Name: Esther Abrami
Occupation: Violinist
Nationality: French  
Recent release: Esther Abrami's new full-length album Cinéma is out via Sony.

If you enjoyed this Esther Abrami interview and would like to find out more about her music and current live dates, visit her official website. She is also on Instagram, Facebook, and twitter.



When did you first start getting interested in musical interpretation?  

My first introduction to the violin was by my grandmother when I was 3 years old. She was herself a violinist and showed me her tiny little violin she used to play on back in the days. However it wasn’t until a few years later that I developed a real interest in musical interpretation.

I think it came after having my first violin lesson, aged 10. I felt something so special making a first sound on the violin, as if my voice was going through it!

Which artists, approaches, albums or performances captured your imagination in the beginning when it comes to the art of interpretation?

There was a Klezmer band I fell in love with when I was young, called Les Yeux Noirs, with one particular song called ‘Cioara.’



That piece did more than just inspire me - it showed me what a violin could do, how much life, expression, fire it could have!!

Are there examples for interpretations that were entirely surprising to you personally and yet completely convincing?

I think quite a few interpretations from one of my favorite violinists, Yehudi Menuhin have been like this, surprising and yet totally convincing.

He is one of the only classical violinists to have had the courage to go into other styles of music like jazz or Indian music.

What, would you say, are the key ideas behind your approach to interpretation? Do you see yourself as part of a tradition or historic lineage?

I am a very open minded person who has worked and collaborated with many different genres of music but who has studied for 15 years in a strict classical background. So I think my approach to interpretation is a mix between these two worlds.

I don’t really see myself as part of a tradition, I want to take everything around me, my background, my roots, my inspirations and create my own style out of it.

Could you describe your approach to interpretation on the basis of a piece, live performance or album that's particularly dear to you, please?

I had a deeply touching moment when approaching the piece “Buongiorno Principessa” from the movie ‘La vita è bella’ for my new album Cinéma. It is a film that really had an impact on me due to my family history and it meant so much to be able to record it for this new album.



I first listened to it tens and tens of times, trying to feel and understand fully the phrasing, the subtleties of the dynamics.. After that I took it as a base and worked on making it my own, practicing, trying first to start with the phrasing I had heard then letting myself go and being led by my natural intentions and feelings.

What was your own learning curve / creative development like when it comes to interpretation - what were challenges and breakthroughs?

As classical musicians, we learn everything from the score, we have a very intellectual approach to music, nothing is learnt by ear.

The real breakthrough for me when it comes to interpretation was when I went to the Manhattan School of Music for an exchange and had jazz lessons!

Suddenly having to understand a flow rather than a metronome, learn how to improvise, to learn a melody by ear … It changed everything!

In many cases, the score will be the first and foremost resource for an interpretation. Can you explain about how “reading” a score works for you?

There are different levels of ‘reading’ a score. The first one being the most basic one of just reading the notes, the rhythm. Then one might start looking at dynamics, expression markings left by the composer.

Then the real work of reading comes into finding what’s not literally written on the score but what the composer ‘meant’ - I guess similarly to someone who would analyse a painting, or a poem!

One of the key phrases often used with regards to interpretation are the “composer's intentions”. What is your own perspective on this topic and its relevance for your own interpretations?

I think we have to try and find a balance on still being able to bring our own expression, person generally into a piece and not be just completely obsessed by just serving the composer.

When it comes to composers such as Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, I often find we sometimes get lost into just sticking to what they would have meant. However when we work with living composers we often realise how much freedom they are happy to give to the performer, whilst of course we still respect what they have written!

When you have the score in front of you, what's your take on taking things literally, correcting possible mistakes, taking into account historical aspects etc?

I am very meticulous and will literally colour dynamic markings, or tempi changes or anything like that to make sure I do not forget anything.

As I said in the previous question I use this as a base to my own interpretation so I do want it to be solid and true to the composer’s intentions.

What role does improvisation play for your interpretations?

I love improvising! I do it a lot when I am alone in the practice room. Sadly classical music does not allow much space for it.

But I think having performed in concerts of other genres - like the ones I did recently, being soloist on a tour of the electronic musician Worakls - has developed a certain freedom in my playing even when I am then following a score.

[Read our interview with Worakls's label partner Joachim Pastor]

Interpretations can be wildly different live compared to the studio. What is this like for you?

I feel that as a musician there’s a huge difference between recording and performing. When you are doing the performance, it’s spontaneous. You’re looking for something that’s people’s experience. People won’t remember mistakes. You’re more focused on emotion.

In a studio, you always think you can do it better. Sometimes you feel you can lose the life of it.

With regards to the live situation, what role do the audience and the performance space play for your interpretation?

A lot. It depends on where you are, how big the hall is. I performed recently in London where the artist is very close to the audience. People listen to the music and have a drink. That’s very different from the Royal Albert Hall. You don’t even see their faces.

The bigger the room, the easier it is because you don’t see people. You can feel the reaction of the audience. That’s why I love speaking in performances. Then they are more supportive. You can feel it.

With regards to the studio situation, what role do sound, editing possibilities and other production factors play for your interpretation?

It comes back to so many possibilities. We are used to listening to recordings that don’t have a single mistake. If you listen to old recordings, you hear mistakes.

It’s setting unrealistic standards. I want more authenticity in the studios.

Some works seem to attract more artists to add their interpretation to it than others; some seem to even encourage wildly different interpretations. From your experience, what is it about these works that gives them this magnetic pull?

Hearing people. Hearing about it makes you want to play it. That’s why we face problems with female composers. No one is playing them or hearing about them.

If someone takes something on tour with them and plays it everywhere, that’s where it happens. You have to give equal chances to every piece - this hasn’t happened yet for women.

Artists can return to a work several times throughout the course of their career, with different results. Tell me about a work where this has been the case for you, please.

It’s funny when you come back to a work after many years.

Sometimes you may have a bad memory of a piece. I spent hours on a piece and hated it. My very first performance in the UK, they requested this piece. I performed it with an orchestra and now it changed my perspective of it. Symphonie Espagnole by Lalo.



Part of the intrigue of interpretations is that the process is usually endless. Are there, vice versa, interpretations that feel definitive to you?

Never. You can never feel like it’s definitive.

Maybe for a period of your life? Years later you are a different person and you’ll express it in a different way.