The Harpsichord's Historical Pickle
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 มิ.ย. 2024
- The harpsichord has certainly suffered from the slings and arrows of historical fortunes. In this video I look at how the rise of the piano and later the early music movement left us with a historical pickle which needs some clever players and manufacturers to find a solution for. It remains an amazing instrument which I've enjoyed writing for several times in recent year.
Support the Channel on Patreon:
/ davidbruce
Follow me on Twitter:
/ davidbruce
Follow me on Instagram:
/ davidbrucecomposer
Thanks so much to Tamar Halperin for contributing both her thoughts and excerpts of two harpsichord pieces for this video.
Research
Chris Cutler's excellent podcast treads much of the same ground as I do here, with more examples:
rwm.macba.cat/uploads/2015042...
The Omniwerk
bachtrack.com/article-omniwer...
Mahan Esfahani
Championing the Misunderstood Harpsichord
www.gramophone.co.uk/blog/gra...
Vlogging my 'plucked strings' piece, 'Death is a Friend of Ours'
• Writing for Plucked St...
Excerpts from my Glyndebourne opera 'Nothing' which featured harpsichord.
• Nothing - opera by Dav...
Research on the decibel changes when playing the harpsichord
www.dafx.ca/proceedings/papers... - เพลง
A couple of small points and an overall comment:
* Although some historical instruments used gut strings (some German, Spanish, & English makers), iron & brass were far more common as string materials. Modern replicas of these gut-strung instruments are often called "lute-harpsichords" or "lautenwerk".
* Leather was a common material used in plectra, but quill (cut from feathers) was also often seen. The great majority of modern instruments constructed as historical replicas will use delrin or some other plastic as a substitute that closely resembles quill.
Overall though, I would say that the issue isn't one of "historical" vs. "revival" instruments. The issue is that in a historical sense, there isn't any such thing as "a harpsichord". Methods of construction and materials used varied widely from maker to maker, roughly following geographical boundaries (and changing over time!), and these differences contributed to great variation in the types of sounds one would expect from different instruments. A French instrument will sound quite different from a Flemish or Italian one and the repertoire written for these instruments reflects that. Revival instruments were an attempt to recover the "harpsichord sound" without really addressing these differences (or so it would seem to me) while the gradual adoption of historically-informed performance practice rejected this in an attempt to more authentically recreate the harpsichord sounds of the past. "Modern" compositions for the harpsichord written for the revival instruments likely couldn't or didn't take this into account. Composers writing in this "new" age of HIP should be cognizant of the differences between copies based on Ruckers, Grimaldi, Blanchet, Mietke, etc. (or at least to the generalized regional variations) and compose accordingly.
Very informative, thank you!
Good call! Not just "two" but a "range" of instruments according time and place. I learned just now.
You make many great points. I would argue that while composers were aware of what sounded particularly good on instruments in their region, they certainly would not have discouraged anyone from playing it on other kinds of harpsichords, and the variations from maker to maker demanded this kind of universality. It is therefore a bit excessive to ask composers to take these variations into account, even though revival instruments absolutely do reflect these regional differences these days.
Could not agree more!
OLAF, IT'S ONLY A DOG!!!!
Michael Colombo IT'S ONLY A DOG!! :'(
Rest in piece, Dog
@@sebastianzaczek Rust In Peace, Megadeth
DOG ITS ONLY A OLAF!! >;(
Yoda: Olaf. Only a dog, it is.
How about a Double Concerto for baroque harpsichord and modern harpsichord?
I was actually just thinking the same thing. It would be cool to have a piece highlighting the differences between the two instruments in an artistic way.
Danny M C.Ph.E. Bach wrote a concerto for harpsichord and fortepiano
@@HenkVeenstra666 -
Yay! That's the way!
You would have to have equal-temperament on both instruments. A re-tuning exercise for the harpsichord.
@@Spankbucket -
Which would be easier to both re-tune to the other one, and then re-tune to its original temperament? My guess would be the modern instrument.
Thanks for the reply! :)
I work as a harpsichord technician, and take care of both the historic and the revival types. Serious harpsichord players tend to have various models from different periods and add a Pleyel if they can find one, to do equal justice to Sweelinck and Byrd, Froberger, Bach and Couperin, and Manuel de Falla, Poulenc etc. Each is played on the type of instrument the composer would be familiar with, and best suited for their works.
Martin Spaink ...You are right. I don’t know why anyone would presume to play 20th century harpsichord works, designed for “revival” harpsichords on period/period replicas. The instrument is in no pickle at all unless someone with no historical understanding puts it there.
One I personally hate is when they whine about the pitch instability. .....sheesh.....you don't hear a harpist or a timpanist moaning. ....each instrument has its own nuances, basically. ..the right tool for the right job. I was a piano technician in Cheltenham for quite a few years and it was amazing how many harpsichords came into that workshop. .....Maybe I shouldn't of told them of my interest haha.....oh and I was the timpanist for the baroque society, they were hell bent on using authentic instruments in authentic pitch and the harpsichord continuo was often frowned upon. For a laugh I swapped the tuning fork to a A558.....confused the hell out of everyone hehe
I kid you not, he turns a harpsichord into a pickle. Funniest shit I've ever seen
A fine harpsichord has beauty, volume, projection, and character. It works fine for the limited repertoire that coincided with the plucking piano period.
So happy to see mention of Xenakis. One of my favorite composers, whose work is grossly underappreciated.
Excellent thoughts, overall, to which I can't help but add a few:
* When describing the old Pleyels, Sperrhakes, Challises, and whatnot, a more accurate term than "modern harpsichords" is "revival harpsichords", owing to these instruments' position in the early days of the instrument's rediscovery.
* When Ms. Halperin describes these revival harpsichords as "robust", this refers to solidity of construction. I've seen a quartet of football players struggle to lift these things.
* All of that mass comes at a severe cost to the sound of the instrument. Making the instruments heavier doesn't produce a bigger sound. Quite the opposite, actually. The "Aha!" moment of recent generations has been for builders to return to building harpsichords less like an iron-framed piano and more like a guitar.
You correctly point out that revival harpsichords such as Landowska's Pleyel sound brittle and mechanical. (The infamous sobriquet of "two skeletons f***ing on a tin roof"...) But, more important than that, in absolute decibels they sound weak and pathetic for their size. Remember, Landowska achieved her followership on LP recordings where the miniscule sound of her instrument could be masked in the recording studio.
I kept hoping you'd address this. But, obviously, it isn't easy to demonstrate in this forum. Put a 1950's Challis up against a new harpsichord in a side-by-side shootout, and your audience will still be hearing normalized sound out of computer speakers. If you and Ms. Halperin can find a way to get through that hurdle, I'll be all ears.
Hey! Don't forget Lurch's contribution (Lurch often played the Addam's Family Harpsichord. -- some of the best moments from that show). In fact, there was one episode in which they took away Lurch's harpsichord. He was devastated, and I know why. The instrument was beautiful, and soothed the savage beast. Long live the Harpsichord. !!!
The savage BEAST?
I've never heard Lurch called THAT before!
Thank you David for the wonderful videos. I would like just to point out some things: I am a musician, I regularly play both early and modern music, often on harpsichords, and I also study composition. The fact that few music is composed for harpsichord is caused not only by the poor interest of harpsichordist on new music, but also on the general ignorance of many composers (and I've known many valuable composers who proved to be so ignorant) about ancient music and about its unique expressivity. Harpsichord do have a wide dynamic range, but that is made through registration and, above all, density of notes. I've seen many modern pieces written for the instrument that are not valuable because they are basically piano pieces without dynamics, whilst the composer himself should use polyphony to obtain wider dynamics.
I dunno, I don't think having the plectrum directly under the string would be the best way to affect dynamic range. Dynamic range on a guitar is based on how hard the string is hit and how much the plectrum engages with the string (like, hitting it with the tip of the pick vs in the middle.) If I were designing a harpsichord to have more dynamic range I think I'd try having the plectrum weighted and attached to a rotating axis by a spring. When a key is hit fast, it would have enough centrifugal force to overcome the spring, and engage the string more fully; slower, and it would stay closer to the axis and only lightly engage the string.
Actually, in a much simpler manner, you could have the key and the plectrum engaging with each other via sliding ramps. When a key is hit softly, there would be less friction on the ramp, allowing it to slide (like how a phillips head screw slips when you don't push down on the screw driver hard enough), and the plectrum would slide away from the string and engage less. And then pressing harder would create enough friction to prevent the plectrum from sliding over.
I hadn't thought about using more of the plectrum, that's an interesting addition to the problem!
The more a string is displaced from it's resting position before it is released, the louder it will be. ---> Using more of the plectrum will likely, but not necessarily, stretch the string further before it is released.
I was going to mention this, it's more complex than just using more force. I play bass guitar, and since the strings are larger and the tension higher than guitar, I find that effect is even more noticeable. The higher tension means it takes more force to displace the string, and the larger cross section of the string presents a more round, slippery surface to the pick, making it harder to get a sharp attack. The angle of the pick's surface determines how hard it can pull the string before it slips off, which is in turn related to the pick's flexibility and shape. Additionally, how you hold it, the path of your picking motion, and what part of the string you pluck affect the volume and tone of the note. It's a system with a lot more variables than a piano's hammer, but in return you have a ton of options to change your dynamics. Incorporating some of that into a keyed instrument is an interesting problem. You could add a pedal, or a system that automatically adjusts based on how fast the key moves like Ariel Rae said. Maybe there could even be some traction added to the keys and they could be pulled towards you as you press it for louder notes.
@@joshstarkey8883
Right - the amount the string is deviated depends on how much force the pick/plectrum can exert before the string slips under. I did a comparison of thicker and thinner plectrum a long time ago (a very long time ago) - you get more string noise and loudness with thicker plectra (no surprise). I would think that you could create dynamic range by shifting the plectra so that the string is hitting closer to the base - since the plectra are usually roughly triangle shaped with a thinner tip (for quieter sounds) and a thicker toward the base.
I would think the challenge would be to create a situation where the string doesn't get missed all together or completely stopped by the plectra - and that you'd get a usable dynamic range with the limited amount of space you have.
This is pretty cool. I have heard both old harpsichords and new in person and the older ones have character and soul. I feel that the ones with Antwerp era was the golden age of the harpsichord era. Lots of good manufactures from that era.
No mention of temperaments. This is the third difference between authentic legacy harpsichords and modern instruments with, their generally, equal-temperament tuning. An experiment I never got round to on my clavichord, was to install piezo-pickups under the soundboard/bridge to provide electric amplification via a modern amplification system, with or without distortion, according to taste. This, if it provides acceptable results, could equally be applied to harpsichords to increase and control their dynamic output rather than modifying the plectrum pluck/height position.
I'm really glad to watch this video, I was always curious about the instrument. I hope there's a way to make evolved designs of the harpsichord that would have more dynamic range if required AND the expression of the older designs.
I was hoping you would talk about Ariel Ramírez Misa Criolla. It’s a choral piece that uses the harpsichord alongside traditional South America instrumentals and Spanish guitar.
Wow - the sound of that Ritter piece at the end. So beautiful.
Personally, I don't buy that the instrument can't be expressive because its lack of dynamic range. In my opinion, limitation breeds creativity.
This is of course why tremolo was invented for the guitar. Guitar has very little sustain and so tremolo is a way of simulating a sustained note like a violin can, and it remains a common technique in classical guitar repertoire and has been enthusiastically adopted by electric players too.
A harpsichord is far more articulate and dynamic range wasn't considered an important element of expression when improvisation was so important compared to today. Many harpsichords had multiple ranks of strings and keyboards and so had multiple dynamic ranges available. Since most played from chord notation harpsichordists played as many or as few notes at once as they wanted thereby producing a quite wide dynamic range.
@@davidmdyer838 Basso continuo?
@@arsantiqua8741 Basso continuo = the chord shorthand notation.
yeah!
Modern harpsichord has one thing going for it -- even if few instruments are made, we can all have virtual instruments sampled from the ones already built.
I like the addition of instrument performance at the end of video. I think it should became a regular thing in your uploads.
That the instrument player comissions pieces from the composer and not the other way around (the composer writing, then finding a player) blows my mind. The composer is the actual artist, the player is just a human midi sequencer.
This was a wonderful and informative video.
Oh, one more thing that another poster alluded to: modern technology also provides us with a method whereby we can combine multiple different types of harpsichord into one instrument: MIDI & sampling.
Software like Hauptwerk can allow the construction of a "virtual" instrument consisting of sampled sound sets from multiple actual historical instruments and/or their historically accurate copies. Electronic manipulation of the samples can also expand the compass of any instrument to meet the need of the composition (many historical instruments and their copies are limited to what modern players would see as a greatly reduced compass) as well as even combine string and stop sets from multiple instruments into one.
Sampling is actually far from ideal in replicating harpsichords and pianos because it doesn't take into account the way in which sounds affect each other, resonance, sympathetic vibrations, etc. Physical modelling is the way to go - and it's been around for a long time already. Pianoteq, for instance.
I’ve been to more than a few venues were the Chamber orchestra has amplification through a PA system. The harpsichord could receive the same treatment for the Symphonies of Haydn and Mozart.
Both Pascal Taskin (knee levels to add or withdraw stops) harpsichords and the Shudi/Broadwood, Kirkmann produced Harpsichords with the ability of Crescendo and Decrescendo (Venetian Shutters Machine Pedals), these were expressive and expensive and these where available for decades into the first decade of the 19th century. George Washington purchased one in 1797. Harpsichords were expensive and large, vs spinets better suited to apartments, and having only one choir of strings less expensive. Marie Antoinette had both Harpsichord, her teacher was Gluck, square piano, and harp as Queen.
What eclipsed the harpsichord wasn’t only the fortepiano becoming louder or more expressive, the clavichord remained popular as an expressive keyboard instrument) was a increase of prosperity of the middle class and the first square pianos were less expensive than a harpsichord.
Clementi and Beethoven et al pushed the classic period into the Romantic era. Music Publishers had a new home or parlor audience, and to show off their new found prosperity, the social climbing middle class took a page from old money, have your daughters proficient at the piano for family and guest. entertainment. Those upper middle and upper classes also followed suit.
Composers have written for the harpsichord, even the general public knew the Addams Family theme song of Vic Mizzy better than than Gorecki, Cage’s HRPSCHRD and other “modern”-avant-garde shit.
Ned Rorem’s 1968 Spiders for Harpsichord, I heard in an encore in Monterey, CA in 1975 as performed by Mark Kroll as an encore. His performance of Scarlatti and Duphly brought thunderous applause. Rorems Spiders cleared the hall “damn fast” to borrow a term from physics.
The Beatles used the Harpsichord in the studio, Fixing A Hole, All You Need Is Love, and the Yardbirds used one in For Your Love. Eric Clapton left the group.
1970cartoons would use a harpsichord playing Thomas Arne’s “Rule Brittania from the masque (King) Alfred as a leit motive for an English character. Possibly more composers compose pieces for film or video if popular music (read girl group or soloist) had a hit as accompaniment, but the copy cats band would use digital for convenience through a PA in a keyboard with a volume pedal and it would sound stale very soon.
The Classical Radio Stations go out of their way not to play Harpsichord recordings and those Early music group seem to prefer continuo organs and lutes (the former is louder the latter more portable) than to follow historical accuracy or iconography.
KUSC now calling itself Classical California calls all of Bach’s Harpsichord Concertos Keyboard Concertos and so forth and Scarlatti more often than naught is either transcriptions for guitar or keyboard sonata. Maybe similar to Bach’s organ works (always gutless orchestral transcriptions) KUSC is worried they would scare away their subscribers if they played music as it was written. Maybe their General manger hates Harpsichord music.
Or maybe hearing Andras Schiff playing Allemandes Allegro assai (instead of slow as the 18th Century references State) Courantes as Corrente (Prestissimo) in Equal Temperament not well tempered, a=440 instead of a= 420-421 (Leipzig pitch 18th c) or arrangements concerto for 3 solo oboes on the trumpet recorded by the same trumpeter who multitracked the solos is what convinces listeners to donate their cars and pledge monthly donations while Voting with their dollars for their favorite performances and the occasional John Williams and Elmer Bernstein film scores. People tend to listen to what they grew up on and the cycle continues.
Why I listen to TH-cam except when driving to the market.
Big harpsichord fan. In my short stint as stage manager for The Mohawk Trail Concert Series, I had the pleasure not only to move one on and off stage but to hear it played in a nice small venue.
So, your Death is a Friend of Ours is a combination I've wanted to use since _I_ was a student. How cool to hear some of what you do with it.
I would love to see a instrument with the tone of the "old" harpsichord but instead of the levers and pushing the manual back and forth for linking the manuals and switching registers, "modern" pedals to do this. This would enable you to accentuate just a few notes by switching on and off a register momentarily while playing.
As for dynamics. The plectrum lets go when the string exerts a preset amount of force on it. This means the strings tension and how deep the plectrum picks the string determinate how far the sting is pulled out. Both these parameters are fixed. This is very different from for example a guitar, where the player can pull the sting out as far as they like.
To make a more dynamic harpsichord you would have to come up with a radical different mechanism.
And, I know its cursing in the church, but I love using a synthesizer instead of a real harpsichord just because of the wider dynamic range.
Very, very insightful. Thank you.
I've built harpsichords for years, all of them based on historical instruments. "Modern" instruments like the Pleyels or early Neuperts have a huge disadvantage - their weight! A Pleyel or a large Neupert can weigh close to, or in some cases, well over a ton. A historical copy of an Italian harpsichord from the 17th or 18th Century weighs about 60 pounds! The historical instrument has even better carrying power than the heavy one. And SO much easier transport in a basic station wagon! You can guess which one I prefer! The historical one of course.
A Pleyel biggie, Grand Model de Concert, weighs about 330 kgs. A lot indeed, but a third of a ton..
I do have to stand corrected. "Over a ton" is not accurate. But the biggest harpsichords did indeed weigh quite a bit compared to true "historical" instruments. My first harpsichord teacher had the largest Neupert model from the late 1960s, and he believed it to weigh perhaps 7 or 800 lbs. Whenever he used it in concert, he had to hire a moving company to move it. The fact that historical harpsichords, several of which I have built, are as loud as all of the heavy 20th Century models, but are much lighter, was why I went with historical copies.
would love to own a digital piano with a good harpsichord voice along with a harmonium(currently saving for one). Love the sound of both instruments when used by the Beatles.
How horrible.
Or also in Panic! At the Disco's use of it in their album "Pretty Odd", especially in "She Had The World"
Amazing video. Thank you.
Oh how cool, it's Tamar Halperin! She played on one of my favorite concerts and records ever, the Project "Wunderkammer" with jazz pianist Michael Wollny.
That collaboration features some gorgeous harpsichord sounds.
- Today for portable acoustic keyboard classical music, the Steinway style piano and the Baroque harpsichord are common. - Other portable acoustic keyboard instruments have lost favor just as the Baroque harpsichord was discarded in the early 1800s. The many portable acoustic keyboard instruments which are neglected include; the clavichord, the many fortepianos from the early 1700s up to the Steinway design, the pedal Pleyel style harpsichord, and the Viola Organista invented by Leonardo da Vinci.
Wonderful vid, beginning to end! But the priceless bit (5:57) is when Tamar Halperin ticks off the shortcomings of the old instruments, demonstrates conclusively the superiority of the modern instruments -- and then destroys them in a single phrase.
Hi David, with regards to your question at the end of the video regarding giving the harpsichord a larger dynamic range, I believe that the very nature of the instrument's action makes this impossible. The flexible plectrum can be thought of as a spring which gains "tension" from the resistance of the upward-moving jack with the taut string as the key is depressed. As such, the plectrum is "tugged" from both ends by the jack, which wants it to move along up with it, and the friction with the string, which wants it to stay perpendicular. This causes the plectrum to be curved downward as the key is depressed, but before the sound is produced. Then, at some point, the friction between the string and the plectrum becomes not sufficient enough to withstand the force applied by the player through the key. After reaching this "breaking point", the plectrum will snap up, relieving the string of its perpendicular tension, causing it to restore to its original position and oscillate about it (plucked). This "breaking point" is only dependent upon the nature of the string and plectrum, not on the force applied to the keys: if one presses harder, the sound will simply be produced faster, not louder. In order to change the dynamic level, one must be able to manipulate where this "breaking point", i.e. change the internal mechanics of the plectrum which, unless one figures out a way to attach a device to each jack which manipulates the position of the plectrum on the string, seems impossible to me.
I am a harpsichordist myself, and very much enjoyed your video. It's true that us "modern harpsichordists" have a unilateral disdain for "modern harpsichords" (i.e. revival instruments"), but I feel it is, to some extent, justified. The metal soundboard of Pleyel-style instruments makes them sound quite dead and, paradoxically, quite weak. Nothing, in my opinion, beats the absolute clarity of tone and resonance of period-style harpsichords.
Great video, as usual. Being Polish, among other good things I appreciate Your very good pronunciation of the name Wanda Landowska, and other links to my country in this video and the polyrhytms video with picture from Warsaw. :)
I love the harpsichord setting on my synthesizer! Good dynamic range and aftertouch on it also.
But there's nothing like feeling the string being plucked by the plectrum on a harpsichord.
What does the aftertouch do?
The harpsichord is my favorite instrument of all, since i was a child
I truly loved and was obsessed by the harpsichord as a child. I loved how the black and white of the keys were reversed. Hey I was a kid. I have to say haven't given it much thought in for the last 48 yrs.
Guitar players get more dynamic range because there are multiple things they can adjust in the way they address a string and hold a plectrum, most of which are done intuitively even for a beginner.
It's rather a pity many/most players outside classical make little or limited use of that facility. Thinking mostly of jazz guitarists,
The most magical use of a traditional harpsichord on a pop album that I have heard is on the old Stone Ponies album Evergreen II. Just gorgeous.
Never too old to learn something new. Love the music history lessons even though I’m not a musician.
Bach ALWAYS sounds better on a harpsichord than a piano. ALWAYS.
Lari Kipe That's a hot take.
Well, he didn't have pianos then.
@@oilersridersbluejays Yes, but we do now and Bach always sounds better on a harpsichord.
@@larikipe940 I prefer baroque music on clavichord too, especially when there are ornements. Bach uses less ornements than Rameau or Couperin, and maybe Bach can be played a little bit more 'easily' on a piano. Anyway, this music is not intended to be played on a piano, but for the sound of a clavichord, it is clear !
If JS Bach had had a piano, he should have composed differently, it is sure too ! Of course, it is 'possible' to play Bach on a piano, listen to Andras Schiff playing the all Well Tempered Clavichord, it is wonderful !
@@oilersridersbluejays They did have clavicembalo, or pianoforte.
a great video!! if it was around a year and a bit ago it would have served as great inspiration for an essay for my keyboard history course at uni!
Superbly interesting!
The harpsichord never had gut strings. The strings were always metal.
Re your question near the end, the volume of a note is largely determined by the stiffness of the plectrum and the amount of string engagement. These are parameters for voicing and do not vary with the speed at which the plectrum approaches the string. One could conceivably provide a pedal which shift the plectra slightly so as to vary the string engagement, thereby allowing dynamic control, but frankly that sounds like a mechanical nightmare.
I wouldn’t say it better myself
The pedal mechanism wouldn't be a mechanical nightmare, technically, they are all built to be able to that, with pedal or not, the problem is that the pluctra only shifts about 2-3 mm over so and if it goes any further, the jack wouldn't even come down. This could however be countered with a spring which throw the touch of the instrument out the window. I'm hoping to study the building of these instruments so perhaps I'll test the viability of such a design.
@@seamuskelly3408 Plectrum engagement is typically in the 1mm ballpark, most likely less. When plectra are being voiced, adjustments are made in the sub-0.1mm scale. Your pedal mechanism would have to be so precisely manufactured as to give repeatable and smooth control in this sort of length scale. Not saying it's impossible with modern engineering, but it would be far from easy.
This was a very informative video, thanks. Recordings that combine a traditional harpsichord and a modern instrument ensemble, in, say, the Bach keyboard concertos, apparently present audio engineers with a very difficult problem, viz. how to make the harpsichord audible without spot-miking it in such a way that it sounds like it's in a different acoustic than the orchestra. Some refuse to spot-mike the HC at all---for example the old Leppard recordings of the Bach concertos, where his truly brilliant playing is virtually inaudible when the orchestra is playing. There are many (I would even say most) recordings of the Bach concertos where the balance is wrong one way or the other. But there are also many recordings with original instrument ensembles where the HC can hardly be heard. Here the modern harpsichord, even though it doesn't sound quite right, can make it easier to get the right balance. But I think the best answer is simply to work out the engineering. For example, on the Suzuki father & son recording of the Bach Concertos for Two Harpsichords (BIS)---where they play traditional instruments---the miking, and the size of the ensemble, have been calibrated to provide a realistic and balanced sound for both. It can be done!
The harpsichord was used extensively in TV shows in the US during the 1960's - check out the Adams family Theme, many episodes of the man from uncle (try the last Act of the Yukon affair), and even into the 1970's in the UK with the theme tune of the show Randall and Hopkirk (deceased).
Thank you for pronouncing Wanda's name properly :)
The harpsichord had reached its peak in design by the 18th century. These instruments you are describing are not harpsichords, but are plucked pianos. Each type has its own advantage, and value. And I hardly would dare to say that the historical movement is a “downfall.”
I still remember when I first heard the octets made by Alec Wilder in the forties. And then the music made by Maurice Ohana. It's just a great instrument.
David, thank you again for another lovely video!
I had a quick question - since you wrote for Tamar, as you said, and she obviously has one of each kind of harpsichord ("traditional" and "modern"), which did you end up writing for? And did you write for the same kind in "Nothing"? Or did she choose, and what ended up guiding your or her decision? I don't know that I'm able to pick out the sound of each in an ensemble setting well enough to tell by listening alone.
Thank you! - Jay
One minor correction- Xenakis wrote five works for harpsichord, not four. There's the two solo scores Khoai and Naama, two for harpsichord and multipercussion (Komboi and Oophaa), and the concertante work A l`ile de Goree. Oophaa comes up right near the end of when Xenakis could no longer work on writing due to illness, and is a considerably gentler work than the previous four in the cycle, hence some of the lack of attention- Komboi's a lot more famous and a lot more difficult, in part because Chojnacka had so many more years to play that one.
Also personally I never found the modern harpsichord sound to be soulless, indeed, for a lot of modern repertoire that was written for it it really highlights just how expressive it can be- however I do agree that some sort of compromise between the two soundworlds is ideal. Perhaps "modern" stops?
If you placed the plectrum directly underneath the string, you would indeed gain dynamic range (just the way a finger can plug softer or harder on a guitar string), but how would the plectrum fall back under the string once the key is released. I don't think there would be enough room/force to overcome the string on the way back.
Now that I think of it, you could have a small wheel with two plectrums opposite of each other. When you press the key, the wheel turns 90 degree so that the plectrum passes the string (with the force applied to the key). When you release the key, the wheel turns again 90 degree so that the 2nd plectrum moves on to the string, thereby muting it.
This would only work if the player always pressed the key all the way down, though (to have the full 90 degree rotation). But maybe there is some mechanical solution to this? I am no engineer but it seems to me, that there should be some solution to having a key plug a string with different dynamics.
Thanks for the awesome video btw. :)
Thanks! Love the 2 plectrum idea! But I actually think there is already a mechanism for the plectrum to move out of the way of the string on the way back, at least in some harpsichords.
In all harpsichords. Your clip of the instrument's action shows how it's done. The plectrum resides on a tongue set vertically in the jack. When the bottom of the plectrum comes into contact with the string on the way down, the tongue tips backward, allowing the plectrum to clear the string. Once that happens, the jack's spring (the metal wire at the back of the jack on this particular harpsichord) returns the tongue to the vertical.
Good job!
I'm pretty sure the thing limiting the dynamic range isn't the starting position of the plectrum in terms of closes press to the string, but the resistance of the plectrum. Whether you press the key down fast or slow, with great force or little force, what gets imparted to the string is going to be dominated by the resistance to bending of the plectrum, because you're essentially just loading a spring and letting it release. That resistance could be changed by changing where along the length of the plectrum the string is located, or by varying the length or relative angle of the plectrum. Essentially what's needed to increase dynamics in a way to act more like a piano, is a mechanism to convert a difference in acceleration to a difference in position or angle. This could probably be done with a spring-centered cantilevered weight, where the inertia would make the plectrum strike with a sharper angle with higher acceleration.
I purchased a 1 Manual+/- 4 octave painted plywood Zuchernan "Z-Box" from a Salvage Yard, I had a friend build replacement jacks for it, I need a Tuning Hamner (or maybe a Tuning Hamner tip) that will fit the roughly 1/8" pins (and to replace missing Strings.
I tune pianos, so (even though there might be different subtlties) I should be able to Tune it
9:42: That chord is centuries ahead of its time!
I enjoyed this video. I had no idea the history of the instrument. I am fond of players like Jean Rondeau, who has a very robust and youthful style. It would be wonderful if the instrument enjoyed a new renaissance because of some change in design that lead to a more expressive range of effects.
A classic children’s intro is “said the piano to the harpsichord.” that was my intro to the instrument back in the 1950s. it’s a fun short listen. now available on TH-cam.
In 2002 I bought a unbuilt zuckermann Z-box kit. It only had one 8ft rank and a harp stop, however. ....I brought it into the 21st century by building in electric pickups in 3 places and adding inbuilt effects and ........a volume pedal. Sadly it got destroyed when the garage roof totally collapsed. ...I was devastated. ....BTW if you ever write a piece for laser harp gimme a shout as I have a full colour 3D one hehe
A jacks' plectrum needs some 1.5 mm clearance between the top of the plectrum and the string, if not, the escapement doesn't work properly. If at all. As for your suggestion around 9.00. Cherio!
There are some interesting suggestions below for how to get more dynamic range with a new design for the instrument's mechanism, but I've long suspected that plucked instruments are just kind of doomed outside a parlor-type setting because plucked instruments are limited to the initial energy of the pluck (bowing and breathing pump energy continuously into the instrument); the piano solves this problem by hammering, which transfers almost all the energy to the string, while the plectrum itself uses up a lot of the vibrational energy. Guitar, mandolin, lute, harpsichord -- only the harp has retained a position as an orchestral instrument, and it's one of the quietest.
“The sound of a harpsichord - two skeletons copulating on a tin roof in a thunderstorm"―Sir Thomas Beecham
Also, viewing this video while working on a harpsichord concerto.
What bothers me is the complete neglect of the early PIANOS, both with makers and performers, even piano builders & experts barely seem to know or care that they exist at all, or how they were different from the current design!
Leave us not forget that formidable ancient family retainer of the Addams', Lurch, who introduced many an American to that noble instrument.
My dad once told me about a practical joke they did when he was a boy, where they stuck metal thumb tacks on each felt hammer in the piano before music clasd (probably spending the whole lunch break doing so) which gave the piano a harpsichord like sound when the teacher started playing. I've never had the opportunity to try this on real piano, but striking the strings of a guitar with something hard sounds quite similar to using a pick, so that might work. Not sure if the piano/forte feature of a piano still works with metal hammers though. If you have access to a old piano you don't mind damaging, it might be worth testing.
I didn't realise he'd written nothing!Opera North used some extracts from the opera as part of a piece which we performed in the culture festival in Aarhus, it was really cool
Thinking about the ways to add dynamics, on guitar one of the factors is that besides working harder with their strumming hand the player will also grab the plectrum harder, which makes it pull the string further. In purely mechanical sense suspending the plectrum mounting point in a non Newtonian liquid could maybe work that way, but honestly I think using electronic sensors and actuators would be a more sure fire way to implement this - though I suspect this would be frown upon by the classical musicians.
One easy way to test the "harpsichord, but with dynamics" idea is to use a sample library. I tried this using Demonic Virtuoso library by Wavesfactory and the results are interesting, though for modern listeners I think still the big problem with the instrument is the harsh attack transient. I guess I'm more of a clavichord guy.
There used to be a competition here in the States for new harpsichord compositions called the Aliénor competition. I don't know if it's still going on.
I've never gotten around to adding a guitar pickup to my clavichord, but suspect this could provide a harpsichord type sound with an increased dynamic range albeit through electric amplification.
Surprised there's no mention of tack pianos. Those seem like a pretty good compromise in Glenn Gould's recordings, for example.
The Goble/Gotto triple manual harpsichord after Hass (1740) has sounds to die for. And you will never own one like it.
i find the revival harpsichord fun and colorful-sounding, and a lot of organ works like Buxtehude and Walther sound better on the pedal harpsichord which is basically a modern instrument since none of the originals exist anymore
Interesting trail of Harpsichords from Wanda Landowska's new-built Pleyel instruments, via newly commissioned compositions to the revival of historical replicas. As far as I know none of the modern replicas use feather-plectrums; they are too vulnerable and prone to displacement. Modern materials can help making the Harpsichord a good and stable instrument. (But it is out of reach for an ordinary family).
Being a guitar player I must correct your assumption about volume/loudness and impact: The volume comes from pressing the finger (or plectrum) against the silent chord and thus like a bow-string giving it a distance from the relaxed (straight) position, then releasing. The greater bending of the string, the more force in the sound. That can't be done by a harpsichord action, due to the way it is guided by the "tunnel" over the inner end of the key.
Referring to your video about The Unbearable Irrelevance of Contemporary Music, the observation that most audiences are from kind of inner circle and most composers are involved in academia, I will say that the sound of Harpsichords in modern music probably will not help out making music more authentic and relevant.
There is a book by Nicholas Cook about these issues: "Music: A Very Short Introduction" which mentions the quasi religiousness with which composers were treated ca. 1800-1950, and also discusses music and gender + more.
I like Bach played on a piano by skilled pianists, using a good piano's clearness in the bass range and singing ability in the soprano. Dinu Lipatti managed to "popularize" the Partita in Bb major (generation ago, 78-records).
However, some traits will never be possible to do on a piano. The menuet from said partita begins with a lute-like dansante rhythm - probably with a lute-damper on the harpsichord - then the menuet-II is played with all couplings on, giving it a "grandiose" sound of all strings in the instrument, octaves and all.
:)
I never thought of the fact that they used to have gut strings. Wouldn't it work having nylon strings, to get a mellower sound? And leather plectrums!? Couldn't have had much volume with that.
Wow! A truly fantastic mix of fact and misinformation.
OH! Another comparison is with the electric/acoustic guitar and even with the lute, and another, often forgotten, dichotomy of instruments: The violin and the Stroh Violin (and even with electric violins, too).
So, while the discussion is good, and Tamar's campaigning for the more traditional construction (I think) is good, again I will just say that each of these is a "tool" that is applied to the music which is written for it. You can play the instrument that coincides historically with the music or try something else.
Personally, I like Bach arrangements by Mahler, Stokowski and others. I like Casal's approach to Bach, and I like Richter's, etc., too. I just like it all.
Now that I have had some time, I learned more about the harpsichord and tuned into Poulenc and Falla's pieces for harpsichord.
WOW.
I always felt sorry for this instrument. I never knew why exactly. I tried to use it here and there, so it won't feel so lonely anymore. Now I know what that was the case and still seems to be somewhat of a problem. This instrument definitly deserves more attention.
I've always loved the harpsichord, even though most of the soundfonts used to represent them sound rather dull (Definitely not bright enough) or too bright to even begin thinking of weaving them into a minor piece. Thank you for doing them justice!
Have you tried this website? sonimusicae.free.fr/blanchet1-en.html
It also features an Italian instrument. A German harpsichord can be found here: sites.google.com/site/clavecinsvirtuels/170-clavecin-silberman
Thank you! You've just opened up my world into many new possibilities~
A lovely pocket appreciation of this unique instrument. Despite its checkered history, can we all agree its utterly unique and recognizable sound is permanently imprinted on our Western cultural consciousness such that we're never likely to forget it. That alone should be some small consolation for this beleaguered font of glorious sound!
Thanks for the profound explanation. Perhaps also the modern harpsichord suffers from the digital piano and its ability to produce soulless noises.
If one wanted a sound to split the leather "pick" (im going to use guitar speech, for I am a guitarist) and the plastic "pick", one should try made some sort of wood or perhaps a hard silicone. The strings could be made to be nylon instead of steel or catgut, which is a nice inbetween. Then the frame could be made out of a rather hard, dense wood to again split it.
Mozart and Haydn began their career playing on, and writing for, the clavichord.
Albion Island
The attitude at the time was not specific to one instrument. Mozart & Haydn would've been just as familiar with the harpsichord as with the clavichord, just as the generations of composers before them. You could write a keyboard concerto for either harpsichord or piano, but you'd have been damn hard pressed to do the same with clavichord.
Though "Klavier" meant any keyboard instrument, in German-speaking territories, the clavichord was by far the most popular instrument for solo keyboard music.
That's true, but outside of a concert hall, the instrument they would have played on personally was the clavichord. In the German area the clavichord was a much more common sight than a harpsichord, and we know that it was the instrument with which Mozart and Haydn would have learned to play on. A great deal of the sonatas, upon examination, were clearly written with the clavichord in mind (dynamics, consideration of the fretted nature of the clavichords of the time, etc.).
The harpsichord was, as you mention, the instrument for a concerto. Though Mozart especially took to writing for the new piano instrument as it grew in popularity.
Check out Igorrr if you want to hear harpsichord in some pretty crazy scenarios.
Hamster_ofthe_Apocalypse I didn’t expect this comment on this kind of video but kudos!! Igorrr makes super interesting music!!
The Beatles - In my life (the solo part), that's an interesting use of this instrument.
The harpsichord-like sound on The Beatles’ “In My Life” was produced by recording the piano played by George Martin at half speed, thus sounding an octave higher with sharper attack, brighter timbre, and shorter sustain when played back at normal speed.
You forgot to mention that the character Lurch from the Adams Family played the harpsichord
That was the fist time I ever heard it
I've always wanted to write a quartet for keyboards - piano, harpsichord, celesta, and pipe organ. Tricky, finding the best way to blend, as well as contrast, their relative sounds. Has anyone done this, already?
It's quite a nice idea, but i would be careful with the pipe Organ... unless you're using a Hammond Organ instead, how would the organist communicate with the other keyboardists? And Also i think it would be a hell Lot louder than the piano, celesta and Harpsichord...
I quite like the idea though, you gotta give it a try!
Thanks! I shall, one of these days...
In these times we have electronic amplification to help with volume differences, also.
@@sebastianzaczek Instead of writing for a large church or auditorium pipe organ, it could be written for a 3 or 4 rank positive organ such as this. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_organ
For matching volume and for communication between performers, this could work. I'm not sure what the resulting sound would be though!
@@howeks indeed, that could work
I think terms like "soullless" don't help much, either. It's just an alternative sound. Think about the various kinda of guitars. Spanish vs steel vs electric. Hollow vs solid. Clean vs overdriven. Make the most of differences, and use them where applicable.
If I may, it seems that at 3:21 you forgot to mention Mr Arnold Dolmetsch who, before Wanda Landowska, brought Bach's music back on the clavichord and harpsichord in the late 19th century.
With regard to the second "pickle", that of the modern vs. the traditionally built harpsichord:
They are "tools" by the simplest of definitions. Those organizations that strive to play the whole range of music for harpsichord from the very beginning to the latter part (do I have that right?) of the 20th century should by all rights have access or ownership of both types of harpsichords. The more expressive, traditionally built (and hard to keep in tune and good operation) one for probably the bulk of the repertoire and the newer one (robust, easy to keep in tune) for the compositions that require that sort.
BUT.... where are the engineers? The engineers who can make what might be a third harpsichord (no not an electronic, sampled one, nawwwwww) but one that is easy to keep in tune but is able, through the use of novel materials and manufacturing techniques, can be both, and perhaps, like Wanda Landowska's instrument, be something new on the market, like the saxophone, when it was "new".
Where are the music engineers? ;)
The harpichord was featured in Margaret Rutherfords Miss Marple series.
Tom Jones And fon't forget the Beatles' Because.
Here are my (unsolicited) thoughts/comments on the harpsichord and its history:
- The host of this video briefly touches on the fact that the harpsichord's lack of dynamics inevitably fell into obscurity with the advent of the piano, which is true. The clavichord, an instrument that predates the harpsichord, was the only keyboard instrument with dynamic control before the piano. Bach, for instance, and almost certainly all German-speaking composers of the 18th century wrote their solo works for the clavichord unless indicated otherwise. In some parts of Europe, the clavichord was still in use as late as the 1840s. There were numerous keyboard instruments in Baroque Germany, just nowhere near as prominent. The harpsichord was generally reserved for larger concerts with orchestral accompaniment. In France, Italy, and the Netherlands, however, solo harpsichord music was not uncommon.
- As one commenter pointed out here, nationality and geography was a crucial factor as to how a harpsichord sounded. For instance, playing Bach's harpsichord concertos on a Flemish instrument like a Ruckers will never sound as good when compared a German instrument like a Mietke or a Zell, because Bach wrote for German instruments. In the same vein, Couperin wrote for French instruments, Bustijn wrote for Flemish instruments, and Scarlatti Italian.
The preference for the clavichord surprises me. I've studied neither instrument but I've always found playing a harpsichord to be a lot of fun and playing a clavichord makes me claustrophobic due to its tiny scale.
Certainly anything requiring other instruments would have to require a harpsichord.
Rosalyn Tureck wrote an essay on the use of the clavichord in 18th century Germany: www.tureckbach.com/publication-documentation/page/piano-harpsichord-or-clavichord. Belgian keyboardist Wim Winters also performs Baroque and Classical repertoire on his clavichord, which is actually quite a loud instrument (which was a large factor for the quality of a good clavichord.) He has a TH-cam channel called AuthenticSound where he talks extensively about the role of the clavichord in Europe, tempo, tuning, etc.
Does anyone know what became of the pedal harpsichord?
Oh you've written for theorbo, I'm so jealous. I'm very new to music theory but do you have any compositional tips when writing for such an instrument?
Ask a theorbo (or guitar) player, preferably one you know and can demonstrate on an instrument. Writing for polyphonic plucked strings can be daunting if you've never played one. A few tips:
1. Know the tuning of the instrument you're righting for, so you can think about what sonorities can be performed. The guitar has one standard tuning, but older instruments have multiple.
2. Exploit idiomatic techniques such as arpeggios, strumming and harmonics - a lot of these weren't historically used, but I assume you intend to compose in contemporary styles.
3. Use the open strings at any opportunity, but be aware that they have a noticeably different timbre compared to stopped notes. A theorbo, in particular, has a lot of open strings that are meant as bass notes, so make sure you compose in a scale which facilitates those notes (assuming your work has a tonality).
4. Read existing works for the Baroque lute, particularly from Dowland - that should give you a great idea on what is playable on the instrument.
5. Keep the writing simple at first. These instruments can get quite busy - with the right performer - but when you're treading in murky waters you'd better write too simple than too hard, because the former can at worst be boring, but the latter can at worst be literally unplayable.
What about Schnittke?
I do feels sorry for the harpsichord. I love the sound and used to go to harpsichord recitals in North Melbourne. I agree that it should be able to have the same dynamic range as a guitar.
I would be interested to find some projects together and share results on youtube
What if I thought of an idea where you could have an amplified harpsichord hooked up to a foot pedal for volume. I think you would need multiple mics throughout the harpsichord but yeah