Not sure how to defend Duane Denison against a classical guitarist as skilled as Julian Bream except to say he's one of the most distinct and versatile rock guitar players alive, playing everything from heavy rock, to country, to avant jazz. Classically trained, he may or may not be able to play as well as Julian Bream, but Bream's unlikely to play with the force of Denison.
His tense, metallic sound defined The Jesus Lizard, and now powers Tomahawk.
Still, I'm going to. Denison's brilliance wasn't in virtuosity -- a vote on technical skills would be a no-brainer for Bream. Instead, I'm voting for Denison because his work with Jesus Lizard was pure personality and, imo, the defining sound of a one-of-a-kind band.
Well of course Bream is a virtuosic genius, but there seems to be some kind of insinuation here that his work is characterized primarily by this virtuosity, which entirely overlooks that his playing is deeply emotive in it's own right. Don't let Bream's technical prowess distract from the fact that his music is rich with feeling beyond simply his ability to hit all the right notes with great dexterity
(and I know this is a guitar tourney, so this is only tangentially related, but Bream's work on the lute is just as awe-inspiring as that with the classical guitar, and I highly recommend sampling his work on each instrument)
Well of course Bream is a virtuosic genius, but there seems to be some kind of insinuation here that his work is characterized primarily by this virtuosity, which entirely overlooks that his playing is deeply emotive in it's own right.
I'm not sure I would grant someone mastery of their instrument (virtuosity) unless their playing was deeply emotive.
The subtle differences between the styles of the various classical guitarists is beyond my ears and honestly not that interesting to me. Don't get me wrong, I could probably listen to Bream play for hours and enjoy every minute, but he just contributes less to my musical universe than Denison.
Hm I've always thought of "virtuosity" as more or less only implying technical mastery
nah, my dude. just 'cause old white Germans look miserable all the time doesn't mean their interpretations of masters like Beethoven or Bach, while being technically supreme, aren't also deeply passionate affairs. yeah, the two aren't mutually inclusive - plenty of angry guys with guitars with no illusion of virtuosity can be incredibly passionate and your high school's best Chopin recitalist was probably pretty cold and emotionless in his or her performances, as we treat classical as a very clinical umbrella of music, but the two can go hand in hand for sure.
nah, my dude. just 'cause old white Germans look miserable all the time doesn't mean their interpretations of masters like Beethoven or Bach, while being technically supreme, aren't also deeply passionate affairs. yeah, the two aren't mutually inclusive - plenty of angry guys with guitars with no illusion of virtuosity can be incredibly passionate and your high school's best Chopin recitalist was probably pretty cold and emotionless in his or her performances, as we treat classical as a very clinical umbrella of music, but the two can go hand in hand for sure.
Very true, although it can be hard to credit the player with the emotion, since the composer's original vision was likely very passionate. There's definitely something to be said of Bream's excellent playing and ability to capture the passion of Bach's work.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that that "high school's best Chopin recitalist" was actually probably not very good. Maybe nimble and on point, but missing something tonally. _________________ http://jonnyleather.com
Very true, although it can be hard to credit the player with the emotion, since the composer's original vision was likely very passionate. There's definitely something to be said of Bream's excellent playing and ability to capture the passion of Bach's work.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that that "high school's best Chopin recitalist" was actually probably not very good. Maybe nimble and on point, but missing something tonally.
yeah, totally agree there. i would just add that fidelity to a composer's original intention isn't always the way to evoke an emotive response. easy example is Roge vs. de Leeuw's Satie interpretations - both masterful, both probably acceptable to Satie, but very different and different kinds of emotive.
I actually agree with most every point made above. My bad for poor word selection but I wasn't really trying to argue for the mutual exclusivity of virtuosity and emotive playing so much as I was expressing my (clearly incorrect) interpretation of the semantic implications of "virtuosity" as a term.
satiemaniac wrote:
i would just add that fidelity to a composer's original intention isn't always the way to evoke an emotive response. easy example is Roge vs. de Leeuw's Satie interpretations - both masterful, both probably acceptable to Satie, but very different and different kinds of emotive.
Was just about to suggest this point. Being able to precisely play a piece in direct accordance with the composer's original intention is impressive in its own right, but the individuality of any one performer's interpretation of the piece makes it that much more personal to the performer, which generally implies a more emotive performance. (Another good example would be Rostropovich vs. Casals in reference to Bach's cello suites. Once again, two very different kinds of emotive; two remarkably individual/personal takes on the same pieces)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
