--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> But modern or period still does matter, I enjoy
> listening to Bruckner, Mahler
> etc.
>
>
> There are enough good "authentic" orchestras out
> there that modern
> performances of baroque music are a bit pointless.
>
> Mark
Shall we come up with a list a acceptable
repertoire for the modern orchestra to perform, then?
Lets say, from Haydn/Mozart to early Stravinsky (at
least in America, they don't very often go much beyong
this...Schoenberg? Never!).
Oh no, too bad for them, because the early music
repertoire is getting bigger all the time! There will
have to be new pieces, composers, and styles that the
modern orchestra will be forbidden to perform each
year. Soon the classical period will be truly EM.
I'm sure I don't have to point out that modern
orchestras already aren't using the "proper"
instruments for even Beethoven or Schubert.
I'm a bit perplexed as to why anyone would want to
deny a performing ensemble their choice of what they
want to present in concert. Modern orchestras have
made great strides recently in attempting to be more
historically informed about the older music they
perform. Surely the dedicated early music
professionals have had a lot to do with that. If we
lutenists can be a catalyst for change, I'm all for
it, even if every note isn't heard right now. Not so
long ago, no mainstream orchestra would have even gone
to the trouble of seeking out a lute player, so there
has been progress.
Chris
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
