A thought or two regarding performances

Obviously, my enjoyment of a piece of music increases with greater performances, but rarely if ever am I 'bored' by a performance of a piece of music I like, unless the performer is just plain incompetent and can't hit the correct notes or the instrument is faulty in some way. I must be a very rare breed in this respect, because, especially on the recording newsgroups, it is often remarked that X's performance of piece Y is 'boring' whereas Z's performance is ... enthralling.

This issue occured to me this past weekend because I bought the Heifetz recording of Bach's sonatas and partitas, which I sadly find to be a very disappointing performance (I feel the same about Perlman's, but I like Szeryng's first, Podger's and van Dael's, in case anyone cares). But, I can't say I find the recording boring. In fact, there are many moments that are very beautiful and, at the very least, everything is engaging. Relegated to the proverbial desert island with this recording and only this recording of the s/p, I would listen to it often.

I'm convinced that good music, as long as it is played competently on an adequate instrument, *cannot be played so badly it is boring*. Yes, I figure I'm pretty much alone in this view, but I'm curious if anyone else shares it.

Also, along the same lines: in a telephone call to a friend a week ago, we both came to the conclusion that we rarely find one recording of a work hands down 'the best'. The more recorded a work is, the less likely we are to find one 'best' recording. More often, we like several recordings and value each on its own merits and choose one or another depending on mood or whim. We may even enjoy recordings by performers who have diametrically opposed styles (suggesting we don't subscribe to the 'Beethoven must be played *this* way' school).

But here too my friend and I are in the minority, since often recordings buffs cite one recording as the best, even of an oft-recorded work. Again, I wonder if anyone shares our view. Please don't respond merely by telling me you *don't* share my view. I expect you don't.

I agree, actually. Wishing that the performance came up to what you expected is itself interesting. You get to listen to your expectations. I always hear an atrocious 'Messiah' when the season rolls around. The piece is invulnerable to a bad performance.

Hi John,

Actually I don't think you're alone in this view, and what's more, when you step outside the world of compulsive record-collectors (like many of us here or in RMCR), I think this view is actually more widespread than is generally accepted.

After all, the vast majority of casual record-buyers will buy one recording of some work that they like, and never really think about it again. If they want to listen to Beethoven's 9th, they stick on their CD of Beethoven's 9th and off they go, happy as Larry!! Of course, around these parts it's easy to suggest that this is due to ignorance: if these people *really* loved and understood this music, they'd listen to lots of different recordings and decide that 'X' conducts the best on label 'Y'. I'm not criticising here

on 6/15/01 4:06 AM:

You may be right, but I admit to having lots of different recordings of many pieces. My current CD collection numbers somewhere around 2000 discs, and much of it consists of multiple performances of favorite works. Still, having on the order of 10,000 discs is not rare among serious collectors, so I have not yet gone completely overboard. My point was just that I don't find the worst of these recordings 'boring'. I still *like* even bad performances of good music, but that doesn't mean I don't seek out the best recordings, although rarely, as I said, do I find *one* best.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, John, but this ng is sometimes a funny place. It makes me think of the 'Sounds Crazy' thread going at the moment. Here, it's pretty normal to laugh at those crazy audiophiles who spend all their time (and money) chasing the perfect sound. Someone invariably makes the comment 'Wouldn't they be better off spending the money on more CDs'.

Of course, this doesn't differ all that much from chasing the perfect recording of any given work, and there are people who have laughed at me for doing exactly that. I have been asked on more than one occasion 'Wouldn't you be better off buying some different music, rather than the same piece by different conductors...'

But now I'm taking this thread away from where it started, so I think I'll leave it there.

Never been an audiophile. I find there is a certain quality of sound past which I simply cannot distinguish any difference.

My answer to that is *I do both*!

In another thread I recently commented that I thought the Keith Jarrett recording of the Shostakovich Preludes and Fugues was excellent and someone wrote in to say that he thought it was the most boring thing he had ever heard in his life and recommended the Scherbakov recording on Naxos. It was hard to imagine how anyone could be bored by it unless they just didn't like Shostakovich; I bought the Naxos recording and it is a little different, de-emphasizing the dissonances and putting a dreamy romantic spin on some things Jarrett plays with more Bach-like rhythmic energy (e.g. fugue #7), but I suspect I would never be bored by any performance of these pieces.

That was me; my characterization might well have been unfair, because I haven't heard it in several years and the problem then might have been

Well, McGegan proved this to be false.

I have zero tolerance for slow tempi, especially in fast movements.