virtuosity...

[adam kondor]

in itself is a value!


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

[J.C. Combs]

"a person highly skilled in music or another artistic pursuit "

Hucbald that's the first definition. Those who play instruments are well aware that speed is one factor in becoming skilled. This is what I stated (notice two other examples besides speed...)

1. Master of realizing dynamic markings.
2. Yes, speed.
3. Insane ability to avoid mistakes ;)

Your examples presume that those who subscribe to the "speed notion" don't appreciate non-virtuoso moments and that's not correct. If anything, I enjoy works that don't take superhuman ability, speed being the most obvious.... Liszt is a great example who's music to my taste is somewhat bland and uninspired. In fact there are quite a number of times I find myself tuning out classical music when it turns into virtuoso masturbation.

[Nigel Keay]

The above three definitions seem to me to be simply the prerequisites of a professional player.

[J.C. Combs]

Hah, now we're getting somewhere!

How do we differentiate a virtuoso from professional player? Good point, seeing that most people might view those as synonyms.




Nigel Keay said:

The above three definitions seem to me to be simply the prerequisites of a professional player.

[Antonio Celaya]

It's easy to take such a high art attitude that one totally dismisses the flash and fun of virtuosity. I commit that sin often myself. Even when I'm in the mood for virtuosity much of the most virtuostic music bores me silly. If I never hear the Rachmaninoff Third again I will be better off. Still, as composers we should recognize that people like virtuosity and it entertains them. The entertainment part is the thing that tends to irritate the voices old muzak school form and analysis professors that ring in our heads. Those voices should be banished. Entertainment is not inconsistent with cerebral enjoyment. The body, the emotions and the cerebral make for more interesting music together than anyone alone.

Players also love a chance to strut their stuff. Making players interested in a score is no easy matter. If a little flash helps is that so evil? There is a lot to think about in Venetian opera, and the virtuosity only helps. Fernnyhough's music is certainly virtuostic, but it's no damned fun to listen to. So virtuosity can become a vice.

Jeff Harrington said:

I think what Adam's getting at is a fundamental human fascination with people who can do amazing physical things with music. The composition of a piece requiring virtuosity becomes disassociated to a big extent from the actual realization of the piece - which in a good virtuoso piece has something to say - but - it mainly gets lost in the WOW factor of the performance.

Plus virtuosi have sex appeal - it's the rock star/rogue-jazz-dude/crazy-violinist shtick. I think composers who never write virtuoso type passages - there's like a pretence that they're above wowing an audience - are losing a direct physical connection between audience->virtuoso->composer. And anything physical in music is cool I think...

Now did any of that make sense... heh.

[adam kondor]

Music, movement and marimba: an investigation of the role of movement and gesture in communicating musical expression to an audience
Mary Broughton

The experiment reported in this article investigated the assumption that visual movement plays a role in musician-to-audience communication in marimba performance. Body movement is of particular relevance here as the expressive capabilities of the marimba are relatively restricted, and the movements required to play it are visible. Twenty-four musically trained and 24 musically untrained observers rated auditory-only and auditory-visual presentations of 20th-century solo marimba excerpts for perceived expressiveness and interest. Performances were given by a male and a female professional musician in projected (public performance expression) and deadpan (minimized expressive features) performance manners. As hypothesized, higher ratings were recorded in response to projected performances than to deadpan. The hypothesized interaction between modality and performance manner was observed. Musically trained participants recorded higher ratings than musically untrained observers, upholding the final hypothesis. Expressive body movement plays an important role in the communication between marimba performer and audience — a role relevant for both performers and educators.

[vanessa rossetto]

...[T]echnique is dictated by, and only necessary to the extent to which it is commensurate with, the vision of the artist.

Remodernism, Billy Childish and Charles Thomson

[Nigel Keay]

J.C. Combs said:

How do we differentiate a virtuoso from professional player? Good point, seeing that most people might view those as synonyms.

I think the idea of a virtuoso player is perhaps somewhat obsolete, for example, to get a job in the back desk of a major orchestra these days the standards are extraordinarily high and the auditions a filled with dozens of players that could do the job. I don't really hear the word virtuoso used very much at all. Amongst professional players "special" might be more used, a player that stands out above the rest, but that might also be for factors such as being able to learn something difficult incredibly quickly.
As applied to composition the term virtuoso might even be pejorative these days ie. the opposite to "well-written for the instrument" or, that's a lot of work for what the pay is...

[Tina Pearson]

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?

[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?