32 Short Films About Glenn Gould (1993) is one of my favorite films. Highly recommended to anyone who has any interest in the man or who want to see how good a biopic can be when it eschews the standard, boring, chronological genre formula. Of course, like everyone, I already have the '55 and '81 in standard issues and am perfectly fine with them. Would be interesting to hear from any of the nutcases in here who would buy that "deluxe" edition. Clearly the person who has everything.
This is a good commentary you put together on a very special release. From what I've read over the years, you are correct in that Gould was very amiable and an easy person with whom to work. The only person who didn't enjoy working with him was the quite rigid Schwartzkopf. However, other collaborators enjoyed their time with him, including Roxy Roslak.
The first record I ever bought was Glenn Gould's recording of WTC I. That was back in 1974, not long after it's release. I still listen to his recordings of Bach's music with the same sense of joy and excitement as I did all those years ago. He is someone I would have loved to have met.
another good video by Dave! Thank you Dave. Despite I do not Know how to like Gould (I don't hear Bach, but Gould) your videos are clear, well informed.
Sony already released the 5 cds of the 1955 outakes. But Gould actually experimented quite a lot during his recording sessions, in terms of tempo, articulation, phrasing. So he did not come with a fixed idea of how to play but used the recording as a way to experiment different options. That is a very different way from some other pianists like Rubinstein.
That is only partially true. In the case of the Goldbergs, he had a very clear idea of the overall shape of the piece, but as you say, he liked to vary numerous smaller details.
Well, I did not listen to the 1981 outakes, but I did for the 1955 and it goes well beyond details. M. Scott indeed recognized himself that Gould was searching the proper interpretation by changing a number of parameters. Just listening to the different takes of the opening Aria or the following variation, there are so many different and major changes, that each take presents a different view. Different tempo, articulation, phrasing, .... There are pianists who indeed come with a fully set version and only fine tune very small details during the recording, but that is definitely not the case with Gould who was using the recording process as a working tool to define his final product. Gould, by nature, was a relentless searcher and thinker who couldnt set his mind easily. It is interesting to read his letters to understand how relentless and agitated he was. BTW and quite curiously Gould completely rejected his 1955 version when a lot of people would consider that it is his best version. I would certainly think it is his most original one, even today. It has this sort of impetuosity and freshness; the 1981 is more refined, but all in all less interesting. But indeed beyond the understanding of the very unique recording process of Gould, I am not sure what the interest is to listen to so many different takes.
The documentary films on Gould are generally pretty interesting, because he was so eccentric you never know what you’re going to get. A good deal of it is right on RUclips, and one of the best is the two-part: “Glenn Gould Off the Record” and “Glenn Gould On the Record.” The Film Board of Canada follows him through the whole process of recording one of his early Bach albums at Columbia. It’s vintage Gould, brilliantly captured.
That album also has an interesting aspect in terms of audio recording technology (I assume it being mentioned in the book): Columbia announced it with big fanfare as one of the first major releases recorded digitally. But in later years, these early digital recordings were being frowned upon, something with the early A/D converters now regarded as producing too harsh a sound. So, beginning with 2002, every re-release of the recording (including this one I believe) no longer used the milestone digital tracks but the analog tapes that had been made in parallel as a reference and backup.
Gould's first recording of The Goldberg Variations is superlative. And Gould's second recording of The Goldberg Variations is superlatively superlative.
What I love about Gould's "Gouldberg" variations -- either one -- was that he put the virtues of the harpsichord onto the piano. It would have been a good idea to put the 1955 recording into this collection.
Hi Dave..I fell in love with Gould's younger..earlier interpretation of the Goldberg Variations..taught myself many of the Preludes based on his interpretations while in college. ( University of Wyoming..24 hour open music/Art building) ..late 1970's. Don't enjoy this later slower more clipped interpretation. Thanks for sharing this review!
Some found his vocals off-putting . So what? True story or not, when George Szell (one of the last tyrants of the podium) first worked with Gould he exclaimed, (That nut is a genius!) I believe that Leonard Bernstein's experience with Gould's Beethoven was less than snaguine.
I really thing that he was a genius in marketing, creating a mistique around himself.. But so much substance and brilliance was behind Gould's music making not like some of today's completely hollow music superstars pushed by the big labels.
In 2003 i visiting a glenn gould exposition at the palais de la civiisation at ottawa,gatineau ( canada)...i see his two pianos,his chair,and mutch other thing.....really interessting....the year after i go to toronto to make a little pelerinage to see few of glenn gould.....his bithday house,and were he live during his life....i love this artist.....a really good biography of glenn gould was writen by kevin bazzana.....i d'ont know if this book was traduce in english....so ....what glenn gould doit if he live after 50 years old.....? (age of his death)
I always prefer live performances of works from all composers. When I was growing up in the mid and late 1960s Gould's Bach was all the rage. I wish I'd had an opportunity to listen to others with very different approaches to his music.
A very minor point, but when this first came out on LP the word was that the digital recording had problems and that the release was cut from backup analog tapes. I wonder if the notes on the current release have anything to say about this?
I have no idea how Gould and Leonard Bernstein managed to collaborate together. It was one of the greatest battle o musical wills in history. The only rationale I can think of is the Gould was so photogenic when he was introduced to U.S. tv audiences by Bernstein in 1960.
Do I care? Yes I do. For the music, and not so much for who is doing the playing. I do struggle a little with Bach on the piano rather than harpsichord. My first choice would be Helmut Walcha, which these days is also old fashioned! But I think this kind of artist led "de-lux" issued is more about cultism than absolute artistic worth. A littler like the Bruckner cult or at least the cult for certain Bruckner conductors .... Helmut Walcha will never get this kind of treatment, because essentially he was not an eccentric, or iconoclastic performer, but a great workaday one. Though blind, and so memorising the music by ear from his wife playing it, he learning it, and then synthesised his interpretation, the result is most amazingly aurally pleasing. He weights the music with no apparent ego but a huge understanding of the structure and expression via that most unlikely instrument, the modern harpsichord [Amer], which does not clang and clatter, but has a tremendous presence when there are lots of notes. He only recorded Bach organ music on instrument from Bach's time or near it ... Dear Dave, Thank you for your videos! May I wish you all the best for the rest of this year, and continuing health and happiness for another hundred years! Best wishes from George
The only thing better than having a copy of the 1981 GB recording by GG on the shelf, is having a copy and never listening to it. Listening to it only pops the bubble of exultation. I will skip this release I think.
A friend of mine was once SO excited to play the Gouldberg variatons for me, absolutely marveling over that humming/singing along that was his own unique style for it, dutifully pointing out that the music flowed through him so naturally that he couldn't help himself, etc...to me I always found it SO distracting that I couldn't enjoy the music whatsoever and found another performance where Bach came across more than Gould...perhaps the engineer in those recordings was too intimidated by the legend to ask for a retake based on this particular 'problem', or perhaps he was simply drooling over it...either way, not for me
The engineers tried their best to lessen the extraneous noise. Ultimately it came down to using a brilliant take that had some of his "singing" or using a not-as-brilliant take with no "singing." I think they made the right choice.
32 Short Films About Glenn Gould (1993) is one of my favorite films. Highly recommended to anyone who has any interest in the man or who want to see how good a biopic can be when it eschews the standard, boring, chronological genre formula. Of course, like everyone, I already have the '55 and '81 in standard issues and am perfectly fine with them. Would be interesting to hear from any of the nutcases in here who would buy that "deluxe" edition. Clearly the person who has everything.
This is a good commentary you put together on a very special release. From what I've read over the years, you are correct in that Gould was very amiable and an easy person with whom to work. The only person who didn't enjoy working with him was the quite rigid Schwartzkopf. However, other collaborators enjoyed their time with him, including Roxy Roslak.
The first record I ever bought was Glenn Gould's recording of WTC I.
That was back in 1974, not long after it's release. I still listen to his recordings of Bach's music with the same sense of joy and excitement as I did all those years ago.
He is someone I would have loved to have met.
another good video by Dave! Thank you Dave. Despite I do not Know how to like Gould (I don't hear Bach, but Gould) your videos are clear, well informed.
Sony already released the 5 cds of the 1955 outakes. But Gould actually experimented quite a lot during his recording sessions, in terms of tempo, articulation, phrasing. So he did not come with a fixed idea of how to play but used the recording as a way to experiment different options. That is a very different way from some other pianists like Rubinstein.
That is only partially true. In the case of the Goldbergs, he had a very clear idea of the overall shape of the piece, but as you say, he liked to vary numerous smaller details.
Well, I did not listen to the 1981 outakes, but I did for the 1955 and it goes well beyond details. M. Scott indeed recognized himself that Gould was searching the proper interpretation by changing a number of parameters. Just listening to the different takes of the opening Aria or the following variation, there are so many different and major changes, that each take presents a different view. Different tempo, articulation, phrasing, .... There are pianists who indeed come with a fully set version and only fine tune very small details during the recording, but that is definitely not the case with Gould who was using the recording process as a working tool to define his final product. Gould, by nature, was a relentless searcher and thinker who couldnt set his mind easily. It is interesting to read his letters to understand how relentless and agitated he was.
BTW and quite curiously Gould completely rejected his 1955 version when a lot of people would consider that it is his best version. I would certainly think it is his most original one, even today. It has this sort of impetuosity and freshness; the 1981 is more refined, but all in all less interesting.
But indeed beyond the understanding of the very unique recording process of Gould, I am not sure what the interest is to listen to so many different takes.
The documentary films on Gould are generally pretty interesting, because he was so eccentric you never know what you’re going to get. A good deal of it is right on RUclips, and one of the best is the two-part: “Glenn Gould Off the Record” and “Glenn Gould On the Record.” The Film Board of Canada follows him through the whole process of recording one of his early Bach albums at Columbia. It’s vintage Gould, brilliantly captured.
Many thanks - I look forward to gaining this insight into Gould.
That album also has an interesting aspect in terms of audio recording technology (I assume it being mentioned in the book): Columbia announced it with big fanfare as one of the first major releases recorded digitally. But in later years, these early digital recordings were being frowned upon, something with the early A/D converters now regarded as producing too harsh a sound. So, beginning with 2002, every re-release of the recording (including this one I believe) no longer used the milestone digital tracks but the analog tapes that had been made in parallel as a reference and backup.
Gould's first recording of The Goldberg Variations is superlative.
And Gould's second recording of The Goldberg Variations is superlatively superlative.
What I love about Gould's "Gouldberg" variations -- either one -- was that he put the virtues of the harpsichord onto the piano. It would have been a good idea to put the 1955 recording into this collection.
They gave it similar treatment already, in another big set.
@@DavesClassicalGuide I know of the other set. It would make sense for each set to contain the other recording for contrast.
I needed this..love it
Hi Dave..I fell in love with Gould's younger..earlier interpretation of the Goldberg Variations..taught myself many of the Preludes based on his interpretations while in college. ( University of Wyoming..24 hour open music/Art building) ..late 1970's. Don't enjoy this later slower more clipped interpretation. Thanks for sharing this review!
The other thing that Callas and Gould shared was great vocal range... :)
LOL!
Some found his vocals off-putting . So what?
True story or not, when George Szell (one of the last tyrants of the podium) first worked with Gould he exclaimed, (That nut is a genius!)
I believe that Leonard Bernstein's experience with Gould's Beethoven was less than snaguine.
I always enjoyed his singing.
I really thing that he was a genius in marketing, creating a mistique around himself.. But so much substance and brilliance was behind Gould's music making not like some of today's completely hollow music superstars pushed by the big labels.
In 2003 i visiting a glenn gould exposition at the palais de la civiisation at ottawa,gatineau ( canada)...i see his two pianos,his chair,and mutch other thing.....really interessting....the year after i go to toronto to make a little pelerinage to see few of glenn gould.....his bithday house,and were he live during his life....i love this artist.....a really good biography of glenn gould was writen by kevin bazzana.....i d'ont know if this book was traduce in english....so ....what glenn gould doit if he live after 50 years old.....? (age of his death)
I always prefer live performances of works from all composers. When I was growing up in the mid and late 1960s Gould's Bach was all the rage. I wish I'd had an opportunity to listen to others with very different approaches to his music.
I always prefer great performances. I don't care whether they are live or not.
100% agree with you
A very minor point, but when this first came out on LP the word was that the digital recording had problems and that the release was cut from backup analog tapes. I wonder if the notes on the current release have anything to say about this?
I have no idea how Gould and Leonard Bernstein managed to collaborate together. It was one of the greatest battle o musical wills in history. The only rationale I can think of is the Gould was so photogenic when he was introduced to U.S. tv audiences by Bernstein in 1960.
which of his Goldberg's is your favorite?
I have no preference.
Do I care? Yes I do. For the music, and not so much for who is doing the playing. I do struggle a little with Bach on the piano rather than harpsichord. My first choice would be Helmut Walcha, which these days is also old fashioned!
But I think this kind of artist led "de-lux" issued is more about cultism than absolute artistic worth. A littler like the Bruckner cult or at least the cult for certain Bruckner conductors ....
Helmut Walcha will never get this kind of treatment, because essentially he was not an eccentric, or iconoclastic performer, but a great workaday one. Though blind, and so memorising the music by ear from his wife playing it, he learning it, and then synthesised his interpretation, the result is most amazingly aurally pleasing. He weights the music with no apparent ego but a huge understanding of the structure and expression via that most unlikely instrument, the modern harpsichord [Amer], which does not clang and clatter, but has a tremendous presence when there are lots of notes. He only recorded Bach organ music on instrument from Bach's time or near it ...
Dear Dave, Thank you for your videos! May I wish you all the best for the rest of this year, and continuing health and happiness for another hundred years!
Best wishes from George
The only thing better than having a copy of the 1981 GB recording by GG on the shelf, is having a copy and never listening to it. Listening to it only pops the bubble of exultation. I will skip this release I think.
There is no excuse for never listening...
A friend of mine was once SO excited to play the Gouldberg variatons for me, absolutely marveling over that humming/singing along that was his own unique style for it, dutifully pointing out that the music flowed through him so naturally that he couldn't help himself, etc...to me I always found it SO distracting that I couldn't enjoy the music whatsoever and found another performance where Bach came across more than Gould...perhaps the engineer in those recordings was too intimidated by the legend to ask for a retake based on this particular 'problem', or perhaps he was simply drooling over it...either way, not for me
Agree. Not questioning his brilliance - but I find his vocalising utterly ruinous.
The engineers tried their best to lessen the extraneous noise. Ultimately it came down to using a brilliant take that had some of his "singing" or using a not-as-brilliant take with no "singing." I think they made the right choice.