recordings in historic tunings

does any one know of some good recordings of Rameau and/or Couperin? Is it true that most "original instrument" recordings use period harpsichords tuned 12et?

Hello,

The best Rameau recording is quite possibly the Trevor Pinnock
recording on CRI, which is in an unequal temp.
Two Couperin recordings that I suggest are the Kenneth Gilbert
recordings and the Christophe Rousset. The Rousset is in an unequal
tuning, and I would assume that the Gilbert is also.

Steven Kallstrom

>does any one know of some good recordings of Rameau and/or Couperin?
>Is it true that most "original instrument" recordings use period
>harpsichords tuned 12et?

That isn't true.

>I have taped some Rameau in "unequal tuning", don't remember who the
>harpsichordist was. According to Daniel Wolf (surprised he hasn't
>responded), today most "original instrument" recordings aim for some
>authenticity in tuning. Certainly too many still use 12-tET.

I think this over-estimates the popularity of 12-tET harpsichords.
Very few harpsichords are tuned to 12-equal anymore. I'll buy the
person who can find a solo harpsichord album recorded in the last
5 years in equal tuning an ice cream cone.

-Carl

On Sat, 20 May 2000, Carl Lumma wrote:

> Very few harpsichords are tuned to 12-equal anymore. I'll buy the
> person who can find a solo harpsichord album recorded in the last
> 5 years in equal tuning an ice cream cone.

I don't think many professional harpsichordists would admit to using
12-tet any more; but apparently lots of people use Valotti, or Young, or
whatever you want to call it, which is not far from ET. Not far enough, in
my opinion, for anything 18th century I play. It's called 'lip-service.'
Which is a start.

Judy

>>I'll buy the person who can find a solo harpsichord album recorded
>>in the last 5 years in equal tuning an ice cream cone.
>
>Keith Jarrett WTC 2?
>(I like vanilla)

Possible, and me too!

I don't have the album, and I gather the liner notes say nothing? I
guess I should yank his French suites, if I can stand them...

-Carl

>Why are we talking about Jarretts music when La monte is so much more
>interesting and in his own tuning! Jarrett is always getting lost anyway.

While I admit that Jarrett's Bach can be painfully lackluster, and his
Shostakovitch outclassed, and his solo efforts a bit indulgent, I think
it would be wrong to claim that his performance of Shostakovitch's 24
preludes and fugues, or his Koln and Vienna concerts, are without merrit.
Although I find it a bit of apples and oranges, I prefer them to what
I've heard of La monte young. The only truely bad thing I've heard out
of Jarrett is his clavichord album.

-Carl

This Jarrett bashing won't end. I think that I agree with many
positions given. I think the thing to remember is that Jarrett is a
'third stream' artist, a crossover performer. I must say that his Jazz is
quite nice and he has his place in that world. His improv concerts may
get long boring and uneventful, but there are lovely moments in these
works, moments that can interest many composers. In his classical
performances he definately brings a very new and fresh
perspective. Stripping away the the performance practice issue, his
interpretations do offer a somewhat spontaneous quality that could have
only come from a prolific improviser. His interpretations may not be
standard and may not be great but he atleast makes us think about this
where as many performers in this world bury there personality in the sand
and mechanically pound out a tune. I'm not saying I like Jarrett, but I
think there might by some value in everything he has produced.

Steven Kallstrom