Someone replied to my post:
>This seems somewhat harsh -- of course a Pleyel would not sound like a
> modern imitation of a Ruckers -- it's really a different instrument. But >"I
don't like" is not the same as "it is bad", nor is it the same as
> "nobody else would like". While I love the tonal qualities of a
>"reasonable" harpsichord, I
I said IMHO, but fair warning, Pleyels sound much more impressive on
old records than in real life. Landowska had virtuosity and, more
important, star quality. If a good remastering of one of her recordings
exists on CD, I would buy it immediately.
When I heard Puyana play, I was in the first row at Sanders Theater at
Harvard and could hear clearly. His virtuosity was beyond question. The
sound of the instrument was weak only a few feet away, and was surely
inaudible to most of the hall.
The Rogell recital was in Jordan Hall, at the New England Conservatory.
I have heard a recital there on a Chickering clavichord, made by Arnold
Dolmetsch about 1910, which I could hear from the balcony without problem.
I also had no trouble hearing Rogell's Pleyel, but didn't want to after a
short time. An LP was issued of this recital, so anyone who has it can
form an independent opinion.
I admit to being an intemperate curmudgeon, and don't expect anyone
to accept what I say without question. I have been listening to
harpsichords carefully for 30 years.
Rodney Myrvaagnes [log in to unmask]