Listening Project
Sat, Dec 8 2012, 7:44PM
#2
RE: Listening Project
Graham, are Koppel's Third or Nyman's Memorial "relatively unknown pieces"? Don't you think that even Schumann's Piano Quartet or Mendelssohn's Piano Sextet or Brahms' Second Piano Quartet would be "relatively unknown" to most of us, being at the same time works of the "core repertory" worthy of further investigation and listening?
Parla
Sun, Dec 9 2012, 12:54AM
#3
RE: Listening Project
Brumas, sorry for furthering the digression caused by our exchanges, but I feel compelled to reply to your last post:
-I'm very glad we agree on the important difference between "notated" and "Classical" music as well as who are the "performers" of the latter.
-In pop music, the song "connects" with the performer more than in Classical, because we don't deal with the recreation of a precise score.
-The key features do exist, because they define the nature and character (the identity) of what is Classical and what cannot be. Without them, practically anything notated would be Classical music. Of course, in the History and development of the Western Music, certain periods' composers could not adhere to all the key features, because they have not been elaborated and developed, while in our times composers, moving far from these features, find themselves on the very edge of what is Classical Music (the correct term should be "contemporary").
-An Impromptu means a piece of music in a not predetermined form. That means the composer can choose the form he wants accordingly and not obliged by the nature of a composition like a Piano Sonata or a Symphony. In Schubert's most famous Impromptus, all of them follow different but very clear forms of classical composition : in Op. 90, the no.1 follows the form of variations with two themes. No.2 is in ternary form. In op.142, no.1 is in rondo form, no.2 is a minuet with trio. No.3 is in a monothematic variation form, while the fourth is in rondo too.
-In jazz, any sort of "form" has to do with the performance and not with the composition, since there is no score. So, there is no comparison of the form and features of a classical written composition.
Again sorry for leading astray,
Parla
Sun, Dec 9 2012, 4:50PM
#4
RE: Listening Project
Parla: perhaps the confusion between us is that you seem te be talking mainly about the common practice period... Anyway, I think I'm with Wittgenstein on this one: meaning is use, searching for perfect, platonic definitions is futile.
On jazz: of course the form of jazz is different from a fully notated, clasical score. But despite that, jazz (as well as all kinds of other music) posesses the kind of features you mentioned as key features of classical music: "complexity of thematic development, demanding harmony, rich variety of modulations" etc. These might be features of a lot of music we call classical music, but they are by no means exclusive to it, and thus sufficient to define it, nor are form, "clear melodic lines, connected to counterpoint", or specific instrumentation...
Also: note that our idea of classical music (that I also adhere to in this thread), as 'as-true-as-possible executions of a written score' is in fact a very modern idea. The concept of a musical 'work' only came into being at the end of the eightteenth century or so - see Lydia Goehrs The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works if you're interested in the subject.
Bazza: on the Vermeulen: yes, it is a very dense work, and indeed feels rather relentless at first. It does reward repeated listening though, I think - there's more singing going on in it than seems to be the case at first glance...
Sun, Dec 9 2012, 5:13PM
#5
RE: Listening Project
Brumas, "definitions" are extremely useful; they are not "platonic" or "perfect"; they are simply what the word says: they define what is the subject of our attention. There is nothing "futile" in this operation.
Jazz does not "possesses" any sonata form (is there any exposition of two themes, development of them, recapitulation of them and coda?), rondo, sonata-rondo or detailed and separated variations. What is the varied counterpoint in a jazz combo? what is the instrumentation in a jazz trio? None of these features truly matters in jazz!
Living in the 21st century, we can rely on the wisdom of all these centuries instead of calling this wisdom as a "very modern idea".
On the Vermeulen: the Dutch (I know) called him..."a Dutch composer"...simply!
Sun, Dec 9 2012, 5:47PM
#6
RE: Listening Project
As I've tried to demonstrate, trying to formulate a collection of features and than saying "something qualifies as classical music if, and only if it adheres to this, this, this and this" is a futile exercise. As Wittgenstein has shown in his later works, to approach words and their meaning like that is to ignore how language actually works. In stead, meaning =use: what a word means, is how it is used in the language of every day. And 'classical music' is used for such a veriety of music, that to give a clear-cut definition, abstracted from the every-day use of the term simply is not possible.
On what basis do you assume instrumentation does not matter in jazz? You think a jazzband leader just randomly picks some instruments? No counterpoint? Perhaps no academic counterpoint, but you'd be hard-pressed to say that the Charlie Parker Quintet or the works of Charles Mingus does not feature subtle interplay between two (in)depended voices! No demanding harmony? Ever heard Cecil Taylor? No rich variety of modulations? Ever listened to any bebop?
I really suggest you read Goehr's excellent book on this matter - our conception of what a musical work is, is a modern invention, and the exception rather than the rule, both in time and geographically. We've derailed this thread way too much allready with our ontological ramblings, so I suggest we'll be tacet on the subject in here. I'm happy to continue in some other thread though :-) But let's stay on topic in this one. What's so exceptional about the Dutch calling Vermeulen a Dutch composer when he was a Dutch composer?
Sun, Dec 9 2012, 6:16PM
#7
RE: Listening Project
(I did try and warn you all...........He does it to EVERY thread.)
(And you are quite right, Brumas: Parla's definitions don't do the job he wants them to. The net takes in too many fish, so to speak.)
(Parla: try using "although" instead of "despite". It might make your sentences less Germanic.)
Jane, not really taking part in this discussion, as promised.
Mon, Dec 10 2012, 12:05AM
#8
RE: Listening Project
Brumas, sorry again but till you initiate (or revive) another thread, you made me compelled to respond:
Since when "meaning=use" and not the other way round. So far I've grown up, studied and taught that, before I use a word, I should know its meaning, its definition (use depends on meaning). Otherwise, the way we communicate would be...futile! Classical Music, as any other word, has its definition based on the unique features of this music.
To find a way out in the jazz issue: whatever sort of "instrumentation, harmony, counterpoint, modulations etc." of a jazz piece have to do with the specific performance, not the composition (since there is not such a thing). That's why there is no possibility to recreate the same performance of a jazz work even by the same artist(s), unless someone scores the whole thing. Then and only then, we may start talking for a possibility of a contemporary stuff, that, provided it has enough features close to the Classical works, might be considered as part of the Classical franchise.
I don't think Mrs. Goehr made many people "wiser", not even herself! The issue is: can she contest whether the wisdom which has been developed and established since 1800 on the "concept of a musical work" is wrong? (And does she speak on behalf of the composers, musicians and scholars or simply herself?)
The "exceptional" thing about Vermeulen is that his compatriots simply recognise him as one of them, not as an "exceptional" one, like let's say Sweelinck...
Parla
P.S.: Thrilled to have you back Jane and thanks for the advice on "although and despite". As I'm not German, I don't mind if my sentences sound more (or less) Germanic.
Mon, Dec 10 2012, 1:22AM
#9
RE: Listening Project
Bazza: on the Vermeulen: yes, it is a very dense work, and indeed feels rather relentless at first. It does reward repeated listening though, I think - there's more singing going on in it than seems to be the case at first glance...
Any more comments on Vermeulen's symphony? Or should we start a new thread for the listening project?
Mon, Dec 10 2012, 11:39AM
#10
RE: Listening Project
(Don't you understand, yet, Bazza? It won't make any difference if you start a new one. Parla will simply step from one thread to the next..........)
Mon, Dec 10 2012, 2:02PM
#11
RE: Listening Project RE: Listening Project
(Don't you understand, yet, Bazza? It won't make any difference if you start a new one. Parla will simply step from one thread to the next..........)
Exactly. And ruin that thread with his pompous nonsense just as he has with all the others.
Mon, Dec 10 2012, 3:40PM
#12
RE: Listening Project RE: Listening Project
Since when "meaning=use" and not the other way round.
A statement? A question? Who can tell? Ironic really, given the context.
So far I've grown up, studied and taught that, before I use a word, I should know its meaning, its definition (use depends on meaning). Otherwise, the way we communicate would be...futile! Classical Music, as any other word, has its definition based on the unique features of this music.
Well whatever it is you've taught (or are teaching),let's just hope it's not linguistics.
Mon, Dec 10 2012, 4:12PM
#13
RE: Listening Project
"Pompous nonsense"? That's pompous, Craig!
Parla
Mon, Dec 10 2012, 4:41PM
#14
RE: Listening Project
OK, Brumas, back to the 'straight and narrow'!
I thought this was an interesting idea for a thread. I've not commented on any of the works chosen so far mainly because I'm not a fan of Michael Nyman's music (I thought Eliza got it exactly right) and not very much in sympathy with the styles of the other composers. My loss I'm sure, but increasingly it takes me many hearings to get into new music even when I'm sympathetic to the ideas of the composer. I could never write a 'first review' of a work unknown to me, and admire those who can.
So now for a couple of suggestions from me. In principle I agree with Parla that even neglected works of well-known composers would be worth including, but i won't go as far as selecting rarely-heard Mendelsson, or Bach. However my choices may be less obscure than those discussed so far and some members may know them already.
The first suggestion is (fairly) modern: the fourth string quartet of Schnittke, new to me since last weekend when I found it in a box of 20th Century quartets from the Alban Berg Quartet. But it can be found on YouTube, played by the Kronos Quartet. Building on music of Shostakovich, Bartok (and even Britten) with some chordal progressions Messiaen would have appreciated, I found it fascinating.
My second suggestion is much older. A religious work by Cavalli, a setting of Salve Regina. Many people know or know of Cavalli's operas but his religious music is much more rarely played. You can find it on YouTube, complete with score. Quite different from Monteverdi's style (or anyone else I know of).
If you don't think they are suitable then I won't be offended!
Chris
Mon, Dec 10 2012, 5:33PM
#15
RE: Listening Project
Chris, I have a BIS CD with the first three Schnittke quartets on it but I have never liked them as much as I have some of his orchestral works (Symphony 5 is, indeed, a masterwork). Nevertheless I will give the 4th an audition tonight. The Youtube link is:
Finally!
A long, complex work and thus one cannot hope to grasp it all on first hearing. I did find the first movement rather relentless without enough light and shade to particularly grab the attention. The slow movement gave much needed respite with some mysterious flute lines. The finale is as inexorable as the first movement with some military hammering from the percussion and fanfares from the brass. It does not so much end but peter out.
The work has the subtitle Les Lendemains Chantants which Google tells me means "The Singing Tomorrows". I hear little singing, if truth be told.
http://haydnesqueIII.freeforums.net/