Henry Purcell - Dido's lament and final chorus from Dido and Aeneas / Copenhagen Soloists, J. Ofir
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 кві 2024
- Henry Purcell - Dido's lament and final chorus from Dido and Aeneas
Copenhagen soloists conducted by Jonathan Ofir
Dido: Anna Wierød
Singers:
Anna Wierød, Cassandra Lemoine, Nanna Ipsen, Simone Rønn, Adam Riis, Kristoffer Appel, Emil Ritter, Ørjan Hartveit.
Orchestra:
Vl. 1 Lena Tove, Julia Dagerfelt
Vl. 2 Jesenka Balic Zunic, Jens Solgaard
Viola: Mikkel Schreiber
Viola da damba: Adam Grauman
Cello: Caroline Tarras-Wahlberg
Bass-violone: Lars Baunkilde
Theorbo: Giulia Cantone
Harpsichord: Søren Gleerup Hansen
Live concert recording (of the full opera), Holmens Kirke, Copenhagen, 27th April 2024
Audio and Video assistance: Jørn A. Tolstrup
Editing: Jonathan Ofir
An Copenhagen Soloist herzlichen❤❤❤ Dank für Ihre Einspielung und alle Musiziernden Solistin ,Dirigent,Purcell wurde nur 26 Jahre alt was sich in der Musik ausgedrückt wird.Es grüßt Sie ganz herzlich ❤❤❤.Von mir Joachim Ehlers aus Schallstadt südlich von Freiburg Germany
Wonderful wonderful wonderful🎶, amazing voice👏🏻👏🏽👏🏾
DIVINE🙏🎶🌹🕊️
Absolutely beautiful 🥹 Brava Anna!!!!
🍀❤❤❤❤❤❤🥰🥰🥰
superb!
i don't agree entirely with opera style voice,in purcell, but j.ofrir's furrtwangler style tempo brings, as in furtwangler's case, all that is in the music, usually not heard
Thanks Peter, what is now often called "historically informed practice" (rather than "authentic practice" or "early music practice" etc., is precisely an attempt to draw as much knowledge as possible from historical sources - and yet use that as mere information that could guide us to a possibly convincing result. As to the point in history that we are regarding here - late 17th century - it is still impossible to know matters such as tempi for sure (the invention of the Metronome in 1815 changes this, if composers indicated tempi). Even the type of voice production is a guess. The fact of the matter is that this is an opera, composed about a century after the genre began to develop as such. In later centuries, the genre got its own traditions, and these were sometimes applied "backwards", as you may be alluding to here. This was not really our attempt - rather to connect as best possible to the music with the available means - including historic instruments. Interestingly, the voice is one instrument that has been consistent for millenia - it is perhaps the sound production through it that has altered. This work presents from its very beginning challenges to interpretation - for example, the ouverture, tempting to be read as a French one with "double-dottings", is nonetheless written out with such precision and nuance (sometimes dotted, sometimes not), that it calls into question the very ideas that have been formed, concerning the whole "double-dotting" principle. Not that such a principle did not exist, certainly it did in the French Lullian court, and certainly Purcell attended it at age 14 - but that the taking up of that practice, and how it was or was not applied (or partially applied) - all these are open questions, which have caught the interest of many interpreters. The latter issue of "double-dotting" is one of the most discussed in "historically informed practice", and one of the most divisive ones. We have, for example, decided to go with the written, and not "double-dotted" principle, in our performance. It is always inspiring to work with these mysteries, and channel the music anew. Warm regards, Jonathan Ofir