report

Transcription

report

REPORT
AEC EARLY MUSIC PLATFORM MEETING
Royal Conservatoire The Hague, 22 - 23 January
2010
Content
FRIDAY 22 JANUARY
Welcome……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...2
Presentation of the Early Music Department in The Hague by Johannes Boer, Head of the Early Music
Department……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2
Session 1: ‘Research in Early Music, an attitude to life’ – key-note speech by Ton Koopman……………….3
Panel discussion ‘Research in and through Musical Practice’ – Introduction to common practice in
different European Institutions by Yves Rechsteiner (Lyon), Susanne Scholz (Leipzig), Barthold Kuijken
(Brussels) and Richard Wistreich (Manchester)…………………………………………………………………………7
SATURDAY 23 JANUARY
Session 3: Presentations of research activities by Early Music students in 2 nd and 3rd cycle study
programmes ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..12
1. Daniel Allenbach, Hochschule der Künste Bern.................................................................................................12
2. Annika Gray, Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama Cardiff……………………………………………………14
Session 3 continued: Presentations of research activities by Early Music students in 2nd and 3rd cycle
study programmes….………………………………………………..……………………………………………………15
1. Robert Smith, Conservatorium van Amsterdam………………………………………………………………………15
2. Carl Van Eyndhoven, Lemmensintituut Leuven……………………………….……………………………………...17
OTHER
CLOSING SESSION………………………………………………………………………………………………………..18
THANK YOU……………………………………………………………………………………………………………21
PARTICIPANTS QUESTIONNAIRE …………………………………..…………………………………………………21
PROGRAMME………………………………………………………………………………………………………………24
1
AEC Early Music Platform The Hague
January 2010
AEC EARLY MUSIC PLATFORM MEETING
Royal Conservatoire The Hague, 22-23 January 2010
FRIDAY 22 JANUARY
Welcome
The meeting is opened by Jan Kleinbussink, member of the management board at the Royal Conservatoire in
The Hague, AEC Vice-President Chris Fictoor and Early Music Platform coordinator Peter Nelson.
Jan Kleinbussink welcomes the participants and gives a short introduction to the AEC Early Music Platform and
the meeting. He mentions that when he participated in the breakout groups in Trossingen during the first Early
Music Platform meeting, the wish was raised to organise a meeting addressing research. Jan underlines that
every kind of research is an expansion of knowledge and that in relation to artistic research, the expansion of
knowledge takes place by performing and reading as an ongoing process. He thanks all participants for travelling
to The Hague from all corners of the world and wishes everybody an inspiring meeting.
AEC Vice-President Chris Fictoor welcomes all Early Music Platform participants in various languages and
highlights the importance of the platform within the AEC. He strongly supports the programme of the meeting and
mentions the four elements the AEC deals with: music, education, networking and advocacy. In relation to
education, he mentions the importance of our pedagogical tasks to students not only by stimulating them to
perform on a very high level, but also by stimulating them to become a full professional and a critical lifelong
learner, with an open eye for the actual and always changing environment and society. When addressing music,
he points out the relevance of exploring music in new soundscapes, new genres, and across genres with an
open mind on the way, giving musicians the capacity to explore their own music and at the same time to keep
the rich history and our musical heritage alive. He is convinced that this kind of meetings is crucial for the AEC,
as they bring together those that are close to the actual teaching. He wishes all participants a fruitful and
inspiring meeting.
Peter Nelson thanks all the participants for attending the Early Music Platform meeting. He takes the opportunity
to thank the participants for coming to Trossingen to the first Early Music Platform meeting last year and points
out the two reports, one published by the AEC Office and another by the Hochschule für Musik Trossingen, that
were the results of the meeting. He mentions that this meeting will see new features with the student
presentations. He thanks to all conservatoires that sent proposals and he mentions that the Early Music Platform
working group received 19 proposals in total, which was a higher number than anticipated. He extends his
sincere gratitude to Royal Conservatoire The Hague, and in particular Jan Kleinbussink, Johannes Boer and their
colleagues for inviting participants to the second Early Music Platform meeting and the AEC Office for the
organisation.
Presentation of the Early Music Department in The Hague
Johannes Boer is happy to see so many participants from so many different countries. He introduces the Early
Music Department at the Royal Conservatoire The Hague, which was established by King William I in 1826. The
King decided to organise the musical education in four cities Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Liège. The
2
January 2010
director of the Royal Music School, the predecessor of the present Conservatoire was Johann Heinrich Lübeck.
Johannes mentions the city of The Hague has assembled an impressive collection of music materials and
instruments that now belongs to the City Museum. He then gives more details on the history of Early Music in
The Netherland in the early 20th century, when several early operas were performed by e.g. Palestrina. The first
recorder player to be appointed as a professor at the Royal Conservatoire in The Hague in 1955 was Frans
Brüggen. This was followed by several successful projects at the conservatory, such as a project on Monteverdi
in 1972, in which the entire school had to take part and prominent musicians such as Gustav Leonhardt and
Nicolaus Harnoncourt were involved. The further development of the Early Music was then strongly supported by
the new director at the time, Frans De Ruiter, who created the Early Music Department. Finally, Johannes
presents some of the current early music projects by showing some musical examples.
Session 1:
Frans de Ruiter, chair of the Board of Directors at the Royal Conservatoire in The Hague briefly introduces the
key-note speaker, Ton Koopman, organist, harpsichordist, conductor and leader of the Amsterdam Baroque
Orchestra and Choir.
Ton starts his presentation by talking about a book he recently read called Early Recordings and Musical Style:
Changing Tastes in Instrumental Performance between 1900-1950 by Robert Philip. Ton refers to the main
objective of an Early Music researcher, which is to try to understand how people played and sang. He explains
that the book describes a huge difference between theory and practice, i.e. conductors, singers, musicians spoke
about their research, then they recorded it and the result was completely different. Ton points this out as a
problem because, except for the Musica Automata, we have no recordings of the 17th and 18th century music.
Ton continues his reference to Robert Philip‟s book stating that every 25 years there is a change in style. He also
draws the attention towards some Performance Practice decisions like Vibrato (in Robert Phillips‟ book there are
recorded examples using mass vibrato or non-vibrato at all), Portamento, Tempo (there are changes that are not
indicated in the score, even in cases where the conductor is also the composer), Intonation, and Rubato. Ton
recognizes these simultaneous changing styles that lead to a conclusion there is no Baroque style, but several
baroque styles at the same time: there is not one truth, but several truths. In this sense, he insists on the
importance of the Master presentations being done in The Hague and other Conservatories, where students are
taught not to become a clone of their teachers. He points out that many performers undertook their research
while they were studying and not during their professional lives, which sometimes means they do not conduct
research any further. He specifically says there is the actual risk of Early Music to become a „Box of Tricks‟. He
gives an example of modern orchestras, highlighting that nowadays the feeling exists among players that if one
plays with less vibrato and the trills more or less right, one is already playing Baroque music. According to Ton, it
is important that students are permitted to critic their teachers, who are the first to support them to have their own
personalities and to look at the same sources they did, hopefully discovering new things. Ton mentions as an
example the internationally renowned pianist Wanda Landowska by quoting her: “All the others play Bach, but
they play their Bach…I play Bach.” Ton concludes by saying how dangerous it is for one to think that one holds
the only truth.
This is followed by a brief introduction on how Early Music studies began in the Netherlands. Ton says that at
that time one could only study Recorder or Harpsichord. He then points out the work of Hans Brandts Buys as an
extremely important person in the Netherlands. Brandts Buys hand wrote during World War II all the parts of the
Bach Cantatas that were used in Gustav Leonhardt recording for Teldec and he also wrote a beautiful biography
3
January 2010
of J. S. Bach. Ton mentions Brandts Buys‟ love for Bach, but also his critical attitude towards the composer. He
explains that Early Music didn‟t start in The Hague but with Jo Janssen, student of Jeanette van Wingerden, who
started a course elsewhere in 1968. There were Ton, as a harpsichord teacher; Bart Kuijken, Jeanette van
Wingerden, the musicologist Kees Vellekoop and later on Max van Egmond, Ku Ebbinge and Frans de Ruiter.
Ton exalts the 10 years experience as being an „interesting living making music together‟ with people mainly
coming from or studying in the Netherlands. He also refers to the exhausting work of Kees Vellekoop, giving
lectures on research either on vibrato or on French or Italian Styles. A=415Hz had become an easy trend, which
at the same time was no more than equal tuning but half a tone lower. Meantone tuning was then reinforced
instead of Vallotti tuning, which did not exist at the time yet. Ton refers to the indiscriminate use of Vallotti
temperament in schools of early music as something to be careful about. He then speaks about the importance
of taking risks in performance practice. He explains how he introduced the use of early fingerings through his
personal research and also how lute players properly changed their way of making Basso Continuo. He also
gives the example of Alfred Deller, who became responsible for popularizing the use of contra-tenor voice in
Early Music, but people at that time were not used to hear this. He remembers once hearing him sing in a
concert with Gustav Leonhardt and that people started to laugh from the moment he started singing.
Furthermore, Ton explains that nowadays we are confronted with many discussions, comparing earlier times
when people used to play Bach like Gustav Leonhardt, French music like the Kuijken brothers, and Handel and
Monteverdi played like Harnoncourt with how music is being played today. He mentions how many people took
ideas for granted, e.g. on whether Bach always used a choir. In Ton‟s opinion, to establish if one agrees or
disagrees, we should always decide in line with the sources. He also acknowledges the fact that everybody can
read the same sources differently. In this sense he presents some subjects in which we have the need to find
more information in sources:











The use of cello, gamba or dulcian with the left hand of the harpsichord or the organ;
Differences between Tempo Rubato and Rubato;
Style differences e.g. between playing Italian and French composers;
Trills and ornaments in the music before Bach;
The volume of a harpsichord and the influence of nature quill on the sound of harpsichords;
Pitch and temperament: in this subject, Ton believes, following the book by Bruce Haynes, we should
continue investigating pitch. He gives some examples of Haynes fixed tuning e.g. playing Vivaldi at
a=465Hz or Rameau a=390Hz, but he reminds the audience he once tried to install a flexible pitch at
a=409Hz. Ton highlights that a=415Hz is a nonsense pitch because we would have to change the
original instruments in order to get there. He suggests wind players be severe in this matter and he also
suggests performers go for a unequal tuning by reinforcing: „Not Vallotti again!‟
The question of authenticity regarding the overuse of Percussion in dance pieces and the overuse of
recorders in general;
Specialization: according to Ton it is a risk to only play one instrument; he even describes it as being
bad for music. Nowadays musicians usually play one instrument, but in the past they played lots of
instruments, e.g. Telemann played 18 instruments;
Over and unwise glorification of the role of the conductor in relationship to the composer: Ton wonders
whether the role of the conductor existed at all before Mozart‟s Operas;
The use of piano for compositions by Haydn: did Haydn knew the piano before going to London?
Portamento, as it is heard in the early recordings of the 20th century;
4
January 2010

In relation to the use of vibrato, Ton reinforces that we should go again to the sources and be careful
with generalizations. Ton highlights the sources given by Greta Moens-Haenen in her „Das Vibrato in
der Musik des Barock‟ and he suggests continuing investigating this subject. He gives the example of
Geminiani, in which more vibrato can be used the better or, for instance, whether or not there is too
much vibrato in Baroque orchestras. If there is a shift of style in every 25 years, then one can imagine
all types of things.
Ton underlines there are a lot of subjects that can be the target of research and the important thing is that
students are helped on how to conduct their research. Ton insists one should use facsimiles more, because they
are much easier to find than in earlier times, when e.g. Harnoncourt and Leonhardt copied facsimiles by hand.
He thinks facsimiles should be in use, however in a conscious way, because they do tell less than a 100% truth.
Ton recognizes the importance for students to get a taste for research and to know how a musical library works,
but he thinks it is not necessary to be a musicologist to be able to do so. He refers to the immense amount of
research already done by his and the previous generations, and points out the future generation on bringing new
life to Early Music. He suggests the language of Early Music should not be Esperanto, but with differences and
freshness (“it is not Early Music but Music from Now”). He also points out that the work being done by baroque
orchestras is already very good in the different institutions, but he suggests giving the liberty to go further,
discover, experiment and go wrong! The students should read, go to the sources and also attend concerts.
Finally Ton compares the Early Music of his generation with Early Music today. Ton gives the example of the
Concertgebouw Orchestra when everybody was playing on modern instruments and a piece like St. Mathew‟s
Passion would be performed by 200 people on stage (doubling winds and a big choir), singing too slow, with too
much vibrato and often too sentimental. Ton states that nowadays many things have changed and luckily many
modern musicians try to understand the baroque styles, although he thinks we know only 40 or 50% of the Early
Music that actually exists. In this sense, he suggests helping students to find the information they need, because
there is not only one single truth.
Ton Koopman´s keynote is followed by questions from the audience.
The opening question is about today‟s definition of Early Music and what the criteria and border lines are. Ton
answers that for him Early Music stopped quite soon after 1800, but officially it is considered music from
yesterday, i.e. the music written before today.
A second question asks whether it is considered as Early Music research if an organ player is researching on a
Frederick Mendelssohn song or if a fortepiano player researches keyboard works of Debussy. Ton starts
answering the question by mentioning Robert Phillip‟s book, where one can see the example of Elgar composing
and conducting his own violin concerto in a way not written in the score (different accelerando and ritenuto). Ton
implies that the knowledge of how this music was played is already lost, so he suggests to the audience to find
out how people did play it. He also gives the example of modern pianists, whose way of playing towards absolute
perfection and clarity is pretty much different from how pianists played in the past, for example in accordance
with the existing pianola roles. Once again he incites pianists to question their performance practice direction and
goals.
Marieke Spaans wants to know Ton‟s opinion on a new, big and complete harpsichord method, the „Historisches
Cembalospiel‟ written by Jürgen Trinkewitz. Marieke explains that every chapter in the book is reasoning with
5
January 2010
arguments from the 19th century in order to comment on 18th and 17th century, and she furthermore asks Ton if
he agrees this is a new mode where people are going to the 19th century (and late 18th century) to look for
inspiration. Ton mentions it is better to read the sources on harpsichord playing and then see what else was
written about it. Ton thinks it is dangerous to use both translations and 19th century reasoning, because of the
style shift on taste from every 25 years. He proposes to go for other kinds of primary sources, e.g. the diary by
John March, a contemporary of Handel living and writing about the music scene of the time. Ton highlights that
we have forgotten many sources and he gives an example for harpsichord players: Roger Bacon in the 17 th
century has already written about speed in harpsichords, something that Ton has been investigating for a long
time. Secondary sources by Dolmetsch and Donnington should also be appreciated for their hard work, but they
should be read critically. Ton does not like these sources so much, as they are responsible for some key
mistakes in Early Music performance. Especially when one is speaking about translations mistakes, e.g.
Frescobaldi‟s first preface speaks about the use of different tempi (non-related) and the translation says one can
use accelerando. Ton thinks we should judge by ourselves and suggests people to be careful and look for the
answers in the sources.
The next question is put by Greta Moens-Haenen. She speaks about her own work as a musicologist teacher.
She is missing historical methods on how to read a source, how to compare and if it is something the teachers
are not daring to teach musicians, because it means a different way of looking at sources. Greta gives the
example of vibrato as something she can talk about and read about, but because she does not play, she does
not „know‟ it really. Greta considers whether a book should explain the learning on how to play an instrument.
Ton answers that for musicians the importance of books comes from the necessity of having a context and thus
knowledge of art in general, such as poetry and literature. He goes on explaining that besides the time for
practicing to become a virtuoso, musicians still have a lot of free time they can use to build their musical persona:
sitting in a church in Venetia or Mantova, and let music come into their head.
Jan Kleinbussink then introduces a related question about making decisions according to one‟s taste. He refers
to a St. Mathew Passion recording he attended some time ago, in which the tenor asked Ton how much Vibrato
he should use; Ton advised to try several options. In reply to this situation, Ton answers that people change. He
gives his own example, referring to the fact that now when he listens to an old recording of his own organ playing,
he hears a Calvinistic organist playing. In that sense he sums up that people change, and so does taste. He
refers to Rameau, Handel and Scarlatti, being once great personalities who lived with a specific style and taste,
but Ton also points out that their world was smaller whereas we are surrounded by different and many influences.
In the end, after reading and trying to understand, all decisions are based on personal taste.
The next question comes from Marjolijn Van Roon about new perspectives in Early Music regarding living
sources of Traditional Music. Marjolijn acknowledges work done by Christina Pluhar with Flamenco players and
Jordi Savall with Afghan musicians and other Mediterranean musicians. Marjolijn points out the importance of
having new and different perspectives on tuning, sound making, vibrato etc. and she asks Ton if one should not
use such living sources more. Ton disagrees: he explains that nowadays this kind of music is very much
influenced by others. He refers the work by Savall, Yo-Yo Ma and Magali like good examples of marketing, but
not necessarily looking for missing links or authenticity. Marjolijn then asks Ton his opinion on the question of
sound, if it is interesting to hear these kinds of musicians and talk to them about how they keep their traditions
alive. Marjolijn specifically refers to traditions with unbroken lines unlike Classical music. Ton answers that it is an
interesting dialogue but we should know that those are musicians with specific traditions. He is quite sceptical
about the relationship between Early Music and Traditional Music. He highlights that it is difficult to know and to
6
January 2010
prove whether music that comes out of the realm of traditional music is free from the contemporary world
influences and whether it has remained unchanged from the past.
Johannes Boer wants to give another example related to living sources and traditions, and he introduces the
singer Hughes Cuénod, now almost 108 years old, as a long tradition in Dutch culture. Johannes explains that
Cuénod was present at a 1927 recording of Monteverdi under the direction of Nadia Boulanger and that his way
of singing (light use of the voice) is very close of what existed in 60‟s and 70‟s, and also close to the Bel canto
tradition. However, he wonders how much of the original way of singing has been retained. Ton acknowledges
the research work done by Nadia Boulanger and he points out that since 1870 interesting documents were
already published on the interpretation of music, e.g. the only existing recording of castrati.
Panel discussion ‘Research in and through Musical Practice’ - Introduction to common practice
in different European Institutions
Yves Rechsteiner, Conservatoire National Supérieur de Musique et de Danse (CNSMD) de Lyon
Yves introduces himself and explains that his institution is in the second year of Bachelor and first year of Master
studies under the Bologna guidelines during the academic year 2009/2010. Yves shortly describes how the
courses are organised and points out their lack of experience in research. During the 2 years of Master, the
students choose a subject and are subsequently coordinated by two teachers: one teacher is chosen by the
student, who is then directly related to the subject of the research, while the other teacher helps students to
organize their time and gives basic standards on how to write a dissertation. He adds that the Master exam
consists of a 10-12 pages dissertation and a final concert. He points out that the dissertation is the new element
they implemented due to the Bologna process developments. He mentions the presentation of the dissertation
(10 minutes long) takes place before the final concert and is followed by a discussion at the very end of the final
concert. The conservatoire is very keen to see how this will work, as it will be done for the first time this June.
Yves then explains the CNSMD philosophy of research within music. On the one hand, research is a primarily
scientific related concept and on the other, artistic research is considered neither scientific nor artistic and thus
remains as a quite enigmatic concept. Yves highlights that they do not expect students to „find‟ anything,
because even the teachers don‟t know what „to find‟ (in research), neither do they think a 25-year-old student has
a cultural and rational background sufficiently well prepared to develop the true goal of research (that is to
generate new knowledge). He highlights that at the CNSMD research is undertaken and focuses on a chosen
project in the units of the subject. According to this idea, it is a sine qua non condition that the subject of the
research is linked to performance, i.e. every research must lead to a performance outcome. Yves emphasizes
the CNSMD is a performing school, thus research with a too strong emphasis on musicology, pedagogy or
organology are avoided.
Yves then describes the general fields of research in which the projects are involved:
 Organology, e.g. the Basse de Violon, or the relationship between the Organology of the Recorder
related to the music or the Cornetto in the 15th Century;
 Performance practice, e.g. Basso Continuo on Theorbo and the Guitar, the relationship between
theoretical books to the practical results or Basso Continuo analysis of Italian Vocal Music of the 17th
Century;
 Repertoire, e.g. the Sonata Concerto by Vivaldi specifically written for Pisendel and other Medieval field
related research.
7
January 2010
Yves concludes his presentation by mentioning the changes regarding the new rules in the Master courses. He
refers to the fact that students are given a certain amount of liberty and they can choose to do the final concert
entirely or partially related with the content of their research (e.g. it is possible to play only one composer). This
brings a rather new and enigmatic characteristic while judging the students‟ musicianship. Yves stresses that
they judge the artistic value of the chosen project according to its repertoire coherence, logic decision making
and goals. There is also more awareness in the stage presentation and therefore everything contributes to
increase the students‟ idea towards their professional and artistic life.
Susanne Scholz, Head of the Early Music Department at the Hochschule für Musik und Theater Leipzig
"F. M. Bartholdy"
Suzanne introduces herself and explains her institution has a strong Early Music Department in both research
and performance. She points out their strong sense of responsibility towards the future of the whole Early Music
movement, considering its freedom and independence of any commercial considerations and having the disposal
of all kind of musicological research tools. Suzanne points out they believe in carrying on the research activities
and at the same time in applying practical results of the research. Therefore, they encourage students to go
beyond their current knowledge and understanding.
Furthermore, Suzanne gives information about the history of the Early Music Department in Leipzig, which was
founded in 1992 and has nowadays 50 students from different countries. She points out the important elements
in order to encourage research within the studies:
 Availability of instruments e.g. 11 harpsichords, 3 early pianos, an organ and clavichord, a consort of
baroque string instruments and a renaissance recorder consort. They furthermore organize meetings
with Instrument Builders in experimental fields e.g. Viola da Espalda, Violone, etc;
 Written sources, e.g. a very well stocked library with facsimiles and manuscripts the students may
consult;
 Projects and lectures including research in collaboration with other institutions, e.g. the Instrument
Museum of the University of Leipzig, the Freiburg Project, the Bosehaus/Bach Museum, an Early Music
Festival and an Early Opera project;
 Seminars for teachers to report on their own research.
Suzanne provides an overview on the course structure: 4 years „Bachelor of Music‟, a 1 year „Consecutive
Master of Music‟ for those not having a Bachelor of Music in Early Music, a 2 years „Non-Consecutive Master of
Music‟ for those not having a Bachelor in Early Music, a 1 year Certificate year for those needing to gain a higher
level in order to enter the Master level, a 2 years „Meisterklassenstudium‟ for higher level of studies and a
„Zusatzstudium‟. Suzanne then presents the „Non-Consecutive Master Course‟ that has just started this year. It
consists of 2 years, each year having 3 modules and 2 semesters. She presents the first group of modules within
the 2 years, pointing out the „Principle Study Module I and II‟, which proposes specific compulsory subjects
according with the student main subjects:
 Baroque Violin, Viola, Violoncello, Violone/String bass instrument of the 17th century;
 Cornetto, Sackbut, natural Trumpet, Horn, Bassoon, Dulcian, historical Oboe, Traverse;
 Viola da gamba, Recorder;
 Harpsichord, Fortepiano;
 Historic Singing.
8
January 2010
Suzanne highlights the second group of modules „Early Music Theory and Practice I and II‟, which consists of the
compulsory subjects for all students at the „Non-Consecutive Master Course‟ and therefore the main core of
studies. Suzanne mentions that in the first year there is the „Historical Organology‟ subject, which is taught in the
Instrument Museum of the University of Leipzig. She furthermore points out the „Historical Methodology‟ subject,
responsible for advanced reading and discussing the main issues around the student‟s main subject. For the
second year of the „Early Music Theory and Practice‟, Suzanne enhances the practical approach in terms of the
preparation of the Master thesis. Then Suzanne presents the third and last group of modules, „Elective Subjects
I and II‟, which corresponds to the subjects that are elected by students individually according with their choice.
For both years within the module, Suzanne underlines the possibility to choose a second instrument and to
undertake language workshops. For the second year, Suzanne highlights both „Advanced Chamber Music‟ and
„Applied Musicology‟ subjects. She stresses that „Applied Musicology‟ offers the possibility to cooperate with
external institutions. Finally, Suzanne goes back to the general overview of the „Non-Consecutive Master Course‟
and closes her presentation.
Prof. Dr. Barthold Kuijken, Head of the Early Music Department at the Royal Conservatory Brussels
Bart presents himself and introduces some general principles of education at his institution. According to Bart, art
can neither be (re)created, nor taught without research of any kind: artistic, physical, technical, structural,
communicational, philosophic, etc. He thinks that in the past, artistic research was done by amateurs in a very
active, unsystematically and mostly invisible way. Since the Bologna process reality, artistic research is imposed
by academies and the political world, drawing it towards visibility, therefore driving it apart from art itself. In Bart‟s
opinion artistic research is art and thus cannot be squeezed into a format without losing its freedom, diversity and
vitality. Bart suggests looking for new formats.
Bart then highlights 2010 as the International Year of Biodiversity by explaining how Nature needs biodiversity in
order to survive and so does art and artistic research. According to Bart, the Historically Informed Practice (HIP)
movement could not exist without a strong tradition in research. Thus it is tempting to think Early Music should
set the example for Higher Music Education, because of its sine qua non condition related to research and he
even suggests if this should not be one of the underlying reasons of this conference. Bart agrees that a wellinformed musician can be a better musician, but he emphasizes that knowledge can never be a substitute for
artistic talent. Therefore it is no shame for a musician to be less talented for research, which is the philosophy of
teaching underlying the structure of the programs at the Royal Conservatory Brussels:


3 years academic Bachelor Degree giving automatic access to 2 years Master Degree;
Postgraduate of maximum 4 semesters leading (not necessarily) to an artistic PhD, delivered by the
Brussels University. In order to prepare this PhD, Bart emphasizes the fundamental role of the Brussels
Platform of the Arts, born from the collaboration between the two artistic departments of their Erasmus
University College Brussels: the Royal Conservatory and the RITS, School for Audiovisual and
Performing Arts - Techniques. He explains that this Platform of the Arts produces very active and fruitful
collaborations with other partners, e.g. the Vrije Universiteit Brussel and several Brussels cultural
organizations.
Bart then continues to talk about the artistic research implemented in the Early Music programme of the Royal
Conservatory. It aims at actively integrating research in almost all specialized subjects, rather than imposing
research as a separate item. He mentions that during the 5 years of BA+MA, several seminars take place once a
month, with different specialists and various themes changing every year. Bart highlights „Philosophy and
9
January 2010
Aesthetics of Ancient Music‟, focusing on the general theoretical concepts underlying HIP. At the last year of the
Master, he also points out students have to make a critical commented Urtext Edition of an unpublished
composition, which is a practical and useful application of their acquired skills and knowledge. He furthermore
describes the general steps and tasks for a Master research:
 Research question (recital programme): „what, why and how shall I defend the 2 Master Recitals?‟
 Research answer: Artistic result in 2 Master Recitals;
 Interview with jury of MA-exam where students comment upon their artistic journey, method and
trajectory; it is supported by a personal diary, documenting artistic research activity throughout their
studies.
This way Bart sums up that the Master thesis is the artistic presentation itself that is the most important idea of
their research philosophy. At the Royal Conservatoire Brussels they expect students to consider artistic research
as a fun and helpful tool for their own professional path.
Richard Wistreich, Royal Northern College of Music, Manchester
Richard makes a general and historical overview of the UK situation and their contribution for Early Music
research. He points out that the whole Early Music Movement in the United Kingdom is shaped by the close
relationship between performance and research, since the beginning of the revival in the early 20th Century and
even more from the modern revival since the 60‟s onwards. On the one hand, performance was seen as a
proving ground for scientific research by musicologists and on the other, scientific foundations were established
as credentials for the justification for historical performances. Despite this traditional link between performance
and research, Richard stresses the importance to have a contestation attitude, because there is no rule saying
Early Music performance is only valid if scientifically justified.
Furthermore, he refers to the Early Movement revival that started in the UK thanks to the universities and
specifically by Jack Westrup, a student of Classics Latin-Greek who founded the Oxford University Opera Club
and directed the first complete performance of Monteverdi‟s Orfeo in 1925. He also refers to the fact that most
renowned Early Music practitioners came from universities like Oxford, Cambridge or Birmingham and not from
the conservatories: Thurston Dart, Raymond Leppard, David Munrow, Christopher Hogwood, John Eliot Gardiner,
Roger Norrington, Andrew Parrott, Emma Kirkby, Christopher Page, etc. According to Richard this is important
information in order to understand the British music scene in its long tradition, strongly linked between
musicology and Early Music performance. This UK intellectual background gave its early musical life some kind
of neurosis, but also many positive things. One of them was the BBC sponsorship of research-lead projects
during 30 years and another one was and still is the Early Music Journal founded in 1972:
‘It remains the journal for anyone interested in early music and how it is being interpreted today. Contributions
from scholars and performers of international standing who explore every aspect of earlier musical repertoires,
present vital new evidence for our understanding of the music of the past, and tackle controversial issues of
performance practice’ .
According to Richard, this Early Music Magazine is a meeting place between people who make and think about
music. He then explains the fundamental role of the UK government in establishing guidelines for both researchlead teaching and performance-lead research, specifically through the foundation of the „Higher Education
Funding Council for England‟ in the 1990s. It was then decided to attribute funding to both universities and
10
January 2010
conservatoires according to their research outputs. This measurement was responsible for challenges at the
level of conservatoires, who were desperately trying to be university-like systems.
Richard finishes his presentation with a general description of the options in Higher Music Education for Early
Music performance studies in the UK. According to him, there are approximately 55 University music
departments. Some of them are offer Early Music performance options at Master‟s and Doctorate levels, such as
the Birmingham University Centre for Early Music Performance and Research, the Royal Scottish Academy of
Music and Drama in conjunction with Glasgow University, the Leeds University Centre for Historically Informed
Performance, Southampton University and York University. There are also eight conservatoires in Britain, all
offering Masters Degrees (include MA, MMus and MPhil) with options in Early Music Performance: the
Birmingham Conservatoire, the Guildhall School of Music and Drama, the Royal Academy of Music, the Royal
College of Music, the Royal Northern College of Music, the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama, the
Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama and Trinity College of Music.
Richard then describes more thoroughly two University departments:
 York University, MA in Music: this course is designed for University and Conservatory graduates as well
as for non-graduate performers and it is intended primarily for students wishing to study music from the
late Renaissance to early Romantic periods. The assessment involves both writing essays or
dissertation on agreed topics and a performance, preferably related to topics being studied. Richard
explains it is a musicological lead.
 Birmingham University Centre for Early Music Performance and Research; the MMus offers a wideranging and flexible programme in musicology, composition or performance practice including elements
of research and subject training. Students take one or more compulsory 'Research Training' modules
and select one or more 'Subject' modules. At the same time they are supervised in a project of their own
choice, which culminates in a thesis or equivalent submission in composition or performance practice
presented at the end of their period of study.
SATURDAY 23 JANUARY
The morning starts with a staged presentation given by Frans de Ruiter (Royal Conservatoire The Hague)
entitled “The Constitutional Court against the Performance Practice and Research of Early Music in the
last decennium of the 20th and the first decennium of the 21st century”. In a beautifully and creatively
staged production with interesting light and sound effects, Frans discusses in a ´court setting´ various aspects of
performance practice in early music, demonstrating various unusual interpretations of early music compositions.
Following a coffee break, Frans de Ruiter also introduces the questions that will be discussed in small breakout
discussion groups. The groups are invited to discuss the following questions:
1. What is your opinion about artistic research?
2. Can we teach artistic research?
3. Can verbal/written explanations replace artistic quality/performance?
4. Can artistic research influence artistic results?
The results of the breakout groups are presented at the closing session (see text below). Frans also refers to
other developments in relation to research taking place in the AEC and in the „Polifonia‟ project in particular, in
which a Research Working Group is currently preparing a „Pocketbook on Research in Conservatoires‟ with
reflections, case studies and site visits reports on the role of the research on conservatoires in Europe. More
11
January 2010
information about the work of this group can be found at www.polifonia-tn.org/research. The „Polifonia‟ project is
currently also discussing the creation of a European Platform for Artistic Research in Music, which may be
established in the next 3-year cycle of „Polifonia‟ starting in September 2010, depending on the approval of the
application for this new cycle by the European Commission later this year.
Session 3:
Presentations of research activities by Early Music students in 2nd and 3rd cycle study
programmes
In preparation of the next session, Early Music Platform coordinator Peter Nelson explains that the preparatory
working group decided to focus at this meeting on research done by early music students based on requests
during the meeting in Trossingen, but also with the aim to contribute to the debate on the role of research in
conservatoires. He then introduces the first students to give a presentation on their research. Each student
presentation will be introduced by an representative of the institution in question.
Daniel Allenbach (Hochschule der Künste Bern): ‘Le Cor Chaussier – French Horns between natural and
valve instruments in 19th century France’
Martin Skamletz, Head of HKB Research Area Interpretation, presents the Hochschule der Künste Bern (HKB),
which is a part of the Bern University of Applied Sciences. The HKB has several departments and a Research
Institute for Transdisciplinarity. The HKB gives a high status to research, looks for new forms of research in art
and works on the assumption that findings are formulated in works of art. The institute supports interdisciplinary
research and students at the Master‟s level are able to participate directly in research projects in four research
areas (Intermediality, Interpretation, Communication design and Materiality in Art and Culture). Finally he gives
more general information on the project. Daniel Allenbach is the scientific coordinator of the project. There are
three project partners:
 Blechblas-Instrumentenbau Egger (Basel), http://www.eggerinstruments.ch
 Sinfonie Orchester Biel, http://www.ogb-sob.ch
 Musée des Instruments de Musique Bruxelles, http://www.mim.fgov.be/en
The project is funded by the DORE programme («Do Research») of the Swiss National Science Foundation
SNSF and will run from May 2009 until April 2012.
Daniel Allenbach starts his presentation by telling a story about two horn players that argued before a jury
(including members such as Ernest Chausson and Vincent d‟Indy) in 1891: Henri Jean Garigue (49), first horn at
the Paris Opera, and Henri Chaussier (37), horn player in orchestras in France, Germany, Holland and Belgium.
Although their horns look seemingly similar, they are in fact rather different, especially in handling. While the
Garigue is more or less a horn as we know it today (a F horn with three valves lowering by 1, 1/2, and 11/2
tones), the Chaussier invention (also an F-Horn) differs from a „normal‟ valve instrument: it had 4 valves, the first
lowering 1 tone, the second raising 1/2 tone, the third raising 2 tones and the fourth (for the thumb) lowering the
instrument by 2 1/2 tones (by a fourth). The idea behind these four valves was to create an omnitonic horn, i.e.
an instrument suitable for every tonality. The Chaussier horn was meant to be played mostly as a hand horn,
with the valves serving to „change‟ instantly the crooks. Playing chromatically (as Garigue did on his „normal„ cor
à pistons) would not be comfortable on the Chaussier instrument, but it would be possible as well. Finally at the
competition in 1891, the Chaussier horn was found better and far more convincing that the Garigue valve horn.
While the hand horn had mostly disappeared as an orchestral and soloistic instrument anywhere else in Europe,
12
January 2010
this jury elected the Cor Chaussier, a sort of hand horn – but with valves to change the crooks, to have the edge
over the valve horn by 9 of 10 votes.
Daniel mentions that Camille Saint-Saens wrote his Morceau de Concert for this type of omnitonic horn.
Nowadays, the Cor Chaussier is exhibited in the musical instruments museum in Brussels. During the project,
the team will rebuild the horn with the project partner Egger Instruments in Basel and will introduce this
instrument again in the concert life by playing the Morceau de Concert op. 94 by Saint-Saens with the Sinfonie
Orchester Biel.
In addition, the project aims also at highlighting the history of the valved horn in France in the 19 th century and
Daniel shows some relevant correspondence. In the letter by Gaspare Spontini to Georges Kastner in 1826, we
can read that Louis-François Dauprat, the horn professor at the Paris Conservatory, was very interested in this
new invention. The quality of these instruments had been very low, nevertheless Dauprat published the first
known French method for the valved horn – yet not the entire, but only five pages. Joseph-Emile Meifred, who
was Dauprats„s student, then developed a more constant horn and played his instrument in public, to which he
added again a changeable crook (what the new German valve horns did not have) and adjustable slides for the
valves. When Meifred became professor for the valved horn at the Paris Conservatory, he published his own
method.
Furthermore, Daniel explains that the concept of the valve horn was based on the original hand horn what we
also see in the method by Charles Gounod, who gives in two systems the written score and the respective
harmonics of the valve position. The origins of the Gounod method are rather obscure, since Gounod – as far as
known – never played the horn himself. Daniel mentions that perhaps, while Joseph-Emile Meifred, the most
important man in the Paris valve horn life, was working with the firm of Halary, the competing firm of Raoux might
have profited from the young winner of the Rome prize in 1839 for PR reasons – in fact, Raoux appears
prominently in the preface of the Gounod method, printed in the same season as the Meifred tutor.
Daniel points out that the method by Joseph-Emile Meifred is the most important source for the early valve horn
practice in France. For example Meifred‟s method suggests to play the leading notes slightly stopped, in order to
lead literally to the open main note. Very important for Meifred was to change the crooks, playing wherever
possible without the valves on the open horn. This was also his argument for using a horn with two valves only.
Nevertheless he changed his view for the second edition of his method. There Meifred preferred a three-valvedhorn with an ascending third valve, a kind of horn typical for the French. In contrast to his earlier belief, he
declared the natural horn still being played in the orchestras with rather harsh words as an anomaly. Perhaps
this was the reason, that after his retirement in 1864, the valve horn class was terminated, and for the next forty
years at the Paris Conservatoire it was just the hand horn that was taught (by Joseph Mohr and François
Brémond). It was only François Brémond who reinstalled valve horn courses unofficially in 1897 and installed an
official class again finally in 1903.
Finally Daniel considers the reality of concert life in Paris, which demands at least for some of the then-played
symphonies and operas valved horns and the situation at the conservatories, instructing just the hand horn that
is extremely contrary to each other. This debate is running beyond the surface of Daniel„s project. It was also the
reason for the „duel‟ told of in the beginning of the presentation: the son of Garigue was a horn player too and
tried to do the admission to the conservatory on a valve horn in 1890. He was rejected before even playing since
13
January 2010
no valve horns were allowed. When his father protested in public (in the Orpheon journal) against this „oldfashioned attitude‟ he brought the anger of Chaussier upon himself, what lead to the depicted competition.
For more information, please visit the project website: http://www.hkb.bfh.ch/corchaussier.html
Annika Gray (Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama Cardiff): ‘The Portfolio Career of John Lenton
(c.1657‐1719)’
Simon Jones is Head of the Historical Performance Department and the Master Programmes Department at the
Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama in Cardiff and an active violinist. He gives a short introduction on the
Historical Performance Department that has a very active approach towards artistic research. The college also
develops the research in Historical Performance Masters study programmes in cooperation with the University of
Glamorgan. He introduces Annika Gray, a Master student in Historical Performance.
Annika presents the life and work of the English violinist and composer John Lenton (1657-1719), who provides
valuable insights into violin playing, musical life and the music profession in Restoration and early-eighteenth
century England. She explains that this research project has various complementary aims. Firstly, it seeks to
compile a detailed biography of Lenton, based on recent research, notably relating to court records. Secondly, it
reconsiders Lenton‟s role and significance within English musical society.
Annika considers Lenton‟s biographical information, his work as a composer, author and teacher, editor and
performer. The information regarding Lenton‟s biography comes foremost from court records relating to
payments made to the various servants during the reigns of Charles II, James II and William III & Mary II. This
way, Annika could learn about Lenton‟s various duties as one of the Twenty-four Violins, Gentleman of the
Chapel Royal and Groom of the Vestry.
As a composer, Lenton‟s output is varied and much of it survived only in an incomplete form. Lenton composed
incidental music for plays at the Lincoln‟s Inn Fields theatre, which are complete. In addition, he wrote chamber
music and songs, and examples of these were shown during the presentation. Annika explains that currently she
is trying to compile copies of all of Lenton‟s known works from the various known sources, mainly in the United
Kingdom, for considerations of style and possible reconstruction of missing parts.
Furthermore, Annika highlights that Lenton is the author of one of the earliest known violin tutors, The
Gentleman’s Diversion (1693), which offers important information on violin technique, bowing patterns and
ornamentation in late seventeenth-century England. Despite being written for amateurs, it provides insight into
the practice of professionals. His bowings, which are based on the French „rule of down-bow‟ make frequent use
of repeated down bows within each bar. Annika makes here comparisons with Muffat‟s bowings shown during
her presentation.
Annika also mentions Lenton‟s editing work that concentrates on two highly successful musical compilations: The
Dancing Master (1710) and Pills to Purge Melancholy (1709). She underlines that the editing of Lenton‟s works is
one of the aims of this research. As a performer, Lenton was playing at the court and was very likely a musician
at the Lincoln‟s Inn Fields theatre as well. She summarizes that the Gentleman’s Diversion gives descriptions of
the types of playing styles that were in existence, and makes references to the Italian style and the playing of
Nicola Matteis. A practical application of Lenton‟s work is one of the final aims of this project, resulting in
performances of his music.
14
January 2010
For more information about this research, please contact: [email protected]
Session 3 continued:
Robert Smith (Conservatorium van Amsterdam): ‘Basso Continuo Realization on the Cello and Viol’
Michiel Schuijer introduces the research components on the Masters course held at the Conservatorium van
Amsterdam:
 Originality: the research aims at finding new elements which may contribute to the professional field;
 Orientation: orientate the research into the current state of their fields;
 Responsibility: carefully documentation so it provides constructive criticism.
The main goal is to confront research with future professional performance. The written document is necessary
and is always brought alive in performance recitals, discussions and workshops.
Robert Smith is concerned about the knowledge of how a 17th century cellist and viol (also known as viola da
gamba) player would have performed basso continuo, i.e. would he have played the bass lines as written or
would he have added extra notes (and if so, how did he add them)?
Robert starts by presenting his research questions:
 Historical Research: „Was it historically appropriate to play harmonies on these instruments in
accompaniment?‟
 Practical application: „How could one develop one‟s technique to make such realizations presentable in
a professional concert?‟
He furthermore explains the historical research content of his project on the cello. According to Robert, there are
no treatises or tutors from the Baroque period that provide a method for realizing basso continuo on the cello
until Michel Corrette in 1731 (unlike the lute, keyboard or guitar). Thus there is much more effort implied on
discovering how the cellists would have performed those bass lines. The method used by Robert was looking
into early repertoire to find examples of chord or harmonic writing e.g. Domenico Gabrielli, Ricercar 7, c. 1687.
According to him, it is less comfortable for cello (comparing with the viol) to perform harmonic chords, thus it is
common in cello music to have only sporadic harmonic writing within a melodic writing basis. This underlies
possible interpretation of basso continuo realizations e.g. Corelli 12 Sonate a violino e violone o cimbalo, where
he suggests the cellist to avoid full chord realization. Robert continues his presentation referring to the end of the
18th century into the cello‟s particular role on accompanying opera‟s recitativo secco. He refers the Instructions
de musique by Jean Baumgartner (Den Haag, 1774, Chapter 12 “Accompaniment of Recitatives”), quoting:







“One should be able to read all clefs (of the solo part) quickly in order to play unfigured basses;
The tone is never sustained. In the rest between chords, find the next notes;
The bass note of the chord comes on the beat;
Octavation (changing octave) is permitted when the bass note is too high;
Triple-stopped chords are more likely to be out of tune, so use double-stops most of the time;
Do not play a wrong chord;
Read Rameau or Rousseau etc. for a more thorough explanation of harmony.”
Robert also refers this complies with several methods of the time e.g. the method adopted by the Paris
Conservatoire of 1805 and the Violonzell-Schule, by Bernard Sťastný of 1829. He furthermore suggests that
15
January 2010
according to Baumgartner, a cellist should practice basso continuo in an orchestra in order to camouflage chord
mistakes. He furthermore refers to the fact that this was a common performance practice in Europe for recitative
from around 1790 to 1830. Nevertheless, he points out the keyboard was sometimes present but the
performance was considered not so satisfactory for both singers and audience if there was no cello.
Robert then moves on to the historical research content of his project on the viol. Throughout the solo repertoire
of the viol there is more balance in melodic and harmonic writing. Robert gives the example of C.P.E. Bach, Viola
da Gamba sonata c. 1745 and Carl Friedrich Abel Arpeggiated Preludes c.1770. According to Robert, it is more
suitable to perform chords on a viol and there are concrete evidences that reinforce the viol basso continuo
practice e.g. Jacques Bonnet writings (1726), Ancelet writings about Forqueray (1757) and Handel piece Tra le
Fiamme (1707).
He summarizes the first part of his research:
 „There is solid evidence that says it was a common practice for able viol players to realize basso
continuo;
 No evidence or accounts have been found that suggest it was common for the cello to realize normal
basso continuo lines;
 It was normal practice for the cello to realize harmonies in the accompaniment of recitative at the end of
the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries.‟
Robert goes to the second part of his research, lead by the professional practice. He took the harpsichord
treatise Principes de l'accompagnement of Dandrieu (1719) and tried to apply some harmony exercises to both
the cello and viol as practice for accompaniment. Robert also recommends to it as a good way to know one's
instrument better.
He sums up his practical conclusions by indicating his Elements of Basso Continuo realization on the cello and
viol:
 How to maintain good voice leading: more easy on viol and less on cello;
 How to shift as little as possible: shifting for a cellist is a risk on intonation and resonance; for the viol the
risk lies only on resonance;
 How not to double the melody: the parallel effect is to be avoided between two string instruments, more
in bowing than in pizzicato;
 How to create the appropriate texture: modern cellists are used to apply a dramatic and loud use of
chords but it is also possible to make big chords in a gentle way;
 How to shape the fundamental bass line: according to Robert, using always big chords throughout a
bass line gives the perception of a stuck bass line. Therefore, he suggests some techniques to give the
illusion of a flowing bass line: keeping finger down better, using fewer notes or using no extra notes at
all.
He sums up that on the cello these elements are quite interconnected and that on the viol these elements are
more independent. Therefore Robert enjoys making realizations of bass lines on the viol more than on the cello.
A few questions are raised by the audience. The first question is about viola da gamba performance practice.
The participant wants to know whether it was common to sing while playing the instrument. Robert reinforces that
most probably it was a common practice at the time, as it was for other instruments like the lute.
16
January 2010
The second question is about the use of frets in the cello. Robert explains that the instrument he is using is first
of all a basse de violon, or a bigger sized cello. He furthermore points out that Quantz, in his treatise, refers the
use of frets. Robert highlights how frets are important for extra chord resonance and also that its usage might
have come from the crossover between the viol and the cello.
Another question raised by Bart Kuijken is about any historical evidence on the use of pizzicato for chord
realizations. Robert refers to the fact that it is mainly a personal choice. Furthermore he emphasizes that there is
some evidence in early treatises of Lyra viol music, specifically in the so called "thump" technique, where the
player plucks the open strings with the fingers.
Johannes Boer wonders whether Robert‟s research is about Basso Continuo or Solo performance practice. He
furthermore suggests performers are constantly trying to find new repertoires. Robert replies he has looked in
much more music e.g. Bononcini and Colombi, where the presence of chords in viol music is attested.
Nevertheless, he recognizes one should just take advantage of special harmonies if these exist in the
score. Johannes also suggests the viola da spalla may be more convenient than the cello for realizing a bass
line.
Carl Van Eyndhoven (Lemmensinstituut, Hogeschool voor Wetenschap en Kunst Leuven): ‘Improvisation
and performance by C17th & 18th carilloneurs’
Erik van Nevel presents the Lemmensinstituut, part of the Hogeschool voor Wetenschap & Kunst Leuven. He
specifically focuses on the Organ Department, mentioning the institution has more than 8 organ teachers and 10
historical organs. He refers to research as one of the strong characteristics of the Lemmensinstituut, highlighting
some of the art researches recently completed (information available at www.lemmens.wenk.be). Erik points out
they have more than 20 teachers which are experts in Early Music despite of not having a separate Early Music
Department. He furthermore suggests that music education is developing more and more into the Historically
Informed Practice (HIP) philosophy. Thus, according to Erik, the future lies in sharing a common vision between
all music disciplines, instead of developing into different and separate branches. He then introduces Carl van
Eyndhoven.
Carl briefly introduces the carillon with a video sample. He explains the term Versteek, i.e. the arrangement for
the automatic carillon and Versteeken, i.e. repeating the drum. Carl then starts his core presentation by referring
the importance of carillon culture in the 17th and 18th centuries in the Low Countries (Netherlands, Belgium and
France) and pointing out its history highlights. He emphasizes that at the time, bell music had a constant and
regular presence in the cities and abbeys: when the carilloneurs were not performing, the automatic carillon
announced the time, day and night. Nevertheless, Carl mentions carillon music from that period is rather scarce:
 The 17th century versteek books from Hendrik Claes, Théodore de Sany. Philippus Wyckaert;
 The 18th century carillon books by Beyaert, de Gruytters, Louvain Carillon Manuscripts I & II, Dupont,
De Prins and the Berghuys family. Also he adds the versteek books by Joannes en Amandus De
Gruytters.
Carl then focuses on the carillon-research project conducted at the Lemmensinstituut Leuven that aimed at
reconstructing the performance practice by 18th century carilloneurs. The conclusions taken made that carillon
17
January 2010
books were just collections of music (songbooks), i.e. without music specifically written for carillon. Carl believes
the huge differences found between score and versteek shows that the performance practice consisted mainly
on improvisation. Furthermore, he adds this was a matter of spontaneous adaptation of the repertoire to the
requirements and conditions of the carillon. This adaptation consisted of embellishments of the melody
(ornamentations, variations), changing the harmonic texture and the bass line and (most likely) adding
improvised preludes.
Carl furthermore presents a practice-based comparative analysis of musical examples e.g. Les Vendangeuses of
François Couperin. He shows the differences between the composer score, published in Pieces de Clavecin,
1713 and 3 other extant sources: the carillon books of De Gruytters, De Prins and Dupont. Afterwards, they
compared these pieces by performing them in harpsichord, bagpipe and carillon. Carl concludes that the
differences found between the different bass lines demonstrate the performance is melody lead. These
conclusions were made after analyzing secondary sources e.g. by Charles Burney (1726-1814) and 18th century
letters written by carilloneurs. Nevertheless, Carl highlights the importance of going to the primary sources. He
experimented to reproduce a versteek of Les Vendageuses from De Gruytters versteek book on the historical
drum of the Antwerp Cathedral. He clearly explains that reproducing this kind of versteek can inform us about
what the carilloneurs played (content, which notes) but not about how they played (interpretation, performance).
According to Carl, the conclusion is that by playing and comparing concordances from both the versteek books
and the carillon books, one may come to a new performance practice of historical carillon music based on
improvisation. As every improvisation rests on a series of conventions or implicit rules, it is possible to extract
melodic patterns from the research which offers guidelines for a (new) didactic of carillon teaching. Carl
furthermore explains he has now started a PhD research using this research method i.e. playing the versteken
on (historical) drums and carillons in order to reconstruct the performance and improvisation practice of the 17th
century carilloneurs. He reminds the audience there are only versteek books of this time and any carillon book.
Carl furthermore concludes his presentation by saying it may not be possible to make an accurate historical
reconstruction.
CLOSING SESSION
Johannes Boer presents the outcomes of the discussions in breakout groups. The groups discussed the
following questions:
1. What is your opinion about artistic research?
2. Can we teach artistic research?
3. Can verbal/written explanations replace artistic quality/performance?
4. Can artistic research influence artistic results?
Question 1: What is your opinion of artistic research?
 From the discussions it was evident that the term „research‟ is problematic. It was not chosen by „us‟ but
imposed on us by the politicians.
 There is a difference between artistic research in early music and in non early music studies: artistic
research is to some degree how early music defines itself.
18
January 2010



The added value of artistic research in the Masters programme is that – in its widest sense – it teaches
critical reflection on one‟s own work and activities and how to situate one‟s own work in a wider context.
Artistic research should accept that it will most of the time have an element of provocation and will
challenge to existing conventions and traditions.
In addition, artistic research starts at a very early age in each creative person and is present in every
student – it is part of every act of music making. The task of higher education is to connect with this preexisting (and usually subconscious) sense of research. Understanding and becoming aware of this
process is conditional for the students‟ final outputs and results.
Question 2: Can we teach artistic research?
 According to the groups, we can guide students in developing useful attitudes to research through
generic research skills. We can give them tools, as demonstrated through training in research methods
including the basic philosophical, historiographical and contextual principles that define „research‟ and
also practical tools: for example, bibliographical, recorded music and internet-based resources. It was
also mentions that in the arts, research should follow a systematic procedure in order to be teachable.
Ideas about what artistic research entails differ widely. The means of teaching have therefore differed
accordingly. There was a consensus that we should cherish and celebrate this diversity.
 The question “can we teach artistic research?” should be replaced by: “can we inspire artistic research?”
 Furthermore it is important to encourage students to adapt an attitude of being inquisitive, to ask
relevant questions from the first year of their study in Bachelor‟s, i.e., long before the moment they will
have to produce any sort of research report.
 There must be training for students already during their Bachelor studies giving them an overview of
cultural studies, musicology and source studies, encouraging them to ask the right questions and
arousing their creative curiosity.
 Introduction of the concepts of research should be implemented already at the Bachelor level to
demystify and avoid anxieties about it.
 Each student should take advantage from his work within a special research field. They need individual
guidance according to their personal abilities or limitations (such as language problems).
 Problems occur for students from different cultural backgrounds and learning levels. Language is a point
of discrimination since the native speakers have a considerable advantage over those who struggle with
a foreign tongue. The preparatory year offered by some schools seems to be one good solution.
 There is an urgent need to educate teachers in the philosophy of artistic research
 They should direct students to questions rather than answers. They should teach students to think
through music and not about music. Artistic research should be presented in its own medium through
music.
 Teaching Artistic Research does mean:
o Teaching an attitude or state of mind and an understanding of why it matters.
o Teaching a student to listen to others and to her/him and understand why it matters.
o Teaching critical thinking and curiosity at the same time and understanding why this matters.
o Teaching the understanding that they can build on their innate knowledge, especially in the
principal study instrument or voice.
Question 3: Can verbal/written discourse replace quality artistic performance discourse?
19
January 2010












It cannot replace it, but it can strengthen the performance. For example: research should help the
performer to be convinced of his point of view which will automatically lead to more conviction in the
performance act.
Musical quality remains the ultimate goal, supported by research.
Ultimately, research results will have to be communicated, for example in the form of a presentation
alongside and in addition to the artistic result itself.
In other words: the artistic result itself cannot be considered as the complete report of the research
activities. (Communication skills are thus needed but not for the sake of communication itself)
Teaching students how to communicate will prove useful for them as working musicians anyway, as a
necessary skill in conducting professional life (e.g. applying for grants, to name only one example).
On the danger of ending up with explanation replacing artistic result/performance: Let us take the risk:
let‟s guide the students and give them regular opportunities to talk about their work in order to avoid the
danger of one replacing the other.
Sometimes a double study is offered: theoretical musicology & performance studies within one
institution, leading to a double degree (France).
Something has to be written by the student; important are notes about their personal research trajectory:
a minimum quantity of written text is required.
Written explanation can never replace a performance, it is complementary. It is not always necessary to
present your written notes beforehand: it can also be useful to do so afterwards.
We are too focused on written sources, including at this conference.
It is not only important to teach through books, treatises and facsimiles, but also to study and practice
with surviving original instruments, which often tell much more than books can do.
At one of the institutions, the Masters study concludes with producing a basic CD of the recorded
examination: written liner notes are part of the final evaluation.
Question 4: Can artistic research influence artistic results?
 Only fully integrated research that approaches its subject from all possible angles can influence the
artistic result in a meaningful way.
 The missing link in an interrupted tradition is filled by research. That is the essence of Early Music.
 If there is no influence, there is no point in doing this research.
 In school systems, artistic research must be integrated into all courses and between courses.
 Artistic research can only be measured and judged in the artistic result (not separately) and by artist
peers.
 Musicians ask different questions of their sources and find different solutions to conventional historical
musicologists, who are often limited in their understanding because they cannot apply in practice what
they might have discovered in a source. In writing commentary on his/her performance the student can
become more aware of his/her artistic development.
 New questions can arise out of answers to previous questions, which can in turn lead to new artistic
results (and new questions).
 Being able to manage this process is probably the best preparation for the individual and independent
life-long learning of students, once they move away from the shelter of the wings of their teachers.
 Some schools offer a deal with Master students to divide their 10 ECTS credits in a self chosen
weighting between academic research and performance.
20
January 2010
Following the reporting back from the breakout group discussion, Early Music Platform Coordinator Peter Nelson
thanks the host institution and all speakers for their excellent contributions. He thinks it was a highly successful
meeting and mentions the EMP Working Group will discuss the preparation of the next meeting. Finally he asks
the audience to fill in the questionnaire and not to hesitate to contact the AEC Office for any assistance and
suggest new members for the EMP Working Group. He thanks the participants for their attendance and hopes to
see them again next year.
Mr. Xavier Bouvier starts his speech thanking the AEC for the opportunity to organise the next Early Music
Platform Meeting in Genève. He invites participants to the next EMP Meeting that will take place in January 2011
and is very much looking forward to seeing everyone in Genève.
THANK YOU
The AEC would like to thank all persons who helped to make this meeting a successful event: the staff of the
Royal Conservatoire The Hague, the speakers, the Working Group of the Early Music Platform, the participating
students and all 91 participants. Special thanks go to Jan Kleinbussink and Johannes Boer at the Royal
Conservatoire The Hague for their input and cooperation regarding the preparation of the meeting.
The AEC would also like to thank for all the excellent performances:
 Christina Pluhar (conductor) and Cappella Monteverdiana concert at the Oud-Katholieke Kerk, having
performed works by Biaggio Marini, Claudio Monteverdi, Tarquinio Merula, Cristoforo Caresana and
improvisations.
 An organ recital by Ton Koopman on the restored historical organ of the Mare Kerk in Leiden.
 A performance by students of the Dutch National Opera Academy of Benjamin Britten ‟Albert Herring in
the Kees van Baaren Hall at the Royal Conservatoire in The Hague.
PARTICIPANTS QUESTIONNAIRE
During the meeting the participants were asked to fill in an evaluation questionnaire. The questionnaire was
answered by participants from the following countries: Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Finland, Germany,
Lithuania, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The Netherlands and UK. The results will serve as a guideline for
the next AEC Early Music Platform meeting. The answers will be kept anonymous. Please find the results below.
We would welcome any other suggestions for future meetings.


Number of participants
Number of respondents
91
39
Were you satisfied with:
Registration procedure
Programme design and time schedule
Key-note speech
Programme content
Plenary sessions
Presentations by the students
Break-out group discussions
Opportunities for informal networking
Yes
32
20
23
23
17
33
24
29
Partly
2
17
12
13
17
3
12
5
No
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
2
No answer
5
1
3
3
4
3
3
3
21
January 2010
Facilities (meeting rooms)
Catering and meals
Hotel accommodation
21
23
32
13
14
2
0
0
0
5
2
5
On a scale from 1 to 10 (10=best), how would you rate this meeting? Average mark: 6,95
What were your expectations regarding this meeting?
 Meet teachers and musicians in Early Music from other academies
 Sharing opinions and experiences about research
 Networking
 Actual debate concerning the play of research in conservatoires and illustrated examples
 Inspirations and see how other do.
 Exchange and inspiration, longing for Innovation.
 Experience different practices and expertise in institutions across Europe.
 Stimulus for new ideas.
 Find out how other institutions are dealing with today‟s problems
 Hoping for clarity about AEC‟s aims organizing this meeting
 A continuation of the meeting in Trossingen and development of the talks and issues which were on the
program in 2009.
 This was the first time I had attended this or any other AEC Platform meeting, so I had no particular
expectations. I hoped that I would leave better informed about practice elsewhere in AEC institutions and I
did!
 As it was my first time, I didn‟t have big expectations besides meeting a lot of colleagues
 Positioning the tradition of efforts of the Lemmensinstituut in a larger European and worldwide context
 I expected the meeting to be a bit stuffy and reserved, so I was happy to note that it was not like this at all. I
expected to learn lots about how other institutions operate and I did find this out. I also expected to meet lots
of other people working in my area and to some extent this was true, though I think it would have been good
– possibly – to have had some sessions where everyone had a chance to meet everyone rather than just the
people they ended up next to at coffee or mealtimes or whatever. It‟s hard to introduce yourself to everyone
especially when you don‟t know most of them!
 Overall I enjoyed the conference and I will certainly come next time if I am free.
 Meet colleagues with same function and responsibilities; exchange information and share experience on the
field of new curricula; think together on proposed subject like research in order to enrich one‟s own thinking,
and possibly come together to conclusions, possible aims or needs defined by the meeting.
 I had no firm expectations regarding this meeting, as it was the very first one that I have attended, both with
the Early Music Platform, and with the AEC. Overall, I was very pleased, as all of the topics – Masters
Programme structures, defining „artistic‟ research, assessment and criteria, among others – are currently
under heavy discussion here at my own institution. It was especially beneficial to see student involvement,
and witness the level, quality, and quantity of Early Music research being done at contrasting institutions (not
to mention the fact that the actual content of what they presented was also informative and impressive as
well).
 The theme was interesting, actual and burning for everyone. I wanted to meet colleagues and hear about
their experiences with the need of research from the universities, from “above” as well as from the inner
need of the picture as “the musician nowadays”, from “inside”.

Opinion of the respondents
Yes
Partly
No
No answer
22
January 2010
Did the meeting meet these expectations?
23
5
0
11
What improvements would you like to see for next year?
 More time for discussion, breakouts and sharing ideas
 Please more breakout groups and time to compare the results of each group more detailed
 More answers about what is Early Music and what are the lines for Early Music
 Student presentations are essential and we need more
 In the 1st day should be given more elements to discuss
 I am not used to discuss at this level
 Informal Networking
 More live music
 More examples of new research (students, teachers, performers)
 Rooms with more air
 More theme based podium discussions
 Talks can be more to the point
 Student participation is essential
 More examples of HIP themes
 The programme content was basically good, though I felt that we needed more time to meet in smaller
groups. For instance, perhaps it would be profitable to have three or four breakout sessions but then vary
the people in each group for different sessions? The informal networking sessions were very good though,
personally I felt it would have been good to have been introduced to more people as I didn‟t know most of
them and it‟s hard to know who everyone is. The food was good and the hotel was excellent.
 Not so much better than a good choice of persons who speaks; otherwise two wonderful days.
 Perhaps a little more time might be devoted to summarising the results of the break-out sessions, and a
location for exchanging printed materials between institutions might be considered.
 More time to discuss and fewer issues. More specific and precise questions, perhaps.
 Maybe as an idea to take burning questions from the participants to be discussed.
 The group of participants going to the Ton Koopman concert where “forgotten”- it gave a shadow, a very pity
taste and feeling for the end of this great congress!
 In my opinion it would have been very useful to have more time in discussing the key-note speech and the
breakout group work. I‟d suggest, in a similar schedule, to start the first day somewhat earlier and going on
at least until 7 p.m. Indeed, on Friday we had only 3 hours of effective work. Perhaps it could be stimulating
a previous call for paper, so that participants can have a look on some abstracts and thinking about them
before the meeting begins. Anyway, it has been very useful to me; I enjoyed the atmosphere, the concerts,
and learned a lot. Fantastic people, enthusiastic in working for the same skill… Hoping to meet all of you
again!!
 Gender balance in the presentation /organisation team was not very satisfactory!
 More concerts
 More time for question rounds with „experts‟; a lot of colleagues seem to have a lot of questions of how to
deal with certain developments in musical education but also in the musical world itself. It would be good to
have more opportunities for such plenary sessions, since all profit from these kind of discussions. It is the
only way to really get into deeper contact and having „common agreements‟ about certain things
 Perhaps more info in the participants list – the function of the participant, not just the name of the institution.
This would make it easier to pick out people with whom one really wants to make contact during the
networking sessions.
23
January 2010
PROGRAMME
12:00 – 15:00
15:00 – 15:10
15:10 – 15:25
15:25 – 15:45
Registration at the Royal Conservatoire The Hague
Musical introduction
Welcome words by Mr Henk van der Meulen, principal Royal
Conservatoire The Hague and Chris Fictoor, AEC vicepresident
Opening remarks by Mr Peter Nelson, EMP Coordinator
“Royal Conservatoire The Hague - Presentation of the Early
Music Department” by Johannes Boer, Head of the Early Music
Department
Studio I
Studio I
Studio I
Friday 22 January
Session 1: key-note speech
15:45 – 16:45
“Research in Early Music, an attitude to life” by Ton Koopman,
organist, harpsichordist, conductor and leader of the Amsterdam
Baroque Orchestra and Choir
Studio I
Key-note speech followed by discussion with the speaker
16:45 – 17:15
Informal networking
st
Canteen 1 Floor
17:15 – 18:00
“Research in and through Musical Practice - Introduction to
common practice in different European Institutions” by Yves
Rechsteiner (Lyon), Susanne Scholz (Leipzig), Barthold Kuijken
(Brussels) and Richard Wistreich (Manchester)
Studio I
Panel discussion moderated by Ton Koopman
18:30 – 19:00
Music performance by Cappella Monteverdiana, ensemble of the
Royal Conservatoire The Hague directed by Christina Pluhar
Oud Katholieke
Kerk Den Haag
19:00 – 21:00
Dinner offered by the City of The Hague with welcome words by
Mayor Jozias van Aartsen
Parkhotel
Tuinzaal
24
January 2010
09:30
Registration continues
Foyer
Session 2: plenary presentation
“The Constitutional Court against the Performance Practice
10:00 – 11:00 and Research of Early Music in the last decennium of the 20 th
st
and the first decennium of the 21 century” by Frans De Ruiter,
Royal Conservatoire The Hague
11:00 – 11:30 Informal networking
Studio I
st
Canteen 1 Floor
11:30 – 12:00
“2nd and 3rd cycle developments in Europe and the
process of research in and through Musical Practice” by
Frans de Ruiter, Royal Conservatoire The Hague, and Martin
Prchal, AEC
Introduction to the breakout group discussions
Studio I
Saturday 23 January
12:00 – 13:00
Breakout group discussions on the themes presented in
session
13:00 - 14:30 Lunch at the Royal Conservatoire The Hague
Rooms to be
announced
st
Canteen 1 Floor
Session 3: student research presentations
Presentations of research activities by Early Music students in
nd
rd
2 and 3 cycle study programmes
14:30 – 15:45
Studio I
Presentation by Daniel Allenbach, Hochschule der Künste Bern,
introduced by Martin Skamletz
Presentation by Annika Gray, Royal Welsh College of Music and
Drama Cardiff, introduced by Simon Jones
15:45 – 16:15 Informal networking
st
Canteen 1 Floor
16:15 – 17:30
Presentations of research activities by Early Music students in
nd
rd
2 and 3 cycle study programmes
Studio I
Presentation by Robert Smith, Conservatorium van Amsterdam,
introduced by Michiel Schuijer
Presentation by Carl Van Eyndhoven, Lemmensinstituut
Leuven, introduced by Erik Van Nevel
Final Session
17:30 – 18:00
Reporting back from the breakout group discussions
Final conclusions and announcement of the next meeting
Closing of the meeting
18:00 – 19:00 Pre-concert snack
20:00
(Option 1) An organ recital by Ton Koopman on the restored
historical organ of the Mare Kerk – Leiden, inauguration concert
20:15
(Option 2) Opera performance by the Dutch National Opera
Academy of the opera “Albert Herring” by Benjamin Britten
Studio I
st
Canteen 1 Floor
Mare Kerk –
Leiden
Kees van Baaren
Zaal – The Hague
25
January 2010

report

Transcription

Similar documents

8. Anhang: Arbeits- und Informationsblätter

Die Musikinstrumente