Sorabji question

[communist]

why is it given the title Opus Clavicembalisticum

[retrouvailles]

What kind of answer are you looking for? He gave Latin titles to many of his works, like Sequentia Cyclica, Opus Archimagicum, Opus Clavisymphonicum, and others.

[michel dvorsky]

Dudley had a knack for making up in rhetoric what he lacked in substance.

[thalbergmad]

why is it given the title Opus Clavicembalisticum

No idea, but i would wager that some of the answers you will get will be even longer and more complex than this monolithic monstrosity itself.

Perhaps good old Dud after making his name sound a bit more fancy, thought that he might do the same to some of his compositions.

He could have named it Opiss Longboringshittus or almost anything else really.

Thal

[michel dvorsky]

Neon Leon is all about the flashy titles.

[pies]

a

[michel dvorsky]

It's Latin for "Work for Piano."

Latin is concise.  Duddles can't even write proper titles for his works.

[pies]

The Dudley jokes were okay the first few times, but now you're just beating a dead horse.

Why not listen to some of his works?  His stuff really isn't that bad.  Try his first etude.  Or Rosario d'arabeschi.  Or Fantasia Ispanica.  Or the 99th etude for some fury.

[cmg]

The Dudley jokes were okay the first few times, but now you're just beating a dead horse.

Why not listen to some of his works?  His stuff really isn't that bad.  Try his first etude.  Or Rosario d'arabeschi.  Or Fantasia Ispanica.  Or the 99th etude for some fury.

You tell him, pies. 

[indutrial]

The Dudley jokes were okay the first few times, but now you're just beating a dead horse.

Why not listen to some of his works?  His stuff really isn't that bad. 

It's not bad at all. I've only applied serious study to 2-3 of his works and there's always interesting things to be found. I can't imagine the jibes and superficial criticisms of his work ever going away though. Those things are the herpes of this forum.

[michel dvorsky]

There should be a new reality series called: "when good pianists play bad music."

This piece sounds like Busoni soaked in a bucket of rancid cottage cheese.

[thalbergmad]

It's not bad at all.

That is dropping a fair way short of actually saying it is good.

I have listened to perhaps 10 - 15 pieces including the gargantuam siege warfare that is the subject of this thread and that was sufficient for me to realise his music would never do anything for me. His Bach transcription i did however appreciate.

And yes, the criticism and herpes will probably go on as long as some of the you tube dweebs continue with "hey man dis is the most hardest song evva written".

Thal

[michel dvorsky]

I love your signature btw, Thal.

[communist]

what does he have to do with opus clavicembalisticum

[pies]

a

[minor9th]

https://rapidshare.com/files/137916784/Etude_99.mp3

 

This is some intense sh¡t

No kidding! Thanks for posting it. Who's the pianist?

[ahinton]

My guess is that the pianist playing the 99th study is the Japanese Kentaro Noda. For those interested in the entire cycle of 100 studies (but who are not already aware), the Swedish pianist Fredrik Ullén has so far recorded almost two thirds of them, of which the first 25 were issues on CD some time ago (on the Swedish label BIS); he has played a few more than this number in public and he intends to perform and record all 100 in due course.

Study No. 99 opens with a gesture not dissimilar to the opening of the composer's Toccata No. 2 for piano of a few years earlier (this happened to be the last work he ever performed in public [1936]) and, curiously, it also seems to grow out of the beginning of Bach's Chromatic Fantasia which Sorabji had transcribed at around the time he was embarking on this massive set of piano studies (I'm not certain if it is that transcription or Sorabji's other Bach one from a few years later that Thal exceptionally appreciates).

The meaning of the title in question is neither long nor complex and has already been provided here to the original enquirer and to all others here who may be Latinically challenged; that said, I must admit that I had always assumed that Opus Clavicembalisticum means Kitten on the Keys, so I am grateful to be set right on this.

The fact that some people warm to Sorabji's music and others don't is hardly a matter for debate or surprise, since his case is no different in that regard to that of any other composer; what does matter, however, is that people are given opportunities to form their own intelligent opinions based upon having heard sufficient decent performances - something that would not have been possible had the music not been made available and certain exceptionally gifted musicians dedicated their time and energies to preparing, performing and recording it.

Whether some people here actually take advantage of such opportunities appears to be somewhat questionable, but the only "Dud"s here appear to be among certain of the comments and commentators, so they may as well be recognised and appreciated as such.

Best,

Alistair

[minor9th]

There should be a new reality series called: "when good pianists play bad music."

This piece sounds like Busoni soaked in a bucket of rancid cottage cheese.

Or another one: "When 'Musicians' Make Ignorant and Idiotic Comments."

[indutrial]

Or another one: "When 'Musicians' Make Ignorant and Idiotic Comments."

True indeed. I would love to see some posters put as much work into constructively criticizing Sorabji's work as they do honing (and endlessly reiterating) the snarkiness of their negative opinions on it. It's pretty damn obvious by now that the average Joe Fuckstick pianist or Johnny Dipshit music listener is going to see the work as (a.) overlong, (b.) boring, (c.) indulgent, and (d.) brutally difficult. Kudos for making sure that that status-quo b.s. didn't become obscured. We're really getting somewhere.

Thanks for the post of Etude 99. On the Archive's homepage, the duration for this work listed is 17:00. Is the version played on this MP3 an incomplete version of the piece, or is it just being played much faster? The study is definitely something intense to behold, but there are some parts where it should (perhaps) be allowed to breathe a little more.

[thalbergmad]

It's pretty damn obvious by now that the average Joe Fuckstick pianist or Johnny Dipshit music listener is going to see the work as (a.) overlong, (b.) boring, (c.) indulgent, and (d.) brutally difficult.

Perhaps this is true and Sorabji's music is best left for Joe Bigheadedwanker and Johnny Iknowfuckingeverythingandwanttolookcleveronpianoforums.

Long live Mr Average.

Thal

[pies]

Yes, it's the entire etude, and Kentaro Noda is the pianist.  The 17 minute figure is Fredrik Ullen's estimation of how long the piece is.  Noda is a bit crazy and eccentric so his interpretation is quite speedy.

Study No. 99 opens with a gesture not dissimilar to the opening of the composer's Toccata No. 2 for piano of a few years earlier (this happened to be the last work he ever performed in public [1936]) and, curiously, it also seems to grow out of the beginning of Bach's Chromatic Fantasia which Sorabji had transcribed at around the time he was embarking on this massive set of piano studies (I'm not certain if it is that transcription or Sorabji's other Bach one from a few years later that Thal exceptionally appreciates).

Are there any plans for a recording of the Toccata?  And do you know what Powell's next Sorabji recording will contain?

[michel dvorsky]

Leon Soreabji McDuddle:  "Music that makes you sore."

Though I must admit. I am impressed by Dudley's one notable musical accomplishment.  He has taken the notes / music ratio to previously unheard-of heights.  i.e., there are roughly a zillion notes in Opus Crap but almost zero music.  The ratio is almost indefinite it is so large!

[pies]

https://rapidshare.com/files/168368585/Etude_100.mp3

One of Sorabji's shorter etudes 

[michel dvorsky]

https://rapidshare.com/files/168368585/Etude_100.mp3

One of Sorabji's shorter etudes 

I thought the internet was only mildly pornographic until I downloaded some Sorabji off of this site.

[quantum]

[...] but the only "Dud"s here appear to be among certain of the comments and commentators, so they may as well be recognised and appreciated as such.

Well said. 

[ahinton]

Perhaps this is true and Sorabji's music is best left for Joe Bigheadedwanker and Johnny Iknowfuckingeverythingandwanttolookcleveronpianoforums.

If it is, then much the same may as well be said of Busoni, Szymanowski, Medtner - and yes, Bach, Beethoven and Chopin. Just consider for a moment how large the genuinely appreciative audience is for Mozart - taken, that is, as a fraction of the world's population and you might begin to appreciate that the phrase "minority interest" applies to it, too...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I thought the internet was only mildly pornographic

You did? Well, your ignorance of the subject seems greater even than your ignorance of Sorabji and accordingly amazes us all! That said, I remind you that the internet itself cannot be pornographic - only some of the content available thereon can be that...

until I downloaded some Sorabji off of this site.

If you are already as ill-disposed to the music of Sorabji as your frankly tiresome and uninformative posts suggest, why did you bother to do this?

Best,

Alistair

[michel dvorsky]

If it is, then much the same may as well be said of Busoni, Szymanowski, Medtner - and yes, Bach, Beethoven and Chopin. Just consider for a moment how large the genuinely appreciative audience is for Mozart - taken, that is, as a fraction of the world's population and you might begin to appreciate that the phrase "minority interest" applies to it, too...

Best,

Alistair

I'm sorry. Nobody has heard of Medtner. But even non-musicians can appreciate something like this:

&feature=related

&NR=1

Furthermore, composers will appreciate his sense of harmony, style, thematic development...pianists will appreciate Medtner's understanding of the piano (no kidding, he was an excellent pianist too)...This is another problem with Duddles, incidentally. There is no indication he could even play the piano properly, which probably explains why his music sounds so awkward and cumbersome.

A composer like Dudley has a problem in that it is unclear to musical people like me  that he could have even composed a 2-part in invention. 

In short, I think if piano music is to be taken seriously as a form of art, we as pianists have to do more to make the music of Alkan, Medtner, Scriabin, Godowsky, Balakirev, and other worthwile composers better known and waste time on the hacks, cranks and wannabes. Sorabji was a Busoni/Alkan wannabe.

[ahinton]

Are there any plans for a recording of the Toccata?  And do you know what Powell's next Sorabji recording will contain?

Which Toccata? Of the four (excepting, of course, the short one that is the second of the two early piano pieces), Jonathan Powell has already recorded the first, the third is lost and the fourth has yet to be edited and typeset; the second has been typeset but there are no plans for it as yet.

Jonathan will eventually record Opus Clavicembalisticum but he may well now postpone this until a brand new edition of it has been created, using as source material the manuscript, the proofs for publication, the composer's hand-annotated "working copy" publication and Jonathan's own resetting of quite a few pages (principally in the fugues) where he has reduced the number of staves on certain systems; I don't know when this edition will be ready. In the meantime, Jonathan is working on Sequentia Cyclica, which has been edited and typeset recently and of which he will perform the first 14 of its 27 movements next month in London; I understand that he plans to perform the entire work at least twice in 2010 but I have no specific details yet.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I'm sorry. Nobody has heard of Medtner.

Nobody?! What an astonishing remark! Most of his works have been recorded at least once. He is certainly better and more widely appreciated than he used to be, but your statement above is sheer nonsense.

But even non-musicians can appreciate something like this:

&feature=related

&NR=1

Certain non-musicians may well appreciate plenty of music; that is hardly the point and certainly not the point I was making when I referred to a minority interest. There are non-musicians who appreciate Sorabji, for all that you may not wish to be told this...

Furthermore, composers will appreciate his sense of harmony, style, thematic development...pianists will appreciate Medtner's understanding of the piano (no kidding, he was an excellent pianist too).

Some of us did already know that, actually; Sorabji himself certainly did, otherwise he would not have reviewed both his music and his playing in so positive a manner as he did and, had he not done this, it is unlikely that he would have been invited - as he was - to contribute a chapter to a symposium on him shortly after his death.

..This is another problem with Duddles, incidentally. There is no indication he could even play the piano properly, which probably explains why his music sounds so awkward and cumbersome.

I have no idea what problems there may be with Duddles, but then the subject here is Sorabji, so let's stick with that. There have been reviews of his admittedly infrequent performances that suggest quite other than what you write here; sure, he was no Michelangeli or Rakhmaninov, no Busoni or Cortot, but then he never set out on the path of a pianist's career and why should he have done if he chose to devote his time mainly to composition? In any case, what indication is there that Szymanowski or Roslavets, the composers of two splendid violin concertos each, could play the violin "properly"? (whatever that may mean. As some here may already know, I have myself written a rather large string quintet and was quite flattered to be asked by the first violinist on its recording with whom I had studied the violin, because I do not play a stringed instrument at all...

A composer like Dudley has a problem in that it is unclear to musical people like me  that he could have even composed a 2-part in invention.

"A 2-part in invention"? Whatever you may mean by that, I can only respond by suggesting that the manner in which you write here indicates that many things are unclear to people like you (assuming there to be any in the first place).

In short, I think if piano music is to be taken seriously as a form of art,

"If"? Is there any question about that? And, if so, what kind of place is this forum to pose it?!...

we as pianists have to do more to make the music of Alkan, Medtner, Scriabin, Godowsky, Balakirev, and other worthwile composers better known.

Without seeking to undermine Balakirev, I'm not sure that I would place him on the same exalted level as the other piano composers that you mention. Not all of us here are pianists, by the way; I, for example, am not one (so probably, in your book, I shouldn't write for the instrument, but then that would be just your opinion). That said, whilst it is true that Alkan, Medtner and Godowsky were not as well appreciated in the past as they are today, you should bear in mind that much of Alkan's work, most of Godowsky's and Medtner's and all of Skryabin's work has been recorded. Whilst my admiration for the piano writing of all of them is unquestioned, I have to say that you sound almost as though you are writing from a perspective of 60 or so years ago. I should also add that, from such a perspective, you are agreeing entirely with Sorabji, who did much as a writer in those far-off days to encourage better appreciation of all of these composers!

Best,

Alistair

[michel dvorsky]

I don't believe a composer has to be proficient on an instrument he composes for to be a good composer.

But I also believe there  is nothing to indicate that Sorabji is a competent composer at all.

...And if you aren't convinced Balakirev is a first rate piano composer, pick up the score to his B flat minor piano Sonata and his second scherzo.

[ahinton]

I don't believe a composer has to be proficient on an instrument he composes for to be a good composer.

"Michel Dvorsky" lapses into sense (as Sorabji might have put it).

But I also believe there  is nothing to indicate that Sorabji is a competent composer at all.

Well, at least you are now claiming that this is your belief rather than an incontrovertible fact; that said, you were previously writing about his piano playing about which you clearly know less than nothing, yet you nevertheless questioned his competence at the instrument in the specific context of his ability to compose for it. Perhaps you should read your own posts occasionally (well, someone has to, I suppose...)

...And if you aren't convinced Balakirev is a first rate piano composer, pick up the score to his B flat minor piano Sonata and his second scherzo.

I did not say that he wasn't, but he did not contribute anything like as much important music to the piano repertoire as did Alkan, Skryabin and Godowsky who wrote little for any other medium or Medtner who featured the piano in just about evertying that he wrote (songs and chamber music as well as concertos and solo works); that is not a criticism of Balakirev (and of course I know the music that you mention) - merely a statement of fact.

Best,

Alistair

[indutrial]

But I also believe there is nothing to indicate that Sorabji is a competent composer at all.

There's not much here that indicates that you're a worthwhile critic of Sorabji's music. All you're doing is poking fun at his name and disparaging his music with sweeping opinions that don't rely on any evidence or analytical bases whatsoever. I'm reminded forcibly of plenty of annoying-ass C-students from my college literature classes who would piss and moan endlessly about how much narrative detail and texture authors like Thomas Mann and Marcel Proust would use to explain things that are superficially simple. It was difficult to resist the urge to tell them something like, "if reading is such a chore, why don't you go major in f**king communications instead of English. Go read Harry Potter books and stop ruining the class for those of us that are willing to try harder."

If you think the world is ever going to take any aspect of classical music seriously, you'd better not hold your breath. That dream is OVER and has been over for almost 50 years. The classical music world exists heavily on its own auspices and sustains itself with little to no contribution from the wider public and that's how it will remain. I, for one, don't really have a problem with that. Long after the public turned its back on composers, I'm still able to buy CD recordings of works by Wuorinen, Ligeti, Carter, Scriabin, Sessions, Sorabji, and loads of other great composers who the public doesn't know of or care one sh*t about. Within the world of musicians, most of the right composers are taken seriously enough, including all of the names you mentioned. I don't see where you're going with this tiresome and shameless disparaging of Sorabji, since he's far from a major influential composer in the piano world and in no way threatens to shift the music world's focus off of composers like Medtner and Scriabin. If you care so much about promoting Alkan's and Balakirev's catalogues, why not pregnant dog people about overemphasizing super-famous composers like Liszt and Chopin. At least their oeuvres have been fully recorded and their works are almost entirely typeset and available. Almost half of Sorabji's work (including several major pieces) still have yet to be rendered legible (though Mr. Hinton, Mr. Powell, and co. have done a lot to remedy this). Why something like this seems to be a threat to your touchy musical sensibilities is beyond my understanding, and far beyond the limits of my empathy.

[ahinton]

There's not much here that indicates that you're a worthwhile critic of Sorabji's music. All you're doing is poking fun at his name and disparaging his music with sweeping opinions that don't rely on any evidence or analytical bases whatsoever. I'm reminded forcibly of plenty of annoying-ass C-students from my college literature classes who would piss and moan endlessly about how much narrative detail and texture authors like Thomas Mann and Marcel Proust would use to explain things that are superficially simple. It was difficult to resist the urge to tell them something like, "if reading is such a chore, why don't you go major in f**king communications instead of English. Go read Harry Potter books and stop ruining the class for those of us that are willing to try harder."

This may sound harsh, but I'm afraid that it is here wholly justified as a response to these repetitious infantile witterings; Sorabji's music will continue to affect those who care about it and are moved by it irrespective of the lucubrations of MD.

If you think the world is ever going to take any aspect of classical music seriously, you'd better not hold your breath. That dream is OVER and has been over for almost 50 years. The classical music world exists heavily on its own auspices and sustains itself with little to no contribution from the wider public and that's how it will remain. I, for one, don't really have a problem with that. Long after the public turned its back on composers,

I think that this may be taking matters abit too far. I do agree with you in principle, but the way you write here might suggest not only that "classical" music in general is merely a minority interest and "contemporary classical" music in particular is a minority interest within a minority interest but that they are each intended only for a handful of devotees and not for dissemination in the wider world; maybe you didn't mean to convey this and maybe you didn't actually convey it, but the implication might be perceived nonetheless.

I'm still able to buy CD recordings of works by Wuorinen, Ligeti, Carter, Scriabin, Sessions, Sorabji, and loads of other great composers who the public doesn't know of or care one sh*t about.

The general public may not know or care, but in my experience, even these composers' works (Skryabin in particular, but then his music's been around a good deal longer than the others') reach a far wider audience - including non-musicians - than some people realise or than certain people might want to have us believe.

Within the world of musicians, most of the right composers are taken seriously enough, including all of the names you mentioned.

Yes, but that's not necessarily always been the case; Alkan, Godowsky and Medtner have all had to wait quite some time for the amount of attention that they all get these days - and Busoni and Schönberg tended for a while to attract rather more academic respect and reverence than live performance. Bruckner was not taken as seriously throughout most of his life as he has been since. Mahler was almost entirely unperformed in UK until after WWII.

I don't see where you're going with this tiresome and shameless disparaging of Sorabji, since he's far from a major influential composer in the piano world and in no way threatens to shift the music world's focus off of composers like Medtner and Scriabin.

It's perhaps somewhat difficult to talk meaningfully about the actual or potential influence of a composer in whose work a performing tradition remains for the time being in its comparative infancy, but one thing is certain here and that is that Sorabji himself would have been utterly horrified at the prospect of anyone seeking to "shift the music world's focus off" composers such as these!

If you care so much about promoting Alkan's and Balakirev's catalogues, why not pregnant dog people about overemphasizing super-famous composers like Liszt and Chopin.

I think that we call all guess what MD cares to promote. That said, I should reiterate my point once, this time in the context that Liszt's catalogue of works was largely unknown to the general public three quarters of a century ago, whereas now there are almost 100 CD's worth of his piano works alone.

At least their oeuvres have been fully recorded and their works are almost entirely typeset and available. Almost half of Sorabji's work (including several major pieces) still have yet to be rendered legible (though Mr. Hinton, Mr. Powell, and co. have done a lot to remedy this).

Not to mention Simon Abrahams, Marc-André Hamelin, Marc-André Roberge, Alexander Abercrombie (who alone has typeset more than two thousand pages of Sorabji's music) and David Carter (who has accomplished the most astonishing feat of typesetting the full score of the composer's entire Jami Symphony) - and there are, have been and will be others, too (much to the presumed chagrin of the egregious MD).

Why something like this seems to be a threat to your touchy musical sensibilities is beyond my understanding, and far beyond the limits of my empathy.

"Touchy", undoubtedly; "sensibilities"? - hmmm...

Best,

Alistair

[michel dvorsky]

I can, and am prepared to, defend Scriabin.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Alkan.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Medtner.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Balakirev.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Godowsky.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Busoni.

The onus is on you to prove to us why the music of Sorabji is worthwhile.

So far, nobody has been able to show why:

a) His music could not have been written by a deranged mental patient
b) His music's difficulties are more than difficulties for the sake of difficulties
c) His music is worth playing and thus
d) His music is worthy of being heard by ANY audience

that is all.

[michel dvorsky]

Yes, but that's not necessarily always been the case; Alkan, Godowsky and Medtner have all had to wait quite some time for the amount of attention that they all get these days - and Busoni and Schönberg tended for a while to attract rather more academic respect and reverence than live performance. Bruckner was not taken as seriously throughout most of his life as he has been since. Mahler was almost entirely unperformed in UK until after WWII.

Let's take Alkan as an example.  Alkan had the respect of people like Chopin, Liszt, Mendelssohn and dozens of history's greatest musicians during his own lifetime.  No small feat.  Recognition in one's lifetime is enough for most mortals, but can be trivial when assessing the impact of a composer (Weber, Dussek...) But there is nothing even remotely comparable to even this feat with Sorabji(!) Alkan's tutelege and pianism influenced the next generation of pianist-composers (Cesar Franck, Nadia Boulanger's father etc...)

His romantic works Quasi-Faust, Violin Sonata, Op. 76, Op. 39 absolutely epitomize the very best of the romantic era.  Le Festin D'Esope can easily be defended as one of the most significant and effective set of theme and variations from the Goldberg Variations to the Corelli Variations.  His pseudo-impressionistic piano pieces play a vital role in the continuity of French music from Couperin to Debussy.

Pianistically, his teaching lineage can be detected from the French school (Saint Saens, Pugno, Diemer) to the German school (Busoni, Petri) school to even the American school (Lewenthal, Kapell)!   

Now...What are Sorabji's accomplishments in any of these fields. They are nonexistant.

I submit that the obsession with Sorabji comes from a perverse complexity for the sake of it fetishism. But its pseudo complexity because the music has no substance. It's just technical masturbation, and not even good technical masturbation.  At least Taneyev at his most pedestrian has some evidence of training in counterpoint. 

[indutrial]

I can, and am prepared to, defend Scriabin.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Alkan.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Medtner.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Balakirev.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Godowsky.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Busoni.

Good for you. Why don't you go back to arguing about politics and s**t until someone actually comes along and says anything bad about one of those guys.

So far, nobody has been able to show why:

a) His music could not have been written by a deranged mental patient
b) His music's difficulties are more than difficulties for the sake of difficulties
c) His music is worth playing and thus
d) His music is worthy of being heard by ANY audience

A handful of great pianists have made it abundantly clear to me that his music is worth my attention. Therefore, I listen to Sorabji works when they are presented. Since I = "ANY audience", that proves D, and as a further result, C. B means nothing to me, since I don't play piano and have no reason to whine about technical issues. I find performances such as Jonathan Powell's to be very natural-sounding despite any level of difficulty the pieces may have. Category B only matters to people who can't perform pieces but also want to believe that it's not because of their own technical drawbacks. Whatever makes you sleep at night, I guess. As for category A, that's just smug and tasteless. You should have saved that one for Youtube.

that is all.

God, I hope so.

[minor9th]

It's just technical masturbation, and not even good technical masturbation. 

This musical cretin probably masturbates while reading the responses to his idiotic comments, so perhaps he should be ignored from now on. 

[cmg]

Leon Soreabji McDuddle:  "Music that makes you sore."

Though I must admit. I am impressed by Dudley's one notable musical accomplishment.  He has taken the notes / music ratio to previously unheard-of heights.  i.e., there are roughly a zillion notes in Opus Crap but almost zero music.  The ratio is almost indefinite it is so large!

The only thing interesting in these rants is why MD chooses to so personalize the effect Sorabji and his music exert on him. 

Are you his spurned lover?  A pianist whom he urged never to play his works?

Inquiring minds want to know.  Well, maybe not, afterall.

[ahinton]

I can, and am prepared to, defend Scriabin.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Alkan.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Medtner.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Balakirev.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Godowsky.
I can, and am prepared to, defend Busoni.

Well, that's all very fine - except that, since you have already indicated that these composers are - and are generally recognised as - established major masters of piano composition (and for once you are correct), what "defence" do they need? (least of all from someone who makes such unfounded, cretinous and uncorroborated statements about Sorabji)...

The onus is on you to prove to us why the music of Sorabji is worthwhile.

Why so? It is no more up to me to do that than it is up to you to prove that the music of those other composers is worthwhile although, in the light of certain of your statements, it is certainly up to you to try to prove that it isn't.

Sorabji's music speaks - and indeed has to speak - for itself and, whenever it does so through the hands and minds of intelligent, gifted and sensitive performers, it speaks for itself and communicates to others with ample power and eloquence. To cite a single and perhaps most extreme example, Jonathan Powell presented an enormous all-Sorabji programme in the 2005 Radio France Montpellier Festival at which I had the honour and pleasure to be present (it was broadcast in full later the same year on Radio France). This recital may at first have seemed a daunting prospect even for seasoned Sorabjians, since it comprised the First Sonata (c.27 minutes) and Gulistan (c.35 minutes), an interval, the world première of the variations Il Grido del Gallino d'Oro (on a theme of Rimsky-Korsakov - c. 85 minutes), a second interval and finally Concerto per suonare da me solo (c.65 minutes) - in short, some 3½ hours of Sorabji spread across 60 years of his creative career and more than four hours of a very hot Sunday afternoon in the south of France when there were surely other things for people to do. If that wasn't enough, there were only around three people in the audience of some 160 who had ever previously heard a note of Sorabji's music, yet everyone present sat with rapt attention and serious concentration throughout and offered the indomitable Mr. Powell a richly deserved standing ovation at the end. If that is not an instance of Sorabji proving his work to be more than merely worthwhile, I have less than no idea what would be.

So far, nobody has been able to show why:

a) His music could not have been written by a deranged mental patient
b) His music's difficulties are more than difficulties for the sake of difficulties
c) His music is worth playing and thus
d) His music is worthy of being heard by ANY audience

For one thing, no one has yet been asked to do any of the above until now, but let's see where we go with this.

As far as a) is concerned, anyone able to show anything about this would require sufficient medical and musical qualifications and experience and a practical understanding of what music could or could not be written by deranged mental patients in order to be able to make a meaningful comparison between such examples (if any) and examples of the music of Sorabji; let's see how many such people come forward to offer us their wisdom on the subject and, in the meantime, ponder upon what qualifications and experience you may have in the fields of mental health and composition in order to make such a statement with such apparent confidence...

With b), the best evidence for this is surely that of the dedicated performers who, whilst obviously not being unaware of the challenges that this music often presents, never make a fuss about its difficulties, preferring instead to get on with the disciplined business of preparing performances of it; pianists who can play the most challenging music of Liszt, Alkan and Godowsky generally behave in like manner and, let's face it, some people with insufficient understanding of all of those composers have at one time or another complained, quite falsely, that they, too, wrote music containing difficulties for difficulty's sake.

Now to c), the "problem", as I have already indicated, is that only the music itself, when well performed, can demonstrate that it is so, in which case the "problem" is yours, simply because you don't like the music at all and you prefer not to accept that the performers regard it sufficiently highly to expend their time, talents and energies on it and others respond to it very positively. Jonathan Powell, in particular, has now committed around 20 hours' worth of Sorabji's music to his repertoire, from the piano parts to his songs at one end to Opus Clavicembalisticum at the other; Mr Powell's other repertoire includes the Alkan Concerto and Symphonie, Busoni's Fantasia Contrappuntistica, several Godowsky pieces including the Fledermaus transcription, a number of Medtner's amd Rakhmaninov's works, Granados's Goyescas and a considerable quantity of the works of Skryabin, on whom he is one of the world's leading living authorities; with such illustrious and proven credentials, it would surely be absurd to reject his judgement that Sorabji's music is so well worth playing that he has felt impelled to learn and perform so much of it.

that is all.

I'll believe that - with an immense sigh of relief - when I don't see it...

You have on occasion made some interesting and pertinent observations on other subjects in this forum; you would therefore be best advised to continue to do this rather than expose your meagre, threadbare, mean-spirited, uninformed and hopelessly childish observations on Sorabji as the utterly useless things that they are.

Best,

Alistair

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Let's take Alkan as an example.

Of what? Not the kind of rubbish you've been writing about Sorabji, one fondly hopes...

Alkan had the respect of people like Chopin, Liszt, Mendelssohn and dozens of history's greatest musicians during his own lifetime.  No small feat.  Recognition in one's lifetime is enough for most mortals

This is undoubtedly true; however, as surely you know, Alkan almost disappeared off the radar, again during his own lifetime, for a number of reasons too complex to go into here and, by the time he reached his final days, many of those other musicians (such as those you mention here) had died and it is true to say that Alkan's music subsequently almost died with him, the flame being kept alive by just a handful of major pianists such as Arrau (in his younger days), Busoni and Busoni's pupil Petri until a serious reappraisal of his work began after WWII at the hands of such luminaries as Ronald Smith, Raymond Lewenthal and John Ogdon. Alkan's name was still known at Paris Conservatoire, of course, but a performing tradition in his work was largely left until the later half of the 20th century, which is very different from the cases of Chopin, Liszt, Mendelssohn, etc.

But there is nothing even remotely comparable to even this feat with Sorabji(!)

For which your evidence is what? And, while trying to concoct some, please remember that one of the composers who persistently promoted the music of Alkan in those dark days was Sorabji himself.

Alkan's tutelege and pianism influenced the next generation of pianist-composers (Cesar Franck, Nadia Boulanger's father etc...)

If only that were more true than it is! Alkan's influence in this area was indeed considerable, as you suggest, yet his music remained largely unperformed until the 1950s.

His romantic works Quasi-Faust, Violin Sonata, Op. 76, Op. 39 absolutely epitomize the very best of the romantic era.  Le Festin D'Esope can easily be defended as one of the most significant and effective set of theme and variations from the Goldberg Variations to the Corelli Variations.  His pseudo-impressionistic piano pieces play a vital role in the continuity of French music from Couperin to Debussy.

It is most welcome to observe your fulsome and wholly justified enthusiasm for these and other works by Alkan and your estimation of his importance in music in general and French music in particular is in no sense exaggerated, but don't forget that the Grande Sonate went many years without any public performances at all and that violin and piano work (the opening of whose middle movement, sounding as it does almost as though someone had poured a barrel of sinister vengeance over the opening of Busoni's much later Second Violin Sonata, is hair-raising even to contemplate, let alone to hear!) went for more than a hundred years without a single performance, so it is all very well making such statements as you do here, but you do so, if I may say so, with the benefit of hindsight that would simply have been impossible to most people more than half a century ago.

Pianistically, his teaching lineage can be detected from the French school (Saint Saens, Pugno, Diemer) to the German school (Busoni, Petri) school to even the American school (Lewenthal, Kapell)!   

Very true, although each of these schools was of course also influenced by others - but we are discussing Alkan's music here, are we not - and the influence that this exerted over the nexgt generations of composers is open to far more question, not because of its shortage of power and importance but simply because of its lack of performance over several decades.

What are Sorabji's accomplishments in any of these fields. They are nonexistant.

I note that you answer your own question before permitting anyone else to answer it; that speaks for itself. The balance of chosen priorities in Sorabji's accomplishments were different to those of Alkan; Alkan gave far more performances in his early days and many more lessons throughout most of his career than did Sorabji (who never taught anyone and was a most reluctant performer), whereas Sorabji wrote far more music and criticism than did Alkan. It is what this proves in the present context that is "non-existent"(sp.)...

I submit that the obsession with Sorabji comes from a perverse complexity for the sake of it fetishism.

You may submit what you choose, but on what performing or listening experiences of Sorabji do you purport to do so? If you had a wider knowledge of Sorabji's music, including his (all too few) songs for voice and piano, you would realise that by no means all of it is "complex" and none of it seeks complexity for its own sake; you don;t have to like the music to be able to appreciate that, but you do need to know more of it than II suspect to be the case.

But its pseudo complexity because the music has no substance.

You offer no evidence to support this, presumably because you have none.

It's just technical masturbation, and not even good technical masturbation.

Er - could you - as a presumed expert on the subject - define for us and provide some illustrative examples of "good technical masturbation"? (in words, please, not in pictures)...

At least Taneyev at his most pedestrian has some evidence of training in counterpoint. 

Taneyev was almost certainly a better composer than you realise - but what you at your most pedestrian appear not to have is evidence of anything beyond the most superficial knowledge and experience of the repertoire that you seek to castigate.

Best,

Alistair

[pianowolfi]

https://rapidshare.com/files/168368585/Etude_100.mp3

One of Sorabji's shorter etudes 

I'm listening right now. I don't care about all the pro and contra debates. Please keep quiet until I've finished listening to the whole thing

[pianowolfi]

you, whoever you are and want to debate again, I m only at 19:13 yet

[thalbergmad]

Jonathan will eventually record Opus Clavicembalisticum but he may well now postpone this until a brand new edition of it has been created

Thats bad news for Woolworths.

They were relying on the sales to keep them going until the new year.

Thanks for letting me know.

Thal

[pianowolfi]

I'm at 32.05 (Thal I ignore your interference since you're a nice guy after all ) and so far I can just say this music is exactly what my soul needs at the moment

[minor9th]

https://rapidshare.com/files/168368585/Etude_100.mp3

One of Sorabji's shorter etudes 

Awesome--thank you so much for posting this and No.99. Which other ones have you made available (that Ullen hasn't recorded)?

[thalbergmad]

(Thal I ignore your interference since you're a nice guy after all ) and so far I can just say this music is exactly what my soul needs at the moment

I concur, I am at 3 days 4 hours and 35 minutes into this masterpiece.

This music is exactly what my rsoul needs.

Thal

[pianowolfi]

I concur, I am at 3 days 4 hours and 35 minutes into this masterpiece.

This music is exactly what my rsoul needs.

Thal

hee hee   you seem to have a different perception of time than me since I'm just listening to the last measures and I'm at 49:02

[pianowolfi]

Okay, I have finished listening and I really *love* it . Go on with your debates. Or not. I feel like after a relaxing bath. Ahhhhh

true

 

[Etude]

Posting in a Sorabji thread.

...

The random accidental pianissimo note at the end of the last chord is just what MY soul needed.   

Not so much what sounds like (not having the score myself) many random accidental fortissimo notes from trying to play no. 99 at what is probably two to three times the appropriate speed...