Academy of St Martin in the Fields Chamber Ensemble- Not Sure About This...

[JSngry]

I feel as if I've been Culture Punched or something...

Heard these guys last night, playing Mozart - Divertimento in D, Strauss - Till Eulenspiegel (arr. Franz Hasenohrl), & shubert - Octet in F.

Impeccably performed, I mean, perfect. But the music did not move. At all. It was static as hell. At first I felt like it was just my reaction to a more tightly "traditional" repertoire than I go for, but the longer it went along (especially in the Schubert)...I don't know...part of me feels that any performer who plays anything, there's sort of an unspoken need to justify your choices, you need to bring it as  far as why are you playing this? These guys, it was more like, hey, we are playing it perfectly (and they were), the music is its own justification (it should have been).

Except it didn't come off like that, it came off like anything these folks played (that evening, anyway) was going to sound equally perfect, and...that kinda pissed both me and the wife off, truth be told.

This was a big event for the Dallas Chamber Music society, the season premier performance, replete with champagne reception before and gala dinner afterwards (neither of which we attended, because even though we subscribed for the season, those events were anywhere from $250.00-$10,000.00 extra, sorry, we're not made of that much more money than we've already spent), and the house was packed. So obviously, this band is a money-maker, and you gotta make the money.

However, the Society's President spoke briefly before the concert about the need to keep the music accessible to a broader audience by keeping ticket prices down (they're already $40/person, which I don't mind paying to hear some really good playing that justifies me hearing it, and last year, they delivered consistently, on occasion intensely so), but geez, I got the very distinct impression that the people who will shell out the bucks to accomplish that would much rather hear this kind of generic perfection than they would anything sweaty, and people like me, who definitely benefit from keeping the ticket prices down, want to hear pretty much anything besides this type of generic perfection.

Next month brings us the Dover Quartet playing Dvorak, Berg, and Beethoven (and as I told my wife on the way home, hey, thank god for Beethoven, the man who insisted on putting bumps in the road to force you to stay awake). I expect to leave a bit sweatier than i arrived.

But the question remains - did we get Culture Punched by this Academy of St Martin in the Fields bunch, or are they really considered "state of the art" in today's chamber music world?

[Chuck Nessa]

There can be a huge difference between playing perfectly and making music.

[JSngry]

And there was.

After some level though, I feel that that's a choice with broader implications, and I felt like I was being asked to participate in a choice that I did not endorse.

Guess we could have gotten up and left, but that would have been a bit boorish.

[Scott Dolan]

Not sure if they're "state of the art" or not, but they certainly dominate the orchestral market. Seems like every other piece I hear on our local NPR was performed by them. 

That said, I'm not deep enough into that particular genre to know "perfect" from "personal". 

Jazz? Sure. "Classical"? All pretty much sounds the same (which is all on me). 

[JSngry]

What the real pisser was...not that the music was "too perfect", i mean, hell, there is no such thing, really. It was the notion that the music could/should be "perfect", like perfection is an attainable goal with one end result.

And that might be true, but if it is, once it's been achieved, why keep trying? Because you need the money?

I told Brenda on the way home, I would feel horribly wrong taking a young musician to hear music like this and telling them not to aspire to this. But i would feel just as bad telling them to aspire to it.

[Scott Dolan]

Is there really that much "wiggle room" when it comes to playing through composed music, though? It certainly wouldn't seem like it on the surface.

But in fairness, some folks think most single malts all taste the same, too. So my woefully untrained ear for classical music leaves me at a serious disadvantage to make any argument to the contrary. 

Just out of curiosity, are there any examples of the same piece played by different musicians you could post to highlight the differences? Not that I'd necessarily hear them, but it couldn't hurt. 

BTW, just looked at their Wiki entry. Over 500 sessions! I knew they recorded a ton, as I stated earlier, but that's just insane!

[soulpope]

@JSangry

The Academy St. Martin-In-The-Fields does not "dominate the market" (I believe we are speaking global here ....), it`s just one of the more reputational ensembles/orchestra available. They offer their point of view .... and there are of course different ones ..... but their`s for sure is not stand alone."state of art". But as you`ve mentioned rightly before it simply matters whether the performance moves you .... or not.

Without being overly expert on this ensemble, their had a precise view on Mozart,. but for Strauss "Till Eulenspiegel" (to best effect played by a "full-scale orechestra) or Schubert String Octet  IMO they can`t stand for a final choice .....

 

Edited October 6, 2015 by soulpope

[JSngry]

"Wiggle room" = interpretation, and there are divided schools of though about that, to put it mildly. Not just from a performing, but from a listening standpoint.

Comparisons...compare the Bartok String Quartets as performed by the Emerson Quartet to those of the Julliard or the Tackas Quartets.

Or get that really cheap Sony Rite of Spring box with 10 different versions recorded between 1929 & 1988, including two conducted by Stravinsky himself.

It's awesome (truly awesome, not today's "hey, you show up for work every day, you're AWESOME" type awesome) music with quantifiable, and I would think often enough audible differences.

Of course, this is not free improvisation, so, yeah, more or less the same "instructions" every time out. But past that, there is a lot of room for interpretation, at times on the spur of the moment, once or twice I've heard a group play and it was obvious that there was something going on that was very much "in the moment", and that's as exhilarating in composed music as it is improvised. A lot more than I would have appreciated until I started really paying attention, which has just been in the last year or two.

And that's what was missing from (or perhaps more accurately, what I did not get out of) last night's gig, that sense of "in the moment", that this had to happen right now, and by god, what a privilege it was to be there when it did!

@JSangry

The Academy St. Martin-In-The-Fields does not "dominate the market" (I believe we are speaking global here ....), it`s just one of the more reputational ensembles/orchestra available. They offer their point of view .... and there are of course different ones ..... but their`s for sure is not stand alone."state of art". But as you`ve mentioned rightly before it simply matters whether the performance moves you .... or not.

Without being overly expert on this ensemble, their had a precise view on Mozart,. but for Strauss "Till Eulenspiegel" (to best effect played by a "full-scale orechestra) or Schubert String Octet  IMO they can`t stand for a final choice .....

 

Thanks for that perspective. I'm not big on Mozart in general, just because, but I did appreciate their, as you call it, "precise view".

@soulpope (and others) - who's a good/preferred "go-to" for the Schubert? I heard a really wonderful composition going on, just could not engage with the performance. Would love to meet again under better circumstances, so to speak.

[Scott Dolan]

"Wiggle room" = interpretation

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Thanks for picking up on that. I couldn't find a better term to use there. 

As for the rest of your post, I really appreciate the explanation, but I still have to admit that I don't get it. 

When you say "instructions", you're talking about the notes on the page, right? 

I guess I'll have to find the examples you mentioned and give them a listen to see exactly what it is that you're getting at. It's interesting because I always thought the ultimate goal of through composed music WAS to play it perfectly. Just knowing that that isn't the case gives me something to ponder. 

Wrapping my head around this as I type, so please forgive this stupid question: but doesn't it become improvised music if one deviates from the "instructions"? I suppose that would end in really interesting results in smaller ensembles, but in larger ones? 

How many pieces were in the ensemble you and your wife saw? 

[soulpope]

"Wiggle room" = interpretation, and there are divided schools of though about that, to put it mildly. Not just from a performing, but from a listening standpoint.

Comparisons...compare the Bartok String Quartets as performed by the Emerson Quartet to those of the Julliard or the Tackas Quartets.

Or get that really cheap Sony Rite of Spring box with 10 different versions recorded between 1929 & 1988, including two conducted by Stravinsky himself.

It's awesome (truly awesome, not today's "hey, you show up for work every day, you're AWESOME" type awesome) music with quantifiable, and I would think often enough audible differences.

Of course, this is not free improvisation, so, yeah, more or less the same "instructions" every time out. But past that, there is a lot of room for interpretation, at times on the spur of the moment, once or twice I've heard a group play and it was obvious that there was something going on that was very much "in the moment", and that's as exhilarating in composed music as it is improvised. A lot more than I would have appreciated until I started really paying attention, which has just been in the last year or two.

And that's what was missing from (or perhaps more accurately, what I did not get out of) last night's gig, that sense of "in the moment", that this had to happen right now, and by god, what a privilege it was to be there when it did!

@JSangry

The Academy St. Martin-In-The-Fields does not "dominate the market" (I believe we are speaking global here ....), it`s just one of the more reputational ensembles/orchestra available. They offer their point of view .... and there are of course different ones ..... but their`s for sure is not stand alone."state of art". But as you`ve mentioned rightly before it simply matters whether the performance moves you .... or not.

Without being overly expert on this ensemble, their had a precise view on Mozart,. but for Strauss "Till Eulenspiegel" (to best effect played by a "full-scale orechestra) or Schubert String Octet  IMO they can`t stand for a final choice .....

 

Thanks for that perspective. I'm not big on Mozart in general, just because, but I did appreciate their, as you call it, "precise view".

@soulpope (and others) - who's a good/preferred "go-to" for the Schubert? I heard a really wonderful composition going on, just could not engage with the performance. Would love to meet again under better circumstances, so to speak.

for Schubert Octet in F major D 803 my preferred performance is by the "Wiener Oktett" (aka Vienna Octet)

led by principal Willi Boskovsky this is a moving Schubert performance .....

[Stefan Wood]

I think the Academy group sticks to the written music too faithfully.  Ruffled shirts need to be unbuttoned, sleeve rolled up; time to get funky!

An example that comes to mind are the naive Vivaldi series.  Man, those musicians are playing nasty!  They make the Brits look very stale.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Stefan Wood

[JSngry]

Thanks, soulpope, I'll check that one out.

Stefan - excuse my ignorance, but what is this "naive Vivaldi" thing? that sounds...interesting.

Scott - Yes, "instructions" = notes on page. Not a proper technical term.

For everything going forth, please understand that "classical" music is not my "native tongue". Although i received 4 years of pretty damn good instruction, I didn't always welcome it at the level that it was offered, my interests and passions were elsewhere. But i paid enough attention to have retained the basics, and really, at some level, music is music, period. But there are people on this board who know a helluva lot more - infinitely more - about the breadth and depth of this tradition than I do. I hope i don't spread any outright misconceptions in what is to follow, but consider it a very broad understading, the tippiest tip of the iceberg.

The biggest room for interpretation is in the phrasing, which involves tempo, and beyond that, pulse. Tempos within a phrase are not necessarily a rigid, metronomic steady beat. Also, tempos cover a certain range of metronome markings, not an exactly specific one, unless specifically indicated. Again, lots of room for interpretation, including improvisation. As with any kind of speed limit, some people take those things as suggestions instead of requirements.. The way a solo or group gets through any one phrase can have more variation than you might expect, which then carries out into things like transitions, variations, all the written elements. Even if two groups start and begin a phrase in the same points in time, what happens to time in between may not be identical.

Same thing with dynamics, even when there's a set point for certain moments, how you get in and out of it has room for interpretation.

As to whether or not it becomes improvised music when you interpret it, yes, actually, i think it does. Not wholly imporivsed, obviosuly, but definitly not "palying by numbers", exectuion for the sake of execution, no. And actually, it works to incredibly exciting effect when it happens in an orchestral setting. We also subscribed to the DSO this year (lousy seats from a visual standpoint, but perfectly good sonically), and we heard them do Mahler Symphony 1 this past weekend. The one good thing about our seats is that we can see the conductor in profile, or, at times, full on, and there were time when there was this really intense "come with me, now" thing going on, not unlike the night i got to sit behind Betty Carter and see those looks she would flash to the rhythm section as she went along. Some of a conductor's "posturing" is for show, no doubt, but not all of it, perhaps not even most of it (although Bernstein...still wonder about that with him). You hear stories about "temperamental conductors" and it's often about overall personality, but Furtwangler was famous for really, really, improvising with tempos on the stand, right in the middle of a gig.

It's a different dynamic than jazz, obviously, but it's still music, still a human endeavor. "Perfection" means different things to different people, so consider this - if there was one "perfect" way to play anything, then you would be able to replicate it, and then have overlapping recordings of different performances that, other than the recording quality itself, would be perfectly synced up all the way through. I don't know that such a dynamic exists in the realm of "references recordings", so hey.

Although that type of robotic replicability does seem to be the goal of any number of individuals (and not just in classical music, but in all music, hell, in life in general), especially at the student level), the goal of "perfection" is to expand the options, not limit them. And if that seems to be a contradictory notion, perhaps it is. that's why to me, there's no such thing as an absolute "perfection" in music, but there are any number of perfect outcomes. The whole "know the rules so you can break them" thing, an informed opinion about a piece, equal emphasis on "informed" and "opinion".

Chuck has noted here before that Toscannini's tempos got faster as he got older, and Solti's got slower. There are cases (don't ask me to recall anything specific at this moment, please!) where a later Solti piece goes on, like, 5-6 minutes longer than an earlier performance of the same piece. These are still wind and percussion instruments (and human voices, as the case may be), so when you alter the duration of note values to that extent, there is of necessity an alteration of what the players have to do to make that happen and still sound "right". It not a digital thing where you can slow the tempo down and keep everything else identical, there are real time performance implications, very real, very real time. Just as in jazz, lots of people can play slow, but playing Shirley Horn slow are two totally different considerations. So yeah, lots of room for things to happen every time out.

The program we saw presented a string quintet for the Mozart, a quintet of violin, clarinet, bassoon, french horn, and bass for the Strauss, and the combined ensemble for the Schubert. You'd think that the varied instrumentation between pieces would create its won contrast, but if it did, it did not occur in a manner which i could meaningfully discern. Then again, maybe it was me. Or maybe it was nobody,

[Larry Kart]

The Academy of St Martin in the Fields orchestra, from which the chamber ensemble is drawn, was founded back in 1959:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_of_St_Martin_in_the_Fields

and made a great many recordings in the Baroque field and of music of the early Classical era. Some of those recordings were good or better for their time, but over the years an air of bland routine-ness settled in with ASMF, not to mention that in Baroque music performance and also of the music of Haydn, Mozart, et al.  a good deal has changed stylistically in recent decades, often for the best (see Mom's numerous posts on this topic). Further, you're talking about English musicians, who have a generally deserved reputation for lack of exuberance.

Sorry you had an unhappy experience, but I wouldn't generalize that much from it. ASMF blandness is not the norm in that repertoire these days.

[JSngry]

Yeah, I did the homework about the band when they started soliciting participation for the pre- and post-concert events. Happy to sense that the "blandness" that I felt was not necessarily entirely my fault. Sounds like this might have been one of those gigs where you need the money the band brings with it, so that's the band you hire.

I will say this, on a positive note - the bassoonist (Lawrence O'Donnell) and the clarinetist (Timothy Orpen) were both young-ish and played with what seemed to be a lot of attempted verve. Not idea what that scene is like, maybe this is the gig for the rest of your life, but if I saw them in a different band and/or a different program, I would gladly give it a shot. The other folks, maybe not so much.

Larry, who would you call on for the Schubert? Like I said, I heard interesting music not being particularly interesting. Different interpretations seriously being sought.

Scott, if you're interested, here's a possible chance to play contrast and compare for maybe not a whole lot of money. You can get many great used classical CDs for almost literally next to nothing on Amazon.

[T.D.]

"Naive Vivaldi" - possibly this project? http://www.naive.fr/en/artist/vivaldi-edition

Looks interesting, but I haven't heard any of it.

[Stefan Wood]

yup.  

[psu_13]

One of my old favorite records is the ASMF Brandenburg concertos from the 70s. As has been mentioned it is not in line stylistically with what is more popular now, but I am not all that enthusiastic about the current performance styles, in general. 

On the other hand, there is a "period" group in Cleveland called Apollo's Fire that I can get behind. If you have a Spotify or Apple Music account you can probably compare their performances with the older recording. Actually I bet you can do so on youtube as well...

Ah yes ASMF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7BMf96xT0Q

Apollo's Fire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtIJvA2f1U and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrqP9lm_B9c

They are not actually as different as I remembered ... I guess that makes sense since I like them both. ? The second tends to be a bit less stiff, and a little more improvisational.

Anyway, the other point I was going to make was that it sometimes a particular performance by a particular band of a particular piece on a particular night just doesn't connect. Classical music (and especially music from the classical period ... Mozart, Haydn, Schubert, etc) sometimes has an emotional distance and level of abstraction that keeps it from really getting under your brain unless the conditions are optimal. I've certainly had this experience more than once. Part of the game, I guess.

[Scott Dolan]

@JSangry

The Academy St. Martin-In-The-Fields does not "dominate the market" (I believe we are speaking global here ....)

Oh?

Name another ensemble who has over 500 titles to their name. 

 

Jim, thanks for the thorough explanation. It makes a lot of sense. Perfection being a pursuit, not a destination. 

It sounds like (based on your report) the current ensemble is adhering to paint-by-numbers sterility, and I could see how annoying that would be to a trained ear. And considering the overwhelming majority of their audience will come to the performance with highly tuned listening skills, it's kind of confusing why they would choose to go that route. 

Edited October 7, 2015 by Scott Dolan

[papsrus]

This business of "wiggle room" -- it appears to be quite vast, actually, and the cognoscenti can be passionate in their criticisms of various "interpretations." Tempo, phrasing, vibrato, legato (Karajan); or more broadly, faithfulness to the score, the composer's intent, the "meaning" of the piece.

If you go to a rehearsal you can get a sense of how much "wiggle room" there really is in a given piece of music, how much give and take there is with the score, among the musicians, how their own preferences, or the conductor's "vision" for a given piece, come into play.   

I love Celebidache precisely because he uses tempo to such dramatic effect -- in Bruckner, particularly. But where I hear an intense emotional involvement with the music, others find his often dramatically slower tempos distasteful, an assault on the score and a betrayal of the composer's intent. 

So, yeah, there's wiggle room. As for The Academy of St. Martin's, can't say. Don't know, but I'd guess that their reputation requires a certain standard of precision when they perform, not necessarily a depth of interpretation. That's fine, as far as it goes. Perhaps coming from a difference place -- for instance, if you were familiar with dozens of interpretations of the pieces that were performed -- you might have a different appreciation for the performance. It's a very personal thing, in the end.  

 

Edited October 7, 2015 by papsrus

[JSngry]

 

It sounds like (based on your report) the current ensemble is adhering to paint-by-numbers sterility, and I could see how annoying that would be to a trained ear. And considering the overwhelming majority of their audience will come to the performance with highly tuned listening skills, it's kind of confusing why they would choose to go that route. 

Well, this is where it gets into possible Culture Punching...this particular gig was all about fund-raising, and this group obviously draws a crowd, and this was obviously a "social event" was well as a musical one. When you get into that world, the whole notion of "classical music as class weapon" that some of our UK posters reference has a much clearer face on it than it does at other events..you see a lot of people who give off an air (perhaps entirely imagined on my part, but...probably not, from my experience) of being of a "type" who are delighted, comforted, and made to feel justified by by this kind of self-fulfilling notion of "perfection", and "quality". It's the they are great=we are here with them=we are great equation one of its oldest and finest manifestations.

Whereas, I've been to more than just a few classical concerts where the music was pretty damn edgy, even when on repertoire of an older vintage. I heard Alisa Weilerstein play some Bach that had me sitting on the edge of my seat with my eyes and ears WIDE open, it had that kind of immediacy going on, like, by god, this needs to be happening now, both for her and for me. And string quartets, heard the Tackas quartet play a varied program, and each piece was dealt with on its own merits. It wasn't like they were going to play everything to be one kind of "perfect", they confronted the music head-on to bring what IT needed, not what THEY needed. Or looked at antother way, they gave of themselves to make the music come alive, they did not take from the music to make them seem alive. And of course, the music paid them back in kind, but those are different propositions going in, eh?

And see, that's where I got off from classical music for a long time, this notion that there was one way to play it, no room for real passion or spontaneity, that is was all "acting" to one degree or another, all that. And there is that school, but....there is another world that is a lot more real-time about the music, and they're out there performing and in their own tuxedoed/formal-weared way are pretty much raising hell, not by doing mike-drops or anything (HA!) but by just showing up and bringing music to life, not Disney-Animatronic life, but full, bloodflowingdeepbreathing LIFE, you know? REAL people summoning spirits through sound, that type of thing.

There's any audience that is not comforted by that, they enjoy seeing the ghosts put on display so they gaze on them with a steady pulse, and play the "that's what I am a part of" game. Me, I like to leave with more than I came with, be it excitement, serenity, clarity, questions, whatever. I'm not going to say which one is "right", because if it works for you, it works for you. I will say that at this point, I know what I don't like a lot more clearly than I know what I do like, and what I don't like is getting Culture Punched.

 

[soulpope]

@JSangry

The Academy St. Martin-In-The-Fields does not "dominate the market" (I believe we are speaking global here ....)

Oh?

Name another ensemble who has over 500 titles to their name. 

 

Jim, thanks for the thorough explanation. It makes a lot of sense. Perfection being a pursuit, not a destination. 

It sounds like (based on your report) the current ensemble is adhering to paint-by-numbers sterility, and I could see how annoying that would be to a trained ear. And considering the overwhelming majority of their audience will come to the performance with highly tuned listening skills, it's kind of confusing why they would choose to go that route. 

I believe we learned inter alias via Larry Kart`s post that this ensembles "heyday" was in the seventies/early eighties, when this style of performances had their dedicated followership .... so the number of (their) recordings doen`t make here sense as argument at all.

But in case you are number/quantity oriented to determine "impact", pls try Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra .... Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra ...... London Philharmonic Orchestra and others ......

[Larry Kart]

Yeah, I did the homework about the band when they started soliciting participation for the pre- and post-concert events. Happy to sense that the "blandness" that I felt was not necessarily entirely my fault. Sounds like this might have been one of those gigs where you need the money the band brings with it, so that's the band you hire.

I will say this, on a positive note - the bassoonist (Lawrence O'Donnell) and the clarinetist (Timothy Orpen) were both young-ish and played with what seemed to be a lot of attempted verve. Not idea what that scene is like, maybe this is the gig for the rest of your life, but if I saw them in a different band and/or a different program, I would gladly give it a shot. The other folks, maybe not so much.

Larry, who would you call on for the Schubert? Like I said, I heard interesting music not being particularly interesting. Different interpretations seriously being sought.

Scott, if you're interested, here's a possible chance to play contrast and compare for maybe not a whole lot of money. You can get many great used classical CDs for almost literally next to nothing on Amazon.

Damn -- the Schubert Octet recording I have must be mis-filed because I can't find it and don't recall now which one it was. Maybe this one:

http://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Octet-Michael-Collins-Friends/dp/B000OY1YQQ/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1444189877&sr=1-2&keywords=schubert+octet+collins

Another one that's received some enthusiastic reviews:

http://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Octet-Franz/dp/B000BOWT4K/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1444190184&sr=1-1&keywords=schubert+mullova

FWIW, my favorite recording of the Mendelssohn Octet is by ... ASMF:

http://www.amazon.com/Mendelssohn-Academy-Martin-Chamber-Ensemble/dp/B0011B5I4K/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&qid=1444235195&sr=8-12&keywords=mendelssohn+octet+academy

Not the only ASMF recording of that work, I believe. This one is from 1989 and is maybe the second or even the third ASMF go at it (some different players involved each time, probably). Main thing, as we all know, is that you've got to use your own ears and make up your own mind.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Larry Kart

[Scott Dolan]

 

But in case you are number/quantity oriented to determine "impact", pls try Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra .... Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra ...... London Philharmonic Orchestra and others ......

They may be right up there as well, I don't know. But those also had FAR earlier starts in the recording world. 

Just saying, St. Martin's is heard often on the radio and has over 500 recordings to their name. If that isn't absolute market dominance, it's sure as hell in the running!

[johnblitweiler]

Neville Marinner recordings are good if you go for big lush orch. sound and swooning crescendos. For me, perfection is tiresome.

[7/4]

I thought they were just studio cats. 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited October 11, 2015 by 7/4