I assume it wasn’t senility, since we would have been in his 40s at the time.
Thank you for the lesson on how to be pretentious. Well done.
Being Canadian and involved in the classical music scene, you get him crammed pretty far down your throat. I’m glad you brought up the inventions. How he decided that invention #2 goes at 60 beats per fortnight, and #4 (my personal favorite) goes at warp 9.7, is completely and utterly beyond me. I have more time for his interpretation of second Vienna School piano music, despite loathing expressionism, but weird is weird is weird. You just need to look at the chair he played in–a good foot and a half below where you’d want a piano bench–to see he wasn’t the paragon of orthodoxy. Obviously, YMMV. 
I’m rather fond of his Bachs…
…but before the revival of traditional harpsichord designs they weren’t proper harpsichords. Read once where the author did not recognize the ones from before the revival that he stated categorically that there were NO harpsichords produced between the end of the 18th century and the mid-late 20th.
Do you play? My friend Mr Jaledin can use big words, but, like other keyboard Dopers like pulykamell clearly knows the craft of playing and has invested a lot of time listening hard. I came into this thread looking for folks like them to help me fight a little ignorance, which they did, so I can take a little pretension, thanks.
Oh, and Boyo Jim? Don’t listen to Errol Garner - brilliant jazzer but a huge subvocalizer…
Why do pianists do it but guitarists don’t?? At least horn players are easy to figure out - they have something in their mouth ;). But as a guitarist, I never feel an urge to do it - and the only guys who do sing along with their playing are folks like George Benson who is doing it consciously and brilliantly. Weird.
I’m a fan of Gould’s Goldberg Variations. He made two recordings of the work, one in the fifties, and one in (I think) 1981. I like the later recording better, but I’m not saying it’s “better” – that’s my subjective and very much uneducated (musically) take on it. Yes, he hums on both of them.
My other favorite *Goldberg Variations *is Charles Rosen’s recording. Very different, utterly lovely, and no humming.
I am pretty new to classical music, but I’m not new to recording and sound. I’ve worked as a production and recording engineer in radio, and as a concert sound mixer for live performance. To me, background noise is an absolute no-no. I’m stunned that anyone would release such a terrible product.
I’ve listened to maybe a bit more jazz than classical, but I’ve yet to come across artists where subvocalization was so … present. I’ve heard lots of jazz combos where the artists speak call out or speak softly to each other – things like “that’s right” or “uh huh” – and that kind of thing doesn’t bother me at all. I’m sure I’ve heard Keith Jarrett, but maybe I got lucky and never stumbled across one of his, er, hummers.
I think you did. Pretty much every jazz recording I’ve heard by him has his trademark vocalizations. Listen to Bye Bye Blackbird, especially around the 1:50 mark. He is known for this. Here’s a thread on another message board discussing his vocalizations.
Would you say that it’s good as Gould?
Oh, the wits at the SDMB.
Since I found Gould unlistenable … yes. I did find a couple of reviews that led me to checking him out, though. The middle link actually compares the two directly, though in a completely subjective way.
(Nearly) objectively speaking, IMO the recording quality of Perahia is much better than either of Gould’s. The piano is much brighter and present, and it sounds more intimate to me.
Gould is more along the lines of a pervert on the telephone deep breathing and humming, while passing a really big turd.
The thing about Jarrett is that in concert you can see how he tends to stand up and lean right into the piano while doing his shtick–and it looks for all the world like he’s making a conscious effort to make sure all that moaning and grunting gets picked up by the microphone.
Well, to each his own. I give the OP the benefit of the doubt – after all, Gould is just one man, and any artist has a way of analysis of the text. Certainly Gould hopped the rails any number of times at different spots for anyone.
The only funny thing that made me respond is exactly two days ago I revisited both the e minor fugue from the 6th keyboard partita – remembering when I was 14 or so copying Gould’s ornamentation choices as well as the b minor Rhapsody. The former I copied at that age and think it was a bad choice (Andras Schiff I liked but didn’t know enough to say why so I copied the more charismatic performance of Gould), and the latter remembering back I still like his dry interpretation of Brahms.
Hey wordman get up off my balls! Kidding, but I just feel compelled to rally in support of people or ideas I like, and as a sometime rock and roll piano teacher, I like to make sure there’s room for careful consideration of all interpretative options. People new to classical should be encouraged to discriminate according to their wishes – I started at 12 a mad fan of Beethoven by Brendel and turned Ashkenazy and then Richter and somehow back. It’s a learning thing. But people get crusty in their idées fixes, which is bad no matter the discipline.
Or maybe it’s just that I prefer a irenic approach to criticism – take what you like and leave the rest.
Oh and Jarrett is his own category of pretentious. Gould wasn’t entertaining the masses for concerts, mostly – he was just making the best records he could in studio. Love jarrett for a bunch of reasons, as a soloist and with Miles, but he genuinely went full retard IMO kind of. For a twink instrument like piano, u gotta step softly, and let the horns be the bad guy every once in a while – the guy with the cape. I love his melodic work on he standards albums and Facing You but he’s probably a guy who would have done better if he got the kind of deal Gould did from Columbia and jus stayed in he studio rather than flying off at he audience. Kind of a dick, diva brass or vocalist, not so much given the chance as a jazz musician to become a studio only guy a la Gould or the later Beatles.
Note to self: stay off Jaledin’s balls. Got it.
You claim to be a rock and roll piano teacher and yet haven’t invested the time to listen to Ian McLagan?! Dude. (discussed in previous threads).
When I listen to old school radio, I focus on the music; I’ll be driving out of reception and the songs will get scratchy but I don’t really mind until my family starts getting upset that the music is unintelligible. If someone is humming while playing or the music was produced by some nutcase like Steve Albini, I don’t care if the music is good.
I don’t think anyone has mentioned Gould’s fucking squeaky chair, although it was covered in the Wiki link.
I spent some time trying to figure out whether he was a mad genius, an eccentric or whatever. I finally decided he was a pain in the ass. The type that just likes to jerk you around, some kind of power trip.
Missed the Edit and the comma: I don’t care, if the music is good.
Hey man you know I’m kidding! You are not only hep for a guitar slinger but you are able to write legitimate cultural criticism about music.
Yeah, I got hip to McLagen eventually 
but as rock and roll goes I am in the Ian stewart and chuck Leavell’s bag – if it doesn’t get into a billy Powell bag or a bill Payne thing I tweak them into getting the idioms right, then crunching on to getting some of the theoretical stuff right. I am not a methodical teacher, but just try to get people to work from basics and ideally work towards making their own arrangements. Mos recently my favorite sessions with some friends have been working on their own compositions and trying to get them away from pounding it out to thinking about basslines and drawing out various voices where it makes sense. It all came together with Richard manuel, but for me it came out brilliantly in the e minor fugue of the 6th Bach partita of Bach playd by Gould. The ornamentation makes sense, even though I find it challenging to replicate some of his ornaments in LH and trying t copy the rubato falderol in the opening section sounds like hack work when I do it. At least he had his own thing and did it with conviction.
Since you seem to be the leading classical expert here for the moment, I’d be very interested in your opinion on the Perahia recording. It’s available on Rhapsody streaming – maybe on Pandora too, though I’ve started a station with him as a seed and the Variations haven’t played yet
And conductors . . . more grunting than singing.
Oh, absolutely. Look, I suppose I should preface my hardcore stance by saying that it’s merely my own aesthetic preference, rhetoric notwithstanding. I don’t own a harpsichord, but I play very detached and pearl the notes on my piano when I play baroque music.
The decline of the harpsichord was a great tragedy in musical history, as far as I’m concerned. They were used as kindling by the French revolutionists…
I know that there’s dispute over the “authenticity” of the sounds of the modern instrument. Much of that is addressed now. And I know you open yourself up to the pitfall of the authenticity debate, because of all the other inauthentic stuff that you let slide. You don’t listen to Handel’s Music for Royal Fireworks on a hundred out of tune shawms, or get a recording of piss poor vocalists singing a Bach cantata; and yet these are “authentic” components of the performances the composers presided over.
That having been said, I just like the harpsichord better, and I judge piano recordings by how closely they correspond to the detached, crisp sound I expect out of a harpsichord or clavichord. That’s why I refuse to listen to Angela Hewitt butcher Rameau with so much sustain pedal it might as well be Chopin.