stand Gould’s vocalizations (doesn’t bother me as much as his actual playing), steer far away from any recording by Fazil Say, who takes the prize for the noisiest humming pianist of the 21st century!


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> If you can't stand Gould's vocalizations (doesn't bother me as much as his actual playing), steer far away from any recording by Fazil Say, who takes the prize for the noisiest humming pianist of the 21st century!


Rudolf Serkin would 'mouth' every prominent note while playing, very quietly. Quite distracting!

Some teachers encourage it. The finger popping/vocalization connection really helps with expression. That's how Gould was taught. While playing he said he didn't realize that he did it very loudly, but his playing would really suffer if he was intent on suppressing it. He also said he would never buy a record with such noise on it. lol 

I don't know if Fazil Say was taught like that, but he probably was. If it's frowned upon early, students will stop because of the embarrassment factor. Gould was oblivious of others from an early age because of his Asperger's Disorder.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> If you can't stand Gould's vocalizations (doesn't bother me as much as his actual playing), steer far away from any recording by Fazil Say, who takes the prize for the noisiest humming pianist of the 21st century!


I have always enjoyed the humming for some reason. Can't say the same about Say though, his pianism left a lot to be desired. I heard him playing one of his own compositions, the Troy sonata, and they sounded like video game music to me.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Rudolf Serkin would 'mouth' every prominent note while playing, very quietly. Quite distracting!
> 
> Some teachers encourage it. The finger popping/vocalization connection really helps with expression. That's how Gould was taught. While playing he said he didn't realize that he did it very loudly, but his playing would really suffer if he was intent on suppressing it. He also said he would never buy a record with such noise on it. lol




Being a long time amateur pianist, I vouch for singing during practice just to get a natural sense of phrasing and breathing, it makes a huge difference if you practice using a metronome. But I would never hum during a performance with friends because it distracts.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Gould was oblivious of others from an early age because of his Asperger's Disorder.


I think this is pure speculation that has never been officially proven.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> I have always enjoyed the humming for some reason. Can't say the same about Say though, his pianism left a lot to be desired. I heard him playing one of his own compositions, the Troy sonata, and they sounded like video game music to me.


I find Say's Mozart sonata cycle to be very creative and interesting even if it is almost as idiosyncratic as Gould (but in a different way).


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I find Say's Mozart sonata cycle to be very creative and interesting even if it is almost as idiosyncratic as Gould (but in a different way).


I don't think Gould was serious about his Mozart. He was mocking it.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> I don't think Gould was serious about his Mozart. He was mocking it.


I think that's probably true, yet when he plays Bach in the same way, people praise him for his brilliance. Maybe it's because Bach's intricate counterpoint can sound clearer to some folks when done with that mechanical, analytical approach - not that I think Bach's music is that at all!


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I think that's probably true, yet when he plays Bach in the same way, people praise him for his brilliance. Maybe it's because Bach's intricate counterpoint can sound clearer to some folks when done with that mechanical, analytical approach - not that I think Bach's music is that at all!


You are right. Playing Mozart like that is madness. Mozart Sonata requires pristine techniques, mercurial sensibility, and the lightness of touch. The room for interpretation for Mozart is very fine. Personally speaking, the less I interpret it, the better it sounds. Any technical imperfection is amplified in Mozart. Mozart sonatas are really hard, definitely harder than whatever Liszt wrote (they always sound "good").

Gould's approach of Bach reveals the skeletal structures of Bach, his tone color and rhythms are completely even. For me, the counterpoint aspect of Bach is mathematical and divine, a structural, eternal beauty, not a humanistic beauty (such as a tuneful melody). He is not completely mechanical though, his phrasing is just more subtle and many people find this moving too. My father only got into Bach because he liked Gould's play (he can hear things that can't be heard in other recordings).


----------



## Ich muss Caligari werden (Jul 15, 2020)

I've been a Gould fan for many years, even if that admiration falls short of deification. I do think your very word choice suggests an answer to your predicament: with Gould the vocalizations are anything but extraneous; they are part and parcel of the man and his music, a necessary emotive component of bringing his wizardry to listeners. Why not regard it as a form of intimacy not shared by most other pianists? Anyway, it has never bothered me and instead I have come to appreciate it; his recordings have a human presence I've come to value and appreciate.


----------



## Ich muss Caligari werden (Jul 15, 2020)

That is a real possibility as he regarded Mozart as overrated and something of a note spinner (in that he's not alone, critic Norman Lebrecht et al agree).


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Ich muss Caligari werden said:


> his recordings have a human presence I've come to value and appreciate.


Yeah, I appreciate that humming sometimes so I can be reminded that there is an actual human behind the robotic sounds

Only kidding. I'm expressed my general opinion on Gould plenty enough at this point, and it's been helpful to read in this thread why people like him, which has kind of helped me understand something that I'm utterly baffled by. One question I have, though, is why he chose (if not always, but very frequently) to play with absolutely no dynamic variation or shading. His Bach sounds to me like he thinks he's playing on a harpsichord - he uses a totally even touch without exploiting the unique expressive possibilities of the modern piano. Is this a "historically informed" quirk or just a Gouldian quirk?


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Yeah, I appreciate that humming sometimes so I can be reminded that there is an actual human behind the robotic sounds
> 
> Only kidding. I'm expressed my general opinion on Gould plenty enough at this point, and it's been helpful to read in this thread why people like him, which has kind of helped me understand something that I'm utterly baffled by. One question I have, though, is why he chose (if not always, but very frequently) to play with absolutely no dynamic variation or shading. His Bach sounds to me like he thinks he's playing on a harpsichord - he uses a totally even touch without exploiting the unique expressive possibilities of the modern piano. Is this a "historically informed" quirk or just a Gouldian quirk?


I am afraid that you have to ask a professional Bach specialist for that. I have an amateur friend who plays Bach on the harpsichord and he likes Gould, so your observation is not far off. He intended it to sound in this way. For many listeners, this enhances the sense of structural unity.

It is also interesting that Bach generally sounds good on a synthesizer, whereas Beethoven or Chopin does not at all. I think this shows that Gould's approach has validity (he still plays very humanistically).


----------



## Ich muss Caligari werden (Jul 15, 2020)

Rest assured, there is something in what you say, Allegro, and yours echoes the voices of some contemporary pianists who have reservations about him, Aimard I think is one. Often, it's other qualities Gould is looking for, propulsion among them as well as a pointed and bold upfrontness that bespeaks, arguably, pop music more than classical; I have always suspected those qualities to be what endeared him to his listeners, so modern and refreshing did they (still do) seem. There's much to discover in Gould (besides his idiosyncracies) not the least of which is his sense of play and the sheer exuberance of what he did.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> I don't think Gould was serious about his Mozart. He was mocking it.


Not according to what he said.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I find Say's Mozart sonata cycle to be very creative and interesting even if it is almost as idiosyncratic as Gould (but in a different way).


Yes, to me they're refreshing and exciting.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> I am afraid that you have to ask a professional Bach specialist for that. I have an amateur friend who plays Bach on the harpsichord and he likes Gould, so your observation is not far off. He intended it to sound in this way. For many listeners, this enhances the sense of structural unity.
> 
> It is also interesting that Bach generally sounds good on a synthesizer, whereas Beethoven or Chopin does not at all. I think this shows that Gould's approach has validity (he still plays very humanistically).


It seemed to me whatever he played he looked at the score and made it his. He wasn't concerned about who composed it or what recent 'schools' have layered upon layer upon layer.. That's the way I play too (I'm the one playing and not some person from centuries ago), but I'm no world class player.. We can respect the great creators without being locked into the schools of playing that arose long after they died. The schools might be 'correct', but they might not be correct at all. The score's the thing.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Yes, to me they're refreshing and exciting.


His recent Beethoven cycle is lacking, in an extremely competitive field. I have no doubt Say, as a composer, is very musical and inspired.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> It seemed to me whatever he played he looked at the score and made it his. He wasn't concerned about who composed it or what recent 'schools' have layered upon layer upon layer.. That's the way I play too (I'm the one playing and not some person from centuries ago), but I'm no world class player.. We can respect the great creators without being locked into the schools of playing that arose long after they died. The school might be 'correct', but they might not.


Glenn Gould comes off as an intellectual pianist so I do think he has a rather deep understanding of sound and Bach's music, not just his pianistic techniques or style. I thought the piano schools (French, German, Russian) more or less died in the current era. Pianists are trained using all sorts of different methods (it's also important to avoid injuries).


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> His recent Beethoven cycle is lacking, in an extremely competitive field. I have no doubt Say, as a composer, is very musical and inspired.


I'm happy that Gould recorded Chopin's third sonata, for example. I don't enjoy listening to it, but I want to hear all interpretations by the superb players. The same with the recordings of F. Say. I'd like to hear why they did what they did, but that's rarely available.

We have a few insights from Gould's many interviews (most of them fully scripted by him, isn't that odd..). The Chopin doesn't sound like Chopin. He played the score dryly, continually looking for contrapuntal snippets, and accenting them. It detracts from the beauty, he wasn't after lyrical beauty. He played for himself first, and then the composer, and then the rest of us. He also changed his mind every day. He felt compelled to go back and record that Mozart sonata in C a second time.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> Glenn Gould comes off as an intellectual pianist so I do think he has a rather deep understanding of sound and Bach's music, not just his pianistic techniques or style. I thought the piano schools (French, German, Russian) more or less died in the current era. Pianists are trained using all sorts of different methods (it's also important to avoid injuries).


His view of Bach is colored by his study of the earlier composers. He said more than once that his favorite composer was Orlando Gibbons. He gave 2 or 3 reasons.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> I don't think Gould was serious about his Mozart. He was mocking it.


Glenn Gould's Mozart sonata cycle is frankly awful. He said that Mozart died too old rather than too young. We could say the same about Gould. One just has to wonder whether he was actually mad in that they simply awful interpretations found their way into the market. They do not do him any credit. They are just perverse.They are just saying that he didn't like the music and he went out of his way to make it appear bad. Mind you I do you have a recording of him playing a Mozart sonata when he was younger and it is good. Why he had to adopt this idiosyncratic and frankly obnoxious approach I do not know


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> "I love a lot of Gould's playing, and yes the clarity is great, but...sometimes he seems to want to be different just for the sake of being different."
> 
> Gould said in more than one interview that the only reason to make a recording for posterity was if you can find something new and original (and valid) in the work (and he often did). This makes so much fundamental sense to me that I don't know why people are confused about his stance. Especially when you look back at the times in which he was talking about, because the new offerings were starting to come out in volume! with the new recording improvements.


The key word is "valid". Different for the sake of different is look-at-me pointlessness.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I find Say's Mozart sonata cycle to be very creative and interesting even if it is almost as idiosyncratic as Gould (but in a different way).


Oh, I think it is one of the best surveys of the Mozart sonatas. For me it is up there with Gulda and Arrau and preferred to others like Uchida and Pires. He may do one or two unusual things but the spirit of Mozart is very strong in that set. His Beethoven set is also interesting and has good things in it - and his humming is louder than ever - but it is not quite the success that his Mozart set is.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> His recent Beethoven cycle is lacking, in an extremely competitive field. I have no doubt Say, as a composer, is very musical and inspired.


You have it the wrong way around for me. As a pianist he is almost always at least interesting and sometimes inspired. But his compositions don't impress me at all.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

consuono said:


> The key word is "valid". Different for the sake of different is look-at-me pointlessness.


It only had to be a valid interpretation for Gould himself (and apparently only for that one day in the studio). He was the star - he was the one selling records he was the one propping up the classical department at the time. Many people just bought the recordings because of all the curious criticisms - and if they didn't understand music themselves they were even more captivated it seems, when they tried to understand what the significance was in each of the criticisms from both sides (and of course his extra musical quirkiness).

Added
If he had been just another whizzkid from Toronto, played a few concertos and then just faded away like so many, it seems like (among my friends) musicians today would be thinking in more conservative terms, especially when they came into the studio.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Luchesi said:


> His view of Bach is colored by his study of the earlier composers. He said more than once that his favorite composer was Orlando Gibbons. He gave 2 or 3 reasons.


There is of course the superb record of Gibbons and Byrd and Sweelinck


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

DavidA said:


> There is of course the superb record of Gibbons and Byrd and Sweelinck


Yes. they're not played to the liking of harpsichordists and critics. They really disliked the style. But it's actually easier on modern ears.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

DavidA said:


> Glenn Gould's Mozart sonata cycle is frankly awful. He said that Mozart died too old rather than too young. We could say the same about Gould. One just has to wonder whether he was actually mad in that they simply awful interpretations found their way into the market. They do not do him any credit. They are just perverse.They are just saying that he didn't like the music and he went out of his way to make it appear bad. Mind you I do you have a recording of him playing a Mozart sonata when he was younger and it is good. Why he had to adopt this idiosyncratic and frankly obnoxious approach I do not know


He was under contract to record them all and it was a short enough project (compared to other complete cycles). He was famous enough at that point for it to be lucrative for him. He needed to make a living. He actually worried about being a flash-the-pan, or at least he mentioned it. He was investing his extra money while he could.

He was 'way beyond the obviousness of the Mozart sonatas.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> It only had to be a valid interpretation for Gould himself (and apparently only for that one day in the studio). He was the star - he was the one selling records he was the one propping up the classical department at the time. ...


I wouldn't go that far. And since I was one of those buying the records it had to be valid for me too. With Gould sometimes it was, sometimes it wasn't.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

consuono said:


> I wouldn't go that far. And since I was one of those buying the records it had to be valid for me too. With Gould sometimes it was, sometimes it wasn't.


You knew enough before you bought the LPs back then?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> You knew enough before you bought the LPs back then?


No, of course it was after hearing them and then learning more about the music itself. As I said, some Gould I love, some I don't. I was at first a huge fan of the 1955 Goldbergs, now that recording of the work is one of my least favorite.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

consuono said:


> No, of course it was after hearing them and then learning more about the music itself. As I said, some Gould I love, some I don't. I was at first a huge fan of the 1955 Goldbergs, now that recording of the work is one of my least favorite.


Yes, we change through the years. Critics say that Gould was a one-trick pony, because he was so predictable you expect the surprises. Oh well, few people stay pleased with pieces. Music is transient and only most relevant at the time you first enjoyed it. There's a peak there. Especially with Gould. When I first heard him I was happy that I was playing the Mozart sonatas, because that smoothed it over for me, and yet, all I had heard was the Barenboim K310 and the Cm, and I didn't want to imitate his (Barenboim's) style. I'd rather be a little bit idiosyncratic.


----------

