The historical performance trend in classical music : love it or hate it. If you have perfect pitch (i.e. absolute pitch AP), you'll shudder with horror at the thought of sitting through a performance tuned to a different frequency from your inbuilt pitch reference. Common symptoms include nausea, headache, disorientation, and exiting the concert early. If you were a performer, good luck remapping your inner pitch system!
Thankfully I've never had to prepare a historical performance. For those not familiar with musical tuning systems, here's how it works.
Imagine you are used to climbing a flight of stairs that are spaced at standard height (say 7 inches). Crucially, the first step (similar to our concert A4=440Hz) starts at a specific, well-defined height off the ground, let's say 10 inches. You are so familiar with this flight of stairs that you can run up and down and jump across multiple steps with your eyes closed.
Now imagine someone decided to change the stair dimensions to a different system, perhaps to recreate a historical era when people were shorter. Imagine running up and down the stairs like you did before. You'll probably have to adjust your proprioception, going against the inbuilt spatial map you have in your brain. If you have a robust inbuilt map (like someone with perfect pitch), you'll have a hard time adjusting, and will probably tumble down the stairs in a state of disorientation. If you don't have AP, you'll be more adaptable.
Classical music performance has gone through multiple historical revivals through the years. The most recent trend is termed historically informed performance. Music is recreated in the instrument of that era, and tuning is set to that era. That means the standard concert A4 ranges from 392 Hz (French Baroque) to 466 Hz (Venice Renaissance), depending on the piece.
The octave Hz ratio is always 2:1 since antiquity (there is a neurophysiological and cultural basis for this, more on that in another post.). You can think of it as a fixed height between level 1 and level 2 of the stairs. However, the spacing between the notes can vary - the step height varies. This ranges from well-temperament (Bach's era), meantone temperament (Renaissance) to Pythagorean tuning (Medieval).
Compare that with modern 12 tone equal temperament (TET), where the 2:1 Hz octave ratio is distributed equally across the 12 tones. This distributes inevitable dissonances from previous tuning systems into smaller, less perceptible dissonances, allowing greater harmonic freedom and modulations. I'll discuss more about these aesthetic trade-offs in another post.
Another issue is that the modern piano, first invented by Bartolomeo Cristofori, did not exist prior to the late 19th century. That means that all music prior to the late 19th century was written for other keyboard instruments, mainly harpsichord and clavichord. The main difference between the harpsichord vs the modern piano is the mechanism - harpsichords activate a string-plucking mechanism when you press the keys, versus the hammer mechanism of the modern piano. The clavichord uses a hammer mechanism, but strikes the string at the most inefficient part, creating a sweet and gentle timbre, suitable for domestic use or small-venue performances. For larger venue performances, you'll need the volume of the harpsichord. The timbre of the harpsichord has been described has "two skeletons copulating on a tin roof" by the British conductor Sir Thomas Beecham (1879–1961). So I can hardly imagine practising the harpsichord ten hours a day for a year to prepare for a historical performance.
In line with the historically informed trend, the Urtext edition of scores became standard. These are the expensive editions printed in Germany. The two main publishers are Henle and Barenreiter. The point of Urtext is to uncover the most authentic and original edition of the composer's works. Urtext means original text. Historically, music score editors took liberty with the composer's scores and added in all kinds of performance directions, e.g. CF Peters editions. So Urtext is seeking the original gospel.
Naturally, the idea of Urtext has faced many criticisms. Removing performance directions may be a good way to encourage intuitive and original interpretation by seasoned musicians, but is probably unhelpful for budding musicians. Secondly, there is no such thing as an 'original' text, writing down compositions is often an afterthought after composing music in their mind or on their instrument, and the original manuscript is either lost or incomplete. Thirdly, an Urtext score still goes through an editor, who makes subjective decisions when faced with various composites. Fourth, the philosophy of Urtext prioritises the paper over the sound. Music exists in space and time, and in one's mind, not on paper. This modern obsession with data accuracy goes against the artistic spirit.
Nevertheless, I do appreciate a good Urtext score for their stay-open binding and their clarity, allowing space for the performer's interpretation, and getting into the composer's state of mind, rather than being biased by the clutter of performance directions accompanying non-Urtext scores.
Musicians have taken liberty with historically informed performances. Accademia del Piacere uses historical instruments (Viola de Gamba) to fuse Reanaissance and Baroque music with Flamenco dance and jazz rhythms, producing a unique and hypnotic energy. Hesperion XXI by Jordi Savall plays early music in an improvisatory, multicultural style, creating a living art that engages the modern listener.
Related posts : A history of standard tuning (work in progress)
watermarked.png)
