I have noticed lately, with some horror, what now passes for “Arts journalism.” Arts journalism, especially Classical Music journalism, seems to have taken a dive. The expression “dumbing down” comes to mind. Or perhaps that’s just self-preservation on their part.
One article in particular has come roaring out of the effluvium in the last couple of days. This one is the typical “Ode to the Great Leap Forward.” In this article the author waxes rhapsodic about the AvantGrand, a new product put forth by Yamaha. It seems that actual acoustical components are no longer necessary for a great piano. No Sir, the AvantGrand does away with all that, but you still get the look, the feel, the everything else of a great concert grand!!!
This encapsulates everything that drives me nuts about (Yamaha and) Arts journalism today. Personally I find that Yamaha pianos have no personality. They all sound alike, they all play alike. Now, admittedly, this is my personal experience with Yamaha and some people would say that this uniformity is a good thing. I do know some major artists who would disagree with me about the personality or lack thereof of Yamaha pianos, but I’ll take the inconsistent madness of Steinway over the assembly line feel of Yamaha any day. What really irks me is how the author approaches writing about this instrument:
… Yamaha has done more than capture the soul of a grand piano in an electronic device. They have improved on a 300-year-old instrument.
Oh please.
First of all, we tried this already with another keyboard instrument, the organ. Remember …….. (time for flashback music) ……… when the electronic organ was going to revolutionize the classical music experience? No more need for that expensive boondoggle taking up room in the back of the stage. If you’re programming the Saint-Saëns Organ Symphony you can just wheel the console out, set up some speakers, and voilá! And why is it, pray tell, that every major hall built in the last 10 years now has a full concert organ in it? Because they look good and they sound good. Plus they have personality and audiences love them. Electronic organs are referred to as “toasters” for a reason.
But there’s more – how can you improve on an acoustic instrument by removing its basic acoustic properties? What we have in the AvantGrand is not an improvement on the piano but rather a different instrument entirely that is designed to imitate a piano. Honestly, I bet Yamaha has done a really, really good job in designing this new instrument, but the author of that article does a serious disservice to everyone involved when he claims that this is an improvement on the piano. This claim is not only false but it reveals a lack of knowledge about the subject at hand and leads me to question this person’s expertise. A quick search shows that the author is most probably someone who prefers writing about politics but gives the occasional nod to the “entertainment” beat. (Full Disclosure – I like what this author has done on radio, especially when it relates to “Tech,” so I’m not just dumping on him). What qualifies this person to suggest that the AvantGrand is an improvement on the piano? Nothing. But in some ways it’s the only press we can get so perhaps we should take it.
There once was a time when one could reasonably assume that a journalist writing about classical music had some expertise on the subject. This is no longer true , which begs the question whether it’s important or not. It certainly would be more important to have an expert in medicine talk about H1N1 (the whole “I’m not a doctor but I play one on TV” thing) but I would argue that at a time when classical music is becoming further and further marginalized this lack of journalistic expertise should be a clear warning sign. Perhaps another frontier for our music schools to open up would be to offer courses in Music Journalism. Hey, it obviously couldn’t hurt.
All good observations Bill. Perhaps it’s all continuing proof that everyone keeps hoping for silver bullets or magic beans to come along and save classical music’s hide.
…that’s why I’m happy to discover your blog, because you two know what you’re talking about!!! It’s interesting to me to ponder this subject: When Cristofori supposedly improved on the harpsichord by building a fortepiano, he actually created a different instrument, which evolved into our modern grand piano. Now, people who want to play, for example, Chopin, with a beautiful piano tone will choose a modern grand piano, but Baroquiphiles who want the tinny twang of a harpsichord will opt for that instrument in their concerto grosso or whatever. The same goes for organists who perfer trackers with upperwork over lush, Romantic Skinner-type sounds. I agree with what you say about the electronic piano not replacing the real thing. It does, however, have its advantages, and so do electronic organs (and pipe organs with solid-state action). However, I tend to think of them as different instruments, almost. It’s true, nothing can beat the real thing, but I sure love having an electronic organ on which to practice at home that didn’t cost a fortune. Just So don’t get me wrong, I get what you’re saying. I’m just excited to have discovered your blog as a place to ponder the ideas behind that which I love almost more than life itself; the art form of music.