The Radio 3 Boards Forum from myforum365.com
05:50:59, 02-12-2008 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Whilst we happily welcome all genuine applications to our forum, there may be times when we need to suspend registration temporarily, for example when suffering attacks of spam.
 If you want to join us but find that the temporary suspension has been activated, please try again later.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Leonhardt and Bach's WTC  (Read 185 times)
Baz
Guest
« on: 08:53:37, 15-04-2008 »

This thread continues a discussion from http://r3ok.myforum365.com/index.php?topic=2507.msg107007#msg107007

Moving from the "crackpot" to the "non-crackpot", we might consider Leonhardt's approach; funnily enough Berben studied with Leonhardt, but it is quite evident that he did not possess the capacity to learn very much that was worthwhile. Here is the way Leonhardt plays this Prelude:

Gustav Leonhardt

The only arguably 'dodgy' thing about it is that he does not repeat the second half - but then that is a pattern he uses throughout his recording (which already runs to 4 CDs). Otherwise, it is sensitive and musical, bringing out all the melody lines, and utilising to the full the wonderful sonorities and resonances of the instrument used. The piece, far from being a 'scramble', remains essentially a plaintive and effective piece. [...]

While agreeing with Member Iron that Mr. Leonhardt's is vastly better than the performance of the deluded Dutchman we are nevertheless unable to consider it faultless or faithful; a number of its imperfections strike one at once. Specifically at the beginning: there is too much delay or hesitation, a rubato let us charitably say, on the third note in the right hand (the G-E chord), whereas the sheer musicality of the exposition of this theme calls for an absolutely strict rhythm - an equality of beats that as the music progresses will enable all the various inner thematic relationships to appear of themselves; a simple-minded and routine rubato "interpretation" distorts or destroys this process by giving undue emphasis to one aspect or relationship over others, whereas it were better to allow the music to speak for itself. When a performer that is with his hesitations and "expressiveness" starts suggesting "Listen to this . . . and now listen to this" we simply feel he is being condescending supercilious and overfamiliar. "Leave it alone!" we cry, "Let us work it out for ourselves!" Then the note immediately following, the low C in the bass, is sounded far too lightly, whereas the bass should here be the driver of the whole process and this C should be at least as loud as the first note of the work (the F).

And another word from Tovey here may not be out of place. "Bars 4 to 8 show at once that this is not a slow movement," he writes, "nor is there anything else in the course of the Prelude to indicate any restraint on a moderate Allegretto tempo."


It is a fact that Leonhardt's playing of the '48 tends - rather than being slow - to be 'relaxed'. Often, especially in the Preludes, the playing feels on the slow side. But his sense of phrasing is more sophisticated than that of most other players: he thinks four-dimensionally in a way that provides a simultaneous regard for a) harmony, b) melody and counterpoint, and c) patterning and figuration as generators of d) rhythm.

The gentle rubato of which Member Grew complains always has an explanation in terms of a musical response to one of those four attributes. In the specific cases mentioned above, it is either to express the affects of the written-out appoggiaturas (which, of course, pervade the movement) which (I feel) would become expressionless if played mechanically 'in time', or to provide some slight emphasis upon a particular harmony or cadence that feels to take priority in the unfolding or shaping of the musical phrase. But I don't feel that Leonhardt (unlike some others) ever 'socks it to us'. His playing is really too subtle for that.

One thing that Tovey did not explain in his notes to the F Minor Prelude (Book 2) was his reason for adding the term 'Espressivo' to his editorial tempo mark ('Allegretto espressivo'), and we must infer that he also felt the movement should not be a 'quick' one, but should flow gently and expressively.

The other matter that may cause a confusion with rubato is the gentle spreading of notes that was customary on the harpsichord at the time of Bach (and before): from a technical point of view, this was adopted as a manner of performance to avoid the unpleasantness of a lot of simultaneous clatter from the moving parts of the instrument, but it also became in its own way a means of expression. (Indeed, it gave rise to the stile brisé which resulted in countless freely-notated Preludes.)

Baz
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to: