Here is a recording of Beethoven's Op. 78 Allegro vivace that I just made. No, not on the piano - on the Mac. Is this cheating? I can just imagine that wild German rubbing his hands with glee.
1 comments:
Mike Strand
said...
One advantage of a computer software recording of a work of music is the focus it places on notes and tempo and timing. Within limits of the software, you can see what the composer intended in the manuscript, at least with regard to the fundamental structure.
It's also a great way to bring little-known or seldom-performed works to public attention.
On the potentially darker side, composers now write things that can't be performed, at least as a practical matter, by human beings. Saxophones or violins can be made to exceed their highest and lowest tones and execute physically impossible leaps and figures. A trio can be written for a single piano that would lead to a tangle of arms and fingers if three people tried to play it on one keyboard. As it is, some duets come close to this.
For the composer interested in receiving the gift of human interpretation, it helps potential performers give the composer a "reality check", just by listening to the computer rendition and maybe also following along with the score. In my personal experience, changes that performers have recommended to me have led to improvements in a piece of music (e.g. it sounds better to me than the original version), while making it easier for the performer.
As we listen to Carl's Mac recording of this Beethoven piece, we can imagine the various interpretations that can and have been placed upon it by the piano players of the world: Many different approaches to bringing the work to life, with varying results.
I would hazard a guess that Beethoven might like Carl's Mac recording better than some human interpretations, but not nearly as much as others.
1 comments:
One advantage of a computer software recording of a work of music is the focus it places on notes and tempo and timing. Within limits of the software, you can see what the composer intended in the manuscript, at least with regard to the fundamental structure.
It's also a great way to bring little-known or seldom-performed works to public attention.
On the potentially darker side, composers now write things that can't be performed, at least as a practical matter, by human beings. Saxophones or violins can be made to exceed their highest and lowest tones and execute physically impossible leaps and figures. A trio can be written for a single piano that would lead to a tangle of arms and fingers if three people tried to play it on one keyboard. As it is, some duets come close to this.
For the composer interested in receiving the gift of human interpretation, it helps potential performers give the composer a "reality check", just by listening to the computer rendition and maybe also following along with the score. In my personal experience, changes that performers have recommended to me have led to improvements in a piece of music (e.g. it sounds better to me than the original version), while making it easier for the performer.
As we listen to Carl's Mac recording of this Beethoven piece, we can imagine the various interpretations that can and have been placed upon it by the piano players of the world: Many different approaches to bringing the work to life, with varying results.
I would hazard a guess that Beethoven might like Carl's Mac recording better than some human interpretations, but not nearly as much as others.
Post a Comment