Name: Ladislav Pazdera
Occupation: Guitarist
Nationality: Czech
Recent release: Ladislav Pazdera's new album Chiaroscuro is out via Unit.

If you enjoyed this Ladislav Pazdera interview and would like to find out more about his work and current live dates, visit his official website. He is also on Instagram, and Facebook. To dig in even deeper, we recommend our interview with him about his creative process. 



When did you first start getting interested in musical interpretation?

When I started playing the guitar, I started by learning how to play songs. Back then, I already tried to sound like those rock'n'roll heroes of mine, I suppose, at least to some extent.

After I got admitted at a conservatory, I also gained an access to one of the best private musical libraries that I’ve ever seen and I was able to listen to a lot of great music which helped me enormously to realise what a good interpretation actually sounds like.

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

At the very beginning, it was The Beatles who had a tremendous effect on me. That is why I started playing the guitar in the first place.

Later, it was classical music, especially the Baroque period.

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

At the start, it was definitely Baroque music. Jordi Savall, Fabio Bondi, Cecilia Bartoli … The most interesting to me was learning how much groove this music can have despite being hundreds of years old.

But I get surprised all the time while discovering new artists. Most recently, it was Anuar Brahem whose music and way of playing I like very much.

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 suppose that the key behind any good interpretation is the understanding of the music which is being played.

By that I mean some kind of historical background and even more than that the beautiful logic that every good music automatically has. Respecting the rules of tension and release, groove, basic dynamics and so on.

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

As I said before, I recently discovered Anuar Brahem and a piece called “Astrakan Café.” It’s a beautiful short piece and it has a couple of very interesting aspects.



For example Anuar is an oud player, I am a guitarist. So I have to decide how much and in which way will I try to let the sound of oud affect my playing, which techniques I will use. Also, the harmonic structure is very simple as well as the melody. That allows me to work more freely.

What I need to respect very strictly is the groove, which is essential for the piece to stay together as a whole.

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

There were two major stages for me. The first was the conservatory and all the classical music that I was playing there. It gave me the best possible foundation in many ways, attention to good interpretation being one of them.

The second stage was university where I started developing my own sound and my own way of playing.

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?

I learned a lot about this topic from Carlo Domeniconi, who became one of my mentors a couple of years ago. When I see a score, I am able to tell very fast if it’s well written or not. If it is, then it is actually pretty easy to understand the music and to get the information needed to play the piece well. It is also easy to respect the score.

If it is not written well or if it lacks information, then it has to be the natural logic of that music which is going to lead the interpretation.

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?

Again, it's a lot about the score I think. If the composer provides the information through a well written score, then it’s really an obligation to respect their intentions. If the score is poorly written, then it’s the composer’s own fault if the piece is misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Of course, in the case of older music, there has to be some kind of theoretical background, otherwise the information in the score might not be sufficient for a good interpretation even if well written.

What role does improvisation play for your interpretations?

It often gives me an idea of how I want the final sound to be. It also allows me to try things out without overthinking.

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

That is an extremely interesting question. It’s something I think about a lot when I’m in the studio. The answer I have is that I am usually trying to capture the moment. The interpretation I am aiming for should be my true perception of that particular music at that particular moment.

The only big difference is that in the studio, I have the possibility to do a couple of takes, to cut out big mistakes and to balance the sound so that the recording can be played and listened to in the best way possible. When I’m performing, I only have one shot.

But the approach is actually the same. I am just trying to be in the moment, play the best I can and be satisfied with it.

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

That very much depends on the audience and the mood or the atmosphere in the venue. If it’s nice and relaxed, I usually let the audience to have a certain affect on how I feel on the stage and how I play. I am playing more directly for them.

If the mood is not that great, I usually concentrate more on myself, on what I have prepared and I am just doing my job, so to speak.

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

Very little in terms of playing. I play in exactly the same way as I would on stage and if I manage to have a good take, which gives me a good feeling, I might ignore small mistakes or imperfections and still go with it.

But knowing that I can start over and do multiple takes gives me a security that I would lack when performing. I might also use that as a tool if I have to record a piece which I didn’t have enough time to practice.

My aim when recording is to actually have a piece that will sound as organic and authentic as if I would play it live.

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?

I can only take a guess here, but maybe it depends on how universal the music in that case is.

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.

I don’t really come back to pieces. I play them, often for an extended period of time, sometimes years, but once I stop playing them, I usually don’t come back to them.

I don’t know, maybe my career hasn’t been long enough yet.

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

Yes and no. As much as the logic of music goes, an interpretation happens in a certain space. The logic of music is not endless and therefore there are certain borders of what is actually possible to do with a certain piece.

On the other hand, every musician and every performance bring its own set of conditions which affect the final interpretation. Time plays a huge role as well. Those conditions can be pretty much endless.