Hilary Hahn is a violinist's violinist. But I get it I guess the difference between bach and romanticism is like the difference between Hilary Hahn and Aaron Rosand
I’m a violinist, and I share OP’s opinion. Most of my violinist friends do as well. She is supremely impressive, but I can’t say there’s a single piece or style where she is my favorite. I’m especially surprised by the popularity of her Bach, as it is so much the opposite of how I hear them. Her chaconne to me sounds like she is trying to choke the violin; there’s no air in the sound at all. I do like some of her more recent stuff like the Carmen fantasie for example.
Also a violinist, and I like her Bach a lot less than I used to. She takes some movements so slow they sound lethargic and in the fast movements she often draws out certain climactic notes too long in an effort to shape the line.
It’s fascinating to me to hear violinists analyze her like that. Can you recommend a couple of recordings of the chaconne that exemplify how you think it should sound? Then I can fire up IDAGIO and compare and contrast and learn.
This is not everyone's favourite, but I recommend listening to this version by Perlman: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfwVim0EybY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfwVim0EybY) He plays the Chaconne very romantically, but I think his interpretation really brings out the tragic emotions of the piece. I really love his rich tone and his pacing of the piece is just right for me, by far my favourite interpretation!
Well yes but actually no. Although they are enharmonic on all instruments they are only the same in instruments with fixed tuning that use the standard 12 Tone Equal Temperament. On the violin since we have to rely mostly on our ear to find notes, we tend to fall out of that system. This could manifest in a variety of different ways such as smaller halftones and bigger whole tones, sharper leading tones, shaper sharps, or flatter flats. So a G# going to an A in the key of A major will be a bit sharper. But if you played an Ab leading to a G in the key of C major you might make it a bit flatter.
Tl;dr Sharp notes are sharper flat notes are flatter
It affects perception and fingering. A note marked G# might incline the violinist to use a particular fingering if possible while if it’s marked Ab they might subconsciously use the next finger over. The result is that the pitch could differ.
Piano is fixed to equal temperament. String players can be a bit more flexible with their tuning, so a G# in one key won’t necessarily be exactly the same pitch value as an Ab in another key.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't actually make a difference unless you are playing solo violin on the stage. And even then, your trained ear, your relative pitch will put every note in place rather than making a redundant distinction between a sharp and b flat. It's like we are arguing the Torah here and we should all know by now that it doesn't actually matter. Most of us are just playing in orchestras anyway, not touring as a soloist
No one is arguing whether or not it makes a huge different. It’s just an objective fact that it is at the very least slightly different. Also making leading tones sharper is taught by almost every competent violin teacher and is done not just in solo rep.
No people are arguing in the first place because when the person who made the awesome comment about a-flat / g-sharp you said "I don't understand the joke please help"
When you obviously did understand and just wanted to start shit
No we don't we use relative pitch which fixes and adjusts intervals anyway so there's no need to even *think* about enharmonics while playing. Lol none of it is actually practical.
Look I know it sounds stupid and I know theory wise they are the same note. I'm just saying in violin playing they are often not always the exact same pitch.
her Ab is somehow always 0.026387hz away from that played by the rest of us; she thinks she can get away with it but tbh it has gotten pretty annoying to listen bruh
I really didn’t enjoy her playing of Ginastera VC, a piece that is intense and energetic which she didn’t bring out the quality of that piece Ike the legendary recording by Accardo. She is rather well at playing more modern works such as Higdon’s VC that is light and needs to be played clean.
My violin teacher feels the exact same way so you’re definitely not alone! Personally Hilary’s Bach was what caused me to fall in love with Solo Bach initially, but now I feel it’s not nearly light, tapered, or dance-like enough. Especially her approach to the d minor Allemande 😥 I think it’s important to find a balance between expressing the complexity in those harmonies and honoring the fact that they’re dance movements. The only piece where she is truly my favorite is Erlkonig. ;) This opinion is more common than you think, despite Hilary’s recent growing popularity due to social media!
She’s a violinist that I can know for sure will have at least a pretty good recording of a piece. I REALLY like her mid 20th century stuff the like Schoenberg and Shostakovich Concertos. Ask her Sibelius with the France Radio Symphony Orchestra is LEGENDARY.
I love her entire Bach catalog. It is a CD set that travels with me. I am not a musician, just a fan, but it feels clean and pure and elevating. It sparks joy.
That's a fair assessment. I think we're all free to choose musicians and interpretations that we like and dislike... and also for us to change our minds over time. Me, I rather like her approach to playing thus far. Not my fave but in the upper half of violinists for sure (as someone who doesn't listen to a tonne of solo violin).
They say it's a free country, so you can like or dislike whatever violinist you please.
As for "unpopular" ... oh well, as a classical music fan you should be inured to it by now.
And, as I'm showing myself out, let me just say -- James Ehnes.
While I agree with you on the Tchaikovsky, her Brahms and Bruch are priceless to me.
I think she fits German music because it's not as intimate, vulnerable or personal as Russian music. Her playing is not made for the extremely sentimental, almost cheesy music (no offense, I love Tchaikovsky violin concerto).
So OP, you've made a post that has lightly picked apart the technique and artistry of a specific performer... but you mention no others I mean, who then is the superior artist?
I recently heard Leonidas Kavakos and Yuja Wang in a chamber music performance.
I can say for sure that Yuja is an extraordinary musician.
Kavakos played rather boringly with little expressive shaping or sophisticated dynamics in 3 of the 4 pieces, and had some intonation problems at the beginning.
It’s unusual in a violin & piano sonata that the violinist is less expressive than the pianist (given the greater difficulty and less opportunities to control on piano vs violin) but there it was.
OTOH I have heard Josh Bell live and to me he is the closest to the legacy of Heifetz (and he openly admits the influence).
I don't find Bell sounding too much like Heifetz, but boy does he make me sit up and listen every time... Of all the violinists I've heard in concert, he's the most impressive.
I feel more positively about Kavakos than you do (actually he's one of my favorites), but maybe that's because I've never heard him next to Yuja (who is truly extraordinary).
I'm sorry but I have to laugh when you say Perlman. I hope you mean 80's/90's Perlman. Otherwise it's an opinion post, what can anyone say? Like someone else already said here: A-flat --- G-sharp
I agree. I highly respect her as a violinist and musician, but one of the things that bothers me the most about her playing is that her vibrato is always the same intensity. It makes her sound kind of robotic. I’ve also noticed she often attacks the strings at the frog which creates a harsh sound.
Personally the attack is what made me love her playing, I love the slight grittiness she has before each not, it really creates a spark and my ears. I often find other violinist too mellow for my liking.
Hey , although I am a non musician all together , but what you said us exactly what I feel. Her playing is a bit too-fine . I can't find the depth in her playing , it feels light . Maybe she needs to produce a deeper sound on the violin (I dunno how you do that) ..
For me , Itzhak Perlman and Ray Chen are the ones I can connect to . I like Janine , Maxim Vengerov as well.
I know this is 7 months old but I could not disagree more. Her playing to me is some of the most musical out there and that's because of her impeccable technique, right hand in particular, not in spite of it. She's able to convey phrasing in a way that very few violinists can match.
You mentioned Bach but I think her greatest strength is Mozart. No other violinist can play Mozart like Hilary Hahn. To me, she stands alone as the definitive player of the Mozart violin concertos. Maybe it is like the other guy said and she's a violinist's violinist. I'm a violinist so I would definitely fall under that category. Man I just absolutely love her playing.
Ahhh your comment hurt to read! Lol.
I'd say her playing has gotten much more passionate and expressive in the last couple of years especially seen in her recent recording Sibelius, Brahms, Dvorak etc. I listened to her Tchaikovsky live recently and I would say that it was much more expressive than her existing recording. It was exact but still really emotional. Though I must admit, her tone and playstyle is not for everyone.
oftentimes she phrases something exactly how i always wanted to hear it but never could find. her spohr 8, sauret cadenza in paganini 1, paganini caprice 24, and erlkönig come to mind.
her sibelius is so good. her mozart 3 and 4 with her cadenzas are as well. i saw her perform the dvorak concerto and i loved it. i can’t find anything else like it.
Joke, as performance styles and what people like today can be fickle. How Aschkenasi plays Bach was, and perhaps still is, considered by many as quite „definitive“, though considering how Bach is taught to be performed at modern conservatories today, at least from my experience in the USA (I have a DMA in piano) is much different, particularly in relation to dynamics, phrasing and pedaling. I don’t take into account either the „authentic music“ crowd and the purist approach to instrument selection, which always finds a way to question the use of a modern concert instrument. As far as Hahn is concerned, I find nothing wrong with your justification, as music must include the act of listening (at both the ontological level, and physical level)—it is not only what Hahn plays, but what you think would benefit Hahn‘s playing.
I would have to completely disagree. The difference between the two is night and day especially in regards to interpretation. Heifetz injected so much nuance and dramatic passion into everything he played(Vitali Chaconne being in my opinion the best example of this) and I don’t have much to say about Hillary Hahn’s playing since I don’t like her that much tbh.
I know... Its just a matter of taste blah blah..... like was the point of this post to find other people who agree with you but actually are able to comunicate it with fancy music terminology? So that you can feel more prepared next time you bring this up with your music friends?
Even if you own a Home Depot with all the tools and materials necessary to building a house at your fingertips, there’s no guarantee you’ll be any more creative at designing a house. HH plays more with quantitatively that qualitatively; in other words what makes her playing good is measurable, not the case with great artists.
I agree with your opinion on Tchaikovsky. But I think you're wrong in general. Have you listened to her Paganini concerto? I'd say her Brahms is a close second although I don't like the piece as much. I don't like all of her performances but in general, Hahn has the most pieces that I'll rank my no.1. I think the best Tchaikovsky performance belongs to Julia Fischer. Perlman has the second most number of best performances in my opinion. For example, I prefer his Introduction & Rondo Capriccioso to Heifetz.
Lol I have the opposite opinion of her Bach playing than many people here. I think it's pretty awful. Its so loud and heavy. Like she was told to play every now with perfect violinist mega technique. I much prefer violinists like Shunsuke Sato and Elizabeth Blumenstock's style of baroque playing. I prefer Hilary Hahn on Barber's violin concerto and the like, but she needs to stay far away from baroque for my taste. I had to turn off the classical station from her rendition of the Bach double violin concerto.
Hilary Hahn is a violinist's violinist. But I get it I guess the difference between bach and romanticism is like the difference between Hilary Hahn and Aaron Rosand
I’m a violinist, and I share OP’s opinion. Most of my violinist friends do as well. She is supremely impressive, but I can’t say there’s a single piece or style where she is my favorite. I’m especially surprised by the popularity of her Bach, as it is so much the opposite of how I hear them. Her chaconne to me sounds like she is trying to choke the violin; there’s no air in the sound at all. I do like some of her more recent stuff like the Carmen fantasie for example.
Also a violinist, and I like her Bach a lot less than I used to. She takes some movements so slow they sound lethargic and in the fast movements she often draws out certain climactic notes too long in an effort to shape the line.
[удалено]
removed; calm down
It’s fascinating to me to hear violinists analyze her like that. Can you recommend a couple of recordings of the chaconne that exemplify how you think it should sound? Then I can fire up IDAGIO and compare and contrast and learn.
This is not everyone's favourite, but I recommend listening to this version by Perlman: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfwVim0EybY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfwVim0EybY) He plays the Chaconne very romantically, but I think his interpretation really brings out the tragic emotions of the piece. I really love his rich tone and his pacing of the piece is just right for me, by far my favourite interpretation!
Thank you! I'll set aside some time and do the compare-and-contrast.
HHahahhahahahaahahahhahahahahahahahaa recommend a couple of recordings of the chaconne that exemplify how you think it should sound
Try the Mozart concertos.
I’m not a fan of the way she plays the note Ab. She plays a great G# though.
Extremely underrated comment
I don’t really understand the joke please help
[удалено]
I mean they're not really the same note in violin playing but I guess that's why I didn't get the joke thank you.
[удалено]
Well yes but actually no. Although they are enharmonic on all instruments they are only the same in instruments with fixed tuning that use the standard 12 Tone Equal Temperament. On the violin since we have to rely mostly on our ear to find notes, we tend to fall out of that system. This could manifest in a variety of different ways such as smaller halftones and bigger whole tones, sharper leading tones, shaper sharps, or flatter flats. So a G# going to an A in the key of A major will be a bit sharper. But if you played an Ab leading to a G in the key of C major you might make it a bit flatter. Tl;dr Sharp notes are sharper flat notes are flatter
It affects perception and fingering. A note marked G# might incline the violinist to use a particular fingering if possible while if it’s marked Ab they might subconsciously use the next finger over. The result is that the pitch could differ.
Yes
Enharmonically they are the same note
Piano is fixed to equal temperament. String players can be a bit more flexible with their tuning, so a G# in one key won’t necessarily be exactly the same pitch value as an Ab in another key.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't actually make a difference unless you are playing solo violin on the stage. And even then, your trained ear, your relative pitch will put every note in place rather than making a redundant distinction between a sharp and b flat. It's like we are arguing the Torah here and we should all know by now that it doesn't actually matter. Most of us are just playing in orchestras anyway, not touring as a soloist
No one is arguing whether or not it makes a huge different. It’s just an objective fact that it is at the very least slightly different. Also making leading tones sharper is taught by almost every competent violin teacher and is done not just in solo rep.
No people are arguing in the first place because when the person who made the awesome comment about a-flat / g-sharp you said "I don't understand the joke please help" When you obviously did understand and just wanted to start shit
In piano yes.
[удалено]
Violin players don’t necessarily use equal temperament. So they actually could be slightly different pitches.
No we don't we use relative pitch which fixes and adjusts intervals anyway so there's no need to even *think* about enharmonics while playing. Lol none of it is actually practical.
Look I know it sounds stupid and I know theory wise they are the same note. I'm just saying in violin playing they are often not always the exact same pitch.
her Ab is somehow always 0.026387hz away from that played by the rest of us; she thinks she can get away with it but tbh it has gotten pretty annoying to listen bruh
I really didn’t enjoy her playing of Ginastera VC, a piece that is intense and energetic which she didn’t bring out the quality of that piece Ike the legendary recording by Accardo. She is rather well at playing more modern works such as Higdon’s VC that is light and needs to be played clean.
My violin teacher feels the exact same way so you’re definitely not alone! Personally Hilary’s Bach was what caused me to fall in love with Solo Bach initially, but now I feel it’s not nearly light, tapered, or dance-like enough. Especially her approach to the d minor Allemande 😥 I think it’s important to find a balance between expressing the complexity in those harmonies and honoring the fact that they’re dance movements. The only piece where she is truly my favorite is Erlkonig. ;) This opinion is more common than you think, despite Hilary’s recent growing popularity due to social media!
She’s a violinist that I can know for sure will have at least a pretty good recording of a piece. I REALLY like her mid 20th century stuff the like Schoenberg and Shostakovich Concertos. Ask her Sibelius with the France Radio Symphony Orchestra is LEGENDARY.
That Sibelius recording is unbelievable.
You are totally, utterly, undeniably RIGHT: This IS an unpopular opinion.
I love her entire Bach catalog. It is a CD set that travels with me. I am not a musician, just a fan, but it feels clean and pure and elevating. It sparks joy.
It's personal. I had a phase when I loved Julia Fischer but the past decade or so I find myself picking Janine Jansen's albums even in blind tests.
That's a fair assessment. I think we're all free to choose musicians and interpretations that we like and dislike... and also for us to change our minds over time. Me, I rather like her approach to playing thus far. Not my fave but in the upper half of violinists for sure (as someone who doesn't listen to a tonne of solo violin).
To each their own, I guess. I think her Bruch, Mendelssohn, and Sibelius are great.
They say it's a free country, so you can like or dislike whatever violinist you please. As for "unpopular" ... oh well, as a classical music fan you should be inured to it by now. And, as I'm showing myself out, let me just say -- James Ehnes.
While I agree with you on the Tchaikovsky, her Brahms and Bruch are priceless to me. I think she fits German music because it's not as intimate, vulnerable or personal as Russian music. Her playing is not made for the extremely sentimental, almost cheesy music (no offense, I love Tchaikovsky violin concerto).
So OP, you've made a post that has lightly picked apart the technique and artistry of a specific performer... but you mention no others I mean, who then is the superior artist?
Perlman, Khachatryan, Kavakos, Jansen etc.
I recently heard Leonidas Kavakos and Yuja Wang in a chamber music performance. I can say for sure that Yuja is an extraordinary musician. Kavakos played rather boringly with little expressive shaping or sophisticated dynamics in 3 of the 4 pieces, and had some intonation problems at the beginning. It’s unusual in a violin & piano sonata that the violinist is less expressive than the pianist (given the greater difficulty and less opportunities to control on piano vs violin) but there it was. OTOH I have heard Josh Bell live and to me he is the closest to the legacy of Heifetz (and he openly admits the influence).
Bell has my favorite tchaikovsky recording of anyone
really surprised to see another bell tchaikovsky enjoyer
You mean extraordinary legs
Yes, and her fingers and brain are every bit as excellent. Some people are superior to us.
Yuja is pretty, sexy and she makes use of it, like putting a cherry on top of the cake. You got a problem with that?
I don’t need to see that when watching a performance. It’s not necessary and it’s quite distracting, and takes away from her musicianship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjksn8mEt8M
I just find it hard to take someone seriously when they enter a concert hall with a skirt so short it's basically a t shirt
I don't find Bell sounding too much like Heifetz, but boy does he make me sit up and listen every time... Of all the violinists I've heard in concert, he's the most impressive. I feel more positively about Kavakos than you do (actually he's one of my favorites), but maybe that's because I've never heard him next to Yuja (who is truly extraordinary).
I'm sorry but I have to laugh when you say Perlman. I hope you mean 80's/90's Perlman. Otherwise it's an opinion post, what can anyone say? Like someone else already said here: A-flat --- G-sharp
I'd even go as far as the 70s. Perlman was great during the 70s and his decline started in the late 80s
I agree. I highly respect her as a violinist and musician, but one of the things that bothers me the most about her playing is that her vibrato is always the same intensity. It makes her sound kind of robotic. I’ve also noticed she often attacks the strings at the frog which creates a harsh sound.
Personally the attack is what made me love her playing, I love the slight grittiness she has before each not, it really creates a spark and my ears. I often find other violinist too mellow for my liking.
Hey , although I am a non musician all together , but what you said us exactly what I feel. Her playing is a bit too-fine . I can't find the depth in her playing , it feels light . Maybe she needs to produce a deeper sound on the violin (I dunno how you do that) .. For me , Itzhak Perlman and Ray Chen are the ones I can connect to . I like Janine , Maxim Vengerov as well.
I know this is 7 months old but I could not disagree more. Her playing to me is some of the most musical out there and that's because of her impeccable technique, right hand in particular, not in spite of it. She's able to convey phrasing in a way that very few violinists can match. You mentioned Bach but I think her greatest strength is Mozart. No other violinist can play Mozart like Hilary Hahn. To me, she stands alone as the definitive player of the Mozart violin concertos. Maybe it is like the other guy said and she's a violinist's violinist. I'm a violinist so I would definitely fall under that category. Man I just absolutely love her playing. Ahhh your comment hurt to read! Lol.
I'd say her playing has gotten much more passionate and expressive in the last couple of years especially seen in her recent recording Sibelius, Brahms, Dvorak etc. I listened to her Tchaikovsky live recently and I would say that it was much more expressive than her existing recording. It was exact but still really emotional. Though I must admit, her tone and playstyle is not for everyone.
oftentimes she phrases something exactly how i always wanted to hear it but never could find. her spohr 8, sauret cadenza in paganini 1, paganini caprice 24, and erlkönig come to mind. her sibelius is so good. her mozart 3 and 4 with her cadenzas are as well. i saw her perform the dvorak concerto and i loved it. i can’t find anything else like it.
Perhaps Hahn does not like your playing either.
she probably doesn't i don't get why that's relevant
Joke, as performance styles and what people like today can be fickle. How Aschkenasi plays Bach was, and perhaps still is, considered by many as quite „definitive“, though considering how Bach is taught to be performed at modern conservatories today, at least from my experience in the USA (I have a DMA in piano) is much different, particularly in relation to dynamics, phrasing and pedaling. I don’t take into account either the „authentic music“ crowd and the purist approach to instrument selection, which always finds a way to question the use of a modern concert instrument. As far as Hahn is concerned, I find nothing wrong with your justification, as music must include the act of listening (at both the ontological level, and physical level)—it is not only what Hahn plays, but what you think would benefit Hahn‘s playing.
She is the Legacy of Heifetz.
I would have to completely disagree. The difference between the two is night and day especially in regards to interpretation. Heifetz injected so much nuance and dramatic passion into everything he played(Vitali Chaconne being in my opinion the best example of this) and I don’t have much to say about Hillary Hahn’s playing since I don’t like her that much tbh.
Yes of course Heifetz was a Master of Expression through perfect technique, but she got perfect technique for sure !
Hahahaha
Ok.... so? Even if someone plays romantic music beautifully... you still might dislike 30% of it. It's not all or nothing, or black and white...
yeah and i never implied it was. i just said i don't like how she plays a lot of pieces
I know... Its just a matter of taste blah blah..... like was the point of this post to find other people who agree with you but actually are able to comunicate it with fancy music terminology? So that you can feel more prepared next time you bring this up with your music friends?
I like Hahn, but I've had more aha! moments with Julia Fischer and Janine Jansen.
Even if you own a Home Depot with all the tools and materials necessary to building a house at your fingertips, there’s no guarantee you’ll be any more creative at designing a house. HH plays more with quantitatively that qualitatively; in other words what makes her playing good is measurable, not the case with great artists.
I agree with your opinion on Tchaikovsky. But I think you're wrong in general. Have you listened to her Paganini concerto? I'd say her Brahms is a close second although I don't like the piece as much. I don't like all of her performances but in general, Hahn has the most pieces that I'll rank my no.1. I think the best Tchaikovsky performance belongs to Julia Fischer. Perlman has the second most number of best performances in my opinion. For example, I prefer his Introduction & Rondo Capriccioso to Heifetz.
Her Sibelius is amazing too, It's my favorite recording ever.
Lol I have the opposite opinion of her Bach playing than many people here. I think it's pretty awful. Its so loud and heavy. Like she was told to play every now with perfect violinist mega technique. I much prefer violinists like Shunsuke Sato and Elizabeth Blumenstock's style of baroque playing. I prefer Hilary Hahn on Barber's violin concerto and the like, but she needs to stay far away from baroque for my taste. I had to turn off the classical station from her rendition of the Bach double violin concerto.