virtuosity...

[adam kondor]

in itself is a value!


Update: is there such thing as a virtuoso composer? A composer "who can do everything"?

[Alphonse Izzo]

Virtuosity of listening; is your reference with regard to audience, composer or both? Either way, a really interesting aspect to consider.

Tina Pearson said:

Good points. I have been thinking of other aspects of virtuosity lately ... virtuosity of listening, response, gesture, timing. Some of the most astonishing music, that has really moved me, has these elements, but not really the extreme level of technical skill commonly thought of as virtuosity. Sometimes it is 'virtuous' to be silent, or say very little from a profound sense of listening.

James Ross said:

Yeah, it takes hard work. And this video is impressive, but honestly, I think virtuosity (or the need for it) is DEAD.

It's not a bad thing to have, but doesn't it produce boring results after a while? A flood of notes -- my brain switches off. (I'm typing this message on a machine that is an amazing virtuoso ...) Is virtuosity the technical skill needed to adequately express a musical idea (even a very simple one) or just the ability to play astonishingly fast and complex music? (I have seen "virtuosi" who couldn't play slow music to save their lives.) Is it the ability to play anything physically possible on your instrument? Is everything that is physically possible on an instrument necessary?

[Tina Pearson]

Ultimately, a virtuosity of listening would imply audience, performer, composer. I was referring particularly to composer-performers and improvisors - without listening virtuosity in performers, I suspect a composer's listening virtuosity is diminished considerably, even obliterated in some cases.

But yes, composers and performers modeling this kind of listening in the conception and performance of music defines/invites a multidimensional sense of space and place that gets beyond flash and spectacle and gives a framework for the audience/listener to develop their own virtuosity of listening too.

Alphonse Izzo said:

Virtuosity of listening; is your reference with regard to audience, composer or both? Either way, a really interesting aspect to consider.

Tina Pearson said:

Good points. I have been thinking of other aspects of virtuosity lately ... virtuosity of listening, response, gesture, timing. Some of the most astonishing music, that has really moved me, has these elements, but not really the extreme level of technical skill commonly thought of as virtuosity. Sometimes it is 'virtuous' to be silent, or say very little from a profound sense of listening.

James Ross said:

Yeah, it takes hard work. And this video is impressive, but honestly, I think virtuosity (or the need for it) is DEAD.

It's not a bad thing to have, but doesn't it produce boring results after a while? A flood of notes -- my brain switches off. (I'm typing this message on a machine that is an amazing virtuoso ...) Is virtuosity the technical skill needed to adequately express a musical idea (even a very simple one) or just the ability to play astonishingly fast and complex music? (I have seen "virtuosi" who couldn't play slow music to save their lives.) Is it the ability to play anything physically possible on your instrument? Is everything that is physically possible on an instrument necessary?