# Does classical music need a HIP replacement?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Sir Colin Davis thought so. He was interviewed on his 85th birthday: "He says, 'I think those people hijacked that repertory to give themselves something to do. The way they play Baroque music is unspeakable. It's entirely theoretical. Most don't play the music because it's moving; they play it to grind out theories about bows, gut strings, old instruments and phrasing.' He believes such musicians play 'as though [the music] has no emotional content.' Davis specifically cites Norrington's interpretations as 'a foretaste of purgatory,' and says Gardiner can be 'horribly theoretical.' "

Well, maybe Sir Colin was being a bit cranky (or maybe not). But what do *you* think?


----------



## Pip (Aug 16, 2013)

I am totally in agreement Sir Colin, he knew what he was talking about.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

There are many listeners who enjoy and others who don't enjoy HIP. The Colin geezer obviously doesn't. But he grew up in the old school grand maestro way of conducting anyway, which is all fine and I like some if his conducting.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

It is true that some HIP performers are offering nothing more than historical sound, making their interpretations more about historical character than artistic content of the music. I don't think this way about Norrington though. And I certainly prefer HIP recordings of Mozart's operas by Rene Jacobs to anything that Davis did on this field. Sound that Jacobs achieved is very passionate and expressive, largely thanks to diffrent possibilities offered by HIP ensamble. So all in all, I disagree with Colin Davis.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Davis was quoted on a cranky day  I have many HIP recordings by highly respected artists that I enjoy immensely. Much of modern music, too, is about "grinding out theories." If these theoretical 'grindings' inject new life and new understanding into old music, why not?


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*I'm with Davis*

I'm with Davis.

I look upon HIP as an interesting alternative.

I was at a HIP performance where the orchestra was performing a concerto for mandolin, oboe and strings. The mandolin was drowning out the baroque oboe. It had a very weak sound.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Ho hum. Even Homer nods. If these guys aren't enjoying themselves and being emotional (on period instruments) .....






and a fusion attempt


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I think HIP and non HIP is totally irrelevant. All that matters is if the conductor has something of himself to put into the work. If they don't have anything to say, they're useless, no matter how historically informed they are. There are too many conductors today who just plain aren't very interesting.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Listen to those videos Taggart posted at your own risk! The ear worms have burrowed into my skull and eaten away at my brains!


----------



## GiulioCesare (Apr 9, 2013)

An old man rant.

Davis didn't seem to have a problem with using adapted instruments to match the Baroque sound, did he?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Blancrocher said:


> Listen to those videos Taggart posted at your own risk! The ear worms have burrowed into my skull and eaten away at my brains!


Also they are hardly classical and I should think it hardly matters a darn what you play them on. The MacTaggart will get mad now !!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

brotagonist said:


> Davis was quoted on a cranky day  I have many HIP recordings by highly respected artists that I enjoy immensely. Much of modern music, too, is about "grinding out theories." If these theoretical 'grindings' inject new life and new understanding into old music, why not?


Octogenarians are entitled to 'cranky days'. I am looking forward to it; it is a strain being 'mister nice guy' all the time.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

I don't know, but John Elliot Gardiner certainly doesn't do lifeless performances with his HIP orchestras.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I do not mind if you play music on period instruments, a u-he Zebra2 VST softsynth, or a kazoo, as long as it has soul. Somewhere I have a Bach piece played on ukelele and it's gorgeous.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

clavichorder said:


> I don't know, but John Elliot Gardiner certainly doesn't do lifeless performances with his HIP orchestras.


I just got the box set and it has a pretty lifeless performance of Mozart's 21st piano concerto.


----------



## ccravens (Oct 15, 2013)

brotagonist said:


> Davis was quoted on a cranky day  I have many HIP recordings by highly respected artists that I enjoy immensely. Much of modern music, too, is about "grinding out theories." If these theoretical 'grindings' inject new life and new understanding into old music, why not?


Good point.

I agree.


----------



## hreichgott (Dec 31, 2012)

People had emotions in the 18th century too, didn't they?


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

I think there are various levels of HIP. One way is to insist on period instruments or good replicas, with gut strings, toned down a half tone, having the conductor perform an audible continuo on a fortepiano etc. etc. A more pragmatic approach is perhaps to simply keep orchestras (especially the string section) smaller, and go light on the vibrato. 

Both of these seem to me like a better idea than going Mendelssohn on Bach, and performing Baroque works with huge orchestras and choirs. But it does depend on the composer too. It seems to me that Beethoven withstands a heavily romanticized performance much better than Vivaldi.

Something I would be very curious to hear would be early 19th century guitar concertos, like the ones by Giuliani. I am curious because I can't see how on earth the guitar part could have been at all audible, with those old guitars!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hreichgott said:


> People had emotions in the 18th century too, didn't they?


Prior and even into the classical period (or so I understand) an artist was not expected to express *his* emotion, but to depict an "affect," or an idealized emotion as might be shown in a painting of the time. This was the case until "sturm und drang" came along. I don't suppose the performances should be emotionless, but a certain amount of distancing and restraint might be in order. And in fact, HIP or not, most performances of music of those times are done that way. Some HIP performances, though, are so intense that I wonder what the composer would think if he heard them.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Prior and even into the classical period (or so I understand) an artist was not expected to express *his* emotion, but to depict an "affect," or an idealized emotion as might be shown in a painting of the time.


surely not a painting by Caravaggio or a sculpture by Bernini, then...


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

HIP sure gets people crotchety! You can debate the ins and outs but it looks like it's here to stay.

One of the chief reasons, I think, is cos it's great fun to play. You get to master the old instruments and do a little study to brush up on reading scores stylistically. It just works for players - all the people I know doing it a lot got there cos they love the playing and the repertoire and heaps of regular instrumentalists love to have a go. My experience is you can get more swing and sweetness in an orchestra with historic instruments (except it's really hard) - I certainly had a great time doing it (even if it was only a couple of times and I was awful).

So there's definitely a "production led" factor, but people are buying it! It must also be doing good things for exposure of classical and earlier repertoire. The anti-HIP brigade are probably going to be on the wrong side of history ;-)


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

dgee said:


> ...You can debate the ins and outs but it looks like it's here to stay.
> 
> One of the chief reasons, I think, is cos it's great fun to play....


You are so right, dgee - our local ensemble, _Norwich Baroque_, led by my violin teacher (Jim O'Toole), have *so much fun* you would *not believe*! Even when a theorbo player staying in his house put his foot through a bedroom ceiling and scattered plaster on the baroque violin that Jim was tuning in the room below, Jim came up smiling! :lol:


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

More importantly, who is interviewing Sir Colin on his birthday? He was probably sleeping off the sherry when the phone rang.


----------



## Guest (Oct 16, 2013)

I have found emotionally empty performances both within HIP recordings and in non-HIP recordings. I don't think HIP practice in and of itself is to blame. Quite honestly, Davis' recording of 6 of Haydn's London Symphonies on Philips left me less emotionally satisfied than similar recordings by HIP ensembles (e.g. Philarmonia Baroque Orchestra with McGegan).

I guess you have to try to make yourself still relevant in Classical music performance, when most of the world has moved on, if not completely embracing HIP, then at least incorporating some of the concepts.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Prior and even into the classical period (or so I understand) an artist was not expected to express *his* emotion, but to depict an "affect," or an idealized emotion as might be shown in a painting of the time. This was the case until "sturm und drang" came along. I don't suppose the performances should be emotionless, but a certain amount of distancing and restraint might be in order. And in fact, HIP or not, most performances of music of those times are done that way. Some HIP performances, though, are so intense that I wonder what the composer would think if he heard them.


True, and most Baroque music movements express a single affekt throughout. Renaissance music, on the other hand, was more likely to express multiple affekts in a short span of time, following the changes in the mood of the text very closely. This led to the extremes of composers like Gesualdo, who would throw in constant and violent contrasts.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

I often find the big fight between HIP and non-HIP bemusing, because I would think there is room for both. Let audiences decide what they like best.

Jeez, as it is there are probably already ten thousand recordings of Mozart's last four symphonies. A few more will make little difference.

Next up: completely digital realizations of classical works...


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

brianvds said:


> Next up: completely digital realizations of classical works...


I thought that DDD on CD's meant exactly that.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Taggart said:


> I thought that DDD on CD's meant exactly that.


How quaint. 

No, I'm thinking of performances of classical music using electronic instruments and/or computers. I'm actually surprised it hasn't yet been done quite extensively.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

KenOC said:


> Prior and even into the classical period (or so I understand) an artist was not expected to express *his* emotion, but to depict an "affect," or an idealized emotion as might be shown in a painting of the time.


That wasn't true of painting. There were plenty of artists that expressed unique points of view and emotions in the work going all the way back. The subject matter might be standardized religious themes, but the emotions were not.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

brianvds said:


> No, I'm thinking of performances of classical music using electronic instruments and/or computers. I'm actually surprised it hasn't yet been done quite extensively.


Tomita did plenty of that. Also, a lot of movie music is now synthesized, and it's hard to distinguish from real orchestral music. Sometimes the synthesized full orchestra is combined with a small group of real instrumentalists, which can be very effective.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Tomita did plenty of that. Also, a lot of movie music is now synthesized, and it's hard to distinguish from real orchestral music. Sometimes the synthesized full orchestra is combined with a small group of real instrumentalists, which can be very effective.


I have heard one of Tomita's takes on a Bach invention. But it wasn't just a straightforward performance; he added all manner of embellishments of his own.

As you point out, synthesizers are getting to the point where it can be difficult to distinguish their sound from that of "real" instruments. I.e. it may soon be possible (if it isn't already) for a guy to sit in front of a computer and produce a Mahler symphony indistinguishable from one done by a real orchestra. Perhaps that will be the future of classical music, the way orchestras are closing down...


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Like it or not, period instruments and musicians who play them are here to stay .
We will never know exctly how "authentic " HIP performnces are until a time machine is
available .
The thing that annoys me about the HIP movement is not the performances themselves ,
but the arrogance of so many HIP musicians and critics who support it in claiming that we
are finally hearing the music as it sounded in the past and their tendency to sneer
condescendingly at performnces on modern instruments .
I for one can still very much enjoy the recordings of the music of Bach, Handel ,
Haydn and Mozart by the likes of Marriner, Leppard , and other eminent conductors
who have recorded this music . It's not "authentic ", but so what ?
I don't mind hearing the keyboard works of Bach played by Glenn Gould ,
Ashkenazy, Andras Schiff etc played on a modern piano , even though Bach never 
heard the kind of sound it produces . 
I would rather hear a modern pianist play say, the Goldberg variations with great 
panache than a pedantic musician who knows everything about correct performance
practice give a numbingly dry and didactic performance on a harpsichord tuned to baroque pitch.
By the way , playing everything from past centuries down a half step is not authentic at all,
because pitch varied greatly from time to place in the past, and there was no commonly agreed 
on pitch .


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

superhorn said:


> I don't mind hearing the keyboard works of Bach played by Glenn Gould ,
> Ashkenazy, Andras Schiff etc played on a modern piano , even though Bach never
> heard the kind of sound it produces .


Bach is something of an exception, mind you: his music sounds good on any instrument. 

I'm quite the blasphemer myself, seeing as very much prefer his works for solo violin and cello to be played on guitar.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Modern baroque instruments.*

Another element concerning the HIP is the instruments that are employed. It is easy to use authentic string instruments. Good playing string instruments from that period are still around. That is not the case with woodwinds. Unlike string instruments, the modern winds are far superior to the original baroque or classical instruments. The moisture generated in the instruments when they are played contribute to their deterioration.

There are not that many 17th and 18th century woodwind instruments around that are still in playable condition.

In order to execute an HIP performance a woodwind player has to use a baroque instrument that was made by a contemporary instrument maker. These craftsmen are going to use modern tools to make their authentic sounding period instrument. When a maker uses electric drills and laths to make an authetic baroque bassoon it will be a lot better sounding than one of its older cousins. One may be close but they will never be sure these performances will be that authentic. The intonation of a modern baroque woodwind will be far superior to an original instrument.


----------



## GiulioCesare (Apr 9, 2013)

arpeggio said:


> Another element concerning the HIP is the instruments that are employed. It is easy to use authentic string instruments. Good playing string instruments from that period are still around. That is not the case with woodwinds. Unlike string instruments, the modern winds are far superior to the original baroque or classical instruments. Also the moisture generated in the instruments when they are played contribute to their deterioration.
> 
> There are not that many 17th and 18th century woodwind instruments around that are still in playable condition.
> 
> In order to execute an HIP performance a woodwing player has to use a baroque instrument that was made by a contemporary instrument maker. These craftsmen are going to use modern tools to make their authentic sounding period instrument. When a maker uses electric drills and laths to make an authetic baroque bassoon it will be a lot better sounding than one of its older cousins. One may be close but they will never be sure these performances will be that authentic. The intonation of a modern baroque woodwind will be far superior to an original instrument.


You are correct. But I doubt many proponents of HIPs claim to achieve perfect authenticity. It's about trying to be loyal to the time the pieces were composed.

You make a good point about the woodwind instruments, but I think it's even more radical in the case of the brass instruments. Especially the trumpets, which are simply not recreations of Baroque/Classical trumpets. They have been equipped with holes to aid the players in finding the tune more easily. This clearly helps enormously and makes for a much better-sounding performance, but alas, it is a long shot from being authentic. I wish more period ensembles would play with natural trumpets, rather than staying with the norm of playing with the badly named "Baroque trumpets".

There is something majestic about seeing trumpets being played with a hand behind the back.


----------



## Bill H. (Dec 23, 2010)

Based on my own observations among musicians I know, and from my own son's training in the conservatory where he is studying violin, there is a much greater level of coexistence regarding HIP and non-HIP practices than used to be the case. Certainly much moreso than I see among the listeners who are absolute adherents of either side

E.g. it's becoming more common among string students to have a Baroque or transitional bow in their possession, and more modern ensembles have absorbed the idea of using vibrato more sparingly in works of the appropriate era, as well as different modes of attacking and releasing notes, etc. The availability of gut strings is also much greater than was the case say 30 years ago. 

Things are a bit more complicated in the case of woodwind and brass instruments, which of course have changed in the course of the centuries in ways that stringed instruments have not. 

Of course, the repertoire involved is a big factor. Where the greatest overlap occurs (say, ca. 1770s-1850s) in the repertoire covered by differing approaches seems to create the most controversy. Whereas I would say it's rarely been the case that the Vienna Philharmonic has played any Schutz, Monteverdi, or Florentine Intermedii, nor would I necessarily WANT to hear said group try to play such works. So HIP pretty much rules there, as it should.


----------



## hreichgott (Dec 31, 2012)

brianvds said:


> I'm quite the blasphemer myself, seeing as very much prefer his works for solo violin and cello to be played on guitar.


Let's see the guitarists try it with only one finger on the right hand!


----------

