Welcome to the website of Enrico Gatti and the Ensemble Aurora.

This site is quite new, but our story comes from the distance, at the advent of early music performed on original instruments in Italy.

Enrico Gatti was the first Italian violinist to devote himself entirely to the study and performance of music ranging from the end of the XVI century to the beginning of the XIX century on an original instrument, and was also the first Italian to make studies abroad and to be invited by the most prestigious Dutch, Belgian, French and English ensembles before founding the Ensemble Aurora in 1986. His first concert experiences took place in Rome and Italy already at the end of the seventies, first with “il Dolcimelo”, then with “la Stravaganza” together with very young Paolo Pandolfo and Rinaldo Alessandrini.

At that time, the musical renewal pursued by some young musicians – on the cultural and emotional wave of the big social changes occurred between the end of the sixties and the beginning of the seventies – led to a new “sound ecology”, freed from the common denominators that burdened in equal measure all the music written before the XX century.

For us, in the seventies, it meant to bring back a sound cleaned up from all the anachronistc waste deriving from the XIX century aesthetics; to leave the attitude of efficient worker on the instrument that the conservatories tended to create; to find an identity of complete musician, able to understand ancient forms and their rethorical structures, to be aware of harmony and of the various musical languages in order to be able to improvize in the style of the composers whose music we wanted to perform.

We believed – and still do – that the modernity importance of an interpretation should not be defined by its “newness” degree, also because fashions do not last for long and leave very little after themselves. In the early music field I believe that the real modernity should consist in being able to use all the information now available, not in trying to assimilate the past cultural expressions to the contemporary ones but knowing how to live and valorize them as they are, not wanting at any cost to make them refer to the present experience.

We refused the contemporary violin sonority, often too aggressive and shouted if applied to the repertoire written before the XX century, and pursued the non-violent imitation of human voice, so often recommended by all the principal ancient texts for instrumentalists. We didn’t have too many concrete models to refer with (the specialized discography was at the time very lacking), there were very few teachers (none in Italy), it was not possible to find gut strings and internet didn’t exist. We believed however that the truth was to be searched in the whole we could deduce from the detailed study of several sources, rather than slavishly imitating an isolated performer or one of the rare discs. But the original sources – both the direct and the indirect ones (so not only the specific treatises) – were sometimes extremely difficult to find: the first facsimile editions just started to appear.

As the heroes in the American movies of the fifthies used to say: “It’s a dirty job, but someone has to do it…”.  And we did it, against everybody and everything. In a time when the musical critics and the conservatories did not give us a right for citizenship in Italy, we became the extraparliamentaries of the music. And many among us emigrated, to study and to work: we contributed to enlarge the number of Italian “brains” escaped abroad.

What is left of that research nowadays? For sure in time the early music “phenomenon”, became actual, has enlarged and has become an object for a market that attracted many musicians because it created new work opportunities. Among the numerous musicians  climbed on the “baroque cart”, not all did it with purity of intention and true passion for the XVII and XVIII century culture. Very often (especially in Italy, but also in other countries) we assisted to an artificial research for exotic queerness by those who – in the general noise – were trying to shout louder than the others in order to be heard.

We believe in the responsability of the interpreter. To interpret today in an aware way the music of a far past needs, upriver, to know the art of restoring the work itself and its context, and this restoration should preceed and be the stylistic basis for the performance. To make an example: nowadays nobody would like to go and visit an exibition where the paintings would have  been restored as they used to be a long time ago, when new painting was used to hide the damaged parts. We visit an exposition in order to get to know from very close the intentions of the author and his stylistic peculiarities, to see his life in the context of the time during which he worked.

Well, unfortunately this does not always happen with music.

There are two kinds of interpreters: those who try this adventure, and - with the methodology and perseverance of a detective, of an archaeologist, of a passionate musicologist - build up an image, the most complete and resembling the far reality, starting from this and inside this finding a personal interpretation. In this way, interpretative freedom coexists with the awareness and responsability of what we transmit to the audience, inserting itself in the necessary and actual reflexion on the relation between philological, musicological and aesthetic research and executive praxis.

Then there are musicians who take in their hands the music of the past and bring it close to them, making it “current” in many ways and using various means, making it easier to acknowledge for a modern listener, more used to “see” than to “hear” the music, bringing out in this way their own image as performers.

We believe that what is really beautiful never needs to be made “current”, which means over-painted. We believe that an immortal work of art is more important than its possible performer. We believe that a musician should not bring the music of the past towards himself and the present time, but should make the effort to go closer to the work itself and to its aesthetic importance, because – if the work of art as it is is not interesting for the modern world – then there is no reason to make use of it.

Dead languages don’t exist, only “hibernated brains”(Carlos Ruiz Zafón).

Today, with the same cultural honesty as before and with more professional competence and awareness, we continue with unchanged enthusiasm our way started over 30 years ago, for music, for beauty, for culture.

                                               Only for beauty

Only for culture

– The exile has finished! – said El Conde. – Finally we can do what we have been thinking about for such  a long time! Why are you still on the tree, Baroe? There’s no more reason!

Cosimo opened his arms. – I climbed up here before you, gentlemen, and I will stay here even after you!

– You want to pull back! – shouted El Conde.

– No: resist – answered the Baron.

 [Italo Calvino, “The rampant baron”]