Extremes

 

The nine symphonies of Beethoven are performed and recorded so much they’re almost cliches. I doubt there’s a symphony orchestra in the world that doesn’t perform at least one Beethoven symphony every concert season. Each conductor finds his own interpretive path to take. There are the classic recordings of the entire cycle of nine symphonies by Claudio Abbado, Berlin Philharmoniker; George Szell, Cleveland Symphony, the ones I cut my Beethoven ears on; and Leonard Bernstein’s New York Philharmonic and Vienna Philharmonic sets. Each has something to recommend it. But I still remember the night I was driving home. The 7th symphony was on the radio. Instead of the usual mind wandering and half listening, the performance grabbed my attention. Minute after minute I kept thinking, “Wow, this is Beethoven alive and thrashing!” I felt as if I were feeling Beethoven’s emotions. I heard an energy and spirit that I had never heard before. I heard accents, articulations and dynamics that put a wicked topspin on his music. At the same time, it never went over the top  with Romanticism, as Bernstein’s exaggerated rubato does. Nor did it underplay or round out the edges. It had the right balance of Classical manners and Romantic boisterousness. I could imagine Beethoven giving this a standing ovation. At the time, I had no idea why I felt this way. When I got home I sat in the car until the very end. I had to find out whose recording this was. I wrote down the conductor and orchestra, and later found the box set.

 

 

Gardiner did his homework researching the history and scouring the available scores. His efforts spring forth in every beat of every bar of the symphonies. Part of the reason he’s been able to capture the heart & soul of Beethoven is, fortunately for us, that Beethoven was fanatical about expressing his intentions and precisely spelling out his instructions. Usually I’m not a stickler for following the composer’s instructions to a tee, or trying to second guess their intentions. Usually composers aren’t so specific. Although I won’t argue Gardiner’s interpretation is the only true interpretation of the nine symphonies. I am always open to idiosyncratic takes on any music. I strongly believe in putting one’s own personal stamp on the performance. Still, there can be no dispute these recordings are the most historically authentic.

 

Beethoven’s music is an emotional rollercoaster. If these extremes are not extracted with a precise measure of manic passion, and equally important, tempered sentiment, the performance won’t get to the core of Beethoven. But then, who am I to say this is the way Beethoven heard his music? All I can be certain of is this, when I hear Beethoven, when I play Beethoven, the music speaks to me. It tells me how is should sound, and the Orchetre Revolutionaire et Romantique under the direction of John Eliot Gardiner are speaking the same language in these recordings. Their idioms and syntax fit the music, not only as it’s written, but as the music wishes to communicate, as it needs to express itself.

Listen to Beethoven’s use of syncopation in the 8th symphony, how he plays 3 against 2, that is, when the accent goes from on the beat ONE-two-three, TWO-two-three, to three accents over in two beat , ONE-two-THREE, two-TWO-three. He does this in both the 1st and 3rd movements, just as he uses the ta-ta-ta-DAH rhythm through the 5th as a unifying device in more than only the first movement.

 

(||) Rating — Music : A+ ║ Performance : A+ ║ Recording : A+ ║
 Orchestre Revolutionnaire et Romantique, John Eliot Gardiner, Beethoven 9 Symphonies, Archiv Produktion, 1994

Posted in Discover, Music reviews | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Wonder

Skipping the preface and jumping straight on top of this one. Double blind testing (DBT) is the standard used for the scientific inquiry of physical and psychological responses. It is the only valid means for determining the authenticity of perceptual differences and for finding direct cause and effect. Of all the possible variables effecting the response under question, all but one must be held constant to insure that only one variable is tested at a time. Any additional sensory input (multiple variables) will alter and influence the primary input being tested, whether it’s sight, taste, touch. smell, hearing, or other physical responses. No matter how objective you try to be, it’s impossible to keep irrelevant signals, erroneous beliefs and/or preexisting knowledge from interfering. Without DBT, we’re just stabbing in the dark.

A frequently used argument against DBT is that it puts test subjects under stressful, artificial conditions for which they are unable to perform normally : the anxiety excuse. Many psychics have allowed themselves to be subjected to controlled, scientific testing. Every test has failed to prove paranormal powers. And with every failure they come back with the excuse that they can’t perform under “those conditions.” Athletes, dancers, musicians, and actors perform under very high stress conditions. They prove their abilities time after time under the artificial, anxiety producing conditions of public performance. They make no excuses.

DBT can prove or disprove effects. Subjective listening preferences have been confirmed under DBT conditions. They have also been correlated and backed up with real, quantified, documented evidence. Yes, double blind testing does produce results—reliable and repeatable results. Direct correlations are found when they actually exist. The critics of DBT forget to mention the successes. When the tests are inconclusive, it’s a clear demonstration that the differences, if any, are too small to be significant, or do not exist.

Test equipment is far more sensitive than human ears. If you can hear it, you can measure it.

I have done blind and sighted tests myself. I do not trust my own impressions unless I do a side by side, A/B blind test. The changes in my own perception from day to day, hour to hour, make subjective testing without careful controls unreliable.

Others argue that accuracy cannot be measured. In truth, it can. The closer the output is to the input, the more accurate the sound reproduction. This can be determined objectively with test equipment, and later corroborated with subjective blind listening tests. Your ears may prefer the less accurate sound—that’s your choice. It’s okay, you’re okay.

Misconceptions and misinformation keep clouding the facts. Some outright lies are passed off as evidence to support misinformation. Often it’s not the facts stated, but the facts omitted that skew the argument. Add the opinions of others taken at face value, blindly trusted, taken without question, without investigation, and without asking for substantiated or verified support data, and it’s not hard to see how misunderstandings get accepted, spread, and persist.

I know, I know, there’d be nothing to talk about if we were to adhere to the facts. The mystery of the cosmos would be lost if we give up our fantasies and fairytales. Life would be boring if we were all the same. All hope would be lost in a world of meaninglessness, and blah, blah, blah. . .

The absolute truth keeps eluding us. Every layer we peel away reveals another deeper, previously hidden layer. We will never run out of puzzles to solve. We don’t need myths to find mystery. All we need is wonder.

See [Honestly!]

Posted in Audio, Discover | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment