I've got to play the Prelude (Prelude ONLY, G major, Op.37 - Mendelssohn) in an organ competition later this year - 2023 in New Zealand. This piece is the SET work, and the rest of my programme is my free choice. I thought I would listen to a few different organists on RUclips for their interpretation of this Prelude. Your presentation of Mendelssohn's approach to the organ has given me new insights and a new perspective of Mendelssohn that I've never thought about before. Your argument that Mendelssohn would use the full resources available to him really makes a lot of sense to me and is very convincing. For the competition however, I need to find out what the judge is looking for and play accordingly. But going forward long-term as an organ recitalist, I will now re-question my approach to Mendelssohn. Thank you, Yuri McCoy, for sharing your passion and explanation of Mendelssohn's music. Your playing is absolutely outstanding!!!
I would definitely NOT do what I did in competition. They'll want musicality and an accurate reading of the score. Beyond that, Iet your knowledge of Mendelssohn's organs and their limitations show through your interpretation. Then, once you win, you can ham it up all you want in recital😎.
Love the point that a real knowledge of 19th century music is a historically accurate way to understand organ music of the time. Seems obvious to you and me. But you articulated it so well.
Thank you for breathing new life in this very beautiful music. I agree, had Mendelssohn the resources of today's powerful instruments, he would every resource available to him when planning this music.
So wonderful! This a piece I have played for so many years. However, this was inspiring! I am taking a blank, clean copy and sitting down and making registration notes based on your performance. I wish you could offer an on-going video series on taking pieces such as these and creating beautiful, orchestral performances. I would gladly pay for such "lessons."
Thanks William! Let me know if you have any pieces in mind... there's many things to consider when deciding which works make a good candidate for such a transformation. But, if you go to my performance of Ravel's Minuet on a Theme of Haydn (originally a piano work) I took a similar approach there. ruclips.net/video/frTgY5QUI5w/видео.html. I have a Dupre Variations on a Noel video and a "how to" video on conquering the most complex rhythms on the planet coming out in the coming months. So subscribe if you haven't!
@@yurimccoy7094 Thanks for your reply. I will think on repertoire ideas. I have indeed subscribed and will look forward to watching other work you have posted. All the best!
I would really like to know what classical composers would have thought about instruments like the Midmer Losh in AC, and the Wanamaker in Philly, and their extreme versatility. The Wanamaker with her soft lush strings, and the Midmer Losh with the booming and thundering voice of Poseidon. It really makes me curious as to what kind of music they could have written given the vast contrasting resources of both instruments.
Yes, me too. Certainly, one would assume at least some of the instrument's capabilities would be explored in the case of Mendelssohn. Or maybe he'd hate it, who knows?😅
@@yurimccoy7094 I’ve seen some people speculate on it. And some people completely miss the point. But in the case of Mendelssohn, I think he would be enamored by the idea of a CA and multiple expressions for different divisions. With the ability to go from one end of the spectrum to the other. Don’t even get me started with how useful they’d most likely find second touch! No need for couplers to a point.
This was great - the talk and the playing, I loved it, thank you!!! There is another OR to interpreting 19th century organ scores - read reviews and treatise from the period. I was struck years ago when I read a detailed report on the inaugural concert of a three manual Hook and Hastings Organ at the 3rd Presbyterian Church of Pittsburgh in 1868. The reporter had a firm grasp of music and the review made several interesting statements - the organ was conceived as an "orchestra", the pieces throughout had constant variations in registration and dramatic effect, and the audience was thrilled by the variety of tone colors and combinations from ppp to fff. The pieces on the program ranged from organ sonatas to hymns and Scottish folk songs, all designed to show the variety on the large and well balanced instrument, the printed the stop list as well. Another source are the books and articles on registration and then actual markings in scores from 19th century organists. I am often surprised as I've collected old organ scores to see the many notations for interesting registration changes penciled in were none are indicated, often you can grasp the style and size of the instrument from these, many times even on what must have been a smallish 8 and 4 organ their are plenty of notations to provide color, often in very inventive ways. When I served at a Lutheran church with a smallish 2 manual early 20th century tracker, I was amazed out the variety of colors I could obtain by creatively playing around with the instrument. There was a fascinating article from the Etude magazine in the early 1920s that made the same argument, even a modest 8 to 14 rank organ could be the source of endless registration possibilities if one only uses their imagination and finds ways to make the music dramatic.
Thanks for your insightful comment! Yes, it definitely would be interesting to look into a late 19th century performance practice as well (before performance practice itself became the supreme guiding principal in musical interpretation!). That would lead us down an interesting albeit different path than I posit in the video. My thought is this: Mendelssohn was not concerned with historic performance practice, and organists' obsession over it leads to an end product that has little in common with the beauty and excitement found in Mendelsson's works for other instruments. Studying up on, say Lemare or Straube's performance of 19th century music on the one hand, might be freeing, or, on the other hand might again restrict us in that we now have a new "source material" to replicate... in fact, those types of interpretations (play Bach like Straube for instance) are becoming more common. I enjoy the novelty of these performances, but I think they are currently the only way for a performer to break free from standard baroque performance practice while still retaining the good graces of the organ establishment. What's wrong with coming up with your own registration scheme and paying however you want? Mendelssohn and his buds didn't worry their little heads over such matters, and I long for the day we don't either! Thanks again for watching!
@@yurimccoy7094 Absolutely, I am not suggesting we become slaves to 19th century performance or any other practice. If Bach could played an EM Skinner with black smoke rolling out of the swell boxes and French reeds and Midi, you think he wouldn't have used them? Come on! I applaud your fresh take on this - this is what informed practice should me, we inform ourselves to get as wide a perspective as possible and then we make music our own. Some things will be more successful than others and some will please some tastes and not others and some will be "historic" and some won't - and that's all OK in my book. As long as the music lives and connects with the audience we've done our job. I think it is also ok to toy with the score - please cast stones now.
@@amicus1766 ahh, I've found a kindred spirit! Amen to all that. And, as a former colleague of mine once said "if Bach had a flush toilet, he would have used one!"
I really think that most of what you're saying is totally true: we shouldn't avoid more "orchestral" registrations, or using the swell box, just because Mendelssohn's organ didn't have such "commodities". However, I'm rather puzzled by your version of his Prelude and Fugue. I come from a different context as yours, I am an European, maybe I'm missing something... but isn't this rendition a bit exaggerate? The prelude is a very subtle, sweet, tender piece, does it really need such a powerful climax? And also the orchestration seems nothing like Mendelssohn's works. Take the second Movement of the Lobgesang Symphony... there's no abrupt change of colour, and everything is build around dynamic nuances, alternating the solo melody between the violin and the double reeds. And when the trombones and all the woodwinds come it's not triumphant and loud, it's just full and bright. Concerning small historical organs... We have plenty of them here. Often I've had to give concerts on them, and Mendelssohn is often a good choice for the very reason that it sounds just as good without too many changes of colour (at least when we compare him with the plethora of minor authors who just wrote music for the services). And I think those organs are really precious, not only because often their sound is marvellously harmonised, but also because they force you to work on other aspects to make it intresting: rubato, articulation, touché, poliphonic variety. Your interpretation, though technically impressive, was entirely a tempo and legato... Is this really what organ playing is about? Of course, at the end it's just personal taste, but I think it's good to raise these questions, particularly with myself.
Hi Vittorio! Thank you for sharing your thoughts! The goal of my registration was not to mimic the literal sounds of Mendelssohn's orchestra because that would not sound good on the organ. I wanted simply to make a compelling case for an "over the top" rendition of this work which doesn't usually receive a thoughtful performance. Sure, it is possible to bring out subtleties through delicate phrasing, articulation, etc. which is what I demonstrated in the first 30 seconds of the video. The general audience reaction to a "sweet" rendition of this piece (i.e. more or less "historical") is to say "that was nice..." I was aiming more for "WHOA!" Does this piece need such an epic climax? I would argue YES! Here's a thought experiment. Go dust off your copy of Bridge's Adagio in E Major and look at it with fresh eyes. Imagine for a moment there are no dynamics, phrasing or registrations given. And also imagine that for the last century, the performance of this piece was always on smallish organs and using only minimal registrations. If you decided to go hog wild and do a huge build up to an even larger climax, people would probably think you're crazy and say "that's not how that piece should go". But, is it wrong? I think not! In this case, you would rightfully argue that the texture and the register indicate a sort of climax in the Bridge even if there were no other markings. This is precisely why I decided Mendelssohn's Prelude was begging for such treatment. The movement is a lilting pastorale. As in most pastorales, the middle section becomes turbulent, the harmonic rhythm speeds up, and we get further and further from tonic using shorter fragments of melodic material. Also, the register ascends to the top of the keyboard at the peak of this section. I don't need any more direction from Mendelssohn, to know that this would be a huge swell in the orchestra if he had written instead for that medium. Would Mendelssohn have performed this specific Prelude and Fugue in a similar fashion to what I did in the video? Probably not. I'm only arguing that historic performance practice TODAY need not be limited to resurrecting the literal sounds of the past; it is equally appropriate to resurrect past philosophies and filter our performance through that lens! Perhaps it should be called Philosophical Practice rather than Performance Practice?! I don't know;). Of course you're welcome to disagree, I'm just happy I got you thinking about it!
@@yurimccoy7094 Although I think your approach is valid in its own right and has been performed magnifically, However, I also think this prelude and fugue sounds very American now, and slightly anecdotic. Mendelssohn has written far more pieces that are not dramatic at all and it appears to me that this prelude and fugue belongs to this type. I have been a resident organist for over 40 years now on late-romantic organs in Europe (currently a German 1905 Walcker organ), so stylistically and technically half way the instruments Mendelssohn has known and yours. Over the years I have come back from these 'orchestration' practises, simply because the organ sound of these older instruments is so harmonious and rich, and the textures have been laid out so cleverly by Mendelssohn, that they don't need to be enhanced. Moreover, these organs have been voiced much more polyphonical than has been your organ, of which the stops have been primarly voiced with minimal proper character, blending them to the limit. However, I do favour transcribing orchestral and piano pieces for organ, which I have been doing extensively, and with the use of many technical resources, but not always all the way. One last thing: should Mendelssohn have had access to an organ like yours, it is my guess that he would have composed very different music. All in all, I do agree that on your particular type of instrument an orchestrated rendition is more preferable. However, personally I wouldn't play Mendelsohn on that instrument ;-) Cheers, Willem
@@willemceuleers6041 Thanks Willem! I appreciate your stance and expertise, and agree with your "halfway there" evaluation of your Walcker! Sitting at your organ, of course, I would have probably done very little registration-wise with this piece... perhaps setting up 8' 4' flutes and nudging(!) the rollschweller a bit in the b section. But, I'm happily at an American Symphonic organ, and have allowed my instrument to influence my interpretation of the music freely, rather than constraining it and trying to shoehorn it into a German romantic style. The latter is unfortunately the norm here, whether it's Mendelssohn or Bach, American organs are always being made to replicate some European style of organ building. That being said, it comes down to personal taste. Given the choice, I much prefer the prelude to have an organic and orchestral crescendo with lots of solos, rather than an understated and monotonous (or, in my opinion, boring;)) registration. Perhaps my interpretation is a bridge too far for some... but I think that if everyone immediately agrees with everything you're doing, you're not trying hard enough!😅
I really enjoyed using the different soo stops to highlight the musical line and the use of the swell boxes really adds drama and interest. Wonderful thoughts and performance.
Really delightful, I've always thought that the organ works deserve the full orchestral treatment and you've done it wonderfully! Have you thought about treating one of his Sonatas like this?
Yes, I have done this with the slow movement from the A major sonata. Build up phrase by phrase to full organ. It's pretty cool! But, I've yet to give a full sonata this sort of treatment... maybe in the future!
Really a great and thought-provoking analysis of Mendelssohn’s organ music, especially the 3 Preludes & Fugues. His organ sonatas, esp. No’s. 1 & 3 are quite dramatic. So why do we assume the P&F’s are to be played “andante monotonato?”
Ha, exactly! This one in particular suffers because it the lacks rhythmic drive inherent in the C minor and D minor. Nuanced articulation and phrasing can make it more interesting, but I feel like the organist should at least have one or two stop changes.
Excellent video production and performance! Since I'm not a musician, a lot of the stuff went over my head, but...that thunder clap did me in! Nearly caused an "accidental" discharge of waste material! LOL.
This is a good approach. During Mendelssohn's lifetime, taking liberties (adapting) was common practice. Aside from the French tradition, registration instructions in organ music were rare until about 1900 (the French pretty much had a standard design that made it possible). Even now that registrations are commonly provided, they're only guidelines as they might not work on the instrument you play. You have to adapt to whatever works on any given instrument.
Wow Yuri. Jerry (below/above) recommended I should watch this and I must say I love your style and forthright approach when expressing your opinions. Had me laughing a lot of the way and also really appreciating your performance style here. Well done dear man.
LMAO! My Mendelssohn edition is no other than Vol 976 of the Schirmer Library of Musical Classics (edited and registered by none other than Lemare and originally published in 1910). I never did subscribe nor perform Mendelssohn in an austere style (to the angst of my colleagues). So happy to see this video!
Is Lemare's G major full of registration suggestions?! I'd be curious to know his thoughts on this since I'm very much indebted to that free wheeling golden age of organ performance!
Loved your interpretation, but you could achieve similar results using a period instrument, you just need to get a couple organist friends to pull stops. I believe that works with “pro Organo Pleno” can have stop and manual changes, it just takes some imagination and willingness to “color outside the lines”.
I wish you would apply the same sort of persuasive (but appropriate) arguments with those organists who play Bach with unchanged registrations, no rubato and no phrasing. Have they never heard the St. Mathew Passion or the B Minor Mass? Do they think Bach and his contemporaries never had assistants to adjust the stops? Where did Prince Albert learn to do that? Was he such an innovator? You don't want the swell pedal for playing Bach but you do not need to be a robot with a metronome running inexorably in your non-human brain.
Yes! I'm down for anything (boxes, solos, re-writes etc.) when it comes to Bach. We all have heard the plenum version of St. Anne enough times I believe. Surely it's ok if 2% of organists out there dare to be different. However, in my experience, branching out has led to complete alienation🙃. So maybe there's really no room to be unique.
Sounds convincing except for the fact that Mendelssohn would not have known or ever heard the sounds of the large symphonic orchestra of the 20th cent., nor even the modern piano, much less a modern organ. To assume it isn't possible to play expressively on a particular registration is perhaps more a commentary about the player than about the instrument itself. Aside from that, only Mendelssohn's ghost knows what he would have preferred. Generally speaking composers have always worked within the parameters of the time and resources available to them.
Thank you for your comment! You're right, Mendelssohn was dead long before my organ was built! I explain my reasoning in the video using his performance of Bach's Passion as an example. Bach would not have known Mendelssohn's romantic orchestra/modern instruments either, but that was not an artistic inhibitor for Mendelssohn. If we apply the same reasoning today, the fact that Mendelssohn didn't know what American Symphonic Organs sounded like shouldn't be an inhibitor for us. I believe if he had access to our organs the score would have been full of musical indications, registrations and dynamics! To ignore our modern organ's technological advancement in order to stay "true" to Mendelssohn's sound world, I think, doesn't allow the piece to reach its full dramatic potential. Also, I agree you can play musically while using a limited number of stops. There's many very subtle nuances possible through phrasing and articulation... but would you really prefer the 3 stop version over a dressed up symphonic rendition just because it's a bit closer to the sounds he knew? I think most ppl who attend concerts aren't thinking as much about performance practice and would rather hear a convincing musical performance that goes up and down the entire organ.
I appreciate your approach to make use of dynamics. But I don't like that you totally miss to follow the phrasing slurs. Instead you play legato all the time (only some articulation if you change the keyboard). That is similar as if you don't have any stop mark in a speech so that it is an endless sentence that is neither anything a singer would do and we should approach our interpretation to that how a singer would sing the phrases this way you do is simply a swell of notes without any articulation similar to that sentence here do you like o read such long sentences and dynamic changes alone cannot replace articulation. I like to recognize stops and commas in a speech. And I like if someone follows the articulation with phrasing slurs. Mendelssohn took much care to have those in the score. They should be followed also articulation wise.
Thanks for watching DulzianBlues! There's actually a ton of phrasing/shaping of lines. In the prelude for instance, each solo voice (and there are tons) enters with the box closed, crescendos, then decrescendos before the end of the phrase which is then followed by a lift. But, I'm not taking much time after the majority of them because I want the piece to flow. If you're referring to the 4-note slurs in the fugue subject, you're correct I don't observe those because they don't sound good😅. I think it's best in general to do what sounds best rather than adhere strictly to his markings. He was much better with phrase markings for strings and winds.
@@yurimccoy7094 First, why do you think that you would loose the flow if you would follow the composers intention concerning the phrasing slurs? It does not necessarily mean to have lots of rubato or other loss in flow, only to do some articulation according to the intended phrasing slurs. I kind of like your crescendo/decrescendo attempts, but they cannot replace articulation. You simply don't do that, you play almost all the time legato beside some keyboard changes. Well, if you prefer to have a continous playing similar to a bagpipes player instead, than it is fine for you. But do you think a singer or string player looses the flow only if phrasing is applied? And beside the written notes itself all the composers score entries should be considered, including the dynamic and phrasing markings. Of course I also don't think that those composers entries have to be followed without any ifs and buts, but in my opnion more can be done as to replace e.g. phrasing slurs by more or less complete legato playing (dynamic changes cannot replace articulation,that can be added if one likes to do so).
Ok, we'll just have to disagree on the validity of Mendelssohn's phrase indications. I assure you they were all considered, but following them to a T leads to some very strange mid-phrase lifts/hiccups. But, if you wish, record/post your more faithful rendetition and convince me! As far as articulation, Mendelssohn left no indication... it's either notes with a slur on top, or notes without. No staccato, tenuto, accents etc. That would lead me to believe the prevailing articulation is legato.
@@yurimccoy7094 A phrasing slur is already an indication for articulation! A phrasing slur - at least in the context of the time area of Mendelssohn - means to not play legato between the end of the phrasing slur and the begin of the next note of the following phrase, so to indicate that the phrase is over. So it is only legato within the phrasing slur normally. I recommend the very well received book from Jon Laukvik "Historical Performance Practise in Organ Playing", Volume 2 for the romantic period, published 2010. He explains in detail what Mendelssohn and others meant with a phrasing slur, and of course many more information. According to that you do not consider phrasing slurs, you simply ignored them more or less. I also don't say that all of the phrasing slurs have to be followed without any ifs and buts, but having none (beside where you changed keyboards), is too less - is at least my opinion. You showed interest in how I play it, so I looked through and indeed found a video where I played the prelude in a church service. The link is not allowed to be public since it contains a complete church service and was shown only a limited time during the Corona lock down. And I also don't have the intention to cut single organ pieces out of that to post that public. But you could sent me a mail so I could share it privately if you are interested and promise to not distribute. But more as this I recommend that really great book from Jon Laukvik - especially if you are interested in historical performance practise. There is another volume covering the Barock area. Both volumes are for sure worth the money. But most of all, it is of course highly personal taste what to do and what not to do with the interpretation according the score any composer has left. At we end we don't have any recording from Mendelssohn itself, only hints about his performance practise, carefully collected e.g. by Jon Laukvik and others. But interpretation is always personal, so I told only my opinion. Maybe it is also partly influenced by cultural differences. Living and growing up in the area where Mendelssohn and also Bach lived, and knowing some historical organs they played might have an influence on that aspect too...
If you’re looking for flash-grenade excitement and shock-and-awe, no, Mendelssohn’s organ preludes & fugues are not for you. Just beautiful thoughtful organ music by a genius, wonderfully presented by Mr. McCoy. “Rammstein” might be a better option for you.
I've got to play the Prelude (Prelude ONLY, G major, Op.37 - Mendelssohn) in an organ competition later this year - 2023 in New Zealand. This piece is the SET work, and the rest of my programme is my free choice. I thought I would listen to a few different organists on RUclips for their interpretation of this Prelude. Your presentation of Mendelssohn's approach to the organ has given me new insights and a new perspective of Mendelssohn that I've never thought about before. Your argument that Mendelssohn would use the full resources available to him really makes a lot of sense to me and is very convincing. For the competition however, I need to find out what the judge is looking for and play accordingly. But going forward long-term as an organ recitalist, I will now re-question my approach to Mendelssohn. Thank you, Yuri McCoy, for sharing your passion and explanation of Mendelssohn's music. Your playing is absolutely outstanding!!!
I would definitely NOT do what I did in competition. They'll want musicality and an accurate reading of the score. Beyond that, Iet your knowledge of Mendelssohn's organs and their limitations show through your interpretation. Then, once you win, you can ham it up all you want in recital😎.
Wow, what an awesome & interesting video!! PS: I really like your editing-style!
Thanks Paul!
Wow, what a perfect orchestral sound you find for this prelude and fugue! Great job! Thank you for new vision!
Thank you for watching!
Love the point that a real knowledge of 19th century music is a historically accurate way to understand organ music of the time. Seems obvious to you and me. But you articulated it so well.
Thank you for breathing new life in this very beautiful music. I agree, had Mendelssohn the resources of today's powerful instruments, he would every resource available to him when planning this music.
Thank you for listening!
Totally agree and is coherent with the intentions he late plamed in the monumental Organ Sonatas Op 65
Thanks for watching!
So wonderful! This a piece I have played for so many years. However, this was inspiring! I am taking a blank, clean copy and sitting down and making registration notes based on your performance. I wish you could offer an on-going video series on taking pieces such as these and creating beautiful, orchestral performances. I would gladly pay for such "lessons."
Thanks William! Let me know if you have any pieces in mind... there's many things to consider when deciding which works make a good candidate for such a transformation. But, if you go to my performance of Ravel's Minuet on a Theme of Haydn (originally a piano work) I took a similar approach there. ruclips.net/video/frTgY5QUI5w/видео.html. I have a Dupre Variations on a Noel video and a "how to" video on conquering the most complex rhythms on the planet coming out in the coming months. So subscribe if you haven't!
@@yurimccoy7094 Thanks for your reply. I will think on repertoire ideas. I have indeed subscribed and will look forward to watching other work you have posted. All the best!
I would really like to know what classical composers would have thought about instruments like the Midmer Losh in AC, and the Wanamaker in Philly, and their extreme versatility. The Wanamaker with her soft lush strings, and the Midmer Losh with the booming and thundering voice of Poseidon.
It really makes me curious as to what kind of music they could have written given the vast contrasting resources of both instruments.
Yes, me too. Certainly, one would assume at least some of the instrument's capabilities would be explored in the case of Mendelssohn. Or maybe he'd hate it, who knows?😅
@@yurimccoy7094 I’ve seen some people speculate on it. And some people completely miss the point.
But in the case of Mendelssohn, I think he would be enamored by the idea of a CA and multiple expressions for different divisions. With the ability to go from one end of the spectrum to the other. Don’t even get me started with how useful they’d most likely find second touch! No need for couplers to a point.
Wow, serious musical scholarship combined with influencer montages! I love it!
Glad you liked it!
This was great - the talk and the playing, I loved it, thank you!!! There is another OR to interpreting 19th century organ scores - read reviews and treatise from the period. I was struck years ago when I read a detailed report on the inaugural concert of a three manual Hook and Hastings Organ at the 3rd Presbyterian Church of Pittsburgh in 1868. The reporter had a firm grasp of music and the review made several interesting statements - the organ was conceived as an "orchestra", the pieces throughout had constant variations in registration and dramatic effect, and the audience was thrilled by the variety of tone colors and combinations from ppp to fff. The pieces on the program ranged from organ sonatas to hymns and Scottish folk songs, all designed to show the variety on the large and well balanced instrument, the printed the stop list as well. Another source are the books and articles on registration and then actual markings in scores from 19th century organists. I am often surprised as I've collected old organ scores to see the many notations for interesting registration changes penciled in were none are indicated, often you can grasp the style and size of the instrument from these, many times even on what must have been a smallish 8 and 4 organ their are plenty of notations to provide color, often in very inventive ways. When I served at a Lutheran church with a smallish 2 manual early 20th century tracker, I was amazed out the variety of colors I could obtain by creatively playing around with the instrument. There was a fascinating article from the Etude magazine in the early 1920s that made the same argument, even a modest 8 to 14 rank organ could be the source of endless registration possibilities if one only uses their imagination and finds ways to make the music dramatic.
Thanks for your insightful comment! Yes, it definitely would be interesting to look into a late 19th century performance practice as well (before performance practice itself became the supreme guiding principal in musical interpretation!). That would lead us down an interesting albeit different path than I posit in the video. My thought is this: Mendelssohn was not concerned with historic performance practice, and organists' obsession over it leads to an end product that has little in common with the beauty and excitement found in Mendelsson's works for other instruments. Studying up on, say Lemare or Straube's performance of 19th century music on the one hand, might be freeing, or, on the other hand might again restrict us in that we now have a new "source material" to replicate... in fact, those types of interpretations (play Bach like Straube for instance) are becoming more common. I enjoy the novelty of these performances, but I think they are currently the only way for a performer to break free from standard baroque performance practice while still retaining the good graces of the organ establishment. What's wrong with coming up with your own registration scheme and paying however you want? Mendelssohn and his buds didn't worry their little heads over such matters, and I long for the day we don't either! Thanks again for watching!
@@yurimccoy7094 Absolutely, I am not suggesting we become slaves to 19th century performance or any other practice. If Bach could played an EM Skinner with black smoke rolling out of the swell boxes and French reeds and Midi, you think he wouldn't have used them? Come on! I applaud your fresh take on this - this is what informed practice should me, we inform ourselves to get as wide a perspective as possible and then we make music our own. Some things will be more successful than others and some will please some tastes and not others and some will be "historic" and some won't - and that's all OK in my book. As long as the music lives and connects with the audience we've done our job. I think it is also ok to toy with the score - please cast stones now.
@@amicus1766 ahh, I've found a kindred spirit! Amen to all that. And, as a former colleague of mine once said "if Bach had a flush toilet, he would have used one!"
A well designed 15 rank organ with a good combination action offers amazing flexibility.
@@karlrovey Yes, agreed. Super/subs/unison offs will go a long way for sure!
This is absolutely brilliant, Yuri. Thanks for making the case for an orchestrated interpretation of Mendelssohn organ works so beautifully!
Thanks Grant, I have no choice but to orchestrate on my organ;)
I really think that most of what you're saying is totally true: we shouldn't avoid more "orchestral" registrations, or using the swell box, just because Mendelssohn's organ didn't have such "commodities". However, I'm rather puzzled by your version of his Prelude and Fugue. I come from a different context as yours, I am an European, maybe I'm missing something... but isn't this rendition a bit exaggerate? The prelude is a very subtle, sweet, tender piece, does it really need such a powerful climax? And also the orchestration seems nothing like Mendelssohn's works. Take the second Movement of the Lobgesang Symphony... there's no abrupt change of colour, and everything is build around dynamic nuances, alternating the solo melody between the violin and the double reeds. And when the trombones and all the woodwinds come it's not triumphant and loud, it's just full and bright.
Concerning small historical organs... We have plenty of them here. Often I've had to give concerts on them, and Mendelssohn is often a good choice for the very reason that it sounds just as good without too many changes of colour (at least when we compare him with the plethora of minor authors who just wrote music for the services). And I think those organs are really precious, not only because often their sound is marvellously harmonised, but also because they force you to work on other aspects to make it intresting: rubato, articulation, touché, poliphonic variety. Your interpretation, though technically impressive, was entirely a tempo and legato... Is this really what organ playing is about? Of course, at the end it's just personal taste, but I think it's good to raise these questions, particularly with myself.
Hi Vittorio! Thank you for sharing your thoughts! The goal of my registration was not to mimic the literal sounds of Mendelssohn's orchestra because that would not sound good on the organ. I wanted simply to make a compelling case for an "over the top" rendition of this work which doesn't usually receive a thoughtful performance. Sure, it is possible to bring out subtleties through delicate phrasing, articulation, etc. which is what I demonstrated in the first 30 seconds of the video. The general audience reaction to a "sweet" rendition of this piece (i.e. more or less "historical") is to say "that was nice..." I was aiming more for "WHOA!"
Does this piece need such an epic climax? I would argue YES! Here's a thought experiment. Go dust off your copy of Bridge's Adagio in E Major and look at it with fresh eyes. Imagine for a moment there are no dynamics, phrasing or registrations given. And also imagine that for the last century, the performance of this piece was always on smallish organs and using only minimal registrations. If you decided to go hog wild and do a huge build up to an even larger climax, people would probably think you're crazy and say "that's not how that piece should go". But, is it wrong? I think not! In this case, you would rightfully argue that the texture and the register indicate a sort of climax in the Bridge even if there were no other markings. This is precisely why I decided Mendelssohn's Prelude was begging for such treatment. The movement is a lilting pastorale. As in most pastorales, the middle section becomes turbulent, the harmonic rhythm speeds up, and we get further and further from tonic using shorter fragments of melodic material. Also, the register ascends to the top of the keyboard at the peak of this section. I don't need any more direction from Mendelssohn, to know that this would be a huge swell in the orchestra if he had written instead for that medium.
Would Mendelssohn have performed this specific Prelude and Fugue in a similar fashion to what I did in the video? Probably not. I'm only arguing that historic performance practice TODAY need not be limited to resurrecting the literal sounds of the past; it is equally appropriate to resurrect past philosophies and filter our performance through that lens! Perhaps it should be called Philosophical Practice rather than Performance Practice?! I don't know;). Of course you're welcome to disagree, I'm just happy I got you thinking about it!
@@yurimccoy7094 Although I think your approach is valid in its own right and has been performed magnifically, However, I also think this prelude and fugue sounds very American now, and slightly anecdotic. Mendelssohn has written far more pieces that are not dramatic at all and it appears to me that this prelude and fugue belongs to this type. I have been a resident organist for over 40 years now on late-romantic organs in Europe (currently a German 1905 Walcker organ), so stylistically and technically half way the instruments Mendelssohn has known and yours. Over the years I have come back from these 'orchestration' practises, simply because the organ sound of these older instruments is so harmonious and rich, and the textures have been laid out so cleverly by Mendelssohn, that they don't need to be enhanced. Moreover, these organs have been voiced much more polyphonical than has been your organ, of which the stops have been primarly voiced with minimal proper character, blending them to the limit. However, I do favour transcribing orchestral and piano pieces for organ, which I have been doing extensively, and with the use of many technical resources, but not always all the way. One last thing: should Mendelssohn have had access to an organ like yours, it is my guess that he would have composed very different music. All in all, I do agree that on your particular type of instrument an orchestrated rendition is more preferable. However, personally I wouldn't play Mendelsohn on that instrument ;-)
Cheers, Willem
@@willemceuleers6041 Thanks Willem! I appreciate your stance and expertise, and agree with your "halfway there" evaluation of your Walcker! Sitting at your organ, of course, I would have probably done very little registration-wise with this piece... perhaps setting up 8' 4' flutes and nudging(!) the rollschweller a bit in the b section. But, I'm happily at an American Symphonic organ, and have allowed my instrument to influence my interpretation of the music freely, rather than constraining it and trying to shoehorn it into a German romantic style. The latter is unfortunately the norm here, whether it's Mendelssohn or Bach, American organs are always being made to replicate some European style of organ building. That being said, it comes down to personal taste. Given the choice, I much prefer the prelude to have an organic and orchestral crescendo with lots of solos, rather than an understated and monotonous (or, in my opinion, boring;)) registration. Perhaps my interpretation is a bridge too far for some... but I think that if everyone immediately agrees with everything you're doing, you're not trying hard enough!😅
@@yurimccoy7094 fair enough ;-)
I really enjoyed using the different soo stops to highlight the musical line and the use of the swell boxes really adds drama and interest. Wonderful thoughts and performance.
Thanks Kevin, I'm glad you enjoyed it!
Wow. Just, wow! I tried it somewhat like this and it's my new favorite thing ever!
Great! It takes a while to setup and get used to, but if it's an organ that you can permanently save all your registrations on, the sky's the limit!
@@yurimccoy7094 The sky's the limit... or the late '90s II/27 German tracker 🤣 Thanks again for making me see this chestnut in a brand new light!
@@TheCantorD 🤣🤣 I try my best to avoid those!
Dude this is totally brilliant and I’m inspired by the organ stuff. But the montage is where you reached GOD LEVEL
Haha! I have no idea why I put that in there... but here we are!
C’est très beau c’est tout ce qui compte !
Really delightful, I've always thought that the organ works deserve the full orchestral treatment and you've done it wonderfully! Have you thought about treating one of his Sonatas like this?
Yes, I have done this with the slow movement from the A major sonata. Build up phrase by phrase to full organ. It's pretty cool! But, I've yet to give a full sonata this sort of treatment... maybe in the future!
@@yurimccoy7094 That sounds glorious - I'd love to hear!
What a fantastic presentation. Thank you!! Great background and supporting evidence. And a mesmerizing and virtuosic performance of the P&F!!!
Thanks for watching! Stay tuned, I have a Christmas video you won't want to miss!
Your orchestration is perfection. No go Philadelphia and work it out on the Grand Orchestral Organ of all, the Wanamaker Organ. The adagio is lovely.
Would love to, tell Peter😉
I studied this piece at school. My teacher dedicated his life to playing the organ musically, and believe me, we got expresssion!
That's great, too often the focus is soley on performing historically. It has its place, but should be balanced with individual musicality etc.
Really a great and thought-provoking analysis of Mendelssohn’s organ music, especially the 3 Preludes & Fugues. His organ sonatas, esp. No’s. 1 & 3 are quite dramatic. So why do we assume the P&F’s are to be played “andante monotonato?”
Ha, exactly! This one in particular suffers because it the lacks rhythmic drive inherent in the C minor and D minor. Nuanced articulation and phrasing can make it more interesting, but I feel like the organist should at least have one or two stop changes.
Excellent video production and performance! Since I'm not a musician, a lot of the stuff went over my head, but...that thunder clap did me in! Nearly caused an "accidental" discharge of waste material! LOL.
HAHA! Yes, that thunderclap is truly epic! Be warned: my next video will include monster trucks and heavy metal (and also some organ music)🤣!
Totally agree with everything you’ve said and done in this video. Well done!
Thanks for watching!
This is a good approach. During Mendelssohn's lifetime, taking liberties (adapting) was common practice. Aside from the French tradition, registration instructions in organ music were rare until about 1900 (the French pretty much had a standard design that made it possible). Even now that registrations are commonly provided, they're only guidelines as they might not work on the instrument you play. You have to adapt to whatever works on any given instrument.
Thanks! Yes, this is simply my unique approach for a large symphonic organ. If I were somewhere else, I would play it completely differently.
I love you, Yuri! This is amazing. Alcee
Thanks Alcee!! Glad you liked it!! Still need to get our Florentz tour going!😉
And he played without gazing at a piece of paper!
I echo the video series! MORE!
Well done, Dr. McCoy!
Comin atcha... I probably should have used this format with the Schoenberg video! There's definitely more to discuss!
Yes
Absolutely
Thank you. This is a great video!
Thanks for tuning in!
Wow Yuri. Jerry (below/above) recommended I should watch this and I must say I love your style and forthright approach when expressing your opinions. Had me laughing a lot of the way and also really appreciating your performance style here. Well done dear man.
Thanks Maurice!
LMAO! My Mendelssohn edition is no other than Vol 976 of the Schirmer Library of Musical Classics (edited and registered by none other than Lemare and originally published in 1910). I never did subscribe nor perform Mendelssohn in an austere style (to the angst of my colleagues). So happy to see this video!
Is Lemare's G major full of registration suggestions?! I'd be curious to know his thoughts on this since I'm very much indebted to that free wheeling golden age of organ performance!
It's interesting, really!
It sounds more or less like a Reger's "Mendelssohn's memento".
@@14reger yes, I could see him adding roller crescendo indications all over the score!
Loved your interpretation, but you could achieve similar results using a period instrument, you just need to get a couple organist friends to pull stops. I believe that works with “pro Organo Pleno” can have stop and manual changes, it just takes some imagination and willingness to “color outside the lines”.
Thanks! Yes, all that would be missing were swell boxes!
I wish you would apply the same sort of persuasive (but appropriate) arguments with those organists who play Bach with unchanged registrations, no rubato and no phrasing. Have they never heard the St. Mathew Passion or the B Minor Mass? Do they think Bach and his contemporaries never had assistants to adjust the stops? Where did Prince Albert learn to do that? Was he such an innovator? You don't want the swell pedal for playing Bach but you do not need to be a robot with a metronome running inexorably in your non-human brain.
Yes! I'm down for anything (boxes, solos, re-writes etc.) when it comes to Bach. We all have heard the plenum version of St. Anne enough times I believe. Surely it's ok if 2% of organists out there dare to be different. However, in my experience, branching out has led to complete alienation🙃. So maybe there's really no room to be unique.
10/10
Woohoo!
Lobgesang is calling you…
Oh boy... there's a project. Ha!
Sounds convincing except for the fact that Mendelssohn would not have known or ever heard the sounds of the large symphonic orchestra of the 20th cent., nor even the modern piano, much less a modern organ. To assume it isn't possible to play expressively on a particular registration is perhaps more a commentary about the player than about the instrument itself. Aside from that, only Mendelssohn's ghost knows what he would have preferred. Generally speaking composers have always worked within the parameters of the time and resources available to them.
Thank you for your comment! You're right, Mendelssohn was dead long before my organ was built! I explain my reasoning in the video using his performance of Bach's Passion as an example. Bach would not have known Mendelssohn's romantic orchestra/modern instruments either, but that was not an artistic inhibitor for Mendelssohn. If we apply the same reasoning today, the fact that Mendelssohn didn't know what American Symphonic Organs sounded like shouldn't be an inhibitor for us. I believe if he had access to our organs the score would have been full of musical indications, registrations and dynamics! To ignore our modern organ's technological advancement in order to stay "true" to Mendelssohn's sound world, I think, doesn't allow the piece to reach its full dramatic potential.
Also, I agree you can play musically while using a limited number of stops. There's many very subtle nuances possible through phrasing and articulation... but would you really prefer the 3 stop version over a dressed up symphonic rendition just because it's a bit closer to the sounds he knew? I think most ppl who attend concerts aren't thinking as much about performance practice and would rather hear a convincing musical performance that goes up and down the entire organ.
I appreciate your approach to make use of dynamics.
But I don't like that you totally miss to follow the phrasing slurs.
Instead you play legato all the time (only some articulation if you change the keyboard).
That is similar as if you don't have any stop mark in a speech so that it is an endless sentence that is neither anything a singer would do and we should approach our interpretation to that how a singer would sing the phrases this way you do is simply a swell of notes without any articulation similar to that sentence here do you like o read such long sentences and dynamic changes alone cannot replace articulation.
I like to recognize stops and commas in a speech.
And I like if someone follows the articulation with phrasing slurs.
Mendelssohn took much care to have those in the score.
They should be followed also articulation wise.
Thanks for watching DulzianBlues! There's actually a ton of phrasing/shaping of lines. In the prelude for instance, each solo voice (and there are tons) enters with the box closed, crescendos, then decrescendos before the end of the phrase which is then followed by a lift. But, I'm not taking much time after the majority of them because I want the piece to flow. If you're referring to the 4-note slurs in the fugue subject, you're correct I don't observe those because they don't sound good😅. I think it's best in general to do what sounds best rather than adhere strictly to his markings. He was much better with phrase markings for strings and winds.
@@yurimccoy7094 First, why do you think that you would loose the flow if you would follow the composers intention concerning the phrasing slurs? It does not necessarily mean to have lots of rubato or other loss in flow, only to do some articulation according to the intended phrasing slurs.
I kind of like your crescendo/decrescendo attempts, but they cannot replace articulation.
You simply don't do that, you play almost all the time legato beside some keyboard changes. Well, if you prefer to have a continous playing similar to a bagpipes player instead, than it is fine for you.
But do you think a singer or string player looses the flow only if phrasing is applied?
And beside the written notes itself all the composers score entries should be considered, including the dynamic and phrasing markings. Of course I also don't think that those composers entries have to be followed without any ifs and buts, but in my opnion more can be done as to replace e.g. phrasing slurs by more or less complete legato playing (dynamic changes cannot replace articulation,that can be added if one likes to do so).
Ok, we'll just have to disagree on the validity of Mendelssohn's phrase indications. I assure you they were all considered, but following them to a T leads to some very strange mid-phrase lifts/hiccups. But, if you wish, record/post your more faithful rendetition and convince me!
As far as articulation, Mendelssohn left no indication... it's either notes with a slur on top, or notes without. No staccato, tenuto, accents etc. That would lead me to believe the prevailing articulation is legato.
@@yurimccoy7094
A phrasing slur is already an indication for articulation!
A phrasing slur - at least in the context of the time area of Mendelssohn - means to not play legato between the end of the phrasing slur and the begin of the next note of the following phrase, so to indicate that the phrase is over. So it is only legato within the phrasing slur normally.
I recommend the very well received book from Jon Laukvik "Historical Performance Practise in Organ Playing", Volume 2 for the romantic period, published 2010. He explains in detail what Mendelssohn and others meant with a phrasing slur, and of course many more information.
According to that you do not consider phrasing slurs, you simply ignored them more or less.
I also don't say that all of the phrasing slurs have to be followed without any ifs and buts, but having none (beside where you changed keyboards), is too less - is at least my opinion.
You showed interest in how I play it, so I looked through and indeed found a video where I played the prelude in a church service. The link is not allowed to be public since it contains a complete church service and was shown only a limited time during the Corona lock down. And I also don't have the intention to cut single organ pieces out of that to post that public. But you could sent me a mail so I could share it privately if you are interested and promise to not distribute. But more as this I recommend that really great book from Jon Laukvik - especially if you are interested in historical performance practise. There is another volume covering the Barock area. Both volumes are for sure worth the money.
But most of all, it is of course highly personal taste what to do and what not to do with the interpretation according the score any composer has left. At we end we don't have any recording from Mendelssohn itself, only hints about his performance practise, carefully collected e.g. by Jon Laukvik and others. But interpretation is always personal, so I told only my opinion. Maybe it is also partly influenced by cultural differences. Living and growing up in the area where Mendelssohn and also Bach lived, and knowing some historical organs they played might have an influence on that aspect too...
What was SO SPECIAL About this? NOTHING!!!!
You're right, just a garden variety interpretation of Mendelssohn's Prelude and Fugue in G😉.
If you’re looking for flash-grenade excitement and shock-and-awe, no, Mendelssohn’s organ preludes & fugues are not for you. Just beautiful thoughtful organ music by a genius, wonderfully presented by Mr. McCoy.
“Rammstein” might be a better option for you.