...from Toccata:
http://www.toccataclassics.com/cddetail.php?CN=TOCC0021 (http://www.toccataclassics.com/cddetail.php?CN=TOCC0021)
A must-buy for me...
Oh yes.
Oh, I expected to see such an album from cpo - now that they seem to have replaced some of their booklet authors,
their releases should appear a little bit faster?
I'm not holding my breath. In the meantime, this forthcoming release from Toccata should be a winner.
The one and only "first" recording (and btw. only complete recording of Kahns music for Violin and Piano) you find in this thread ;)
http://www.unsungcomposers.com/forum/index.php?topic=4952.0 (http://www.unsungcomposers.com/forum/index.php?topic=4952.0)
(Of course is nevertheless toccata still faster than cpo - just look at the booklet author and you know why 8) )
ERM... sorry? I don't consider (... e.g.) my online posting of MIDIs of Fuchs' 3rd string quartet to be a "first recording" even though it predated the appearance of the (actual first) recording of the work by the Minguet Quartet on MDG by some years. There are set definitions of these things.
... Whatever...
First recordings must be played by real human beings on real musical instruments! Electronic renderings don't count, however useful they are in order to gain an idea of the music involved.
Just to be clear:
It is neither "properly" nor friendly to define my person as being not "real human" working with surreal or simply "unreal" what means not existing instruments.
This is simply not true and not acceptable. Could you please correct those misunderstandable sentences.
The rest seems to me a matter not of any "properly" but just personal definition.
For me "first" is more an "temporal" aspect than a matter of any alleged or assumed "quality".
BTW in my opinion it is also definitly no quality criterion if someone is producing music with manual labor, there are definitly more than enough awful handmade recordings available, where I would definitly prefer to listen a good digital realisation.
If you dont like the sound of your Robert Fuchs midifile, you should perhaps think about to use more capable and contemporary means than the more than 30 years old midistandard to represent what is written in the score. At least the the technical development was significant in the thirty years since the midistandard was invented.
And even if it comes to musical quality, there are on the other hand definitly compareable big differences in musical understanding and quality possible between different ways of digital realisations, as there are between different Craftsman using different kinds of wood to produce their music. Today it is at least definitly possible that people enjoy digital realisations musically as it is possible to dislike a recording of handmade music.
I my opinion it is very simple:
- If one can chose, the criterion that counts for me is, if the music is produced based on apropriate musical understanding and how good the results make audible what the composer intended.
- But if there is no other than the first way to hear something, than I would consider it the first, respecting the effort one has contributed to make something audible for the first time. Even if the musicians are playing with more manual labor than musical understanding or ability.
The "first" is for me simply the "first", this I would not deny even the worst handmade interpretation of a music no one has made audible before, as I would do not discuss at all however someone produced his recording except I have the chance to decide between different recordings.
But however this is naturally a matter of taste nothing for any ideological disputes.
So please excuse me if I feel free enough to go on to consider my first recordings the simply the "first" if this is just the case. ;)
best
fahl5
You are perfectly entitled to call your renditions "first recordings". However, I would expect any properly defined "first recording" to be made by human beings playing real musical instruments. Having said which, I am sure we are all grateful to hear music which we might not otherwise encounter.
This particular debate has now run its course, I think. So: back to the subject of the thread, which is Kahn's Violin Sonatas.
Well you could say that a digital rendition isn't a RECORDING, rather by definition a recording would involve the act of caputuring performed audio.
I agree, but let's return to the subject of the thread, please...
Dear Fahl5,
I think so that is one welcome source. There are a lot works, that no one pianist playing. If we haven't this source (software programs), we can't get idea about the sound. I had worked about Fuchs, Richard Franck, Gernsheim, Scharwenka Phillip piano music (Recordsinternational.com have this recordings from me), it's a hard work and there are very beautiful pieces. It's unbelieve it that no one pianist play them!! :'(
The forthcoming CD from Toccata will show us how Kahn further developed Brahms' idiom - probably more through structural innovation than by any other means. He is, of course, very conservative in his handling of harmony, melody, etc., but that hardly matters a century after the composition of these fine pieces.
May I be allowed to respond to one thing, conversation having run its course even so? I said nothing about whether or not I -liked- the sound of my files- Fahl5's understanding of my response was wholly a misunderstanding, off the point, and irrelevant.
Thanks.
And no, as yet, haven't heard Kahn's violin sonatas. Based on the cello sonata (one of at least two), piano quartets, and quintet (Op.54) of his I've heard, I look forward to doing so.
Thanks, Eric. That particular debate is now closed, though. Let's concentrate on the music, in whatever form it comes to us...