Jump to content


Photo

Recorder Thread!


  • Please log in to reply
4026 replies to this topic

#4021 elemimele

elemimele

    Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1473 posts
  • Member: 895612
    Joined: 17-July 16

Posted 08 April 2020 - 15:10

If you'd just written Telemann's 2nd flute fantasie, would you ever dare put pen to paper again? It's perfect.


  • 1

#4022 AdLibitum

AdLibitum

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts
  • Member: 900040
    Joined: 28-January 20

Posted 08 April 2020 - 17:51


a handmade Ganassi in autumn


If you haven't seen it already, Philippe Bolton's website has lots of excellent information about recorders in general. There's a page on ganassi recorders here: http://www.flute-a-b...-sam-135gb.html and one about bore evolution more generally here: http://www.flute-a-b...ionpercegb.html
That's really interesting. I am leaning towards a Ganassi simply because I like the sound of those played in various YouTube videos, but I didn't know much about the history.
  • 0

#4023 elemimele

elemimele

    Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1473 posts
  • Member: 895612
    Joined: 17-July 16

Posted 08 April 2020 - 18:45

Sound is a very good reason to lean towards a particular instrument.

I wonder whether the 20th C pursuit of a Ganassi recorder was a result of thinking from a modern perspective? The modern player who picks up an early instrument feels its limitations because they know that with modification it could play a much larger range, and that a lot of music has been written that it can't play. The player back in history didn't know what was to come, and had an instrument with as good a range as any, and that could play anything that had been written, so why would he want more?

Presumably if Ganassi knew some high fingerings, he wasn't alone, and others would have known them too (certainly if they'd read Ganassi). But no one composed using them. That suggests strongly that no composer of any significance thought those notes were of any value.

Strangely, as well as the sound value, I'm now curious about those "Ganassi" instruments anyway, just to know what they're like to play, because even if they're not historically accurate for the Renaissance, they're now historically interesting in the rediscovery of the recorder. And in any case, any instrument that's been made with care by a skilled maker is something of value, something of interest, and worth exploring. 


  • 0

#4024 old_and_grumpy

old_and_grumpy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Member: 889252
    Joined: 27-October 14

Posted Yesterday, 13:28

If you'd just written Telemann's 2nd flute fantasie, would you ever dare put pen to paper again? It's perfect.

 

I shall make sure I listen to it!  I very much "grew up" with the view that Telemann was just a sort of poor imitation of Bach, and his contemporaries had got it all wrong, but I have come to know his music better over the last few years and he wrote a lot of excellent stuff and some real gems.


  • 0

#4025 old_and_grumpy

old_and_grumpy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Member: 889252
    Joined: 27-October 14

Posted Yesterday, 13:40

> I am leaning towards a Ganassi simply because I like the sound

 

I generally prefer the sound of pre-baroque recorders, and I like the simple lines of them too.

Obviously it's all subjective.  When I attended Jacqueline Sorel's recorder maintenance workshop, I took my Moeck Hotteterre tenor along; it's a (reproduction) baroque instrument but it's early baroque and has a wider and slightly less cylindrical bore than later baroque instruments and I like its tone whereas Jacqueline clearly did not.

Personally, I'm not bothered about authenticity (eg playing 16th century music on a 17th century (style) instrument is fine by me if I enjoy it).


  • 0

#4026 AdLibitum

AdLibitum

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts
  • Member: 900040
    Joined: 28-January 20

Posted Yesterday, 19:20

Hmm, I wonder if Ganassi's contemporaries (and Ganassi himself) didn't use the top notes much because they didn't sound very good on the then-available models? After all the current "Ganassi" recorder is a modern invention.

 

I'm also not bothered about authenticity - I think it's entirely within the spirit of the music tradition of thousands of years up until the 19th century or so to play whatever instrument produces the sound I'm after. Speaking of which... https://www.bernolin...ategory=1001058

 

:wub:  (Nononono, must not, must not, cannot afford and don't want a soprano anyway. Aarrgh.) Does anyone know which piece the first sound sample is?


  • 0

#4027 elemimele

elemimele

    Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1473 posts
  • Member: 895612
    Joined: 17-July 16

Posted Yesterday, 21:06

Oh yes, nothing wrong with playing something on any instrument that makes it sound good.

 

Bach and Telemann. Yes, as a kid, and more thoroughly as a teenager, I learned organ (not to a very good level, but I made a start!). Back then, unless you had a good teacher, the organ repertoire consisted of:

(1) Early English Organ Music for Manuals (ed. C H Trevor, in multiple volumes)

(2) The Cloister Albums, a set of hideous anthologies with lurid monochrome covers and a title in Gothic type; I can't remember anything more about them.

(3) Bach

At that stage, no one had invented anyone else. Good organists played (1); less-good organists played (2) with a lot of swell-pedal and faith; really good organists played (3). It was possible to be aware of other organ composers if you dabbled in CH Trevor's rather good tutor-books, as he was clearly aware of the Rest of the World (except France) and did give snippets from other places.

It was the end of the era of total Bach-worship. Bach is brilliant, there's no doubt about it. But one of the most exciting aspects of recorder for me, when I rediscovered it, was the realisation that an instrument needn't be dominated by one composer. That there are thousands, tens-of-thousands of composers out there, and a lot of them have written music that is very good. In fact no matter how good someone is, they're never going to encompass every possibility; music is enriched by lots of different people writing it in lots of ways.

In his day, I believe Telemann was better-known than Bach. It's never good to stand too close to a genius - but Telemann can stand fairly close to Bach while still being himself, and still shining.

(should add: I did get a good teacher, and ended up discovering Messiaen and Durufle and a whole load of other lovely people... but Bach really did dominate, probably in part because his music can be played to sound well even on the very limited resources of a small village organ)


  • 0