midi of the opus clavicembalisticum?

[arch0wl]

like the topic suggests, I have searched up and down for a midi of this, but to no avail.

I would think that there would be one, given some people's almost obsessive attitudes toward it? that, and the Madges recording is awful. while MIDIs are in no way a replacement for a real person, it would be nice to hear what it is supposed to be played like, in contrast to madges.

am I out of luck?

[prometheus]

There is a Ogden recording, it is played too slow, the combination of the piano and the recording give the piano a harsh sound, a lot of dynamics are ignores and overall it has not enough musical consideration. But it does have mostly the right notes.

Also there are some incomplete recordings. I though about the idea of a midi. The piece is just too big so it would be too much work.

Maybe you should check out Powell's recording of the Toccata No.1. It is similar in style and structure to the OC, Sorabji style baroque. But it is a lot shorter, still about 75 minutes though. While the OC has a choral prelude, 4 fugues, two sets of variations (one being a passacaglia) two candenzas, a coda stretta (and quite some more other forms). The Toccata also has these forms. But only a choral prelude, one set of variations in passacaglia form, a short candanza-fantasia part, one fugue and a coda stretta.

I find that the Toccata is a bit less experimental and I didn't find the memorable melodies like in some parts of the OC, yet. The music does seem less harsh, but it may very well be the excellent performance, both great finesse and musical depth and the rich piano sound.
I don't have the score so I am not really sure if it rivals the OC in difficulty while ignoring the lenght but probably not. But musically this recording is very interesting because the quality is much better than both OC recordings.

[Etude]

Yes Ogdon recorded OC, but his recording is painfully slow in places, like the 3rd and 4th fugues, and ridiculously fast in other places.  Like the fantasia./

Jonathan Powell is recording the piece after he has performed it a few more times, and his recording should be a lot better than Madge or Ogdon's recordings.  It's taken 75 years already to get a decent recording of this piece, and I'm not sure Mr. Powell will be recording it this year, so it will take ev en longer than that./

As for MIDI, it would take a hell of a lot of work to produce something this big.  It's 248 pages of music!  I have put a few pages of the last movement into NWC, and it's so different to Madge's or OGdon's recordings.  I'd share it with you if I could, but I'm not sure where to upload it.

Sorry for all the typing mistakes in this post, I was rushing because the *** program closed itself, and I had to type everything again. 

[prometheus]

I don't think he will be recording it anytime soon since he wants to perform it live 10 times before recording and I think he has only played it 3 or 4 times with no new performance planned. I also vaguely remembers he is also interested in recording one more sonata. I don't remember, but it was either the 5th, which is huge. Or the 3rd.

I am sure Alistair knows everything there is to know and he will definitely reply when he sees this topic.

[Etude]

5th what? Sonata?  That is huge, but so is the third apparently, which is 80 minutes long and in one movement.

[prometheus]

Yeah, I meant to say sonata. I think I cut it away, because I was not sure which number it was. I also remember number five being huge, I think more than two hours. It's amazing how Powell can think about recording both the OC and sonata No.5. Frankly, I don't believe it until he does it. I should have said he is also interested in recording one more sonata, not that he has plans because I have no idea if he does. Let me edit the original to avoid confusion.

[arch0wl]

As for MIDI, it would take a hell of a lot of work to produce something this big.  It's 248 pages of music!  I have put a few pages of the last movement into NWC, and it's so different to Madge's or OGdon's recordings.  I'd share it with you if I could, but I'm not sure where to upload it.

https://www.midiworld.com/DavidSiu/
https://www.classicalmidiconnection.com/

If these people can do all this, I'm sure the OC would be manageable! Sure, it's the size of quite a few goldberg variations, but I doubt that would stop some people!

[prometheus]

Maybe people with experience have some fast way to make midi's. Also, Sorabjis pieces aren't only very long, they also have about 1000 notes a minute, which is 16 per second. Plus the score doesn't read very easily either, for example in terms of rhythm.

If I had GPO or something similar, and a lot of time on my hands, doing the first fugue only may be a possibilty to consider.

[arch0wl]

Many people have composed midis with large amounts of notes, as well as 30 minute to hour long pieces. While these are still pale in comparison to the OC, it's worthwhile to note that I'm sure the note count wouldn't scare off some people.

[ahinton]

Yeah, I meant to say sonata. I think I cut it away, because I was not sure which number it was. I also remember number five being huge, I think more than two hours. It's amazing how Powell can think about recording both the OC and sonata No.5. Frankly, I don't believe it until he does it. I should have said he is also interested in recording one more sonata, not that he has plans because I have no idea if he does. Let me edit the original to avoid confusion.

Tellef Johnson has recorded Sorabji's Third Sonata for Altarus but I have no release date yet. Jonathan has no more plans than anyone else to record the Fifth, since a complete new edition is itself a long way off. Even when it is finally ready, we do not know if Jonathan will want to prepare a performance of it immediately, although such a prospect would obviously be most welcome.

Best,

Alistair

[Ruro]

Most interesting thread, I would love to hear this piece played perfectly (If not roboticaly via a Midi), although I wonder if that would put some people off. I'm the kinda person who can do long winded things without being bored (because I listen to music at the same time ). I have spent AGES cutting out the piano solo part of the Rach3 from a PDF, just so I could have a score alone for piano, and also have a weird habit of sometimes capitilizing words in texts (and when I get started, I don't stop) ^_^;;

I wouldn't mind compiling the Opus Clavicembalisticum for as long as I knew somebody else wasn't already doing it, therefore wasting my time after all... and also that it would be a worth while result. If no one wants to hear a computer playing a song because it sounds dull... and people say it would be pointless, then again I will not bother.

I only have Sibelius mind... INFACT, why don't we all take a movement each? Obviously for the Variation movements, you would have to split it up into measures among people :/ I'm willing to do a few movements if I had the software, I currently have Sibelius but it's a Demo version, and can't save midi's

But something else just struck me, I don't want us to all finish and find the next day after our victory good ol' Powell is releasing his recording the next day ... Makes me thinks it's pointless to attempt now, unless we got ALOT of people making the different sections of it... or perhaps it's not worth attempting this perhaps pointless task.

[arch0wl]

I would be interested in a midi, I can't speak for others. There's lots of things you can accomplish with MIDIS - and if the classicalmidiconnection.com website has an audience, I'm sure this would too.

Etude posted earlier in this thread that he wasn't sure if Powell was even going to record it this year, so I think it's safe to go for it if that's the case.

[ahinton]

I would be interested in a midi, I can't speak for others. There's lots of things you can accomplish with MIDIS - and if the classicalmidiconnection.com website has an audience, I'm sure this would too.

Etude posted earlier in this thread that he wasn't sure if Powell was even going to record it this year, so I think it's safe to go for it if that's the case.

It is indeed almost certain that Mr Powell will not be recording OC this year, but it all depends on how long it would take to make a serviceable MIDI which would eventually, in any case, be well and truly supplanted by Mr Powell's recording when it does come out. To do this really well - as, for example, was done some years ago with the first 18 Transcendental Studies - would be a monumentally time-consuming task which would in any even t be destined to turn into a rather pointless exercise once Mr Powell's recording does come out...

Best,

Alistair

[Etude]

I think Ruro has a good idea

INFACT, why don't we all take a movement each?

We could choose between one of the very large movements or a few of the shorter ones, and maybe organise the piece into groups of movements (how many groups would have to depend on the number of participants), something like this:

1) Introito, Fantasia, Cadenza I, Cadenza II.

2)  Preludio-Corale, 1st Fugue, Coda-Stretta.

3) Toccata, Adagio

4) 2nd Fugue, 3rd Fugue.

5) 4th fugue

6) Variations

7) Passacaglia


If we have less 7 people who want to help, we would have more work to do each, although the two variation sections really should stay on their own as they are huge.  So, is anyone up for it? 

[xvimbi]

It is indeed almost certain that Mr Powell will not be recording OC this year, but it all depends on how long it would take to make a serviceable MIDI which would eventually, in any case, be well and truly supplanted by Mr Powell's recording when it does come out. To do this really well - as, for example, was done some years ago with the first 18 Transcendental Studies - would be a monumentally time-consuming task which would in any even t be destined to turn into a rather pointless exercise once Mr Powell's recording does come out...

Best,

Alistair

If people find a MIDI version useful (for whatever purpose), there are quicker ways to generate one. One can scan in the score and have it converted automatically into score and thus MIDI. Sibelius has such a functionality, others might too.

[prometheus]

I am not famliliar with that technique because I never used Sibelius but I do wonder if the program can understand a score like the one of OC. I am sure the programmers that programmed the option to convert score into midi didn't have a score like the OC in mind. So there may be so many mess ups that it takes just as much time to manually correct the misakes as it takes to input them all manually.

[JCarey]

I'll be completely honest when I say that I'd be willing to do the entire piece myself. I've even thought of doing that before. And, I've almost finished two movements of it. Plus, I have GPO, which is, of course, much more enjoyable to listen to than a standard MIDI.

Actually, I was planning on uploading some of my GPO recordings of the OC in the audition room, as well as a recording of myself playing Sorabji's "In the Hothouse".

We'll see.

[JCarey]

It is indeed almost certain that Mr Powell will not be recording OC this year, but it all depends on how long it would take to make a serviceable MIDI which would eventually, in any case, be well and truly supplanted by Mr Powell's recording when it does come out. To do this really well - as, for example, was done some years ago with the first 18 Transcendental Studies - would be a monumentally time-consuming task which would in any even t be destined to turn into a rather pointless exercise once Mr Powell's recording does come out...

I disagree.

The OC is an incredibly detailed work. Sorabji's genius can only be truly realized if one examines the score. And, in my opinion, the best way to examine the score is to dissect it, which is exactly what you do when you enter it into your computer - you dissect it, and put it back together again.

Of course, Sorabji would disagree -

What an odd delusion, and how prevalent, that when some composition that one dislikes has been put on the dissecting table, one will dislike it less, or, in that singularly meaningless phrase, "understand it" better. The only result of this ghoulish process, pushed to the furthest lengths of boring absurdity in the analytical programme note, is to make one dislike it even more. It is like someone who, having introduced you to some antipatico person, shows you a radiograph of him, saying, "Oh you are ridiculously prejudiced against him! Just look at what a fine skeleton he has!"

[prometheus]

I always found that a curious statement. I wonder what the context was and what he was trying to attack or defend with it. This statement is very puzzling to me because to me it creates a paradox between this and his music. I would bet that he contradics himself regarding this at some point in all the stuff he wrote on music if I could.

It seems to me this is a constructed argument, which explains the weak analogy, which use was in some way justified by its goal. Or it was an attempt to confuse people and 'keep them out'. But I can't really say.

[ahinton]

I disagree.

The OC is an incredibly detailed work. Sorabji's genius can only be truly realized if one examines the score. And, in my opinion, the best way to examine the score is to dissect it, which is exactly what you do when you enter it into your computer - you dissect it, and put it back together again.

I think that I should have been less hasty and more specific in my responses here. When I wrote of a "pointless exercise" I should have qualified my stance by writing of an exercise of dubious and limited merit. While we wait for Jonathan Powell's recording, it might indeed be of value to individual people who want to find out more about the piece, although it would be an exceedingly elaborate and time-consuming process to accomplish. What I meant was that it would likely be of limited value to the rest of us. Some years ago, someone sent us a CDR of the first 18 of Sorabji's 100 Transcendental Studies in one of the most brilliantly made MIDIs I have ever heard; even then, however, whilst this sounded quite impressive in some places, one had not to listen for long before it became all too apparent that this was an account of the music impossible from human hands and accordingly devoid of the necessary human input. We must remember that Sorabji is not Nancarrow and conceived his music for human minds to approach and human hands to present; this is where the disadvantage of computer realisation, other than for occasional illustrative purposes when there is nothing else to had that would achieve this purpose, reveals itself.

As to Sorabji's genius only being available to those capable of score analysis, whilst I amm well aware of the value of this kind of exercise, the suggestion here seems to be that the full extent of such genius is, by definition, inaccessible to those who have not the requisite musical literacy with which to accomplish this. This is not only incorrect, in my experience, but not what the composer would have wanted; indeed, he always hoped that his music would get trhough to non-musicians as well as musicians and believed that, in certain cases, it had actually done so.

I think that what we are all agreed on is the necessity for Jonathan Powell to get a few more OC performances and then persuade himself that the time is now right for him to proceed with that recording!

Best,

Alistair

[JCarey]

As to Sorabji's genius only being available to those capable of score analysis, whilst I amm well aware of the value of this kind of exercise, the suggestion here seems to be that the full extent of such genius is, by definition, inaccessible to those who have not the requisite musical literacy with which to accomplish this. This is not only incorrect, in my experience, but not what the composer would have wanted; indeed, he always hoped that his music would get trhough to non-musicians as well as musicians and believed that, in certain cases, it had actually done so.

What Sorabji had hoped and what actually is are two different things entirely. I will be completely honest - the majority of people out there who are familiar with Sorabji don't even like his music at all. And most non-musicians who I have played his music for, both by myself and on CDs, hated it.

Luckily, my taste is sophisticated enough to both appreciate and love his music. But that's another issue.

You say I was "incorrect" in stating that one must analyze the score to fully understand Sorabji's genius. But tell me, if one has not studied the score, how can one notice all of the many repeated themes, some of which used on practically every page? How can one see how Sorabji hints at future themes, and then develops them in later movements? How can one understand the way the music is built, which made writing it on 3-5 staves a necessity? And how can one understand his complex use of contrapuntuality?

I rest my case.

[ahinton]

What Sorabji had hoped and what actually is are two different things entirely. I will be completely honest - the majority of people out there who are familiar with Sorabji don't even like his music at all. And most non-musicians who I have played his music for, both by myself and on CDs, hated it.

Luckily, my taste is sophisticated enough to both appreciate and love his music. But that's another issue.

You say I was "incorrect" in stating that one must analyze the score to fully understand Sorabji's genius. But tell me, if one has not studied the score, how can one notice all of the many repeated themes, some of which used on practically every page? How can one see how Sorabji hints at future themes, and then develops them in later movements? How can one understand the way the music is built, which made writing it on 3-5 staves a necessity? And how can one understand his complex use of contrapuntuality?

I rest my case.

What Sorabji "hoped for" and what he sometimes got were not necessarily diametrically different.  However, when John states that
the majority of people out there who are familiar with Sorabji don't even like his music at all. And most non-musicians who I have played his music for, both by myself and on CDs, hated it
he does not surprise or offend me - any more than he might have surprised or offended Sorabji. That said, there have been numerous musicians and non-musicians alike who have really warmed to what he wrote.

Did I really write that John
was "incorrect" in stating that one must analyze the score to fully understand Sorabji's genius?
Once again, then, I find myself guilty of undue hastiness and insufficiently specific and clear expression. What I should have written was that the ability to analyse the score - for all the importance and revealing aspects of that - is not the only and final way to salvation where the appreciation of Sorabji's genius in concerned. John makes a whole series of very valid points in what he writes here - but I have noted from my own experience that people who are not necessarily well versed in the intricate procedures of form, harmony, melody, rhythm and counterpoint to the extent that they can immediately identify all manner of things in a score can still "get" a remarkable amount of what the composer intended, including some of these repeated references of which John wisely writes - the only difference would appear to be that some people who can read scores identify certain things through that facility whereas others do so without it. Of course, the latter are very much NOT in the majority of listeners, but I would not seek to deny them their abilities.

John "rests his case"; for all that I write here, he undoubtedly has a good "case" and it is one to which I have been pleased to have an opportunity to try to respond adequately and I hope that, in my endeavours here, I have not dropped yet another indiscretion of expression!

Best,

Alistair

[JCarey]

John "rests his case"; for all that I write here, he undoubtedly has a good "case" and it is one to which I have been pleased to have an opportunity to try to respond adequately and I hope that, in my endeavours here, I have not dropped yet another indiscretion of expression!

Oh no, you were quite clear! I sincerely apologize if I had misinterpreted your prior post.

[ahinton]

Oh no, you were quite clear! I sincerely apologize if I had misinterpreted your prior post.

Not a problem!

Best,

Alistair

[Etude]

I was wondering:  Sorabji notated his piano music using brackets for systems instead of braces, yet all the editions of his piano music so far have used braces.  Which is correct or most appropriate?

[ahinton]

I was wondering:  Sorabji notated his piano music using brackets for systems instead of braces, yet all the editions of his piano music so far have used braces.  Which is correct or most appropriate?

Perhaps I am missing something or misunderstanding what you are asking - or, more properly, why you are asking about it - but I cannot see that it makes any difference; systems are marked out with whichever the composer or editor chooses, but systems they are nevertheless - of two, three, four or more staves (staffs in American!) grouped together by either symbol. Please let me know if you meant something I've not picked up on...

Best,

Alistair

[Etude]

You're right, it doesn't really make any difference, but that's why I don't understand why an editor would use braces when Sorabji wrote brackets.

[ahinton]

You're right, it doesn't really make any difference, but that's why I don't understand why an editor would use braces when Sorabji wrote brackets.

Pass - you'd better address that one to one or more of the editors. It's just a convention - or rather two conventions - and, were I to hazard a guess, I doubt if any of the current editors has even given this factor a moments' thought on it! Perhaps you might even consider encouraging them to pause momentarily to do just that!

Well spotted, anyway.

Best,

Alistair

[arch0wl]

Aren't these discussions about Sorabji's writing method beating a dead horse?

[ahinton]

Aren't these discussions about Sorabji's writing method beating a dead horse?

I would say that they risk being so - but would add that it's not my horse; I'm not even "leading the horse to water", as the old cliché goes. The question was posed, so I endeavoured to answer it reasonably without questioning the validity of the question...

Best,

Alistair

[arch0wl]

well... on that note, is there really anything left to talk about (about the midi) until some of it gets done?

[BoliverAllmon]

I could do part of it if I had some sheets, but currently don't.

[ahinton]

I could do part of it if I had some sheets, but currently don't.

Well - you know whre you can get them - although I should perhaps take an opportunity at this point to mention that The Sorabji Archive will be closed from 24 September to 16 October 2005.

Best,

Alistair

[BoliverAllmon]

Well - you know whre you can get them - although I should perhaps take an opportunity at this point to mention that The Sorabji Archive will be closed from 24 September to 16 October 2005.

Best,

Alistair

yeah, I know where to get it, but I am not interested in paying for some sheets that I will never play. well at least spend that much on sheets I will never play

[ahinton]

yeah, I know where to get it, but I am not interested in paying for some sheets that I will never play. well at least spend that much on sheets I will never play

Your prerogative, of course - but it's hard to know how it can be input by anyone unless they have those sheets to being with, as you yourself correctly observe.

Best,

Alistair

[BoliverAllmon]

Your prerogative, of course - but it's hard to know how it can be input by anyone unless they have those sheets to being with, as you yourself correctly observe.

Best,

Alistair

unless it is someone else's perogative to supply those before mentioned sheets.

boliver

[JCarey]

unless it is someone else's perogative to supply those before mentioned sheets.

boliver

I don't think it's fair to those who put their hard work into making these sheets available to aquire them online without the intention of purchasing them later.

The last thing we need is for the Sorabji Archive to go out of business so we can't get the music at all.

[BoliverAllmon]

oh I agree. If I was to get the sheets, I would like the archive to supply them. The only purpose of seeing those sheets would be to make the midi. I am incapable of performing the piece and probably will never be at that level. Therefore I could not justify spending the money on a piece that is useless to me. I guess what I am saying is that if someone wanted a midi, I could do it (well part of it) if I was lent the sheets.

boliver

[JCarey]

https://www.johncareycompositions.com/fantasia.mp3

If anyone is interested, here is a synthesized GPO recording I made of the Fantasia from Opus Clavicembalisticum.

More movements are on the way.

Sorabji's use of themes in the Fantasia is unbelievable. The way he brings back themes from the prior movements and morphs them together in different keys is incredible. And, of course, his harmonies are amazing, as usual. The ending of this movement is so powerful. I really am anxious to hear Powell's recording.

[Ruro]

I have listened and it is excellent!!! The way... it all flows together, the notes that just bump up out of nowhere weave it swiftly along, Crikey... and the end, I didn't laugh like I did with Madge's (no offense Madge), but this... oh yeah

Obviously not everyone will be compatible taste wise with it, just refrain from the insults directed at Sorabji and the OC

[ahinton]

unless it is someone else's perogative to supply those before mentioned sheets.

boliver

It is no longer - nor has it been for many years - our mere "prerogative" to supply this or any other Sorabji score to anyone who wants it - it is our duty; likewise, no one is obliged to have it/them if they choose not to do so for any reason. We have taken our time and expended our energies to ensure that it is possible for anyone to order these scores and have them prepared and sent as near instantly as possible; it is then up to each individual to decide when or whether he/she might want to avail him/herself of any of them at any time. You are, of course, no exception to this.

Best,

Alistair

[BoliverAllmon]

It is no longer - nor has it been for many years - our mere "prerogative" to supply this or any other Sorabji score to anyone who wants it - it is our duty; likewise, no one is obliged to have it/them if they choose not to do so for any reason. We have taken our time and expended our energies to ensure that it is possible for anyone to order these scores and have them prepared and sent as near instantly as possible; it is then up to each individual to decide when or whether he/she might want to avail him/herself of any of them at any time. You are, of course, no exception to this.

Best,

Alistair

didn't mean to say i was an exception. I thought the archive was interested in a midi of the piece as well that is all.

[BoliverAllmon]

https://www.johncareycompositions.com/fantasia.mp3

If anyone is interested, here is a synthesized GPO recording I made of the Fantasia from Opus Clavicembalisticum.

More movements are on the way.

Sorabji's use of themes in the Fantasia is unbelievable. The way he brings back themes from the prior movements and morphs them together in different keys is incredible. And, of course, his harmonies are amazing, as usual. The ending of this movement is so powerful. I really am anxious to hear Powell's recording.

geez, that is pretty tight and I can't wait to get GPO.

boliver

[ahinton]

I have listened and it is excellent!!! The way... it all flows together, the notes that just bump up out of nowhere weave it swiftly along, Crikey... and the end, I didn't laugh like I did with Madge's (no offense Madge), but this... oh yeah

Obviously not everyone will be compatible taste wise with it, just refrain from the insults directed at Sorabji and the OC

OC is indeed a miracle of 20th century piano music. It's no good any one of us who might feel the same tryng to pressurise mr Powell into making his recording of it yesterday and having it released last week, much as I would be the first to wish it could be so! If his health and strength holds out (and I see no reason why it should not right now), he will surely do it - and then we will have no need for MIDIs or other manifestations of it (besides the score itself, of course).

Watch out for 21/22 November 2005 - Radio France - Jonathan Powell playing his Montpellier Festival programme (which admittedly does not include OC but which is nevertheless a fabulous all-Sorabji marathon of 4 hours +  altogether and absolutely not to be missed by anyone who cares as much as one semiquaver for Sorabji).

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

didn't mean to say i was an exception. I thought the archive was interested in a midi of the piece as well that is all.

We are not UNinterested in the idea per se - it's just that we are far more interested in the hopefully not too far distantly forthcoming CD recording by Jonathan Powell, because that will be a replication of a real performance by a real human being of the kind that Sorabji would have envisaged playing his music if anyone were ever going to do so...

Best,

Alistair

[BoliverAllmon]

We are not UNinterested in the idea per se - it's just that we are far more interested in the hopefully not too far distantly forthcoming CD recording by Jonathan Powell, because that will be a replication of a real performance by a real human being of the kind that Sorabji would have envisaged playing his music if anyone were ever going to do so...

Best,

Alistair

groovy

[ahinton]

groovy

Not in the days of CDs, surely?

Best,

Alistair

[Etude]

https://www.johncareycompositions.com/fantasia.mp3

If anyone is interested, here is a synthesized GPO recording I made of the Fantasia from Opus Clavicembalisticum.

More movements are on the way.

Sorabji's use of themes in the Fantasia is unbelievable. The way he brings back themes from the prior movements and morphs them together in different keys is incredible. And, of course, his harmonies are amazing, as usual. The ending of this movement is so powerful.

Indeed, I love this movement too.  Thank you for providing this recording, I never thought I'd hear it played this well so soon, even if it is by a computer.  There could be more of a build up near the ending, but.. wow.  I'm definately beginning learning this movement soon now. 

What other movements have you done in GPO?

[JCarey]

The only other movement I've finished is the Introito, but I have a good start on most of them.

[lostinidlewonder]

Awesome computer recording.

https://www.foxall.com.au/users/mje/OpusClav.htm

Might help you fix some errors in the score.