[PD] Musical notation object on Pd

Jonathan Wilkes jancsika at yahoo.com
Thu Nov 11 01:49:17 CET 2010



--- On Wed, 11/10/10, João Pais <jmmmpais at googlemail.com> wrote:

> From: João Pais <jmmmpais at googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [PD] Musical notation object on Pd
> To: "patko" <colet.patrice at free.fr>, "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "pd-list" <pd-list at iem.at>
> Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 11:52 PM
> >> Absolutely, he can't (and
> that can be a good thing). How do
> >> you know how a
> >> staccato in a Beethoven piano sonata really
> sounds?
> > 
> > Do you mean "how a staccato in a Beethoven sonata
> > sounded to an audience member listening to the
> composer himself play
> > it"?  Because I don't at all understand what it
> means to say
> > what a notated piece of music "really" sounds like.
> 
> the original question had to do with how a composer
> expresses his wishes as well as possible so other performers
> interpret it correctly.

Right.  And, for the sake of argument, let's assume that we can 
precisely reproduce the sonic/cultural setting you were referring to 
in your Beethoven analogy, and we hear the staccato in that setting.

What's the relevance of that experience for a performer who wants to 
interpret that staccato in a performance?  I think the answer 
depends on issues surrounding the rest of around 200 years of reception 
history of that piece, as well as various other historical/cultural
/musical factors that the performer keeps in mind.  It could be 
anywhere on a spectrum from completely
irrelevant, as it is in many performances in the early 20-th century 
on modern instruments, to the sole factor in some other performance.  
But it doesn't make sense to call any point on that spectrum 
"correct" interpretation just because it jibes with the "original" 
sound of the staccato (still assuming that could be known).  It does, 
however, seem fitting to call some interpretations "boring" 
because the performer limits his/her imagination to fit whatever 
models of interpretation are fashionable at the time.

Also, when speculating about original intentions, it seems curious that 
people tend to assume such knowledge would clear up issues of 
interpretation.  It seems equally possible that, upon magically hearing 
Mozart or Beethoven play some enigmatically notated articulation or 
slur, that one would come out more confused than when they entered.

Maybe a shorter way to say all this is that clear, well thought-out 
scores in the 21st century made by considerate composers have a very 
high likelyhood of receiving a serious and considerate performance.  
Really, who are these composers whose scores are so misunderstood that 
their complex poly-rythms get played back as homophony?

-Jonathan

> What a pieces "really" sounds like
> is another question, most likely much more complicated, I
> guess.

It's actually quite simple: the piece really sounds like what one hears 
when listening to the piece.  What else could possibly be the case?


      



More information about the Pd-list mailing list