Xenakis Piano Concerto "Synaphai"

[soliloquy]

I just felt everyone should hear this piece

Rawr

Potatoes<3

[etudes]

this true? 

[jre58591]

i actually kinda liked this piece, and i thought it was very unique. i kinda found erikthon more enjoyable, though. i can just imagine the grunts of distaste from other members though.

[gilad]

thats the first time i've heard anything by  Xenakis, i was planning on checking him out. but god, that was freaky. it made me really uncomfortable. have that effect on other people? is a lot of his music the same? very good though of course.

[soliloquy]

is a lot of his music the same?

Xenakis went through three periods of composition: the sort of "engineering" one, the "New Complexity" one, and the "block" one.  These aren't actual names, but just sort of what fit in my mind.  As you probably know, Xenakis was an architectural engineer and mathematician, and used a lot of mathematical/scientific formulai in his music (this type of composing is called "stochastic").  The first sort of period is where he very rigidly used stochastic composition EG "Herma"- Musique Symbolique, which was based on Gestalt Periods and Boolean Algebra.  The second, which is not really "New Complexity" but sort of is, is where he sort of focused on technical aspects of performing the pieces EG ST/4 for String Quartet, Nomos Alpha for solo cello, "Evryali" which uses up to 10 voices at a time on solo piano, and Synaphai, this piece posted, which uses up to 16 voices (or "attack points") simultaneously on the piano (NOT an easy piece =P).  The third period is probably my least favorite and produced a lot of his least-inventive work.  He basically created large blocks of sound and sort of toyed with them.  A lot of it is kind of boring.  Honestly, this was really not a good piano to do this piece with since it wasn't really loud enough; the piano got drowned out a lot.

[donjuan]

man, I know I sound ignorant, but *** man this is some weirdass ***  I havent been so weirded out since watching Herzog's hypnotized actors in "Heart of Glass"

As you probably know, Xenakis was an architectural engineer and mathematician, and used a lot of mathematical/scientific formulai in his music

nope, didn't know that one.  so skepto, what calculus course should I take to appreciate this stuff?  maybe Im just not smart enough for Xenakis

how do you say xenakis anyway?  is it pronounced like 'ZEEna kiss'?  "ze KNACK-is?"

[soliloquy]

Don't need calculus to appreciate this one; you either like it or not.

Iannis Xenakis:

YAN-iss zen-AH-kiss

AH like aww, how cute, a kitten.  Not like AH, monster!

[gilad]

hey, thanks soliloquy. yeah i knew a bit of that, but not all, thanks.

[kelly_kelly]

Arrrrgh! It sounds almost like the orchestra is playing sul ponticello throughout... Strangely cool though, once you get over the initial shock.

And I though Bernstien's On the Waterfront was weird...

[yuc4h]

Ehm... Can someone actually listen the whole piece without getting a headache?

Edit: And the piano sounds so random that I doubt that even the performer knows what notes he/she should hit and when, since apparently there is no time signature, tempo or anything else except random notes whatsoever. I wouldn't be very surprised if the performer plays it differently each time since noone can tell the difference. At least the piano couldn't sound crappier?

Xenakis looks like he was seriously insane btw ;<


Edit2: Hey, I got it, maybe you need to be synaesthetic to enjoy this. Then, after you have listened it you can atleast say that it looked really cool.

[soliloquy]

Ehm... Can someone actually listen the whole piece without getting a headache?

Edit: And the piano sounds so random that I doubt that even the performer knows what notes he/she should hit and when, since apparently there is no time signature, tempo or anything else except random notes whatsoever. I wouldn't be very surprised if the performer plays it differently each time since noone can tell the difference. At least the piano couldn't sound crappier?

Xenakis looks like he was seriously insane btw ;<


Edit2: Hey, I got it, maybe you need to be synaesthetic to enjoy this. Then, after you have listened it you can atleast say that it looked really cool.

Why, how ignorant of you

Firstly, Xenakis looks crazy because he got hit in the face by shrapnel during the French Revolution; just out of curiosity, how many wars have you fought in?  Now to answer your "questions" (and I use the term lightly seeing as how these are barely questions at all; more like some ignorant idiot making statements that happen to have question marks at the end):

1.  I would assume approximately 99.9999% of the population would be able to listen to this without getting a headache.  Maybe you were listening to it too loud?  I'm sorry you didn't appreciate the music; I guess it must be a bit above you

2. The piano is not random at all; there are actually several major harmonies and counterharmonies; even the most amateur listeners would have been able to discern this at least several times through the piece.  There is a time signature; I have no idea where you would get the idea there isn't one.  Maybe because you're talking out of your ass and have never even seen the score to this piece?  I hope that's a fair assumption.  Actually, the rhythm/tempo in the piano part is insanely simple; very similar to Evryali.  It is almost entirely comprised of only 8th and 16th notes; almost identical to the Prokofiev Toccata in this respect.  That is the rhythm you weren't able to pick up on?  A Toccata?  The most INSANELY basic and formulaic rhythm structure that music has ever seen?  Wow; your ineptitude is overwhelming me.  Calling anything Xenakis wrote "random notes" is actually somehow even MORE ignorant than everything else you've said, and that realllly means a lot considering some of the BS you spouted, seeing as how he was more strict than Bach or Schoenberg with his composition.  This is like, a whole other level of stupidity that I wasn't even aware existed.

3.  "Surprise" as to whether the performer would play it differently each time isn't even a factor seeing as how it is purposefully written so it will be played different each time.  When you say "noone" would be able to tell the difference, I guess you mean "no one" would be able to tell the difference since "noone" isn't a word.  I wouldn't make broad assumptions about other people; especially when it would entail these other people being classed with you which I'm pretty sure they don't want to happen.  What I assume you MEANT to say was that YOU wouldn't be able to tell the difference, due to, apparently, a complete lack of any knowledge of music, modern or just in general, and just a general level of low IQ.

4.  It was a beautiful piano, but had no microphone.  Something that someone with any shred of knowledge on music would have been able to tell.

5.  Referring to your "synaesthetic" remark, I think you could switch out "synaesthetic" for "not retarded".

[pianiststrongbad]

yuk4h, I can completely understand where you are coming from, as I guess I am retarded aswell for not entirely appreciating this type of music.  With that said, apparently composers and a lot of other people must like this stuff a lot since this has been the direction that they have been heading in for the last 70 years or so.

[steve_m]

.

[yuc4h]

Soliloquy

Hehe, I saw this coming
Actually, the piece was quite a shock for me since I have never actually heared any modern orchestral music. Well, there is always something new to be learned. I didn't think you could produce this kind of noise with an orchestra

Anyways, I guess you mean "really" with "realllly", am I right? I'm so glad we understand each other.

Edit: Anyways, I think that goal of the so-called modern 'music' is to create something that requires a tremendous amount of technique to play and sounds crappy. That is just sad. I also think that any tonal music beats atonality, since atonal music appears to be not 'music' at all but mere noise.

[soliloquy]

To make the claim that everyone who can't appreciate blaring noise with no musical value is retarded is ...retarded.

Ah.  You seem to very easily confuse the words "appreciate" and "enjoy".  It's an understandable mistake, I mean they sound so similar, and the both use the letter "E"


Anyone who can't appreciate (notice, APPRECIATE!!!  Not "like" or "enjoy" or "love" or "orgasm to".  Just wanted to clear this up) this piece IS probably mentally deficient, or harbors an extreme bias against anything that has the slightest tinge of dissonance or atonality.  Now, let's go over the definition of the word "appreciate" for your learning use:

V: to recognize the value or significance of

ok now let's look at the definition of "enjoy":

V: derive or receive pleasure from; get enjoyment from; take pleasure in


Obviously modern music isn't for everyone so I wouldn't call someone who didn't derive and receive pleasure, get enjoyment from and take pleasure in this piece (AKA enjoy) a retard.  But, someone who was not able to recognize the significance or value (AKA appreciate) this piece, despite whether or not you ENJOY it, which we've now established is an entirely different thing, is probably not very bright.  Dare I say, stupid; maybe retarded?

Anyone in the world could of written that piece.

What about blind people with no hands?  Or people who couldn't write 16 voices onto a piano and knew about enharmonic multiphonics?

Often I think that people pretend to like this stuff just to make themselves look sophisticated.

Maybe you're right.

I can appreciate more Xenakis' music that is based on mathematical principals because you need to be somewhat intelligent to understand it

Sounds like you're enjoying (hey, there's that word again) for reasons beyond it sounding nice.  Maybe to make yourself seem smarter, or dare I say, more sophisticated?

but still it is awful in comparison to tonality.

I thought you just said you liked Xenakis' music that was stochastic.  That's not tonal.


Let's recap before moving on.  You don't know the difference between two totally common and totally different words, you hate everything atonal but like Xenakis (see, you do have a bias against modern music, or do you?  Your selfcontradictions make it difficult to discern), and you apparently think you could write this piece, seeing as how you would fit into "everyone".  You should marry yuc4h.  You could have the meanest, most ignorance, retarded, modern-music-bashing babies ever.

Soliloquy

Yes?

Hehe, I saw this coming

Good for you.  Have anything meaningful or apt to say?

Actually, the piece was quite a shock for me since I have never actually heared any modern orchestral music.

I see.  You mean *sarcastic gasp* you're not an expert on modern music?  You had me fooled! (more sarcasm, btw)

Well, there is always something new to be learned.

You don't seem interested in learning as much as making yourself look stupid.

I didn't think you could produce this kind of noise with an orchestra

You should check out Krzysztof Penderecki and Witold Lutoslawski.  I think you'd be pleasantly surprised.

Anyways, I guess you mean "really" with "realllly", am I right?

No I did not.  It was an affectation to display how "realllly" stupid whatever you said was, ergo no, you are not right.  Surprise surprise.

I'm so glad we understand each other.

Your lack of coherency makes it straining.

Anyways, I think that goal of the so-called modern 'music' is to create something that requires a tremendous amount of technique to play

You're right.  oh wait....... I forgot!  You even just admitted you have absolutely no experience with modern music.  Please excuse me if I don't take your wise and scholarly opinion too seriously.

and sounds crappy.

Remind me, since when were Gershwin's Piano Concerto, Shostakovich's Symphony No. 5, Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet, Corigliano's Etude Fantasy and Hindemith's Mathis de Mahler crappy?

That is just sad.

Lucky for us, what you thought was sad isn't true.

I also think that any tonal music beats atonality

Stravinsky Pulchinella Suite vs Stravinsky Rite of Spring.  Hmm.  Tough one.  Oh wait, no it's not.

since atonal music appears to be not 'music' at all but mere noise.

Have you ever listened to anything in your life besides Handel?


In retrospect, I think the pianoforum needs to require an IQ test to get in.  Anyone who scores below a 40 is banned.

[donjuan]

[pianiststrongbad]

Soliloquy, you are making a lot of brash judgements.  I really don't see the point of you critisizing somebody who doesn't appreciate this type of music.  It adds a negative atmosphere to this forum.  What does it accomplish?

[steve_m]

.

[steve_m]

.

[ahinton]

Why, how ignorant of you

Firstly, Xenakis looks crazy because he got hit in the face by shrapnel during the French Revolution;

Er - not the "French Revolution", methinks - I don't think that Xenakis was that old - although my so saying is not intended to detract from much of the remainder of what you write here. Xenakis's appearance is precisely as you say it is for precisely the reasons that sadly made it so; I would have thought that anyone with a grain of sensitivity, intelligence and powers of observation would look at this photograph (or any one on a whole series of others) of Xenakis and realise that something profoundly unpleasant had happened to him...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

My cat once fell onto the piano keys after a failed attempt to get to the goldfish bowl.

The sound was similar to this recording.

[steve_m]

.

[soliloquy]

Ok, yuc4h wrote this:

Notice the use of the word enjoy.


Now, we could exchange witticisms all day, but I think it would be best to just admit we have different tastes.

Notice this is what I was responding to:

To make the claim that everyone who can't appreciate blaring noise with no musical value is retarded is ...retarded.

Tell me when you finally say something witty so I can respond to it.  *waiting*

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

Soliloquy, I understand that you are loquacious and enjoy to be invective to other people, but you have to understand that you are just simply insulting others. This is really an equivocal situation here concerning mental capacities. I don't want to prevaricate you, but I just don't see why you would so rashly vituperate others in order to prove "superiority". Just ensconce yourself and be nice.

[kelly_kelly]

Greetings.

Soliloquy, I understand that you are loquacious and enjoy to be invective to other people, but you have to understand that you are just simply insulting others. This is really an equivocal situation here concerning mental capacities. I don't want to prevaricate you, but I just don't see why you would so rashly vituperate others in order to prove "superiority". Just ensconce yourself and be nice.

It sounds as though you don't understand half the words you've used- that paragraph made very little sense. And you accuse Soliloquy of trying to prove superiority?

[yuc4h]

...

Okay, since you apparently don't have any valid arguments about why this 'piece' should be universally enjoyable I consider this argument over. Even me (in my overwhelming ignorance and 'stupidity') know that when one starts to insult others, he/she has already lost the argument, so in this case, the argument supposedly has not even begun yet. Anyways, I don't really care about what you say/think about me, this is internet, give me all you've got.

Since when has the intelligence quotient of a person been even remotely proportional to whether or not one can enjoy or appreciate random noise created by orchestra? It seems that you must have profoundly studied the essence of intelligence since you talk so much about it. Maybe you should consider joining Giga society?

Please, feel free to dissect this post also and comment everything I said and don't forget the punctuation. English is my tertiary language so I'm sure you'll have a lot of things to complain about.

The fact that you got so strong sence of being superior to everyone not liking this 'music' just because you apparently like it(which I doubt since you propably only say you understand and like this just because you want to make yourself look clever or something) is quite amusing but well, people get enjoyment from different things.

[Derek]

soliloquy, you are the sort of person who drives people away from modern music by trying to diminish them and make them feel stupid for not immediately being drawn to the music.  Can't you at least give people a little time and/or space? It took me a long time to begin to appreciate atonal music.

However, even now I still don't like Xenakis. I see little value in determining precisely why; I just don't.


Please take example from our friend Quantum; he does not try to foist his musical aesthetic upon everyone with boorish invective such as what you indulge in, he simply presents music he has genuinely created according to what he likes to hear and lets others listen or not listen or judge as they see fit.   This makes his music much more inviting to listen to and as such he is one of the people who have helped me to see the value in more disjunct atonal works.

That said however, it is still not quite my favorite style of music to say the least.  I really don't like this Xenakis piece.  It sounds, as a friend of mine has put it, like orchestral flatulence through almost the entire piece.

Pointing out a few incidental major chords won't be enough to convince anyone that it is anything but nonsense.  I don't care how many nice math equations he used to compose the piece, it is crap.

I can imagine, I suppose, that there are individuals who do genuinely enjoy being awash with dissonance. There's something fascinating by mind bogglingly complex disjunct music, I have become aware of this myself. So...if you like it more power to you.

But please---stop calling everyone an idiot/retard who doesn't react precisely the same way you are reacting.

[thalbergmad]

soliloquy, you are the sort of person who drives people away from modern music by trying to diminish them and make them feel stupid for not immediately being drawn to the music. 

Very well put.

He starts off threads like this knowing that it is going to court controversy.

He will then display his superior musical and intellectual genius by putting down those with different tastes to him and dissecting their posts almost word for word.

If needed, he will start to list all the famous pianists/composers he has regular correspondence with that agree with him, to add further weight to his point.

We are ALL retards compared to him.

If anything was going to put me off listening to Xenakis, it would be this thread.

Thal

[hodi]

i don't care how genius was xenakis or how sophisticated his music was
it's not pleasent to my ears and mind

Xenakis' music sound like random notes.
he thought a lot before writing his music, but the result was the same as my little sister plays the piano randomly
actually, my sister might be smarter than him, because she doesn't have even to think to create this music XD

[kelly_kelly]

It sounds as though you don't understand half the words you've used- that paragraph made very little sense. And you accuse Soliloquy of trying to prove superiority?

Not to say that I agree with Soliloquy; I don't particularly enjoy this music either. But seriously; "Just ensconce yourself and be nice"