Ignorance is not always bliss, or, the curious case of the missing gestures.

[@DenisFalqueto]

Your opinion on the role of a teacher is so beautiful and fulfilling. Every teacher should have that idea ingrained in his/her mind.

[@anidler]

I could not agree more!

[@SonicPhonic]

Thanks! I'm impressed and pleased that you're being honest.

[@jemith]

These videos are so very enlightening to me as an amateur with no harpsichord teachers within easy driving distance. Thank you for your excellent explanations and beautiful playing.

[@johnmoraitis]

Thank you! I'm very happy you like the videos!

[@mrshervinmoheb]

Such clear explanations, and the explanations actually make me appreciate the music of the harpsichord even more.

[@MarkHarmer]

Thank you so much for your explanation of the starting note being above the main note as I have always thought it interrupted a melody - and you have so brilliantly given examples of how and why you might choose to do that as a gesture. By the way as a lapsed organist and sometime harpsichord player, and latterly a harpist, I have taken some ideas from CPE Bach’s treatise on keyboard playing (wonderful book by the way) and applied them to the harp. And I stopped by just to say, I absolutely love your analytical and careful approach to bringing out the beauty of music on this instrument and with my students on the harp, I similarly delve into the analytical and the details, to show how it supports the overall broader picture of a piece of music.

[@youexx]

How really well said! Cogent, to the point, and damn right!!!!!!!!!

[@johnmoraitis]

Thank you!

[@cavewerk]

I came across your channel hoping to learn more about different temperaments, and now I'm learning about a whole world of music I previously knew nothing about, including some very niche beef :) one dislike from Andras Schiff lol. Thanks for making these great videos, Austin

[@johnmoraitis]

I'm happy you are enjoying my videos!

[@stevecreswell9962]

Only a minority of the greatest living performers have a track record of behaving this way, but in every case it is not a matter of a single quotation, it is a strange bias (whether they are keyboard, string or wind specialists, or singers) that they carry on through their careers, and which makes each of them slightly less great to me.

[@heron6462]

Absolutely riveting. Thank you!

[@johnmoraitis]

I'm happy you liked the video!

[@alexandrezanetta]

7:22 The struggle is real !! Very nice video, thank you for your ideas.

[@johnmoraitis]

I'm happy you liked the video!

[@leeruoho6343]

Absolutely. Modern performance standards are thus an interpretation, not an "improvement". Beautiful.

[@johnmoraitis]

Thank you!

[@paulcaswell2813]

Loved it :-)

[@johnmoraitis]

Thank you!

[@larrytrem]

SO interesting, and a good example of why musicians need to know the context of the music they're playing...

[@JimCullen]

I've heard Schiff's lectures on Beethoven sonatas and have long regarded much of what he has to say about them as near gospel. He provides excellent justification for his opinions on their performance that, frankly, is hard to dispute. But he's so clearly a Romantic-inspired performer, I would have never even _thought_ to engage him when it comes to performance of Bach or Baroque music.

[@Timrath]

I like how you even imitated Schiff's disgusting habit of playing trills before the beat.

[@aphexaphex9807]

The quality of your words are only equaled by the humility which lies in them. Especially with such a tricky subject, that can often result in sterile quarrels. Mr Schiff is a great example, because though his passion for Bach could not be exaggerated he indeed lacks some basic notions that are more common among harpsichord players. It could be said that Bach’s music can nevertheless be approached via a purely architectural or “mathematical” bias, and its perfection will always be enjoyable, if only for the score itself. But neglecting, or rather negating that late instruments (along with a fine theoretic knowledge of how to play them) add important layers of understanding and execution to it confines indeed to a sort of ignorance. This video made me wonder if it wouldn’t be worth having you play a piece on a modern piano ? It might lead to some very interesting things (if you’re open to suggestions why not the Courante of the C minor partita, which is often a good example I think of how not to play Bach’s music) and could interest lots of not too narrow minded piano players (such as myself) ! Thanks again 🙏🏻

[@johnmoraitis]

It would definitely be interesting to play Bach on the modern piano for comparison purposes. The only trouble is, I don't have a modern piano at home :-) (I have a Yamaha clavinova and an 1860s upright in need of restoration). But I'll see what I can do for a future video!

[@MaurizioMGavioli]

Hear hear! Recently, I heard (on KZbin) a master class by Scott Ross in which he was calling Gould an "énergumène" ("en entend des énergumènes comme Glenn Gould...") for exactly the same reasons you are detailing now; it was recorded 30 or so years ago, and apparently things didn't improve that much in the meantime. Which is sad on one hand, but perhaps the time came (or is coming) when we can discuss these things with calmness, reason and "bon goût" (sorry, no idea how Bach would have expressed this typically French idea... ;) ).

[@mercoid]

Maurizio M. Gavioli .... link please. Thank you.

[@dropletdreamcometrue]

@@mercoid See here, 25.20 to 28.00 then 35.45 to 37.30: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aICzc36GbMhsgck

[@johnmoraitis]

Oh yes, that's the one masterclass filmed towards the very end of Ross's life. I think some things have changed a little bit, but yes, there's still a long way to go!

[@shadighaffari8088]

Yes, but I think the issue here is irrelevant to what Mr. Moraitis is talking about, and has absolutely nothing to do with Glenn Gould's interpretations of Bach's music, which can't be compared at all with Andras Schiff's interpretation of Bach's music, from the aesthetic point of view. Notwithstanding, his idiosyncrasies, I think Glenn Gould's interpretations of Bach's music bring out the beauty of Bach's music like on other performer. For example his interpretation of Bach's harpsichord concerto in D minor or, his interpretation of Bach's Contrapunctus XV.

[@shadighaffari8088]

no other performer.....

[@bikkies]

Very interesting and welll argued. I've never had the good fortune to sit at a harpsichord, let alone play one, but my interest in this family including spinets and virginals is exactly that they are NOT a piano. I'm only a talentless amateur, but to me the instrument almost calls out for a non-legato performance style in the main. This then makes true legato sections more interesting to the ear by their rarity than if the majority of the piece is played in that manner. I would compare that to sitting at a piano and over-using the damper pedal. This results in a blurred effect, very characteristically piano style, but not crisp and precise. When I sit at my very modest digital piano to play Bach, I tuck my feet well out of the way. I pay close attention to note values and try with my own highly limited abilities to do the work justice. This includes turning off all velocity/touch response and setting a harpsichord voice, so that I have the shorter decay to which you expertly refer.

[@ibikwitty8770]

we use a lot of legato and overlegato to play harpsichord... the point is, there is a lot more creativity with all manner of articulation, not the legato default of the piano, but not a staccato default either.

[@Nelya57]

I always imagine thrills as laughters, to play them from the above key makes the effect more natural))))

[@runepoor4711]

I had composition professors who wouldn't acknowledge any music that didn't adhere to what they personally valued in music. I ended up quitting composition because every time I sit down and try to write I'm just full of thoughts telling me that nothing I write will be good.

[@Libertylute]

Very unfortunate!

[@RichardASalisbury1]

The slightly differing time-lengths of the notes, and of the separations between the notes, lend an audible coherence to the passage that the legato phrasing possible on a pianoforte--being impossible on harpsichord--cannot provide. Bravo! And as always, your explications are admirably clear and concise. I will forward a link to this KZbin segment to my wife, who earned a music degree in harpsichord performance many years ago.

[@johnmoraitis]

Thank you!

[@nigelhaywood9753]

Thank you for this very interesting and informative video. I'm sure it will stimulate a lot of reflection with regards to the interpretation of this piece and of baroque music in general. I have a question though about your comments on the interpretation of baroque trills. I love the way they sound in your performance but as a student of recorder and therefore of a lot of baroque repertoire, I was taught that when you came from the upper note to a trilled note there was no obligation to repeat that upper note. I was studying in the 80's and I know that ideas about the interpretation of early music are very much part of an evolving and on-going debate. Have you ever come across this exception and do you have any ideas about it?

[@johnmoraitis]

First of all, I really apologize for not responding sooner! And also I'm happy you liked the video! Unfortunately, I never got a notification about your message and only saw it yesterday while scrolling through the comments. The type of trill I am mentioning is the one that appears in Bach's table of ornaments as well as every other table of ornaments of that time that I know of. In other words, all historical sources consistently describe the trill the way I described it. However, it's important to keep in mind that I am approaching this from the perspective of keyboard instruments, and since I don't know how to play the recorder, I also don't know of its specific technical capabilities. One way to find out would be to look into historical sources of that time or current literature on performance practice relating to the recorder. Perhaps a faster way of finding an answer (although ultimately it's important to examine historical sources) would be to listen to recordings of established recorder players within historically-informed performance practice and see what they do. And I think an excellent starting point would be Frans Brüggen, who is not only very well-respected, but has also made several recordings.

[@nigelhaywood9753]

@@johnmoraitis Thank you for your reply. I love Frans Brüggen's playing. He was the big awakening for me many years ago when I bought a record of of the Händel Sonatas, made in the 60's. Wonderful! With regards to the trills though, as I say, I would attack a trill from above but I was taught by my teacher (Layton Ring, a very respected performer of Early Music back in the day) that if you came to the trill from the melodic note immediately above the trilled note, sometimes tying that preceding melody note to the beginning of the trill was acceptable and/or preferable. Also I used to play the Brandenburg No. 2 and I remember the trills at the beginning of the third movement were extremely challenging and almost impossible to attack anew from above each time, as they were quick, repeated notes. They're in the very high trumpet part too. My teacher explained that being repeated notes the general consensus was that they could be started on the note itself. However that is very exceptional, I think. On the keyboard it might not be an issue. Certainly different trends apply to different instruments, as you say.

[@johnmoraitis]

@@nigelhaywood9753 I have a 3-record set (Philips) with his Händel recordings! And now I understand exactly the type of ornament you are describing, which is a slightly different ornament from a "regular" trill. Bach includes it in his table of ornaments and calls it "accent und trillo" (as opposed to just "trillo"). And d'Anglebert also distinguishes between tremblement appuyé (Bach's "accent und trillo") and tremblement simple. This distinction also means that there are separate signs for these two ornaments (although there is more than one way of notating them), but, as I think we both agree, the particular characteristics and capabilities of an instrument need to be taken into account, so that substituting one ornament for the other is perfectly acceptable, especially when the substitution makes musical sense.

[@nigelhaywood9753]

@@johnmoraitis Thank you!

[@roberthubbard5696]

What recording artists on either piano or harpschord do you think best achieve the effects of these gestures, as you have described them? As an obvious example; trills starting on the high note?

[@johnmoraitis]

I would say that the effects and gestures I am describing in this video should be common knowledge among musicians within the HIP (Historically Informed Performance) movement ("traditional" training relies on a very different performing aesthetic, and I say this as someone who was originally brought up in it), so most of the harpsichord performances you will hear, and especially most recordings made after around the mid-1980s, should reflect this knowledge (although of course different performers will apply it in different ways -- there isn't necessarily a single "correct" way of doing it). So, for instance, the vast majority of harpsichordists would play trills starting on the upper note. In terms of pianists it depends. I think many pianists of the younger generation are certainly aware of the proper way of playing ornaments, so most recent recordings should reflect that. In terms of the gestures I am talking about this is a little trickier, since it also involved playing on an instrument (i.e. the modern piano) that was designed with a very different aesthetic in mind, and therefore is more suitable for sustaining longer musical lines (which, conversely, the harpsichord is not very good at doing). In other words, it's not always possible to render these different gestures convincingly on a modern piano, but understanding that there are there will make a performance on the piano more convincing, at least in my opinion.

[@stephenkunst7550]

Great video The way in which the piano , violin, and opera have dominated the classical world, has clouded the way in which people (Americans) see the art form. Singers and string players seem to only play with vibrato, and preach this idea as the only way. With all the great historical performances available, it is sad that certain mind set continues, unchallenged.

[@johnmoraitis]

I'm happy you liked the video!

[@Timrath]

Grammar nitpick: 24:45 The title should read "Concerto nach italienischem Gusto". "Italienischem" with "M", because it's dative. "Italienischen" with "N" would be accusative.

[@johnmoraitis]

I know, but it was spelled with "N" in the original edition :-)

[@artie360]

I love Andras Schiff but I don't really care what he has to say about the harpsichord. That would be like a clarinetists telling a violinist how to play. It is comparing apples and oranges. The harpsichord is a much more intimate instrument than the piano. If you don't play the harpsichord you will never know this.

[@johnmoraitis]

Of course, in my opinion, someone who has spent so many decades playing Bach should at least be familiar with the harpsichord... He could still choose to play Bach on the piano, of course, but I think knowing the capabilities of the harpsichord would have enhanced his Bach performances. His Bartok is wonderful though!

[@IamAlessandro1]

I heard Schiff several times, last time he was playing the Italien Concerto. Schiff is a great pianist indeed. But sorry, his Bach-Playing I dont like it at all; No life, no colour in it. Monoton from the beginning to the end, Im sorry to say so in somehow brutal words. May be Im wrong but Im just feeling like this. Playing Hapsichord myselfe nd organ sometimes, not best level, just an ordinary normal bad player.. Schiff's argument "dont use pedals by playing Bach" becose he had no pedals in his time is not logicely at all as at Bach's time they had even no pianos at all! With his logic we shouldn't play Bach on a piano! What you thinks about? greez

[@AhimSaah]

The 'modern piano' is an overrated term: the piano as we know it today was constructed around 1880 and has not changed at all since. There is no such thing as a modern piano. The problems of large keyboards which demand huge hand spans and cause injuries have not been improved, the bass is still much too loud for most of the repertoire we play, the instrument gets out of tune easily... Anybody thinking that a piano is a modern device must be out of their mind. Pianos are ancient levers of keys, hammers and strings, undisturbed by the industrial revolution. When I studied piano I had a professor (who was a relatively famous pianist at the time) who told me that the slightest deviation from the objectively prescribed note values is absolutely forbidden in Bach's music. She called that romantic playing! So, when I played the Italian concerto, I had to practice the second movement with a metronome to avoid the slightest hints of rubato. Poor man, I feel sorry for myself 20 years ago.

[@ibikwitty8770]

the only part of your interpretation that puzzled me maestro were the punchy ornaments? no deliciously long appoggiaturas and acciaccaturas? performance practice of the time certainly does allow for them, if you like...!

[@johnmoraitis]

It definitely allows for them! I would say that this performance simply reflects my approach at that particular point and time, and the kind of expressive content I was after. But this is certainly not the only way to do it, and I highly doubt I would play it the same way if I were to revisit the piece in the future.

[@oboyoh3960]

yes! the idea of appoggiatura long accatiatura short is so silly! I enjoy stretching them a lot in this movement most of the time (but sometimes I play them like you did here too). Ornamentation is intended to be spontaneous, playful, emotive and expressive, those are the cardinal ideas that underpin the whole aesthetic. 'Gesture' in the Baroque is all of the above too.

[@israelkastoriano]

Dear,thank you for trying to educate. You definitely are in my view a serious scholar and musician. Nevertheless ,your singling out negatively one performer as the basis for your lecture is not collegial .Frankly I myself have reservations about every artist I hear but wouldn't act as you did; perhaps only with my own students.. My question to you is the following: I consider Bach's "testament" to performers to be "play in cantabile style" (out of the preface to the inventions and sinfonias). Are you sure you yourself would sing the way you are playing? Specifically I mean the abrupt and in my view too angular and didactic separation of groupings of notes,even though those are most logical. In other words do you think that instrumental and vocal practices ought not to converge. Sorry for my criticising you about Andras Schiff.

[@johnmoraitis]

In general, I don't like to single out performers because I regard them as colleagues. However, when an eminent performer such as Andras Schiff (whose playing in 19th-century and 20th-century repertory I admire, by the way) spreads misinformation purely because he dislikes the harpsichord, then I think it is important to point out the fallacy of his arguments, especially because they may negatively influence young performers. Incidentally, Schiff has himself apologized for the negative comments he used to make regarding fortepianos, so perhaps he will also admit that his comments regarding harpsichords are incorrect. Regarding the cantabile style, it is important to keep in mind that, like many other aspects of performance, what we call cantabile is based on a 19th-century performing aesthetic, which has nothing to do with what Baroque musicians had in mind when they used that term. Of course a harpsichord is not the same as the human voice, but yes, in terms of phrasing, I would indeed sing the way I play, emphasizing short gestures rather than long legato lines. And good Baroque singers (like Emma Kirkby, to mention one of the most prominent musicians) sing very differently compared to modern "operatic" singers.

[@stevecreswell9962]

@@johnmoraitis I'm waiting for Andras Schiff to to so, as well. Two years ago I heard him give a spectacular recital of Schumann and Janacek, so it seems you and I agree in this way, also.

[@danielwaitzman2118]

I find that you are right in principle; but your playing is excessively mannered and lacking in cantabile. And by the way, I believe that Frans Brüggen destroyed recorder-playing, with his bizarre style and lack of attention to tone.

[@johnmoraitis]

I certainly can't defend my own interpretation, but, since you are also criticizing Brüggen, may I suggest that what is considered "cantabile" has changed radically over the course of time? One essential element of HIP performances, as well as the use of historical instruments, is that it challenges our preconceptions of musical aesthetics. And, just as you find Brüggen "bizarre," an 18th-century musician would very likely think the same about a performer you admire.

[@danielwaitzman2118]

@@johnmoraitis The down-side of the "HIP" movement is that it assumes that mankind's psyche has changed since the days of the old masters. It has not; and I take it as axiomatic that what we conceive of as "cantabile"--or of most other musical characteristics, for that matter--has remained relatively constant. I consider Brüggen to be as modernist as Stravinsky, in that he rejects the old art, and, most especially, the old sensuous emotionality of Music, in favor of a materialist notion of deriving musical interpretation through materialist, documentary evidence. But it is more than that: he, like so many other recorder people, PREFERS the ugly to the beautiful. You can derive a perfectly horrible performance through the misapplication of Quantzian principles; and many people do. More than that, they disregard certain precepts of the old masters (such as Quantz's advocacy of a more or less constant breath vibrato as the normal way of making a tone on the flute--and, by analogy and implication, on the recorder as well). How many one-keyed flutists and players of the recorder "considerably improve the tone through the action of the chest", as Quantz recommends? (That is how I play the recorder and the "Baroque" flute: see, with apologies, my performance of a Telemann Recorder Sonata [kzbin.info/www/bejne/n5SnhGuXibiiqrc] and a Quantz Flute Sonata on the "Baroque" flute [kzbin.info/www/bejne/rIvUdqVqg5drea8]. Musical aesthetics do change; but they have always done so within certain limits, according to human perception and human feelings. Wagner and the 20th-century modernists upset the proverbial apple-cart, and "early music" is essentially a modernist attempt to justify a lack of musical common sense by recourse to an imaginary conception of the ethos of the old masters, seen through materialist glasses. The archaeological approach to music-making doesn't work: one must, rather, rethink and learn again to express one's feelings through Music. And, incidentally, how on earth can you be sure that "an 18th-century musician would very likely" find modern cantabile-playing bizarre"? I believe that this not so; but I cannot pretend to speak for Quantz with 100% certainty. By the way, I apologize for the bluntness of my criticism of your performance. I mean no disrespect. But since you appear to have made categorical statements, through musical performance, concerning the musical habits of the old masters, I felt obliged to comment on your performance. I think that you are right in principle; but to stretch certain notes to the degree that you have done--and this in a quick movement--seems mannered to me. I respectfully urge you to take a more nuanced approach, so as to allow the music to flow more naturally: and this is why I mentioned Brüggen--he apparently knew nothing of such things. I consider his playing an exemplar of the tumultuous protest movement of the Vietnam War era, rather than a suitable model for young musicians such yourself.

[@johnmoraitis]

@@danielwaitzman2118 Listen to Adelina Patti singing Bellini, and then listen to Callas -- and then tell me how "cantabile" has not changed over the years :-) Incidentally, Rossini -- among others -- was already complaining that the art of bel canto and cantabile singing had been lost. Reading historical sources, and listening to early recordings, provides ample evidence that musical aesthetics have changed radically. Again, this is not a defense of my own performance, but, at least my reading of historical sources cannot support the statement that musical aesthetics have remained relatively constant.

[@danielwaitzman2118]

@@johnmoraitis You are right in that styles have changed, sometimes considerably. I was wrong to imply otherwise. The “Early Music Sources” channel has a video on early sound recordings, which illustrates this very well. However, Brüggen’s stylistic antics were, I think, beyond the pale. He was WRONG, even though he imitated Leonhard, who was RIGHT. Listen to the ebb and flow of Leonhardt’s agogic accents. This is not mannerism, but, rather, expressivity of the sort that we find in the old recordings cited in the above-mentioned channel. I think that we must be careful in our interpretation of historical sources-we should never allow our interpretations of them to override our own innate musicality. Furthermore, we should recognize our right to express our own styles, whether or not they conform to historical styles, as these styles, rightly or wrongly, may appear to us. In passing, it it tragic that the recorder community chose to follow the example of Brüggen, rather than that of my teacher, Bernard Krainis, and myself. I couldn’t care less how closely you think you are following the teachings of the old masters: the question is, Do YOU really want to play that way? I respectfully call your attention to a lack of cantabile, and to a misinterpretation of 3-and-1 groupings as 2-and-2 groupings, and to a general lack of hierarchical appreciation of stress points in your phrasing. Nothing in Quantz tells you to play that way. You lean too excessively and too frequently. I say these things in all humility: do not take offense, but, rather, think about what I have said: and, above all, think about the music itself and the natural ebb and flow that exists in all of us.

[@plekkchand]

"So unique" is nonsense. Something is either unique or it isnt, like being pregnant. "So unusual" is proper English.

[@hobochangba7638]

Get off your high horse, you pedant.

[@plekkchand]

@@hobochangba7638 Learn the rules of English, you fool.

[@plekkchand]

Also: a pedant is primarily concerned with self-display, not with the subject he is treating. The purity of language is of extreme importance. Your implicit assumption that my remark was a matter of ostentation and that the subject was unimportant merely reaffirms the need for my making it in the first place. Presumably you think yourself virtuous in your plea for a big-spirited approach, which means you put yourself on a bit of a high horse yourself.

[@andresanchez7742]

"The purity of language is of extreme importance." - Oh, please enlighten us poor peasants with your pure knowledge! You are so much better than the average speaker! You're truly one of a kind! The world is so lucky to have you!

[@cavewerk]

When you say nonsense, do you mean that you can't make sense of what is being said? Do you mean it is literal nonsense? Or were you just taking liberties with the English language?