Opus Clavicembalisticum - Have your say...

[Ruro]

Sorry to barge in on this thread again, but Mr Carey! Can I borrow you a moment?

I can't email or PM you, you keep yourself well sealed from junk mail Good choice.

Anyway, we were talking about making the OC into a midi, I finaly aquired software which can do it, and I almost finished the Second Cadenza now. Since it's in "noteworthy composer", can your Garriton Orchestra open a *.NWC file and playback, and record this like with your Fantasia?

I love the Fantasia since you released that recording, and frankly it totally whoops Madges, I can't get enough of it... which in ways is sorta shameful since it's computerised, but still sounds mightily impressive!

And yeah, making it a midi is probably a waste of time cause of Mr Powell, but I love Concerto Cadenza's, and with plenty of time on my hands, devoting my time to one of the OC ones would be cool And hear something else other then the Madge Massacre O_o

AND LOL, this thread has had 4 posts while I wrote this, god this is active crazy Another Fantasie Impromptu here, lol. ROFL, I took the 3rd page

[JCarey]

https://pianochat.proboards25.com/index.cgi?board=recs&action=display&thread=1128371974

My review of Madge's recording, and Etude's comparison.

I encourage all Sorabji-ites to join this forum!

[prometheus]

Powell hasn't recorded the OC yet. He has performed it a few times (three times?). As it stands at this moment he will very probably record it in the not so near future. He wants to perform it at least 10 times live. If you use the search option you will find some messages he posted here regarding Sorabji and the OC.

I am afraid xvimbi hasn't got the time to read and reply to all three of our replies on his post. We are probably right, but we all jumped on him, accidentally though. That didn't turn out very polite.

Ruro, I don't think GPO works as easy as just importing the file and playing it back/exporting it as an audio file. Maybe it is possible, but this does not use the full power of the software. Detailled dynamics need to be added manually. As least that is my impression of its workings.

[JCarey]

Sorry to barge in on this thread again, but Mr Carey! Can I borrow you a moment?

I can't email or PM you, you keep yourself well sealed from junk mail Good choice.

Anyway, we were talking about making the OC into a midi, I finaly aquired software which can do it, and I almost finished the Second Cadenza now. Since it's in "noteworthy composer", can your Garriton Orchestra open a *.NWC file and playback, and record this like with your Fantasia?

I love the Fantasia since you released that recording, and frankly it totally whoops Madges, I can't get enough of it... which in ways is sorta shameful since it's computerised, but still sounds mightily impressive!

And yeah, making it a midi is probably a waste of time cause of Mr Powell, but I love Concerto Cadenza's, and with plenty of time on my hands, devoting my time to one of the OC ones would be cool And hear something else other then the Madge Massacre O_o

AND LOL, this thread has had 4 posts while I wrote this, god this is active crazy Another Fantasie Impromptu here, lol. ROFL, I took the 3rd page

This may be a bit tough... try saving it as a standard MIDI file and emailing it to me. I can then open it with Finale and take a stab at making a decent recording with GPO.

It's nice to see others involved with this project. 

[Etude]

Sorry to barge in on this thread again, but Mr Carey! Can I borrow you a moment?

I can't email or PM you, you keep yourself well sealed from junk mail Good choice.

Anyway, we were talking about making the OC into a midi, I finaly aquired software which can do it, and I almost finished the Second Cadenza now. Since it's in "noteworthy composer", can your Garriton Orchestra open a *.NWC file and playback, and record this like with your Fantasia?

I love the Fantasia since you released that recording, and frankly it totally whoops Madges, I can't get enough of it... which in ways is sorta shameful since it's computerised, but still sounds mightily impressive!

And yeah, making it a midi is probably a waste of time cause of Mr Powell, but I love Concerto Cadenza's, and with plenty of time on my hands, devoting my time to one of the OC ones would be cool And hear something else other then the Madge Massacre O_o

AND LOL, this thread has had 4 posts while I wrote this, god this is active crazy Another Fantasie Impromptu here, lol. ROFL, I took the 3rd page

Well it IS Sorabji.  

I don't think a computer version would be a waste of time.  Jonathan Powell actually STATED on this forum, that he doesn't plan to record it for a few more years.  Computerized recording of OC could be done far before then.

This may be a bit tough... try saving it as a standard MIDI file and emailing it to me. I can then open it with Finale and take a stab at making a decent recording with GPO.

It's nice to see others involved with this project.

I might not be able to get GPO.  Then again I might.  If it goes ok with Cadezna II, I'll get started right away!  I think we should plan which movements we are doing.

But the variations are MINE!!!!

[JCarey]

But the variations are MINE!!!!

Which ones? I'd like to do a few too. 

[Etude]

CAn I do the vars and you the passacaglia?

[prometheus]

Since everyone is doing something. Could I do a part in finale 2005? Would that be helpful?

[Etude]

Sure, assuming Cadenza II goes okay in transfer to GPO

We need to work out who's doing what.

I think John's got Introito, Toccata, and Coda-Stretta going.  And if he wants to take it on, the PASSACAGLIA.

I'm going to do the Variations, and maybe Cadenza I.

Fancy having a go at one of the Fugues?

[Etude]

NWC doesn't have the capacity for complex cross-rhythms, so this could limit for some without a more powerful notation program, the movements they can do.

[prometheus]

You know I prefer fugues.

Can we get a topic with guidelines and an overview of the project somewhere? I am registering at the piano chat forum.

[Etude]

Glad to hear that.

I'll create a topic now.

[JCarey]

I would love to do the Passacaglia. Hell, I'd love to do the variations too, but you can have them. 

I'm not interested in doing the fugues. Prometheus, if you could do them, that would be wonderful!

This might actually work out. Let's get to work right away!

[Etude]

I've made a topic here.

If we need one over at piano chat, so be it, but all important posts need to be replicated here in case anyone involved doesn't visit PC.

[xvimbi]

I am afraid xvimbi hasn't got the time to read and reply to all three of our replies on his post. We are probably right, but we all jumped on him, accidentally though. That didn't turn out very polite.

That's quite alright. I did participate in discussing the merits of the OC in the past. It wasn't always a pretty sight. I still haven't gotten an answer from Powell what he thinks the OC brought to the development of music.

It is just amazing to me how much discussion a piece like the OC invokes that nobody can hear in an authentic version, because there is no such recording, nobody can play it to check it out, and a MIDI certainly won't do the piece justice either.

There are plenty of pieces out there that would fit that bill, so what is the deal with the OC? It can't be argued - well, to be politically correct I should say, I believe that there is clearly an attraction to be simply different as stated before many times. The OC by now almost is a counter-culture; a path away from Beethoven, Mozart, Liszt, etc.

I do talk about these things with pianists around me, including performing artists. So far, everyone of those has said the OC doesn't interest them at all (and it's not because they don't have the technical skills). I take it that certain pianists see Sorabji as a niche in which they can make a name for themselves, because the traditional turf is too crowded. There is nothing wrong with that either.

Oh well, I think I'll just go back to playing my boring Mozart sonatas.

[xvimbi]

Wow, how you guys shift your focus around is really awsome. I would have expected a flurry of posts after my last one. Instead, you guys are all gone to another thread.

That isn't really true. People get an entirely false impression of the character of the piece based on Madge and Ogden's recordings. It sounds monotonous and random. And neither of those descriptions fit the piece when played correctly (I know this because of the work I have done entering the piece, note by note, into Finale 2006)

I remember, certain Sorabjians making an OC recording available for download on this forum, saying that people should listen to it what a great work it is and how fantastic it is. Now, they are saying that this same recording is not able to reveal the character of the piece. Words such as 'disgusting' are thrown around when talking about the available recordings. What's up with that?

Here is my prediction: you guys will have fun with it for a while, then you will move on to something else. At this point, Sorabji is something different from what everyone else is doing, and that is what probably counts the most. I'd be surprised you guys will be as enthusiastic about Sorabji in twenty years as you seem to be now. I would guess all of you are below or around the age of 20. I've gone through a few fads in my life, and I know that I didn't stick with a single one of the more extreme ones. That doesn't mean it was wasted time. On the contrary, it was very helpful for my development overall. Let's talk again in 20 years. Perhaps, it is you who need to "see the light" and not those who don't find Sorabji that great. For now, have fun with it.

[thalbergmad]

Wow, how you guys shift your focus around is really awsome. I would have expected a flurry of posts after my last one. Instead, you guys are all gone to another thread.

I remember, certain Sorabjians making an OC recording available for download on this forum, saying that people should listen to it what a great work it is and how fantastic it is. Now, they are saying that this same recording is not able to reveal the character of the piece. Words such as 'disgusting' are thrown around when talking about the available recordings. What's up with that?

Here is my prediction: you guys will have fun with it for a while, then you will move on to something else. At this point, Sorabji is something different from what everyone else is doing, and that is what probably counts the most. I'd be surprised you guys will be as enthusiastic about Sorabji in twenty years as you seem to be now. I would guess all of you are below or around the age of 20. I've gone through a few fads in my life, and I know that I didn't stick with a single one of the more extreme ones. That doesn't mean it was wasted time. On the contrary, it was very helpful for my development overall. Let's talk again in 20 years. Perhaps, it is you who need to "see the light" and not those who don't find Sorabji that great. For now, have fun with it.

You live dangerously.

Excellent post.

[perfect_pitch]

You know me and Contrapunctus speak the truth....   

[arch0wl]

I, for one, am looking forward to the MIDI with much excitement.

[bernhard]

I prefer the word "Sorabjian".   

I can easily see this finding its way into some Star Trek episode:

-   Captain Pickard! A Sorabjian vessel has just uncloaked and it is sending a distress signal!
-   Salute them number one, but keep shields up, these Sorabjians are a pretty treacherous lot!
-   Ay, Sir!

(The Enterprise is hit by a massive chord progression)

-   Damage control, Mr Data?
-   It was certainly a tonal chord, Sir, and I believe its thick maximal texture eluded our shields. Now half of the crew is hopelessly mesmerised by it, while the other half is trying hard to resist…

To be continued…
 

[xvimbi]

I can easily see this finding its way into some Star Trek episode:

-   Captain Pickard! A Sorabjian vessel has just uncloaked and it is sending a distress signal!
-   Salute them number one, but keep shields up, these Sorabjians are a pretty treacherous lot!
-   Ay, Sir!

(The Enterprise is hit by a massive chord progression)

-   Damage control, Mr Data?
-   It was certainly a tonal chord, Sir, and I believe its thick maximal texture eluded our shields. Now half of the crew is hopelessly mesmerised by it, while the other half is trying hard to resist…

To be continued…
 

Computer> Intruder Alert! Intruder Alert!

Crewman> Cap'n, one of the Sorabjians managed to slip through our harmonic frequency filters. He was sighted on deck forteen, but immediately split into three staffs and is now drowning out our audio-sensory systems.

Pickard> It's worse than I thought. Any ideas, Number One?

Data> Sir, if I may say...

Voice from the background> He's dead, Jim.

Pickard> I have heard this before, but where? It seems the Sorabjians are able to resurrect ancient fugal patterns with long forgotten Mixolydian tonalities. I may have to initiate the self-destruct sequence.

Worf> I could just hit them in the middle register.

Pickard> Mr. Worf, a more subtle approach is warranted here. (Worf grunts)

Data> Sir, I believe if we augment our key modulators and send out a perfectly pitched contrupuntal tritone, we might be able to confuse their key color detectors. That should deflect their quintuplets and incapacitate their second inversions.

Pickard> Go ahead, Mr. Data!
 
(Loud explosion)

Sorabjian> whee, whee, whee (scuddles away leaving blotches of low-pitched tremolos)

Pickard> Well done, Mr. Data! I guess we can now relax again and continue to explore this galaxy.

Crewman> Cap'n, sensors have just picked up a Xentakissian Battlecruiser.

Pickard> Darn! Red alert!

(to be continued...)

[Etude]

I can easily see this finding its way into some Star Trek episode:

-   Captain Pickard! A Sorabjian vessel has just uncloaked and it is sending a distress signal!
-   Salute them number one, but keep shields up, these Sorabjians are a pretty treacherous lot!
-   Ay, Sir!

(The Enterprise is hit by a massive chord progression)

-   Damage control, Mr Data?
-   It was certainly a tonal chord, Sir, and I believe its thick maximal texture eluded our shields. Now half of the crew is hopelessly mesmerised by it, while the other half is trying hard to resist…

To be continued…
 

That is pure genius bernhard!   

I, for one, am looking forward to the MIDI with much excitement.

You will be getting no MIDI.  You will be getting a high quality GPO recording, made by me, JCarey (who will hopefully be converting our MIDI files to GPO recorded mp3 files, Prometheus, and Ruro (possibly, not sure his program, NWC, can cope with the second cadenza).

I remember, certain Sorabjians making an OC recording available for download on this forum, saying that people should listen to it what a great work it is and how fantastic it is. Now, they are saying that this same recording is not able to reveal the character of the piece. Words such as 'disgusting' are thrown around when talking about the available recordings. What's up with that?

Now for the serious stuff.

We didn't know the character of the piece.  We never questioned the accuracy of the recording.  We just assumed it was correct, as it is traditional for a pianist to play the right notes in a performance of a work for the instrument.  Madge is a fraud, okay, I've read an interview with him, he pretends he knows what the hell he's talking about when in reality his performance is almost entirely a fake.

I like listening to Avant-garde music occasionally.  I even listen to Cage prepared piano pieces, and I was quite into Penderecki's famous "Threnody" near the time.  So, the apparent dissonance of Opus Clavicembalisticum didn't put me off at all.  I just thought it was this amazing, incredibly detailed piece.  The length disturbed me at first, after I listened to the first movement, and started on the second.  The second movement is around 13 minutes on his recording.  That was a long time for a piece of music for me then.  And that goes on for 12 movements I thought.  Then I saw that some movements lasted up to three quarters of an hour!  (Interludium Primum).  I wondered how anyone could take it all in in one go!  So, I decided to get to know a few seperate movements.  The Fantasia being one.  It struck me as odd that Sorabji broke into streams of catastrophic tone clusters at the end of almost every movement, often after being relatively calm for the better part.  I saw this happen in Fuga I, Fantasia, Fuga II, Coda-Stretta.  Then (although I assumed so before) I read on this forum that he accurately notated every cluster in OC.  I thought, "this is surely the hardest piece, what a nightmare this must be to perform, it must take about a day just to work out the notes in each phrase."  

Then Jonathan Powell came along and said, "I would advise no one to judge the merits of the piece (whatever they may be...) on the strength of the two available recordings, simply because they are both hugely inaccurate.  I strove to learn all the notes, and in my humble opinion, the piece doesn't sound random and ridiculous (which it does on those recordings)."  Now I didn't think it would be this bad.  I thought, "So Madge and Ogdon don't play the clusters with the exact notes Sorabji wrote?"  I didn't even imagine the piece could be tonal in any way, I just thought the pianists were taking shortcuts round what seemed unnecessary detail, how could a tone cluster sound different when it consists of different notes (around the same general area.)  This was supported by a post I read saying something like, "Some composers just right a line between two notes and you're supposed to fill them in.  Sorabji is like this, but he writes the notes in."  I assumed Madge and Ogdon followed the score as if the former technique was used.  

When I finally got the score, I thought, "wow, this is it.... oh, that's what the opening of the Fantasia looks like..." I try to play the opening of the Fantasia... "Hm... This doesn't sound like the recording at all... Hm... maybe I'm not interpreting it right"... I look through more of the score... "Hey, where are all these huge clusters I've been told about!?"...  I never find them... "Oh look, the Coda-Stretta is written in parts!"...  I look at the last flurry of notes before the final G sharp minor chords... "Where it that ascending splash of clusters I hear in the recording?"... I look at the top of page 250... "What's going on?  I simply can't see how this can correspond to what I hear in the recording"... I want to see these seven stave systems I heard about... I look through the entire score for them... There are no seven stave systems.  I thought maybe the opening of the Coda-Stretta would have seven staves.  It did of course, have these upward rushes of scales in the left hand along with the huge chords and highly active parts in each hand...  But no... I have been lied to...

But I attributed all these problems, these discrepancies between the score and the Madge recording, for quite some time, to Mr. Madge's terrible nerves, which he must have had, no doubt, at the concert, simply not being able to cope and playing many wrong notes.  Then the idea that Madge - IMPROVISED - some sections of Opus Clavicembalisticum was initially suggested here, by JCarey (known then as Ludwig Van Rachabji) when he said, he saw in some places that he was improvising.  Some places, I thought.  He plays many many wrong notes throughout his performances, and resorts to extemporising in some rare instances.  

Note quite true.  I thought this was because of his nerves at his performance of what was likely to be the longest and most difficult piano piece ever published.  Only when JCarey told me, "listen to 5:06 on the Coda-Stretta.  What a joke!", did I realise it.  What.  A.  Joke.  He made up lots of sections of OC, simply playing what he wanted whenever the music got extremely difficult and went onto four staves.  And I continued, thinking he still played the majority of it decently.  That would be letting him get away with far more than he deserved to.  I began to notice gradually that the vast majority of his performance was completely faked.  EVEN when he sounds like he's playing the right notes.  I found fairly recently in the last two months that he has a way of hiding the lines he makes up behind simpler lines which he plays the notes in. 

When JCarey set up his thread with comparisons between the Madge recording, and a computerised version, I found another improvised section that I overlooked, and I think the day before I noticed that the (supposed to be) faster section on page 25 was also faked, as well as the bit before it.  I commented on it here, which perhaps caused JCarey to include the section in his comparisons.  At some point I obtained the Ogdon recording of Opus Clavicembalisticum, and from listening to just the Fantasia (one of my favourite movements) which was terribly rushed, and highly inaccurate, I thought perhaps the Ogdon recording was worse than the Madge recording.  Ha! 

Once I started discovering just how bad the Madge recording was (Coda-Stretta - 5:06) I retracted the statement I made here declaring it so.  For a while now, I have been stressing the importance of not judging the Opus Clavicembalisticum by either the Madge or the Ogdon recording.  I don't, like another member, consider hearing the Madge recording, hearing Opus Clavicembalisticum.  And no one else should.  I could stand it if it was correct, I remember I quite liked some movements of Madge's recording before I knew, but it isn't correct and it has driven people away from OC in the past.  Although I can see some people do genuinely dislike the concept of the piece, which I don't mind.  As long as they acknowledge other people's opinions like the 'Sorabjians', I will acknowledge theirs. 

[prometheus]

You guys forgot the: "There is too much interference..." line.

[Etude]

Well, better get back to the variations after all that typing. 

[xvimbi]

Once I started discovering just how bad the Madge recording was (Coda-Stretta - 5:06) I retracted the statement I made here declaring it so.  For a while now, I have been stressing the importance of not judging the Opus Clavicembalisticum by either the Madge or the Ogdon recording.  I don't, like another member, consider hearing the Madge recording, hearing Opus Clavicembalisticum.  And no one else should.  I could stand it if it was correct, I remember I quite liked some movements of Madge's recording before I knew, but it isn't correct and it has driven people away from OC in the past.  Although I can see some people do genuinely dislike the concept of the piece, which I don't mind.  As long as they acknowledge other people's opinions like the 'Sorabjians', I will acknowledge theirs. 

That's an excellent account.

I do however remember the times before these discrepancies were introduced to this forum. The OC was advertised as a milestone of music history, and everyone should check it out and listen to the recordings. Some members did listen to it (I did), and some wrote back saying that it's just a bunch of notes, others said it's garbage. You should read through those old posts and see how the Sorabjians reacted. Being called 'ignorant' was one of the more harmless attributes. Now we learn that in fact the recordings were garbage, and that it was all a big mistake, and that we should either wait for Powell's recording, or buy the score and check it out for ourselves.

This whole earlier discussion pretty much polarized the two camps, unnecessarily it seems. We should then probably defer all further discussion until we have an authentic version in our hands.

[JCarey]

Here is my prediction: you guys will have fun with it for a while, then you will move on to something else. At this point, Sorabji is something different from what everyone else is doing, and that is what probably counts the most. I'd be surprised you guys will be as enthusiastic about Sorabji in twenty years as you seem to be now. I would guess all of you are below or around the age of 20. I've gone through a few fads in my life, and I know that I didn't stick with a single one of the more extreme ones. That doesn't mean it was wasted time. On the contrary, it was very helpful for my development overall. Let's talk again in 20 years. Perhaps, it is you who need to "see the light" and not those who don't find Sorabji that great. For now, have fun with it.

Would you tell that to Michael Habermann or Jonathan Powell? Why do you assume that our enjoyment of Sorabji's music is a "fad"? Why do you assume that we only enjoy Sorabji's music because it's "different from what everyone else is doing"? In 20 years, I'll be 44 years old, and I doubt I'll enjoy Sorabji's music less that I do now. Do you know why Sorabji happens to be one of my favorite composers? Because I find his music beautiful and enjoyable to listen to. Imagine that.

I was once fooled by the Madge recording. If you look at some of my posts from way back when, you can see that. But the point is, I know better now, and things I said in the past are not important anymore.

[Etude]

This whole earlier discussion pretty much polarized the two camps, unnecessarily it seems. We should then probably defer all further discussion until we have an authentic version in our hands.

I'm actually quite impressed.  I've seen how many more people have come to like Sorabji's music, regardless of performance quality.  We've gone from last year when at the most, three or four people liked it, having good things to say about Sorabji, and most other members were either indifferent, silent, or absolutely despised it.

Here are the quotes I selected which I posted in JCarey's Madge thread:

These first ones are from JCCCF:

Well, I have to admit, I'm not particularly fond of Sorabji's music either... it's just too out there for me. I think there is too much "banging" on the piano, and not enough slow, melodic parts. I own the Madge recording of the OC, and haven't listened to it all the way through, but I'm not sure I want to.

I once bought a CD of the OC...

It sounded like crap. 

I tend to like his earlier stuff better, but hey, I have nothing against the OC. It is a bit too loud and violent for my liking

Ok, I can't claim to understand this guy's music. What I have heard of it sounds pretty much like organized chaos.

And on this forum....

THis thread is almost as annoying and tiresome as listening to Sorabji....

hay guyz look sorabji sux ok lolol blah blah blah etc.

I think clavicembalisticum is the stupidest pointless piece of crap ever recorded

I just think this is a very stupid piece of work, why spend all this time studying and recording such meaningless work, yes I have heard it, no I dont own the records.

i have the score and madge's rec of the opclav

and im like what

 

But I had a very high expection on the OC before, after spending hours to find it, and finally get to hear it... Spent me these many hours to listen.

Except the first 20 mins I was surised that someone can play these many notes and in a such a random rhythm at the same time, i don't feel much.

After this feeling wear off, I have to keep myself concentrated on score so I won't be lost, and I am starting to feel numb of these completely black sheet of music. It's just not fun or interesting or anything anymore. It's just plain annoying.

In my opinion, I don't think it's a good piece. Because for these many notes and these many hours of concentration on this music, I feel it has awfully little thing or musical ideas to offer me, it's pretty blatant, and not very creative (except all these condensed bunch of notes.) It feels like Sorabji just randomly splashed those notes onto the sheet and ask other people to play it. I am quite curious what was the response and how many right notes the composer hitted when he gave the first debut recital of this piece. And quite frankly, I don't think he cared about how many right notes he hitted, because it's impossible and pointless to hit the 'right' notes, as they were never intended to be play 'correctly'. It was just intended to increase the reputation of the composer because he has composed the most impossible piece of piano work in the human history. Bravo Sorabji!

Listened to some of OC.

Sounded like crap...

The best part of it is the wonderful silence that envelopes the listener after 4+ hours of cacophonous torture.

There is probably no [point], but to make it so hard, that only the finest pianists could play it ! I never heard it, so i don't know if those gigantic pieces sound good, but i just want to see how d**n hard they are!!

I don't want to disappoint you but I've heard the third mvmt. of the opus and it's pure garbage. 

i think we need to have the word "Clavicemballisticum" banned from this site

BTW my new plan is to compose a 24hr work.  If anyone calls it crap, I'll simply accuse them of not listening to it.  If they've done that, I'll say that it needs repeated listens to be appreciated, and if they still persist in their criticisms, I can simply respond that the recording that they listened to is unfaithful to the score.  Of course all recordings will be unfaithful to the score, as this piece will be impossibly difficult.  My plan is bulletproof.

   

The amount of abuse OC receives publicly on these forums has, from my point of view, decreased dramatically since that time, with only the odd few people, only about two people in this thread, believing it to be plain fact that it is a very bad composition.

This discussion has shown how much we have moved on from those times, when we thought the recordings were correct. 

[xvimbi]

Would you tell that to Michael Habermann or Jonathan Powell? Why do you assume that our enjoyment of Sorabji's music is a "fad"? Why do you assume that we only enjoy Sorabji's music because it's "different from what everyone else is doing"? In 20 years, I'll be 44 years old, and I doubt I'll enjoy Sorabji's music less that I do now. Do you know why Sorabji happens to be one of my favorite composers? Because I find his music beautiful and enjoyable to listen to. Imagine that.

I am assuming that, because, as I said, I went through similar experiences, and I have seen many other people doing things like that. It is my experience that most of those activities are indeed fads. This is not a personal attack, as you might think it is. This is simply the voice of experience talking here. It's like talking to a son who is entirely enthralled in motorbikes, believing that he would never be able to do anything else for the rest of his life, trying to convince everybody around him that it's the best thing since sliced bread, only to find out that after a while interest fades, and  something else comes along. Thus, I would not be surprised at all if, in 20 years, you would look back to your "Sorabji times" and chuckle, while you pat your son smiling at his newfound love - the motorbike!

[Etude]

Sorabji devoted his life, to his music.  His mature style, it wasn't just a fad for him, was it?

[JCarey]

I am assuming that, because, as I said, I went through similar experiences, and I have seen many other people doing things like that. It is my experience that most of those activities are indeed fads. This is not a personal attack, as you might think it is. This is simply the voice of experience talking here. It's like talking to a son who is entirely enthralled in motorbikes, believing that he would never be able to do anything else for the rest of his life, trying to convince everybody around him that it's the best thing since sliced bread, only to find out that after a while interest fades, and  something else comes along. Thus, I would not be surprised at all if, in 20 years, you would look back to your "Sorabji times" and chuckle, while you pat your son smiling at his newfound love - the motorbike!

I guess we'll see in 20 years then.

Keep in mind that other people probably said the same things about fans of Debussy, Ravel, and late Beethoven.

[xvimbi]

Sorabji devoted his life, to his music.  His mature style, it wasn't just a fad for him, was it?

That's actually quite funny: can someone's own life be a fad for oneself?

[arch0wl]

You will be getting no MIDI.  You will be getting a high quality GPO recording, made by me, JCarey (who will hopefully be converting our MIDI files to GPO recorded mp3 files, Prometheus, and Ruro (possibly, not sure his program, NWC, can cope with the second cadenza).

Why not a MIDI file? You could submit it to classicalmidiconnection.com and turn more people onto Sorabji. Also, for some people like me, it's easier to analyze through MIDI.

[perfect_pitch]

We should stop these threads - THIS PIECE - TELL US WHAT YOU THINK!!! - Because one, they will always have their critics (I KNOW - Like me.... You don't need to say it), and whenever you have someone saying that they like this piece, you'll always have someone saying differently (I know - like me again) and these threads are used to entice people like me to go nuts and say 'everyones an idiot for liking it' etc... They entice people to show their ugly side and they are just created to spark controversy... And I can prove this...

How many times have there been Lang Lang threads....?   I rest my case.

People create these threads to heighten peoples aggressive sides and to have people take sides as if in competition. The person who created this thread MUST have know that this was going to turn out into a Verbal Wrestling match between the 'Classicalists' and the '20th Centuryists'... If he didn't, then he can't have been paying too much attention on these forums.

I say we put certain things to rest and vow never to speak of them again.... Only because we already know what people think of them, because they have been discussed 100 times before... and the list is...

Lang Lang
Opus Clavicembalisticum (For once I hope I spelled the bloody thing)
and little knick knacks like that...



Hows about a truce??? We all go our seperate ways???

[leahcim]

We should stop these threads

Why not just ignore them?

I look at it like this, if there's a certain type of post / thread I don't like, then the only thing I can do to stop them is not make them. As for other people's posts, sure I can moan about them, have an opinion about them, read them or ignore them - but ultimately I have no control over those posts, even if I post "Stop making these threads", but that's just another class of posts that someone, somewhere won't like - the only posts I can do anything about the content of, are the ones I post.

[perfect_pitch]

Why not just ignore them...?

Because they're created to incite anger and debate from everyone... Thats why.

If I put Helfgott is great thread... You'll have people from all over the place who want to put their two cents in and tell me better...

They are created to stir people up, and thats why. Their only goal is to get people (dickwads - like me unfortunately) to react and pregnant dog about everything.



They're created to annoy... Basically.   

[leahcim]

So what do you want to do?

There are 5 things

(a) moderation - everyone can't do that and it's not wise to do it - see my previous post for the alternative that everyone / anyone can do. This would solve the personal gripes / issues of whoever is the mod because in that way you would have control over other posts and threads - [except your own because you've effectively said you have no control over them] -  but if you can't control what you already have the facility to, it's not a good basis to be granted more facility, so you wouldn't be a good choice of mod anyway which leads to

(b) Beg a current mod to see your pov. But equally, lack of self-control isn't a good basis for the removal of threads and posts of others.

(c) Asking for a "truce" - which won't work because you've said you can't control your own posting and there must be at least one other who will post a thread you don't like that can't either or a future newcomer who won't be party to your agreement. Besides it implies doing what I said  - except what I suggested involves you doing something and the others too - rather than saying "truce" where you effectively mean you want others to stop doing something for your benefit

(d) Have loads of threads that switch to this debate instead - arguing about the motives and point of the thread and who should do what.

(e) Do what I said before.

[prometheus]

So we aren't allowed to mention Sorabji because it offends Mr. Perfect Pitch because of his utter megalomania?

Funny thing he tries to create a 'classicalists vs 20th centurist'-proxy cover for his reasoning. Lets not forget Mr. Perfect Pitch doesn't like Bach either because he finds it 'too bland'. What would he have to say about Mozart?

This is not a 'classicalist vs 20th century'-discussion. This isn't about music This is Mr. Pefect Pitch's close mindendness, hate, arrogance and bigotry vs everyone he can offend. But I wonder, where does all this bitterness and hate come from?

He seems to be hanging onto this gambit: either he gets banned or Sorabji gets cencored off these forums. Pick your sides.

[perfect_pitch]

rather than saying "truce" where you effectively mean you want others to stop doing something for your benefit

YES - EVERYBODY SHOULD BOW DOWN TO ME!!!!

(Is that what you expected me to say leachim.... You couldn't be more wrong...)

I'm sure EVERYBODY is sick of going into this argument... Not just me and you.

[leahcim]

(Is that what you expected me to say leachim)

Not at all - I just see that you want others to stop making some threads and in return you won't reply in threads that wouldn't exist so you couldn't anyway Nothing as extreme as demanding servitude or worship.

Perhaps some of your difficulty with the threads is also caused by only being able to perceive extremes?

Good luck with the quest anyway.

[pseudopianist]

This thread moves way to fast for me.

I have a question tho.

I got a hold of Ogdon's OC a month ago and I've been listening to it quite a lot and I like it except some movements (like his Intrio and Fantasia) but what are exacatly are the problems with the recording except the extrem tempi and dynmanics? Are there also alot of faked parts like Madge?

And what do you people think of Habermans recording of the first 2 movements? Best I've heard so far, esp the 2nd movement.

[Etude]

This thread moves way to fast for me.

I have a question tho.

I got a hold of Ogdon's OC a month ago and I've been listening to it quite a lot and I like it except some movements (like his Intrio and Fantasia) but what are exacatly are the problems with the recording except the extrem tempi and dynmanics? Are there also alot of faked parts like Madge?

And what do you people think of Habermans recording of the first 2 movements? Best I've heard so far, esp the 2nd movement.

No, Ogdon definately doesn't fake many parts of the OC, but there are nevertheless many wrong notes. 

Habermann's recording of the first 2 movements is okay, but aside from playing a few wrong notes, the piano he uses is AWFUL, making it harder to enjoy when listening to. 

Why not a MIDI file? You could submit it to classicalmidiconnection.com and turn more people onto Sorabji. Also, for some people like me, it's easier to analyze through MIDI.

MIDI has no chance of producing a decent recording of OC, trust me, using sibelius to make a MIDI of the variations (to begin with, John will hopefully be able to convert it to a GPO recording), which I started last night  , the sound is absolutely terrible.  That's why a GPO recording will be far superior to MIDI, even if it will reach more people at www.classicalmidiconnection.com.

[vladhorwz]

I think we need to discuss how Lang Lang would play Opus Clavicembalisticum

[JCarey]

...and these threads are used to entice people like me to go nuts and say 'everyones an idiot for liking it' etc...

No they aren't. 

They entice people to show their ugly side and they are just created to spark controversy... And I can prove this...

This is only because of your own lack of maturity. Just because you can't control yourself because you are an adolescent male, most likely in your mid teens (I don't believe for a second that you're over the age of 15) doesn't mean that everyone else has to suddenly stop discussing things they wish to discuss. Welcome to the real world, where the earth doesn't revolve around you!

How many times have there been Lang Lang threads....?   I rest my case.

What is your case, exactly? That people create Lang Lang threads to "entice" people? Don't you realize how stupid that sounds?

People create these threads to heighten peoples aggressive sides and to have people take sides as if in competition.

Once again, that's pretty stupid.

The person who created this thread MUST have know that this was going to turn out into a Verbal Wrestling match between the 'Classicalists' and the '20th Centuryists'... If he didn't, then he can't have been paying too much attention on these forums.

First of all, when the word "know" follows the word "have", us English-speakers like to add an N at the end of it. And maybe the person who started this topic assumed that members of this forum were mature enough to express their opinions without making statements such as "This thread should be burned as well as the moron who started it," and turning to personal attacks and insults. I guess he was mistaken.

I say we put certain things to rest and vow never to speak of them again.... Only because we already know what people think of them, because they have been discussed 100 times before...

Maybe certain people enjoy talking about it. And if you have a problem with that, just ignore the threads.

Hows about a truce??? We all go our seperate ways???

Sounds like a good idea. Here's the agreement - we won't attack you if you don't attack us.

So we aren't allowed to mention Sorabji because it offends Mr. Perfect Pitch because of his utter megalomania?

Funny thing he tries to create a 'classicalists vs 20th centurist'-proxy cover for his reasoning. Lets not forget Mr. Perfect Pitch doesn't like Bach either because he finds it 'too bland'. What would he have to say about Mozart?

This is not a 'classicalist vs 20th century'-discussion. This isn't about music This is Mr. Pefect Pitch's close mindendness, hate, arrogance and bigotry vs everyone he can offend. But I wonder, where does all this bitterness and hate come from?

He seems to be hanging onto this gambit: either he gets banned or Sorabji gets cencored off these forums. Pick your sides.

Good post.

[chopiabin]

I don't really know that much about the OC, but, from what I've heard from it and about it, I think I'm alright without it. It seems a little too overblown and too individual to be connected with by many people. I mean, doesn't it seem kind of inefficient to have to take 4.5 hours to express a musical idea? It's pretty much impossible to play, so is it even really worthy of a listen? Well, anyway.... Idunno.

[pianoperfmajor]

This topic has been over-discussed and is a waste of time and space.

[JCarey]

This topic has been over-discussed and is a waste of time and space.

Only to people who aren't interested in the topic but read it anyway, for whatever reason.

[mrchops10]

I mean, doesn't it seem kind of inefficient to have to take 4.5 hours to express a musical idea? It's pretty much impossible to play, so is it even really worthy of a listen? Well, anyway.... Idunno.

Sorry, I know nothing about the topic, but 150 years ago couldn't you have replaced the 4.5 hours with 45 minutes and perfectly described Hammerklavier? Just a thought.

[prometheus]

Pop songs still have to be 2 and a half minutes in terms of best lenght for hit potentional.

My personal preference for a lenght of a piece has varied during the years. I always thought a real good piece had to be more than 6 minutes. Then a little more than 10 minutes seemed a good lenght. Then 20 minutes. I think now it is probably 25-35 minutes. Fourty is a bit long.

Of course 4 hours is way too long in terms of practical considerations. But that doesn't mean we should ignore the music because it is too long. That would be stupid. We have to accept it as it is. It would be a big preconception to ignore music that doesn't fit our strict rules.

Lets say I think every piece of music that is less than 15 minutes isn't worth my time. Lets ignore the actual reasoning behind it. Wouldn't that be silly.

[contrapunctus]

I don't understand modern music in general, why can't they just compose a piece of music with a melody and a harmony in any eight tone scale. I mean it's worked for centuries and it's really simple stuff.

[mrchops10]

I don't understand modern music in general, why can't they just compose a piece of music with a melody and a harmony in any eight tone scale. I mean it's worked for centuries and it's really simple stuff.

Well once again, I can't really defend the OC, but I will fight for modern music. You are really far too simplistic...what is melody and what is harmony? These definitions have changed over the ages. Modern music also has melody and harmony, but it understands melody and harmony differently than before, just as Beethoven did.

Lets say I think every piece of music that is less than 15 minutes isn't worth my time. Lets ignore the actual reasoning behind it. Wouldn't that be silly.

Excellent point.