rankfrankrank (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

beautiful music

michaelrusman (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

beautifully played

niwana (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

should not a triplet be played like one? I love this edition of the piece, i think care has been taken but the triplets are not triplets! also some minor tempo and dynamics are not quite as debussy seems to have wanted

clairannette (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

How often does a composer ever write "Cadenza here", where a cadenza occurs? Knowing Debussy, would it thus be plausible to not even explicitly indicate a cadenza on the score? He was clearly a pioneer, deviating from many practices of the romantic era, and intentionally so. I still strongly believe that *not* exploiting this opportunity at the end sacrifice rather than enhance the music, when musically all the red flags to set up this "moment" are there.

clairannette (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I'm not convinced any composer can accomplish this, regardless of what Boulez says. I would be thrilled to find one who actually does. Stravinsky made this attempt, and even so, his music still varies widely between performers and performances... even when we intend to follow the exact instructions as given.

clairannette (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

It is only striking because you clearly do not understand what the difference is between realism and impressionism. It is realism (or exactism in the era of electronics) where precision and detail are at the forefront. NOT impressionism... neither in music NOR in graphic arts. This performance is by no means a "loose" interpretation, not at the end or otherwise. I took the big picture and fit the details therein, while you are now looking at speckled details and still missing the big picture.

clairannette (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

As we have gathered from the classical period, musicians have ALWAYS dealt with the text liberally. What we see in the score is simply a guide for learning the basics. You might as well have a midi-player playing back these pieces if you take on an exactists view of what is written on the page. You're still missing the point.

clairannette (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

There are many things Debussy wrote that aren't even included in the publication from Urtext note wise or otherwise, that aren't even comparable to what we now consider to be "the Premiere Rapsody". I've never gathered that Debussy ever was an exactist. If anything, he was a non-conformist. The cadenza moment lasts 5 beats and is picked back up in tempo at the "au Mouvement". You keep hinting at the fact that we should ignore this musical moment.

calclar (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

BTW, in case anyone may have missed it, I've already stated that I think the performance is excellent and has many fine qualities about it. It's nothing personal, just a piece (and composer) that is near and dear to me that enjoy discussing in detail. If that's too much tree and not enough forest for you or anyone else, please know that this type of discussion is about the music and performance practice of Debussy - not necessarily the performer per se.

calclar (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I've worked and played for Boulez many times over many years and it is, as he explains, irrefutable that the impressionists should be viewed as saying what they mean and meaning what they say - this having nothing to do with "intentions". Again, there is no way to divine any dead composer's "intentions", only their text and (hopefully) writings are there to inform us.