NEW SORABJI WEBSITE

[ahinton]

We are delighted to announce that, thanks to the excellent hard work of Vasilios Tsokis, Frazer Jarvis and John Wagstaffe, the new Sorabji website is finally up and running.

The URL is www.sorabji-archive.co.uk

Enjoy!

[thalbergmad]

Much nicer than the old one.

Great to have a list of recordings/performers.

Damn fine work.

Thal

[ahinton]

Much nicer than the old one.

Great to have a list of recordings/performers.

*** fine work.

Thal

Many thanks - which are, incidentally, due to those who spent so long putting it all together.

I very much hope that interested parties on this forum will find it useful.

Best,

Alistair

[nicco]

ahem..

Forum Guidelines

When creating a new topic…

Don't use all caps or special characters to draw attention.

And you of all people Alistair!!

j\k  Good job.

[ahinton]

ahem..

And you of all people Alistair!!

j\k  Good job.

My wrist is duly slapped! I have to confess that I had failed to notice this rule, otherwise I'd not have flouted it! Ah, well...

What do you mean, though - me, "of all people"? I am guilty of making mistakes just like pretty much everyone else!

Anyway - I hope that you and others find it interesting.

Best,

Alistair

[da jake]

Sorabji sux0rz it hard.

[BoliverAllmon]

Sorabji sux0rz it hard.

don't be jealous

[ahinton]

I have to admit that I failed to find

sux0rz

in the Oxford English Dictionary...

Best,

Alistair

[da jake]

His music sucks.

Give the Balakirev Sonata a read and tell me that the music of Balakirev is not a MUCH worthier cause to champion than Sorabji's nonsense.

or even Alkan or Medtner for that matter.

[mephisto]

His music sucks.

Give the Balakirev Sonata a read and tell me that the music of Balakirev is not a MUCH worthier cause to champion than Sorabji's nonsense.

or even Alkan or Medtner for that matter.

How can you say such a thing. I admit that I don`t like all things about Sorabji`s music, but still it doesn`t suck.

[ahinton]

His music sucks.

Give the Balakirev Sonata a read and tell me that the music of Balakirev is not a MUCH worthier cause to champion than Sorabji's nonsense.

How can you say such a thing. I admit that I don't like all things about Sorabji's music, but still it doesn't suck.

Each to their own, of course - though, once again, the comment from "da jake" tells us more about him and the way he chooses to express himself than it does about Sorabji or any of the other composers he mentions.

The Balakirev piano sonata is a fine work, though to suggest and kind of comparison on a value-for-value basis with the works of Sorabji seems to be a complete non-starter. I wonder what Donna Amato would make of this? She has recorded and performed quite a few Sorabji pieces - as well as the Balakirev sonata!

Best,

Alistair

[da jake]

It's a nice website and I wish you the best of luck.

But I have a strong feeling that Sorabji's music - regardless of how well it's performed - will only achieve popularity commensurate with it's inherent musical interest (i.e., very little!)

In the meantime I will concentrate my modest performing future in the revival of the best of dudes like Alkan and Balakirev.

[mephisto]

But I have a strong feeling that Sorabji's music - regardless of how well it's performed - will only achieve popularity commensurate with it's inherent musical interest (i.e., very little!)

You say this after having heard how much or Sorabji`s music?

[ahinton]

It's a nice website and I wish you the best of luck.

Thank you.

But I have a strong feeling that Sorabji's music - regardless of how well it's performed - will only achieve popularity commensurate with it's inherent musical interest (i.e., very little!)

"Mephisto" has already queried the amount of Sorabji's music that you may have experienced which prompts your remark here. I would add only that the question of how much "inherent musical interest" that his - or indeed anyone else's - music may be deemed to have is inevitably a subjective matter for the most part in many cases; were Sorabji's music of as little "inherent musical interest" as you imply it to be, many of the performances and broadcasts given and recordings made to date would simply not have happened, because the performers would have found insufficient interest in the music to justify expending the often very considerable time, trouble and energy to prepare it.

In the meantime I will concentrate my modest performing future in the revival of the best of dudes like Alkan and Balakirev.

Well, good luck to you in your endeavours but, in the meantime, just ask yourself how "popular" Alkan in particular was half a century ago, consider whether some people might at that time have made similar observations about him as you have here about Sorabji and then bear in mind that, fortunately, gifted and inspired performers have nevertheless put Alkan in particular well and truly on the map where he belongs, even if only since that time.

Best,

Alistair

[da jake]

I've heard some Sorabji. I think it is drivel. Then again, Hamelin is not really a very good musician, and his advocacy is not to be taken too seriously. 

Bach was unpopular for a century, until Mendelssohn conducted St. Matthew's Passion to great acclaim.

Schubert's Sonatas were almost unknown until Schnabel started performing them.

However, in the case of Sorabji's music, nothing in his oevre will get any mainstream recognition - because - simply put - nothing stands out as great.

 Produce one interesting, innovative piece of music in this thread and I will retract my comments and apologise.

[baron_von_heimlich]

Produce one interesting, innovative piece of music in this thread and I will retract my comments and apologise.

You mean, produce one interesting, innovative piece of music that YOU like.... never mind what musicologists and top-class performers say... I assume you are one of those, right?

[da jake]

Most of my family, friends, and casual acquaintances seem to agree; I'm pretty cool.

[mephisto]

I've heard some Sorabji. I think it is drivel. Then again, Hamelin is not really a very good musician, and his advocacy is not to be taken too seriously. 

He has perfect-pitch wich makes him very music in the first place. Please tell me what isn`t musical about him?

This and your insane political wiews indicates that you have less than average intelligence.

[ada]

Al

I was previously not particularly well acquainted with Sorabji, so tks! 

I realise there would probably by copyright issues but it would be nice to be able to  download some sound files to listen to.

[baron_von_heimlich]

Ada,

There is a free recording (though not complete) of Sorabji's piece "In the Hothouse" located on the website www.sorabji.com.   Go there, and then click on "Piano music", then scroll down to the sorabji piece.  I'm not sure it's the greatest recording, but it gives you some idea of the music.

[mephisto]

It is complete.

[baron_von_heimlich]

I wasn't sure if it was or not, the last chord seems to be cut off.

[ada]

Ada,

There is a free recording (though not complete) of Sorabji's piece "In the Hothouse" located on the website www.sorabji.com. Go there, and then click on "Piano music", then scroll down to the sorabji piece. I'm not sure it's the greatest recording, but it gives you some idea of the music.

tks!

[baron_von_heimlich]

Oh, Ada, I forgot!

There is another sorabji piece you can listen to online for free - this one is actually a video of a professional pianist and the interpretation is very good (IMO).

Go to www.youtube.com and search for "sorabji" in the search bar.  It should be the second video, the one entitled "Sorabji Pastiche no.2 on the Habanera from Bizet's Carmen".

good luck!

[mephisto]

I wasn't sure if it was or not, the last chord seems to be cut off.

I understand, and you may be right. But I thought you ment that it was just half or the piece or something.

[alzado]

Alistair deserves praise for a fine website.

When I first saw this thread, with approx. 25 posts to it, I knew it would have some heated disagreement to it.  This composer just seems to bring out the worst in some erstwhile critics.

Some months ago I checked out a recording of the Opus Clav. and listened to the entire thing.  Took me about three sessions.  I know the composer did not want people to hear the piece except all at once, but reality creeps in sometimes.

Parts of it were interesting, and others rather fascinating.  The format (3.5 hours nonstop) was not very user friendly, but that was Sorabji's way.

I've pretty much decided that I don't know enough about music to make an intelligent judgement.  Parts of it I liked.  I hope eventually to hear more. 

Persons who have stated that this composer "sucks" or writes "drivel" should force themselves to listen to the entire Opus Clav. without a break.   They might then reconsider.

[mephisto]

Wich recording? Madge or Ogdon?

[da jake]

I'm asking for one piece to be posted, with justification as to why Sorabji merits our attention as a composer. Does he deserve dozens of threads dedicated to his music?

He has perfect-pitch wich makes him very music in the first place. Please tell me what isn`t musical about him?

This and your insane political wiews indicates that you have less than average intelligence.

How does having perfect pitch make someone a good musician? That point doesn't make sense.

How does having an opinion that differs from yours indicate that I have "less than average intelligence"?

 

[mephisto]

I'm asking for one piece to be posted, with justification as to why Sorabji merits our attention as a composer. Does he deserve dozens of threads dedicated to his music?

How does having perfect pitch make someone a good musician? That point doesn't make sense.

How does having an opinion that differs from yours indicate that I have "less than average intelligence"?

 

It is not that you are having another oppinion, as in favourite colour, but how you come to so many insane conclusions.


As for Hamelin, he is a classical pianist. I don`t think that a classical pianist need that good musicality. But I think Hamelin is very musical, because he has perfect-pitch.

What a classical musician need is knowledge, mostly about structure. The best Beethoven pianists have to study the sonata form.
Also a classical pianist needs to know how to prhase and how to play forcefull and soft etc

A jazz pianist and a composer on the other hand, they need musicality. Of course if your goal is to become a classical pianist you have to love music, and has probably been raised up on music, and is therefor very likely to be a musical person. But to just play the piano I don`t think you have to be that muical. Well what is musicality.

I may be completly wrong.

And Sorabji`s music is not allowed to be posted here. Even if I posted some you would say that it was bad. The Sorabji piece in Hamelin`s the composer pianist cd is ver beautifull, but it is a pastiche.

[baron_von_heimlich]

Classical pianists don't need musicality?  What?

[steve_m]

g

[prometheus]

How does having an opinion that differs from yours indicate that I have "less than average intelligence"?

You once made the same argument about education level.

I agree that perfect pitch has nothing to do with being musical.


A small Sorabji sample:
https://212.187.69.100:200/Sorabji%20Preludio-corale.mp3

I do wonder if there is any connection with defending your own country/side, no matter what, in a political debate and trying to enforce your opinion about music on other people. I don't like Mozart, well actually I like him a lot better than I used to do but I just like to use this as an example, but surely he was a great composer and as many people as possible should enjoy his music. Same goes for Sorabji. Why does he have to be mainstream? Some of the best art is 'ivory tower intellectual'-stuff. It may be unreachable for many but it is not arrogant. It is honest craftmanship by people emerged and obsessed by their field of study.
I don't care at what level people enjoy Sorabji, or any other composer, either. If people like the 'pianistic noise' and texture when they listen Sorabji, fine. If people can recogise the actual melodies, fine. If people can actually hear the fugue structure and the contrapunctual devises, fine.

Even that what Sorabji was doing. After working frantically on music scores for 20 years, filling cabinet after cabinet with handwritten sheet music no one had ever heard and no one would probably ever care about, he kept working. He kept improving himself, creating more impressive music, larger pieces, more complex. Why so large and complex? Because that was the music that was inside him. Maybe you don't understand creative energy. Some people need to create for the sake of creation. It doesn't matter if no one ever looks at it or if it is destroyed. These people just need to create because of their love and interest.

Now you are opposing this. That is arrogance, barberism. You want to enforce your small worldview on other people. People that have struggled to expand their mind as far as possible.


So why this crusade, or jihad, against Sorabji? Why aren't people allowed to enjoy him? Why don't you want to enjoy his music?

[JCarey]

So I can still access my account. Anyway, I too would like to take this opportunity to thank those involved with the creation of the new site for a job well done!

Now:

Sorabji sux0rz it hard.

Jake... I have respect for you. What's the point of stirring up controversy here? We've all had our heated Sorabji debates, and they've gotten out of hand on numerous occasions. This thread was not about Sorabji's worth as a composer -- it was merely an announcement about the new Sorabji website, which I believe that those interested should be able to discuss without rude interjections such as yours... your remark wasn't stimulating to the discussion, it was pure trolling.

Give the Balakirev Sonata a read and tell me that the music of Balakirev is not a MUCH worthier cause to champion than Sorabji's nonsense.

No, it isn't. Why should it be? Sorabji's contribution to music is a lot greater than most will give him credit for, and I, for one, believe that it should be heard. I believe that Balakirev's music is EQUALLY as deserving of being championed, but "worthier"? Certainly not.

But I have a strong feeling that Sorabji's music - regardless of how well it's performed - will only achieve popularity commensurate with it's inherent musical interest (i.e., very little!)

Strong feelings do not equal facts.

In the meantime I will concentrate my modest performing future in the revival of the best of dudes like Alkan and Balakirev.

Hey, so will I! I don't care so much about performing Sorabji's music. I think I'm a bit too lazy to devote that much time to learning something of such length/difficulty that there is no audience for at the time being. If I were to learn a major Sorabji work, it would not exceed an hour, and it would be included in a program with another piece that would be the "hook" of the concert, such as Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit. This way, I would be able to share the new music with the audience while still playing familiar music to keep them at ease.

I've heard some Sorabji. I think it is drivel.

Really? You said once that you really enjoyed the 4th movement of OC. What is the cause for this change of heart? Not everything Sorabji wrote is a masterpiece, for sure, but I wouldn't say that it's drivel, especially when speaking of such contrapuntal works of genius like as the OC.

However, in the case of Sorabji's music, nothing in his oevre will get any mainstream recognition - because - simply put - nothing stands out as great.

There are several things wrong with this statement. First of all, one simply can't predict the future, so saying that nothing of his will get any mainstream recognition is a bit ridiculous. I can easily imagine seeing the three early pastiches (Habanera, Song of India, Minute Waltz) becoming standard repertoire some day. Secondly, nothing stands out as great FOR YOU, but your opinion does not necessarily apply to the vast majority of people who are familiar with Sorabji's music.

Does he deserve dozens of threads dedicated to his music?

Why should you think of it like this? If people are interested in discussing certain composers, then they will. I can't understand why people get offended by this.

As for your request, I am posting the great Concerto per suonare da me solo as played by Jonathan Powell. Sorabji once said that if he were to introduce someone to his music, he would play this piece -- https://www.blaubeeri.com/temp/Sorabji%20Concert%2027%20Juillet%202005%20Montpellier%20(Powell).asf

It starts at 01:00:23. The other two pieces are Sorabji's Sonata 1 and Gulistan, which are also two of his other masterpieces. Hopefully you will enjoy this. If you don't, at least you should be able to recognize the ingenious contrapuntal work, the weaving of themes, the clever references to previous material, the balance between intense virtuosity and lyricism, the beautiful harmonic progressions, and if nothing else, the sheer power, concentration, and dexterity of the performer. It may require more than one listen to make a fair assessment, but that's the nature of extremely complicated music.

I look forward to your response, and hope that it will be a little less hostile.

[jakev2.0]

So I can still access my account. Anyway, I too would like to take this opportunity to thank those involved with the creation of the new site for a job well done!

Strangely enough, I seem to have LOST my password! Anyway...

Now:

Jake... I have respect for you. What's the point of stirring up controversy here? We've all had our heated Sorabji debates, and they've gotten out of hand on numerous occasions. This thread was not about Sorabji's worth as a composer -- it was merely an announcement about the new Sorabji website, which I believe that those interested should be able to discuss without rude interjections such as yours... your remark wasn't stimulating to the discussion, it was pure trolling.

I have a confession to make: I regret my inital statement  my subsequent rationalizations were a complete waste of time. The truth is, I was prompted to release some anger in this thread after having taken part in a very frustrating debate in the "Anything but Piano Forum", where some of my worthwile posts part were either replied to in a prejudiced or nonsensical manner or simply ignored. It is for disheartening interactions like the one I describe that I vacillate between taking PianoForum seriously as a discussion forum, and merely as a place to stir up trouble (my physics teacher calls me the most -- and least mature 18 year old he has ever taught). Ironically, the bad behavior I have admitted to only worsens the atmosphere here. I apologize for my immaturity.

No, it isn't. Why should it be? Sorabji's contribution to music is a lot greater than most will give him credit for, and I, for one, believe that it should be heard. I believe that Balakirev's music is EQUALLY as deserving of being championed, but "worthier"? Certainly not.

Confession #2: I really don't understand Sorabji's music well enough to judge it. I simply haven't heard enough of it in context. 

Hey, so will I! I don't care so much about performing Sorabji's music. I think I'm a bit too lazy to devote that much time to learning something of such length/difficulty that there is no audience for at the time being. If I were to learn a major Sorabji work, it would not exceed an hour, and it would be included in a program with another piece that would be the "hook" of the concert, such as Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit. This way, I would be able to share the new music with the audience while still playing familiar music to keep them at ease.

Well, those 3-4-hour monstrosities are probably impalatable to the concert-going audience. Their musical worth is yet to be determined, and I apologize for judging them. They may be masterpieces - they may be trash ...I'm certainly not prepared to listen and reflect for countless hours to make up my own mind.

Really? You said once that you really enjoyed the 4th movement of OC. What is the cause for this change of heart? Not everything Sorabji wrote is a masterpiece, for sure, but I wouldn't say that it's drivel, especially when speaking of such contrapuntal works of genius like as the OC.

The fact that you took the time to reply so respectfully, and in particular, remembered sharing some Sorabji is really worthy of respect. I remember finding part of the "OC" interesting, and some of the miniatures -- Hothouse? Jardin Perfumé (sp) very nice pieces indeed. I don't see what would stop good music like that from catching on.

There are several things wrong with this statement. First of all, one simply can't predict the future, so saying that nothing of his will get any mainstream recognition is a bit ridiculous. I can easily imagine seeing the three early pastiches (Habanera, Song of India, Minute Waltz) becoming standard repertoire some day. Secondly, nothing stands out as great FOR YOU, but your opinion does not necessarily apply to the vast majority of people who are familiar with Sorabji's music.

Well, for all the threads dedicated to Sorabji, nobody has really produced any compelling evidence that he is a major or innovative composer -- just a strange one.

Why should you think of it like this? If people are interested in discussing certain composers, then they will. I can't understand why people get offended by this.

I find it difficult to explain my discomfort with the Sorabji-fascination.  I think people are fascinated by Sorabji because his works are so huge and mysterious.  I've somehow associated Sorabji to popular fads for Eastern Philosophies, New Age and Scientology among the rich and the gullible - they are captivated because they are ignorant. I am particularly suspicious of Sorabji because I have an uncomfortable feeling that someone could put on a 3-hour concert of purported "Masterpieces or Sorabji", without the audience ever figuring out that it was a fraud. Ironically, my distrust of Sorabji itself may itself lie in irrational ignorance.

As for your request, I am posting the great Concerto per suonare da me solo as played by Jonathan Powell. Sorabji once said that if he were to introduce someone to his music, he would play this piece -- https://www.blaubeeri.com/temp/Sorabji%20Concert%2027%20Juillet%202005%20Montpellier%20(Powell).asf

It starts at 01:00:23. The other two pieces are Sorabji's Sonata 1 and Gulistan, which are also two of his other masterpieces. Hopefully you will enjoy this. If you don't, at least you should be able to recognize the ingenious contrapuntal work, the weaving of themes, the clever references to previous material, the balance between intense virtuosity and lyricism, the beautiful harmonic progressions, the sensuous, erotic treatment of melodies, and if nothing else, the sheer power, concentration, and dexterity of the performer. It may require more than one listen to make a fair assessment, but that's the nature of extremely complicated music.

Thanks. I will investigae.

I look forward to your response, and hope that it will be a little less hostile.

Posts like your last one, and one of e60s in the other thread have effectively restored my faith in this forum.

[jakev2.0]

@Mephisto and everyone else: Yes, I am perfectly serious when I say Hamelin is not a good advocate for Alkan, or almost anyone else he tries to raise the status of.

[brewtality]

@Mephisto and everyone else: Yes, I am perfectly serious when I say Hamelin is not a good advocate for Alkan, or almost anyone else he tries to raise the status of.

But don't you agree that without his Alkan recordings, the composer would be largely forgotten? I'm not trying to belittle the contribution of Smith, Lewenthal etc but Alkan only seems to have become 'popular' after Hamelin recorded some of his pieces. That said I think that Lewenthal is a better Alkan pianist, but I don't believe that much of his recordings have been transferred to cd. As I have stated previously, I don't think Smith is technically good enough to do Alkan justice, although certainly his ideas are interesting (like in Festin).

[jakev2.0]

But don't you agree that without his Alkan recordings, the composer would be largely forgotten?

Yes. Hamelin has done a tremendous amount to bring attention to many very worthwile composers like, Alkan. He introduced me to the composer. I used to be obsessed with Hamelin, and bought many of his recordings. I was in awe of his flawless pianism. But "flawless", as I came to see it, is not a good thing.

When I say he is "not a good advocate for Alkan", I mean he doesn't really broaden our understanding of Alkan's music - or anyone's music for that matter. Hamelin has a very powerful mind for learning and repertoire and communicating a dead-pan interpretation of what the composer wants. However, too many call him a "genius". I used to think so too. Then I discovered Rachmaninov. Moiseiwitsch. Freidman. Hofmann. Gould. Cortot. Schnabel.

Hamelin's entire oevre, in my humble opinion, is less valuable musically than this lone recording:

https://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=94B942AF712A8730

...and I think that it's very sad that this kind of scrutiny is seldom applied when listening to music these days.

I'm not trying to belittle the contribution of Smith, Lewenthal etc but Alkan only seems to have become 'popular' after Hamelin recorded some of his pieces. That said I think that Lewenthal is a better Alkan pianist, but I don't believe that much of his recordings have been transferred to cd. As I have stated previously, I don't think Smith is technically good enough to do Alkan justice, although certainly his ideas are interesting (like in Festin).

Smith has an impressive technique, actually. The rich sound of his 'KanCerto is certainly better than Hamelin's dreary Music and Arts recording. Also, to me, Smith can sound great - a bit like sloppy-Horowitz. This part of 39/11 is a good example of what Hamelin lacks in his general interpretations:

https://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=55C79785282B49A1

Also, the case of the Lewenthal vs. Hamelin in Festin D'Esope cannot be overstated enough, imo. Hamelin totally misses the point. The piece just sounds hostile in his hands. When I talk of bad advocacy, I mean that people who are only familiar with the Hamelin recording of the piece will be put off of it by his performance.

[mephisto]

[quote author=jakev2.0

Also, the case of the Lewenthal vs. Hamelin in Festin D'Esope cannot be overstated enough, imo. Hamelin totally misses the point. The piece just sounds hostile in his hands. When I talk of bad advocacy, I mean that people who are only familiar with the Hamelin recording of the piece will be put off of it by his performance.

Actually you are wrong. I first heard Hamelin`s recording of Festin and I loved it imidiatly. I love Lewenthal to.

[brewtality]

The problem with Hamelin's festin is that it is rather monotonous.

[mephisto]

No one beats this guy(not Hamelin):

https://www.sendspace.com/file/v2hzcs

[brewtality]

No one beats this guy(not Hamelin):

https://www.sendspace.com/file/v2hzcs

It that Ed's version? the one he made for Comme (iirc). I heard it ages ago, sounds familiar.

[mephisto]

It that Ed's version? the one he made for Comme (iirc). I heard it ages ago, sounds familiar.

Yes, technicly it is amazing.

[JCarey]

Thank you, Jake, for replying.

I have a confession to make: I regret my inital statement  my subsequent rationalizations were a complete waste of time. The truth is, I was prompted to release some anger in this thread after having taken part in a very frustrating debate in the "Anything but Piano Forum", where some of my worthwile posts part were either replied to in a prejudiced or nonsensical manner or simply ignored. It is for disheartening interactions like the one I describe that I vacillate between taking PianoForum seriously as a discussion forum, and merely as a place to stir up trouble (my physics teacher calls me the most -- and least mature 18 year old he has ever taught). Ironically, the bad behavior I have admitted to only worsens the atmosphere here. I apologize for my immaturity.

Apology accepted; I too have gone through episodes of major frustration with this forum, but in the longrun I've found that being aggressive toward the other members doesn't help the thread does it support one's case. I am relieved to see that we can now discuss this intelligently.

Confession #2: I really don't understand Sorabji's music well enough to judge it. I simply haven't heard enough of it in context.

 

Fair enough, you certainly wouldn't be the first! I didn't immediately warm up to it myself, especially the OC, and made a similar judgement to yours. Luckily, I studied his other works enough to discover that Sorabji's music really was beautiful / exciting / emotional / powerful / original / innovative / intellectual / moving / etc., just like everything else I've always looked for in music.

Well, those 3-4-hour monstrosities are probably impalatable to the concert-going audience. Their musical worth is yet to be determined, and I apologize for judging them. They may be masterpieces - they may be trash ...I'm certainly not prepared to listen and reflect for countless hours to make up my own mind.

That's fine, and I will agree with you that listening for 3-4 hours straight is not really my idea of a good time either. If Powell were to play OC in the Boston area, I would of course go to see it, but I still believe that there are much more interesting Sorabji pieces out there that last a fraction of the length.

The fact that you took the time to reply so respectfully, and in particular, remembered sharing some Sorabji is really worthy of respect. I remember finding part of the "OC" interesting, and some of the miniatures -- Hothouse? Jardin Perfumé (sp) very nice pieces indeed. I don't see what would stop good music like that from catching on.

I generally prefer his smaller works to his large ones too.

Well, for all the threads dedicated to Sorabji, nobody has really produced any compelling evidence that he is a major or innovative composer -- just a strange one.

I find it difficult to explain my discomfort with the Sorabji-fascination.  I think people are fascinated by Sorabji because his works are so huge and mysterious.  I've somehow associated Sorabji to popular fads for Eastern Philosophies, New Age and Scientology among the rich and the gullible - they are captivated because they are ignorant. I am particularly suspicious of Sorabji because I have an uncomfortable feeling that someone could put on a 3-hour concert of purported "Masterpieces or Sorabji", without the audience ever figuring out that it was a fraud. Ironically, my distrust of Sorabji itself may itself lie in irrational ignorance.

That is rather interesting. I know that many find fascination with Sorabji for the reasons you mentioned, however, those of us who refer to ourselves as "Sorabjians" are quite different. We have heard enough of his music to make a valid judgement, and appreciate it not for it's difficulty, but for it's musical value. The difficulty fascination is one that most pianists go through, but I'd like to think that I, as well as numerous other members here, have moved past that.

I do hope that you find something of merit in the link I gave you.

[prometheus]

There is a big difference between regilion, new age, scientology and music/art.

The goal of religion and philosophy and science of well should be to help us understand the world. Not to make it more mysterious and appealing.

The goal of art is the opposite. Art shouldn't be blunt, clear and logical. Art, though it should contain a high degree of craftmanship if possible, needs to be mysterious, it has to ellude us, it should be blunt and simple.


As for eastern philosophy. It is as profound as greek and western philosophy. Science has rendered most of the accomplishments of philosophy to the history books but of course not all of it.


So I don't think it is about being gullable. On the contrary.

When I first heard about the OC and about Sorabji I was highly critical. I couldn't imagine it was serious music because it did not fit the usual format. I thought it was a joke or a provocation. Like Cage and like some of those absurd sheet music. Like for example George Crumb.

But Sorabji is a conservative composer. I think he called himself a conservative romantic. And that is what he is.

[ahinton]

I've heard some Sorabji. I think it is drivel. Then again, Hamelin is not really a very good musician, and his advocacy is not to be taken too seriously.

That is your opinion and you are, of course, entitled to it; the value of any such opinion is, however, dependent upon the extent to which you have experienced Sorabji's music and your gratuitous remark about Hamelin gives us all a pretty clear idea of where you stand on this - Hamelin has to date performed less than half an hour of Sorabji's music, out of the 20 or more hours that have so far been performed by others, so he hardly helps your contention any.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Al

I was previously not particularly well acquainted with Sorabji, so tks! 

I realise there would probably by copyright issues but it would be nice to be able to  download some sound files to listen to.

In the interests of those very issues, we have striven to discourage people from posting entire works; if they do this too often, it becomes well-nigh impossible for record companies to record and sell their recordings of these works. We have no objection, however,  to the posting of extracts for the purposes of interesting people in the music, although we do prefer to be asked first, since the music is our copyright; likewise, we do not condone the posting of commecial CD recorded extracts other than with the prior written permission of the record companies who made them and accordingly own the copyright in their recording. We have, for example, given permission to Fredrik Ullén (on his request) for him to post samples of his performances from the 100 Transcendental Studies on his website; why not go visit www.fredrikullen.com and check these out?

Best,

Alistair