While it’s common knowledge that perfection is rare in nature, the concept of perfection itself exists. Almost each person who love music told in his life: this is a perfect performance.
Perfect performance
According to , there is no strict definition of what a musical work is. Instinctively, it’s simple, but mathematically and philosophically, “framing” a musical work “blurs” into (1) metaphysics/ontology, (2) performance interpretation, (3) the location of the music, (4) the quality of recording/reproduction, and (5) determining whether a given piece of music is music.
… let us assume that the work is a flexible entity and no interpretation (whatever that concept is) disturbs its boundaries…
Can a performance be both perfect and good, when I, John Parker, and some artists and listeners are drawn to imperfectionism? When, for example, an actor spends almost their entire life preparing for their profession and rehearsing performances to appear like a pro? When singers hide their training to pass themselves off as natural talents? When music is supposed to reflect the inherently imperfect human soul?
I don’t say this arbitrarily. There are cases when even I prefer perfectionism. One of the best performances of Fryderyk Chopin’s Ballade in A flat major I’ve heard was performed via a MIDI player(!), that is, strictly from sheet music via a computer. Chopin so perfectly transcribed each note that (in this particular piece) no additional pianistic mannerisms were necessary. I should emphasize that this wasn’t a rule with Chopin—almost all of his pieces allow for considerable freedom of interpretation, to the point that the pianist practically identifies with the composer.
The Beatles, on the other hand, said in an interview that they strive to play concerts as if they were recordings, yet they have a whole “palette” of interpretations (even on their official albums). How could one describe a composer’s perfection? Not in terms of musical accuracy, because then even Disco Polo or Country could be described that way. I think perfection lies in the composer’s control and consideration of each fragment, as well as the entire piece. And here’s the incomprehensible aspect – what is this “magical” consideration? What extraordinary dimension of thought is hidden in such a cluster of sounds?
Let’s call perfect execution the “best of the best” standard… does it exist? Music follows different rules than graphics, but is there a perfect image of a sunflower? Or is it possible that there can be an unlimited number of perfect images of sunflowers?
Perfectly composed musical piece
Let me start with an example: Fryderyk Chopin was a very meticulous composer. This irritated George Sand, who believed that two weeks of work on a single work changed nothing in the piece. As we know, history has recognized his unwavering devotion to every bar, every note, and every sound. And here’s something I don’t understand: how is it possible that, despite the composer’s diligent, focused, and experienced work, a piece can be played better, or less better? Despite the score’s dense density of notes, interpretations can be diverse—perfect in different dimensions…
…continue…
…we live in an age of electronics that allows for the recording and correction of every fragment of a piece. Does this possibility answer the question: what is perfect composition? I recently encountered the perfect Amy Winehouse, who was supposedly able to sing correctly in the recording studio on the first try. And despite hours of mastering and expert musicians, her stage performances are captivating in various, different ways. While it’s all about interpretation, the line between interpretation and a new work is fluid. This is especially audible in the performances of the staunch anti-perfectionist St Celfer, who plays his own works so differently at every rehearsal or performance on his Step4D that realizing it’s the same piece happens almost magically.
…I don’t understand…