The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Talk about things that are not necessarily related to music or the guitar.
ddray
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2017 3:10 pm

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by ddray » Thu May 02, 2019 6:53 am

60moo wrote:
Thu May 02, 2019 5:34 am
...

Put another way, they sound far better on guitar than even the best Chaconne on guitar.
The point is though that in what we might call intrinsic interest or value as a work of art, even a mediocre Chaconne played on whatever has more stature than any of the pieces you mentioned, and no amount of exposure is going to change that. And personally I think the Chaconne only sounds "right" on the violin. My point is probably more in response to the idea that "Bach doesn't fit on the guitar very well." Some does, some doesn't; some is at least worth a try. I think what I'm trying to say is that a solo instrument needs some unmistakable "masterworks" in its repertoire, and the guitar does have those, including imo Britten's Nocturnal and Ginastera's Sonata. But for me the "heart" of the guitar repertoire would be the so-called "lute" works of Bach. I think those particular pieces sound better on the guitar than any other instrument, although they weren't written for the guitar.
Last edited by ddray on Thu May 02, 2019 11:09 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
rojarosguitar
Posts: 5004
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: near Freiburg, Germany

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by rojarosguitar » Thu May 02, 2019 7:08 am

The whole thread makes me reflect the actual social and psychological function of the dismissive gesture. Dismissive gestures are so widespread in the different strata of the society that one could assume they are deeply embedded in our evolutionary equipment.

Whatever it is, one should remember that they do not establish any truth in and of themselves but just serve to delineate a borderline between adherents and opponents of that which has been dismissed. They actually speak more about the person doing the gesture than about what has been dismissed.
Music is a big continent with different landscapes and corners. Some of them I do visit frequently, some from time to time and some I know from hearsay only ...

My Youtube Channel is: TheMusicalEvents

User avatar
Mark Clifton-Gaultier
Posts: 1765
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:03 pm
Location: England

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by Mark Clifton-Gaultier » Thu May 02, 2019 8:15 am

rojarosguitar wrote:The whole thread makes me reflect the actual social and psychological function of the dismissive gesture ... They actually speak more about the person doing the gesture than about what has been dismissed.
:Shrug:

User avatar
zupfgeiger
Posts: 2157
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:12 pm
Location: Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by zupfgeiger » Thu May 02, 2019 9:22 am

Harsh reactions and dismissive gestures are nothing at all new in the musical world. How many times did Beethoven complain about critics who rejected debut performances of his today world famous compositions. Some music critics in history were famous for their slaughters. But those guys really understood the topic they wrote about. Critics were a part of the cultural life and artists may have liked it or not - they had to live with it. Today, in times of social media hype and anonymous internet culture, everybody - fitted with musical expertise or not - makes fun of writing devastating, slanderous comments about everything that might pop up, very often anonymous and not at all based on reasoned judgements. This has nothing to do with musical review, it's just bad behaviour.
Fritz Ober, Torres/Hauser model, 2010, spruce/maple
Giovanni Tacchi, Bouchet model, spruce/BRAZ, 2018

Tonit
Posts: 458
Joined: Tue May 22, 2018 1:44 am

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by Tonit » Thu May 02, 2019 9:18 pm

zupfgeiger wrote:
Thu May 02, 2019 9:22 am
Critics were a part of the cultural life and artists may have liked it or not - they had to live with it. Today, in times of social media hype and anonymous internet culture, everybody - fitted with musical expertise or not - makes fun of writing devastating, slanderous comments about everything that might pop up, very often anonymous and not at all based on reasoned judgements. This has nothing to do with musical review, it's just bad behaviour.
So here is a point: bad behavior.
If we were somehow aspired to be the best critics, it might worth discussing.
Then what it says is just "disastrous" without why. It's a bad criticism allowing nowhere to latch on to except for asking "why".

If we are aspired for a good musicianship, it is a bad behavior, meaning, it is bad also for the others but in particular it works the worst for ourselves.

So what else could it be good? I can say it started off as good as a mere like/dislike poll allowing audience to vent.

I should also mention, as far as my experience is concerned, also there are un-musical conditions which pros need to cope with, like "Can you play it in 5 minutes, because our TV show doesn't have 7 minute for your performance?" as they quite often encounter.

I seldom like critics and I do not care unless they are personally biting on me. Besides my father was one of them and I stopped talking with him for a long while.

Stephen Faulk
Posts: 1290
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:27 am

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by Stephen Faulk » Sun May 05, 2019 1:47 am

I really liked the recorder version, I hope that doesn’t make me a bad person.
Patience at the bending iron pays in rounded dividends!

Tonit
Posts: 458
Joined: Tue May 22, 2018 1:44 am

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by Tonit » Sun May 05, 2019 2:21 am

Stephen Faulk wrote:
Sun May 05, 2019 1:47 am
I really liked the recorder version, I hope that doesn’t make me a bad person.
Yeah me too. One thing I noticed was maybe he could do circular breathing if the technique is doable with recorders.

bodhisattva
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by bodhisattva » Wed May 08, 2019 10:49 pm

Let's read Bryan Townsend's criticism on Eliot Fisk's live performance of Paganini's "Caprice No.24" and Britten's "Nocturnal".
- he is beating the guitar to death which is why he is having to adjust the tuning every few measures
- another sign of the excessive pounding on the instrument is the awful tone: nasty, naily and percussive
- his tempos are faster than he is capable of executing cleanly, which is why so many notes are barely heard and so many rhythms are distorted
- this piece is perfect for players who are mindless technical machines as it is pretty much pure virtuosity, so for Eliot it is a good choice, but he simply cannot play it cleanly, so the end result is just bad
This is playing so bad that it is painful and, for me at least, unlistenable. I would not be willingly present at a recital by Eliot Fisk.

The Britten is a rather different situation. This is the musical opposite of the Paganini and requires the greatest sensitivity of musicianship. For the first, slow section, Eliot almost has us convinced he has given up his bad old ways. But no, as soon as the next, fast, section begins, the raucous brutality returns and the sheer sloppiness, missed notes, bad tone and lack of musicality makes it also unlistenable.
http://themusicsalon.blogspot.com/2015/ ... -fisk.html

MarkInLA
Posts: 1369
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 2:43 am

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by MarkInLA » Thu May 09, 2019 8:41 pm

soltirefa wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 4:53 am
Hear about the lady butcher who backed into the meat grinder? Disaster (dis-assed her).
Take the H off 'her' and replace with an apostrophe: 'er . Will read smoother: dis assed 'er ... Now, that's a "Chic-home" we can tolerate ! .... :aide:

Realstaff
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 8:16 am

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by Realstaff » Thu May 09, 2019 8:45 pm

bodhisattva wrote:
Wed May 08, 2019 10:49 pm
Let's read Bryan Townsend's criticism on Eliot Fisk's live performance of Paganini's "Caprice No.24" and Britten's "Nocturnal".
- he is beating the guitar to death which is why he is having to adjust the tuning every few measures
- another sign of the excessive pounding on the instrument is the awful tone: nasty, naily and percussive
- his tempos are faster than he is capable of executing cleanly, which is why so many notes are barely heard and so many rhythms are distorted
- this piece is perfect for players who are mindless technical machines as it is pretty much pure virtuosity, so for Eliot it is a good choice, but he simply cannot play it cleanly, so the end result is just bad
This is playing so bad that it is painful and, for me at least, unlistenable. I would not be willingly present at a recital by Eliot Fisk.

The Britten is a rather different situation. This is the musical opposite of the Paganini and requires the greatest sensitivity of musicianship. For the first, slow section, Eliot almost has us convinced he has given up his bad old ways. But no, as soon as the next, fast, section begins, the raucous brutality returns and the sheer sloppiness, missed notes, bad tone and lack of musicality makes it also unlistenable.
http://themusicsalon.blogspot.com/2015/ ... -fisk.html
Spot on.

Stephen Faulk
Posts: 1290
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:27 am

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by Stephen Faulk » Sat May 11, 2019 5:13 pm

bodhisattva wrote:
Wed May 08, 2019 10:49 pm
Let's read Bryan Townsend's criticism on Eliot Fisk's live performance of Paganini's "Caprice No.24" and Britten's "Nocturnal".
- he is beating the guitar to death which is why he is having to adjust the tuning every few measures
- another sign of the excessive pounding on the instrument is the awful tone: nasty, naily and percussive
- his tempos are faster than he is capable of executing cleanly, which is why so many notes are barely heard and so many rhythms are distorted
- this piece is perfect for players who are mindless technical machines as it is pretty much pure virtuosity, so for Eliot it is a good choice, but he simply cannot play it cleanly, so the end result is just bad
This is playing so bad that it is painful and, for me at least, unlistenable. I would not be willingly present at a recital by Eliot Fisk.

The Britten is a rather different situation. This is the musical opposite of the Paganini and requires the greatest sensitivity of musicianship. For the first, slow section, Eliot almost has us convinced he has given up his bad old ways. But no, as soon as the next, fast, section begins, the raucous brutality returns and the sheer sloppiness, missed notes, bad tone and lack of musicality makes it also unlistenable.
http://themusicsalon.blogspot.com/2015/ ... -fisk.html

Nice try. You selected the parts of the review that only support your obvious discontent. I hope you feel happy that someone validated you. You seem to need a lot of validation.
Patience at the bending iron pays in rounded dividends!

ddray
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2017 3:10 pm

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by ddray » Sun May 12, 2019 4:53 am

Yeah, I have to say I don't quite get it. If you don't like Fisk's playing (or that of any other musician for that matter), don't listen to it.

Tonit
Posts: 458
Joined: Tue May 22, 2018 1:44 am

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by Tonit » Sun May 12, 2019 10:51 am

bodhisattva wrote:
Wed May 08, 2019 10:49 pm
Let's read Bryan Townsend's criticism on Eliot Fisk's live performance of Paganini's "Caprice No.24" and Britten's "Nocturnal".
- he is beating the guitar to death which is why he is having to adjust the tuning every few measures
- another sign of the excessive pounding on the instrument is the awful tone: nasty, naily and percussive
- his tempos are faster than he is capable of executing cleanly, which is why so many notes are barely heard and so many rhythms are distorted
- this piece is perfect for players who are mindless technical machines as it is pretty much pure virtuosity, so for Eliot it is a good choice, but he simply cannot play it cleanly, so the end result is just bad
This is playing so bad that it is painful and, for me at least, unlistenable. I would not be willingly present at a recital by Eliot Fisk.

The Britten is a rather different situation. This is the musical opposite of the Paganini and requires the greatest sensitivity of musicianship. For the first, slow section, Eliot almost has us convinced he has given up his bad old ways. But no, as soon as the next, fast, section begins, the raucous brutality returns and the sheer sloppiness, missed notes, bad tone and lack of musicality makes it also unlistenable.
http://themusicsalon.blogspot.com/2015/ ... -fisk.html
I see.
So apparently you agree with those remarks. But you probably missed the point: it could also be positively described.
The guitar pounding can be ample power that brings the guitar to its limit, with nails that defines the notes with extreme clarity like no other.
I really cant let go of "mindless technical machines" part. I can let go "technical machines" part, but how do you find and validate "mindless"-ness? You really cannot, and is more subjective observation which makes the criticism partial. It could also be highly likely that the mindful-ness is somewhere higher than the critic's understanding that you and none else ever could.
Your remarks may influence non-guitarist audience, but here we are guitarists discussing, meaning, we can be more objectively evaluate the complete set of pros and cons of a certain performance or performer to arrive at more resourceful conclusions through more meaningful discussion than like/dislike poll.

Othewise your remarks that you have compiled would be more likely to be dismissed by many guitarists who are aware of some things are "too good to be true" and the others are "too bad to be true" out of any critics.

User avatar
60moo
Posts: 1831
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 11:35 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by 60moo » Sun May 12, 2019 2:42 pm

I thought Fisk did an excellent job on the Nocturnal, even if the second (fast) movement was a complete letdown.

If you can't play a section cleanly, then you can't play that section - sorry, but it's that simple. Which begs the following questions:

(i) Should we judge a whole multi-movement performance on the execution of each and every movement, or is it still O.K. to have one or more (that is no more than, say, 10% of the total) played in a way that is less than generally considered acceptable?; and

(ii) For an otherwise highly regarded classical guitarist, is it right for us to consider him or her members of an elite if more than, say, 10% of their total recorded stage performances are roundly condemned by a significant proportion of guitarists?

To my mind, Fisk gets a 'Yes' on (i) (he still conveyed overall meaning to me with the Nocturnal), and a 'No' on (ii).

bodhisattva
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The most disastrous "Chaconne" ever seen

Post by bodhisattva » Sun May 12, 2019 10:28 pm

Tonit wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 10:51 am
bodhisattva wrote:
Wed May 08, 2019 10:49 pm
Let's read Bryan Townsend's criticism on Eliot Fisk's live performance of Paganini's "Caprice No.24" and Britten's "Nocturnal".
- he is beating the guitar to death which is why he is having to adjust the tuning every few measures
- another sign of the excessive pounding on the instrument is the awful tone: nasty, naily and percussive
- his tempos are faster than he is capable of executing cleanly, which is why so many notes are barely heard and so many rhythms are distorted
- this piece is perfect for players who are mindless technical machines as it is pretty much pure virtuosity, so for Eliot it is a good choice, but he simply cannot play it cleanly, so the end result is just bad
This is playing so bad that it is painful and, for me at least, unlistenable. I would not be willingly present at a recital by Eliot Fisk.

The Britten is a rather different situation. This is the musical opposite of the Paganini and requires the greatest sensitivity of musicianship. For the first, slow section, Eliot almost has us convinced he has given up his bad old ways. But no, as soon as the next, fast, section begins, the raucous brutality returns and the sheer sloppiness, missed notes, bad tone and lack of musicality makes it also unlistenable.
http://themusicsalon.blogspot.com/2015/ ... -fisk.html
I see.
So apparently you agree with those remarks. But you probably missed the point: it could also be positively described.
The guitar pounding can be ample power that brings the guitar to its limit, with nails that defines the notes with extreme clarity like no other.
I really cant let go of "mindless technical machines" part. I can let go "technical machines" part, but how do you find and validate "mindless"-ness? You really cannot, and is more subjective observation which makes the criticism partial. It could also be highly likely that the mindful-ness is somewhere higher than the critic's understanding that you and none else ever could.
Your remarks may influence non-guitarist audience, but here we are guitarists discussing, meaning, we can be more objectively evaluate the complete set of pros and cons of a certain performance or performer to arrive at more resourceful conclusions through more meaningful discussion than like/dislike poll.

Othewise your remarks that you have compiled would be more likely to be dismissed by many guitarists who are aware of some things are "too good to be true" and the others are "too bad to be true" out of any critics.
I did NOT write those remarks. All those remarks was written by Bryan Townsend.
Bryan Townsend wrote:

"- he is beating the guitar to death which is why he is having to adjust the tuning every few measures
- another sign of the excessive pounding on the instrument is the awful tone: nasty, naily and percussive
- his tempos are faster than he is capable of executing cleanly, which is why so many notes are barely heard and so many rhythms are distorted
- this piece is perfect for players who are mindless technical machines as it is pretty much pure virtuosity, so for Eliot it is a good choice, but he simply cannot play it cleanly, so the end result is just bad
This is playing so bad that it is painful and, for me at least, unlistenable. I would not be willingly present at a recital by Eliot Fisk.

The Britten is a rather different situation. This is the musical opposite of the Paganini and requires the greatest sensitivity of musicianship. For the first, slow section, Eliot almost has us convinced he has given up his bad old ways. But no, as soon as the next, fast, section begins, the raucous brutality returns and the sheer sloppiness, missed notes, bad tone and lack of musicality makes it also unlistenable."


Please read his full article here:
http://themusicsalon.blogspot.com/2015/ ... -fisk.html

Return to “The Café”