Frank Fogliati:

>As I said above HIP means historically informed performance.  It is a
>principle that is applied to most music today, but with double-standards.
>For example, Kodaly in 1915 wrote a magnificent sonata for solo cello (Opus
>8).  When this is performed on a modern steel-strung cello, with stopped
>harmonics, vibrato, long slurred bow strokes etc.  etc.  it is faithful to
>the composer's score and accepted practices.  I am not aware of any non-HIP
>recordings of this work.

This is, as far as I'm concerned, a red herring.  It's ultimately not
about the instruments or faithfulness, folks.  It's about the musical
result.  I've got nothing for or against HIP in itself.  Some performances
I like, others I don't.  I'd never say that Kodaly on a baroque cello
was a priori wrong.  I'd have to hear it first, and then I'd have to be
convinced that the poor result was due to the choice of instrument, rather
than to the player.

The reason why HIP has gained so much ground has little to do with
"faithfulness" and everything to do with the fact that great musicians
have embraced it.  'Twas not always thus.  I remember the hilariously awful
results of the early Telemann Society, compared to which even Karajan's
Bach sounds good.

Steve Schwartz