Fine Music - Orchestra, Big Band, Classical and Such

[Tom22]

... (snip) ....

.....In regards to your ideas of how the orchestral sections/soloists seemed to "respond to her interpretations," I'd say maybe. Members of an orchestra respond to their director/conductor. The conductor and soloist need to communicate with each other to be "on the same page" in terms of interpretation. For all we know, this conductor chose Khatia because she could embody "his" interpretation of this piece.

Unlike popular music where it's considered a cool, fun, and, maybe, genius thing to take a familiar tune and place it in a new/different context, for the last 50 years (at the very least) new "interpretations" of classical music usually stem from recently discovered, (previously) unknown research about the composer, about the piece itself, and/or about directions the composer might have been pursuing. In other words (and I'm no Schumann scholar), I could surmise that, perhaps, the conductor/musical director/whoever makes the choices for the program has been delving into Schumann's life, psyche, etc, and, thus came up with a different perspective and found that Khatia's resume worked with what had been decided on for this program.

Thank you for bringing her to my attention, Tom. She's now within my circle of "listen to" folks.

And, finally, if you find other classical pieces you wish to share, the thread to go to is "Fine Music -Orchestra, Big Band, Classical & Such" which can be found under the broader classification of "Other Musical Subjects".

Thanks, again, Tom.

I thought I'd bring this over here.

I'm sure your suggestions about "interpretations" were aimed at the broader readers here more than myself infering that a soloist might "change things up" in a way that changed the notes significantly. As you pointed out in a thread ... some classical pieces allow some leeway within glissando or grace notes within certain constraints of convention of the era (and those types of liberties apply to a very small portion of their musical part. 99% of the notes they play are strictly in the score.. perhaps more if we took pencil to paper : ) )


I appreciated that you more firmly pointed me to conductors role who I recognized but perhaps thought he was following Kathia .. and while any arbitrary division of who's more responsible when it takes two to tango.... Jarvi not only tango'd but as you suggested, the choice of who to choose to tango with led to what we see

(more on Paavo Järvi I've discovered in a future post)

We use different words, but I think we both were impresses with caliber of Kathia as worthy of a great concert hall but both of us called the excellent quality short of any super impressive "command performance" worthy of say "awe" .

I'm sure people here must think "picky picky picky" .

Maybe that habit of listening to classical music so carefully as classical music fans often do and discuss leads to me criticizing pop music in similar ways.

... when I bother to criticize someone that usually means I have high expectations and they are worthy of being criticized.


I didin't think it was a command performance
but that this piece on my list of favorites was suddenly more splendid...
"this was how it was supposed to be" ! (but again not a perfect performance but and inspired direction that brought even more of the score to my ear)

and MAE.. you inspired me to look.... at the idea of "researching" like you suggested Paavo Järvi, might have ...

and There was the AHA ! very simple to see because someone with advanced degree's in musical history no doubt, had written it up !

Like you suggested.. it seems very likely that Paavo Järvi chose Kathia because, the piece was written for a younger woman pianist who could have had some of the (yes stereo typical but I do believe woman are wiser about certain things in the world ... men have other strenghts that I'm proud of)



-----
http://www.sfsymphony.org/Watch-Listen-L...chest.aspx

I studied cultural history in college 30 years ago...(as you guys are burdened with) so the very idea of needing to understand social context that define an artistic message makes so much sense to me....

The includes a biography of Schubert that dwells on his mental state , mentions that he said he couldn't write a solo piece without a specific soloist in mind AND that the Soloist that he wrote the piece for was his wife clara.. and the time that he wrote the piece was closer to the time they were married and must have had elements of their troubles relating to falling in love with each other years apart.. knowing each other in different context and a father in the way ...
.... all of those things can help to understand what a composer might have had on his mind ... perhaps worth a peformer studying a piece considering...

Most importantly of all though.... Your MAE instinct that Paarvo most likely CHOSE Katia with an idea in mind.

n 1839 Robert had written to Clara: "Concerning concertos, I've already said to you they are hybrids of symphony, concerto, and big sonata. I see that I can't write a concerto for virtuosi and have to think of something else." He did. Now, in June 1845, while the metamorphosis of the Concert Fantasy was in progress, Clara Schumann noted in her diary how delighted she was at last to be getting "a big bravura piece" out of Robert (she meant one with orchestra).

Schumann's "something else" was noticed—first of all, of course, by Clara, who wrote in her and Robert's marriage diary that in the Fantasy "the piano is interwoven with the orchestra in the most delicate way—one can't imagine the one without the other." Most chroniclers of the first public performances, along with noticing how effective an advocate Clara was for the concerto, were also attuned to the idea that something new—and very pleasing—was happening in this work.