Anyone interested in Classical Guitar Music?
Tue, Nov 27 2012, 11:36PM
#2
RE: Anyone interested in Classical Guitar Music?
As for the "third-rate" music compared to what contemporaries wrote for other instruments, I hope you do not expect a Concerto in the Brahms' Piano Concerto No.2 or Bruch's Violin Concerto No.1 or for true contemporaries a Concerto like Bartok's for Piano or Violin or Berg's Violin Concerto or Prokofiev's...It will sound horrible, I can assure you, and the public will hate it.
This I don't get. Why would a truly modern guitar concerto (and not an anachronistic oddity like Rodrigo's...) fail where modern violin concertos (like Berg's or Bartok's 2nd) succeeded in conquering the hearts of the public? Is it an unwritten law that guitar concertos have to be written in a conservative, sentimental style in order to get approved by the public?
If a genius like Bartok would have written a concerto for guitar, it would without doubt eclipse everything else written for the instrument in this century. Just like Nielsen's lucky idea to write then rare concertos for flute and clarinet produced the best pieces in their genres in the first half of the 20th century.
And I'm sure Bartok would have made it sound non-horrible, too. Modern, of course - but I'm sure the guitar-loving public wouldn't be abhorred by a dissonant or two.
As for the rest of your post, as well-written as it is, it doesn't offer new insights apart from "I love this piece and here's why."
Also, I don't get why any of us needs to be called a troll, since all we're having is a nice, decent discussion.
Wed, Nov 28 2012, 1:42PM
#3
RE: Anyone interested in Classical Guitar Music?
50m, there are quite a few "truly modern guitar concertos" that simply didn't make it. Most of them, not at all! The latest bright (if not brilliant) effort was the very interesting Megaron Concerto by the Russian composer and guitarist Nikita Koshkin. Despite his knowledge of the instrument and the idiomatic writing, this music still address the few guitar aficionados.
In the 20th century, another very notable and somehow popular concerto is the First in D major, op.99 by Castelnuovo-Tedesco. Still, very traditional, quite close to Rodrigo and with very idiomatic writing for the guitar, adored by guitarists. Another less successful but very good for the instrument is the Concierto del Sur by the Mexican Manuel Ponce. Again nothing really "modern".
A more modern guitar composer in Spain, named Xavier Benguerel, composed a work for Guitar and Orchestra, called Concertante, with enough influence from Bartok, Stravinsky and the 2nd Viennese School. The result: neither the public nor the guitarists paid any attention to it!
The few British composers who managed to write some considerable works and few concertos, were mostly (to a great extent) influenced and guided by the spirit and expertise of the great Julian Bream.
So, what could Bartok and Berg do, without any knowledge of the instrument, with a view to composing something idiomatic and monumental for it. By the way, their concertos "succeeded in conquering the hearts" of a specific and well-prepared public. They are not popular works, at least for the general or grand public. In this vein, there are quite a few "modern", "intelligent", "complex" concerti for Guitar, but they address only the specialists and the well-prepared audience. Perhaps, a very successful story of more modern but also approachable (somehow) works for the instrument, in various combinations (including Concerti) is the case of the Cuban Leo Brouwer, mentioned by Bazza, by the way. Still, it's far from Bartok or Berg and, still, these works didn't manage to completely make it.
As for the rest of my (previous) post was not about "I love this piece and here's why", but rather "they (guitarists and public) love and appreciate this piece and here's why"
Regarding the last paragraph of your post, I'm totally with you.
Parla
Fri, Nov 30 2012, 12:49AM
#4
RE: Anyone interested in Classical Guitar Music?
As for the "third-rate" music compared to what contemporaries wrote for other instruments, I hope you do not expect a Concerto in the Brahms' Piano Concerto No.2 or Bruch's Violin Concerto No.1 or for true contemporaries a Concerto like Bartok's for Piano or Violin or Berg's Violin Concerto or Prokofiev's...It will sound horrible, I can assure you, and the public will hate it.
At the huge risk of being wrong, I actually think I know what Parla's getting at here, and if so I tend to agree. The challenge for guitar-with-orchestra composers is to write idiomatically for the solo instrument and still say something meaningful. Always a challenge is the need to let the guitar be heard against the accompaniment. For these reasons alone you can't compete directly with piano or violin concerti, you have to find a different way to get your message across and personally I think Rodrigo succeeds wonderfully. Obviously the emotional core of the work is the slow movement but there's nothing wrong with that.
A further challenge for modern writers is to produce something that doesn't just regurgitate guitar cliches, i.e. doesn't sound straight out of Madrid or the Mississippi Delta. Which is why I take a great deal of interest in what 20th and 21st Century composers have written for the instrument and how they're finding new ways for it to speak.
I just relistened to the Bondon concerto and believe he solves these problems brilliantly with transparent orchestration (lots of light percussion), rhythms that work beautifully on the guitar and an argument of real weight.
To BR's dismay, 50m, you have already "fed" it (Let it starve and die!).
So, the "sentimentality" and the emotional have a very thin borderline. What you may call cheap sentimentality, someone else may find it highly emotional. In the case of the "Aranjuez", one thing is for sure: the main theme of the slow movement is simply...beautiful to the extent that this beauty goes deep into our emotional kaleidoscope. However, the outer movements balance this highly "sentimental" movement with a very cleverly written fandango type dance movement, providing the vehicle for the guitar to face a whole orchestra (in a clever orchestration), and its various colours and a mixed metre gentle, light but with some very intriguing orchestral colours finale. The guitar almost throughout is handled in a very idiomatic, inspiringly (and musically) virtuosic character with practically only one moment of a true but utterly impressive and meaningful climax.
The guitarists do not love and appreciate it, because there are not so many concertos (actually there are enough to choose to perform), but because it is the real pleasure and fulfillment to face and handle such music (as some of them have told me). Villa-Lobos' Concerto is also a very favourite one for the guitarists but as a challenge, not as music to inspire and fulfill.
As for the "third-rate" music compared to what contemporaries wrote for other instruments, I hope you do not expect a Concerto in the Brahms' Piano Concerto No.2 or Bruch's Violin Concerto No.1 or for true contemporaries a Concerto like Bartok's for Piano or Violin or Berg's Violin Concerto or Prokofiev's...It will sound horrible, I can assure you, and the public will hate it.
Speaking about the love of the public, the "Aranjuez" has this "quality" of the Classical Works that touch, with immediate effect, a great part of audiences, without any effort from the listener, and going directly to the emotions and satisfaction of them. Andre Rieu is mere pleasure. Aranjuez is musical satisfaction and emotional excitement, if not fulfillment. The love of the public might not be a direct argument in favor of the musical quality, but it is a huge plus for these few Classical works who managed to achieve it, particularly in the 20th century, where there is such a scarcity of this blissful combination of quality and popularity. (Do I have to rest my case? Maybe, no need).
Parla
P.S.: Bazza, you don't have to be mean. You won't hurt it; you simply spoil your vocabulary, to say the least.