Post by EdvardPost by Michael SayersPost by EdvardPost by Michael SayersP.S. - This reminds me of a quarrel between the two schools of bow
handling (the Russian vs. the Franco-German).
There never was a "Franco-German" school of string playing, bonehead. You
obviously have very little idea what you are talking about. Quit while you
are ahead and stop talking about things beyond your experience and knowledge
and using pretentious and pompous language in an obvious attempt to add
weight to your arguments. You have obviously offended many readers of this
group with your posting and not welcome here. This group is for people
interested in pianos and piano playing and not for selling instruments.
Musicians are especially allergic your brand of BS. You have already proved
that you are trying to rip off readers of this group by asking a
horrendously inflated price for your BS, which was manufactured in Korea by
Samick and not posting an original bill of sale to counter claims that is
worth much less than you say. Your attempt to write posts relating to
musical issues has failed because you write about things you don't know and
this has further damaged your credibility as a piano salesman. Please stop
the show and give it up.
Edvard
There are two distinct "schools" of violin playing, which originated
at a time before musicians had much opportunity to hear one another.
You could say there "were" two schools, in addition to many others, but
really this is a great oversimplification of things, especially today since
violinists from these schools have been listening to each other for the last
hundred years or so. It would be better for you to use the past tense or, as
I suggested, not get into this at all.
Even today, most teachers and violinists fall distinctly into one of
the two rubrics.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael SayersThere is the Franco-German school
Sorry, but it's called the "Franco-BELGIAN" school and it's teacher and
founder was Eugene Ysaye (a Belgian). Look it up in that outdated book or
liner notes you read again.
I learned it in a masterclass of Eduard Schmeider. My literal memory
is not what it used to be - but I do now recall that, yes,
"Franco-Belgian" is the designation used by Schmeider.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael Sayers(two exemplars of which are Kreisler
and Joachim)
Well, one could say that Joachim, who was from the Vienna Conservatory
admired Ysaye's playing, and although he and Kreisler (another student of
the Vienese school) went to study in Paris, they are not from the
Franco-Belgian school.
This is absolutely not correct. Fritz Kreisler was Franco-Belgian all
the way. I too, after hearing those scratchy 1903 recordings, have
had my doubts about Joachim.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael Sayersand the Russian school (an exemplar of which is Heifetz).
Heifetz was a student of Leopold Auer, who class produced many of the great
virtuosos of the early 20th century, but evolved and changed quite a bit as
the "Soviet" school developed under the tutelage of David Oistrach.
Post by Michael SayersThe Russian school involves holding the bow with a deep index finger,
and a better control towards the end of the bow furthest from the hand
(have you ever noticed how Heifetz's tone deteriorates when he plays
in the three or four inches of the bow nearest the hand?).
Good boy, the part about the index finger is correct. The part about better
bow control at the tip (that's what one calls the "part of the bow furthest
from the hand") is rubbish. I haven't noticed what you are talking about
with Heifetz and you who by all accounts little more than a
Samick-key-pounder are not the one to criticize his tone.
I am not talking about better bow control in tip - I am not talking
about "control" at all, but about tone. I am talking about worse
violin tone when the 3-4 inches of the bow closest to the hand are
used - plainly audible in the audio and video recordings of Heifetz.
Heifitz had a wonderful, luminous Apollonian tone. Nothing can be
gained, absolutely, without a loss somewhere else. That is all.
The recordings on the Bernhard Steiner brand piano (which you refer to
as a Samick piano) are of Michael Allen, not of myself.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael SayersThe
Franco-German school is the opposite.
I guess you are looking for the easy way out here, but considering that you
are out of your area here, it's no wonder. You oversimplify things by
lumping a lot of schools together. It's like saying there is the Russian
school of piano playing (Rachmaninov) and the Franco-German (Clara Schumann
and Liszt) school of piano playing. You can make it up, but it's just made
up and below the surface it makes no sense.
Clara Schumann and Liszt......two pianists whose playing were
completely opposite, by all accounts, you place in the same school.
Your analogy does not hold at all.
The violin schools are distinguished by the technique of tone
production. The piano schools are distinguished by the goals of one's
interpretation.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael SayersEven today there are strong opinions on this, and I don't wish to
quarrel with you about it (I assume that you are a violinist?). You
might use both approaches: the Russian for larger spaces, where a
bigger tone is required, and the Franco-German for a more exquisite
tone in smaller spaces.
First of all you are in no position to even have an opinion on this at all
so the need for a quarrel is superfluous. My beef with you is that you have
a penchant for expounding on issues that are beyond your grasp. This
paragraph is similar in its opportunistic character as your attempt to win
the trill debate by jumping in late and saying "it's not rotation, it's not
flexion, it's both" and run home with the laurels sought after by get real
and greg presley. As for string playing, if you don't know something go to a
different newsgroup, ask a question and listen. You can gain more by asking,
reading and listening than by writing and talking about things of which you
know very little and covering up for it with a false sense of superiority.
I suspect that I have asked, read and listened, much more profoundly
and deeply than you.
Post by EdvardSecondly, as you seem to have gathered, string playing has become very
international in the last fifty years or so and as you imply, the great
players and teachers of the last half of the 20th century including
Oistrach, Persinger, Galamian and DeLay combined aspects of both methods, so
the "school" debate is not really relevant, which to your credit does have
something to do with how greg and get real were arguing about thumb flexion
(I'll give you a break on that one), but leaves you out in the cold with
regard to spouting out half-witted, not thought out statements regarding
violin schools.
My observation of living violinists bears out the separation under the
two rubrics.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael SayersTo my view there is no one way; the violinist's goal is an individual
tone, and each of these violinists had it.
Excuse me please, but you are going off into the pretentiousness again. It
sounds as if you're saying you single-handedly discovered the greatest
violinists of the century. Of course they had "it," but every schmuck knows
that. Your "to my view" dilutes any credibility to zilch.
It means that by thinking about and considering the view, it has
become my own.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael SayersTheir various
student-emulators, who didn't pursue an individual tone, didn't get
far (I can't think of one famous Heifetz pupil, in spite of all his
years of teaching). Mischa Elman, when asked about how he produced
his "golden tone", said that he strove for the type of tone he had
heard his father produce on the violin. None of the Mischa Elman
pupils, for instance, acquired his golden tone in spite of emulation
attempts.
Mr. Heifetz and Mr. Elman were fiddlers, not teachers, but that's another
story. Actually, Ivan Galamian managed to do a pretty good job of
integrating the best of Capet's bow technique with the russian school and
Dorothy Delay had an outstanding class for decades. The "American's"
produced many famous pupils, but coming from your point of view, I'm
surprised you put so much emphasis on fame. Wasn't your idol Mr. Nyiregyhazi
rather unknown compared to a famous pianist such as Mr. Gieseking, who you
disdainfully said was "obviously not a pianist".
The fingerings in that urtext Schubert edition are distinctly the work
of a German musicologist, not a pianist. If they were published under
the name of "Walter Gieseking", then that doesn't, unfortunately,
change the nature of those fingerings.
We are overdue for a Nyiregyhazi revival. 150 years from now he will
be right up there with Bach, Beethoven and Liszt, and every piano
student (if there still are pianos in production) will study his works
just like they do Schumann's Kreisleriana.
J.S. Bach was unknown for quite some time. Didn't that Leipzig church
hire him only with great reluctance, settling for someone who in their
view was a "mediocrity"?
History repeats itself.
And, I don't idolize Nyiregyhazi as a pianist. In many of those
recitals from the 70s, his playing is in pieces unusually mechanical,
and even shallow (such as in the Chopin F Minor nocturne Op. 55 No. 1,
or Liszt's Il Eglogue). He drank considerably, and was highly self
abusive - and this emerges often in his playing. But his recordings
do achieve extraordinary insights at times, and show what has been
lost from culture of today's best pianists (I suppose the Clara
Schumann-Brahms "school" won out over the Anton Rubinstein-Liszt
"school", would be the proper historical vantage point).
He is most to be admired as a composer; and only secondly as a pianist
who is the strongest recorded link to how the composers of the 19th
century were accustomed to hearing their music performed. Those who
lived long enough to hear the old Liszt and the young Nyiregyhazi,
noted the remarkable similarity of tempos and touch, and the
"astonishing technique", et c.
Brahms gave Anton Rubinstein permission to play Brahms' pieces however
he preferred, by the way.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael SayersOne must experiment with diverse methods, to arrive at the end that is
sought, and one must have a clearly aural perception throughout that
process of the tone that is to be achieved.
Um, yeah. Obvious. Anybody could say that, so what? It's as if you say
"music is the sounds which we all hear in our head and a performer brings
these sounds to life uniting the one of humanity in its humble journey to
reach harmony" or just blah, blah, blah.
I am just saying that emulation of a particular technique does not
produce equivalent results.
Post by EdvardPost by Michael SayersM.S.
P.S. - I am curious about what type of bow you use, because I
understand that in the case of a good French bow, the vibration of the
bow especially aids the type of tone production that evolves with
without the deep index finger position.
I do use a good French cello bow. The bow makes the sound when it rubs
across the string. A good bow sounds better than a bad one. The bows from
the famous french makers are considered the best. Vibration does have
something to do with sound and tone and the stick vibrates, but mostly it is
there to hold the bow hair which gets frequently replaced and does not come
from French horses. Does that answer your question or am I gettting over
your head?
I know very little about the mechanics and acoustics of the
violincello, and wouldn't venture to discuss an instrument that is
played from such a different position as the violin.
Post by EdvardPlease post the bill of sale for your Samick piano to show us how much you
really paid for it. It won't hurt you at all. O.K. we'll all have a good
laugh, but maybe someone would like to have your piano for a fair price and
you could stop trying to sell it here.
The decision to post the bill of sale or not is mine, not yours.
Since Fletcher has now stated that not only did he not speak with Ivan
Kahn, but also that I and the prototype C-8 weren't even discussed, it
seems like there is nothing to refute.
Rmmp is a group of highly vulgar people, to whom any self-expression,
if it can be done, then by all means should be done (which includes
calling others "moron" and "idiot", rather than engage in a rational
discussion). Quite distinct from these persons, I do attach some
value to other human beings on the planet, and I do think a certain
decorum and responsibility for others should be maintained in how one
proceeds.
I may or may not post the bill of sale, but if I do so it will be at a
time and (internet) place of my choosing. I am not obligated to post
it, any more than I am obligated to post my bank records to prove to
"getreal" that I do, yes, derive an income from performing.
Perhaps I should just leave my doors unlocked, and invite the whole
world in 24/7 to see every detail of my existence? No doubt, that
would please you tactless brutes greatly.
Post by EdvardI'm sorry, but due to the lack of content and false use of terms, your
attemt at describing the "Russian vs. Franco-German" violin school post gets
a D.
I propose that it now be upgraded to a B+.
M.S.