Cochereau Improvisation...

[acc]

I've read more than once that "improvisation" seems to be part and parcel of French organ training. Yet, when I watch "You-tubes" of these guys (Latry, Roth, etc.), it seems to consist mostly of pullng all the stops and couplers and romping around in what often comes across as not all that musical. Do they know that organs also have soft stops??

It is true that some of these French guys were/are somewhat addicted to the tutti. Cochereau certainly was: even in a beautiful Andante, he couldn't resist pulling the chamades at Notre-Dame. But that is not to say that he was unable to improvise meaningfully and musically without all these resources: quite the contrary is true, as is exemplified in this recording, made on a small 9-stop organ.

As for Youtube, there is also the question of what people decide to upload to it. The primary motivation for improvisation (at least in France) is its liturgical use. If an organist is as talented in improvising a beautifully soft Communion as a forceful Sortie, but youtubers prefer to upload only the latter, it's not the organist's fault!

Fortunately, one can also find nice and soft clips, such as here, here, here, here, here, and last but not least this three part improvisation (presenting many different facets of the instrument, including the tutti, but also many other things).

Listen also to Roth's and Choplin's CD improvisations, and you'll see that the soft/loud ratio is quite different from that on Youtube.

But to me, the most beautiful soft improvisations are still the Communions of Marcel Dupré on the A.A.A.M.D. and M.F. recordings: when I first heard them, I had tears in my eyes.

[dll927]

To no surprise, professional musicians probably have a tendency to want to show off their talents and abilities. Why else would a certain Fox have had rhinestones on his shoes and sometimes had mirrors set up so the audience could see his antics? This is not to deny the talent, but where are their orders of importance?

Therefore, if the pipes are there, use them. And it always helps to play a "showy" piece rather than Franck's "Cantabile" -- better the romping of the "Final in B-flat"!!

Diane Bish tends to come across to me as a modern version of Virgil Fox - fast tempi and a certain amount of what can only be called flamboyance. But I don't deny she knows what she's doing. And I never see much mention of her in these forums, which I find rather interresting. But I'm not sure she is known for improvisation.

If anything, present-day people may have a better sense of 'public relations' than some of the older generations of musicians -- Vladimir Horowitz and Jascha Heifitz come to mind as being sort of taken with their own self-importance. Since a lot of their fame comes through recordings, it's also a matter of selling.

But I still say there's a difference between composition and improvisation.

[acc]

To no surprise, professional musicians probably have a tendency to want to show off their talents and abilities. Why else would a certain Fox have had rhinestones on his shoes and sometimes had mirrors set up so the audience could see his antics? This is not to deny the talent, but where are their orders of importance?

Therefore, if the pipes are there, use them. And it always helps to play a "showy" piece rather than Franck's "Cantabile" -- better the romping of the "Final in B-flat"!!

It's not so clear to me if it's performers who tend to like playing all the stops or audiences who like to listen to all the stops. I guess we all have already noticed that people applaude much more readily and enthusiastically when a work ends fff. Or, worse, people applauding at the end of a fff mouvement when the work is not yet finished.

So for a performer, it's an eternal balancing act between the music he has to offer and what the audience wants to hear.

[dll927]

You make a well-taken point. You can't sell it if people won't buy it. There has long been discussion about why audiences prefer "music by dead guys" over some of the more modern stuff. Maybe because it just sounds better.

And it's always nicer to end with a flourish. When the organist gets called back for an encore, "Sweet Hour of Prayer" won't substitute for the Little Fugue in G Minor.

There's an old saying that more people have been "saved" with the vox humana than any other stop in the organ. It also seems to have been one of Franck's favorite stops for softer passages. But it won't bring the house down at the end of a concert!!

[pcnd5584]

This is seven trips worse than Reubke, what is good in this?

A musical meltdown, perhaps a technical orgy but totaly meaningless music.

But it's my opinion of course

I can understand that Cochereau's improvisations are not to everyone's taste, however, I cannot agree that they constitute 'meaningless music'.

Cochereau had an extremely rich harmonic language. He also had an excellent undertanding of musical form. There are many of his recorded improvisations which are easier to listen to - indeed many of great beauty. I am happy to recommend some (mostly on CD), if you are interested in giving his music a second chance.

For the record, whilst Olivier Latry and, for that matter Philippe Léfébvre and Pierre Pincemaille all have a recognisably 'French' style of improvisation (for want of a convenient description), each has a unique and recognisable harmonic language and an equally individual stlye of playing. Michel Chapuis is certainly a good improviser - although I would not quite describe him as a genius. Marcel Dupré talking of his former student said "Pierre Cochereau is a phenomenon without equal in the history of the contemporary organ."

[acc]

Michel Chapuis is certainly a good improviser - although I would not quite describe him as a genius. Marcel Dupré talking of his former student said "Pierre Cochereau is a phenomenon without equal in the history of the contemporary organ."

For what it's worth, Michel Chapuis, who was after all organist at Notre-Dame's orgue de chœur for the first 8 or 9 years of Cochereau's tenure, wholeheartedly agrees with that assessement of Dupré's. (Probably the only thing Chapuis and Dupré ever agreed on...)