the music of K.S. Sorabji

[gep]

I've noticed there's quite a bit on the composer Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji on the Forum, but I don't know if there's are specific topic on his music in general, so I'm starting one. I like his music quite a bit, and would like to hear from likeminded members. Just two requests: if you do not like (or even despise) his music (which is perfectly OK, assuming you have at least tried him) please do feel invited to leave no messages here, and secondly, please try to remain within the subject in order to protect readers from having to trawl through reams of messages to find the interesting bits.

I will kick off with stating that the Opus Clavicembalisticum, while in itself being totally Sorabji, is nevertheless so atypical of his (mature) works in general (like the WTC is atypical for Bach in general) that it is a pity that it his his best known work, since it gives a less-than-adequate image of his composing.

[worov]

Hi, gep !

I have never heard the works of Sorabji, but I've read that he's one the great contrapuntists of the 20th century. I like very much contrapuntal music. Bach is one of my favourite composer, I love Shostakovich. I am interested in hearing some of his works. However, there are not many recordings and they are not easy to find. Which one do you recommend ? Lots of people say that Madge's Opus Claviscembalisticum is bad and like John Ogdon's better. Both of them are not available in store in my country. Madge's recording is available at the library : should I borrow it ? What do you think ?

Besides Opus Claviscembalisticum, what works have you heard ? What do you recommend ? Has he composed some orchestral works ? Concerto ? Chamber music ?

[gep]

Hi Worov,

Nice to see your interest! Funny you should mention Shostakovitch, he one of my favorites too, for a long time now!

As for recordings of Sorabji's music, if you want to buy CD's you can easily do so via CDuniverse, or even better perhaps via THE source of everything Sorabji: the Sorabji Archive. If you visit the website www.sorabji-archive.co.uk you can find everything so far recorded, and you can contact the main man (Alistair Hinton), who will no doubt help you where he can. If you want to download (for free) some music, please go www.sorabji-files.com, and there you can find (under "music") a lot of material not yet on CD, and even things not yet performed (!!, these are "virtual performances" of orchestral music made by the editors of these scores. I like the Symphonic Variations very very much!).

If you do not know any of Sorabji's music yet, I would recomend some of the shorter pieces, such as St. Bertrand, or Jami (the piano piece), both you can download. Opus Clav is a bit of a problem, personally I prefer (of the recordings so far issued) Ogdon by far. But I have fond hopes Jonathan Powell will record it soon. The first 5 movements (by JP) you can also download. But you could borrow the Madge from the library, I have it myself, and it gives you at least an idea what it is about (but be warned, it's a BIG piece at 4 hours!).

I think I have pretty much everything so far issued on CD (+ the LP's of Opus Clav by Madge, which is another performance than on the CD's on BIS, and a few things not issued on CD), and it would be hard to say what I like best. Piano Symphony 4 somes to mind (you won't find a recording of that one easily!), or the Concerto per sonare da me solo (a concerto for solo-piano), or Villa Tasca which is a kind of nocture (of 55mins lenght!).

He has written for (piano and) orchestra, among other things 8 (early) piano-concerto's (of which the 5th has been performed once). There's also a bit of chambermusic, little of which has been performed. And some organ-symphonies too. You'd want to check out the sorabji-archive site, look under "compositions".

I hope you have some use for the above, please do write to me again if you have any questions! And please do tell me if you have heard anything; I'd love to hear what you think of it!

Best wishes,
Gep

[worov]

Nice to see you are a Shostakovich fan, I'm currently listening to his Preludes and Fugues, performed by Tatiana Nikolaeva. I love them.


About Sorabji, I have made a research in the catalog of the library. They have three CD and no sheet music.

1.   As I have said already, there is Madge's Opus clavicembalisticum, Grammofon Ab bis, 1999

2.   There is also a CD intituled "Transcription in the light of harpsichord technique for the modern piano of the Chromatic fantasia of J.S. Bach, followed by a fugue and other piano music and transcriptions Kaikhosru Sorabji" performed by Michael Habermann. Bis, 2003

This CD contains several pieces :
Rapsodie espagnole / Maurice Ravel
transcription pour piano par Sorabji (1945).
Passeggiata Veneziana (1956).
Variation 56 (Variations for piano and orchestra, version for piano solo).
Quasi habanera.
Transcription in the light of harpsichord technique for the modern piano of the Chromatic Fantasia of J.S. Bach, followed by a fugue.
Pasticcio capricioso sopra op64 No1 dello Chopin

It looks interesting.


3.   There is a third CD : "Piano Sonata no 1" by Marc-André Hamelin, Altarus, 1990


You mention Jonathan Powell as a good interpreter of Sorabji's works. Do you know Hamelin's recordings ? Michael Habermann ? If you do, what did you think of them ?


A concerto for solo piano ? A piano symphony ? What the hell is that ?

Thank you very much for your recommendation.

[ahinton]

My thanks to "gep" for initiating this thread and drawing attention to the website information source. I will indeed be more than happy to answer questions that anyone may have about Sorabji and his work. As it happens, I have just returned from a performance in London yesterday of the second of his two piano transcriptions of Ravel's lovely Rapsodie Espagnole (this was the one written in 1945; an earlier one dating from 1923 was discovered only recently when it was sold by the Ravel family archive - we have a copy in our collection and it is one of an increasing number of Sorabji scores that has been edited and typeset); this performance was part of a programme given by Danish pianist Jørgen Hald Nielsen in a recital series devised by Jonathan Powell.

Jonathan Powell will not be recording Opus Clavicembalisticum in the foreseeable future, which is a shame since his performances of it have been almost unbelievably wonderful; one reason for this is that a new edition of the work is currently being prepared by Simon Abrahams from the various available text sources (a copy of the ms., the composer's "working copy" publication bearing numerous corrections in his hand and a set of publication proofs). We don't yet know when this will be finished, but I'm sure that Mr Powell will plan to record the piece once it is. In the meantime, he has recently given one performance of part of one of the peaks Sorabji's creative achievements, the Sequentia Cyclica and he anticipates premièring the whole work some time next year. In the meantime, there are ample opportunities to hear superlative performances from him in excellent recordings of Sorabji's music - Passeggiata Venaziana, Villa Tasca, Toccata No. 1, Sonata No. 4, Fantasia Ispanica, Gulistan, Rosario d'Arabeschi, Concerto per suonare da me solo, Un Nido di Scatole, St. Bertrand de Comminges and Djami, seven of which are recorded premières and all of which add up to more than nine hours of music!

As to availability of commercial recordings, I think that I am correct in saying that all that have ever been made are still available except the 2-CD set of Kevin Bowyer playing Organ Symphony No. 1; Mr Bowyer is currently engaged on a massive project to edit and perform all three Sorabji organ symphonies, as part of which he will re-record the first one and he is scheduled to give the world première of the second one in Glasgow at 1.00 p.m. on Sunday 7 June this year at Glasgow University Memorial Chapel. The vast majority of commercial recordings of Sorabji are on the Altarus label andm by special arrangement with Altarus, we supply that label's entire catalogue, so all of their Sorabji CDs are available directly from us. Of those on other labels (which we don't supply), one of the most remarkable is the first in a projected series of six CDs covering the entire cycle of Sorabji's 100 Transcendental Studies for piano; this is played by Swedish pianist Fredrik Ullén and is on the Sewdish label BIS, so it should be easily available from a variety of sources. The second volume is anticipated for release later this year and the third has already been recorded. The first volume comprises studies 1 - 25 and there is no doubt that Mr Ullén is well up to every challenge that they present; he has reflexes of the order of Marc-André Hamelin and some fine insights into this music.

And that's enough from me for now! - except to invite anyone interested to visit the website and mention that I can receive enquiries by email at sorabji-archive@lineone.net. Enjoy!

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

2.   There is also a CD intituled "Transcription in the light of harpsichord technique for the modern piano of the Chromatic fantasia of J.S. Bach, followed by a fugue and other piano music and transcriptions Kaikhosru Sorabji" performed by Michael Habermann. Bis, 2003

This CD contains several pieces :
Rapsodie espagnole / Maurice Ravel
transcription pour piano par Sorabji (1945).
Passeggiata Veneziana (1956).
Variation 56 (Variations for piano and orchestra, version for piano solo).
Quasi habanera.
Transcription in the light of harpsichord technique for the modern piano of the Chromatic Fantasia of J.S. Bach, followed by a fugue.
Pasticcio capricioso sopra op64 No1 dello Chopin

It looks interesting.

This is one of the few Sorabji recordings I don't have (yet), and I'm not sure if I will get it eventually, for the simple reason that I find Mr. Haberman's playing of Sorabji's music (I do have a number of  CD's by him) not so very attractive. Quite possibly my fault, but so it is. Nontheless, you might want to try this CD (rather than go to Opus Clav right away), since the pieces presented are fairly short and simple.

3.   There is a third CD : "Piano Sonata no 1" by Marc-André Hamelin, Altarus, 1990

Wonderful, get it! It's Sorabji's 2nd Sonata, but the first did not get a number (so now it's known as "No. 0"). It's an early work, fairly short and very expressive and, to Sorabji standards, fairly simple to follow.

You mention Jonathan Powell as a good interpreter of Sorabji's works.

Then you got me wrong, for I think he is a superb interpreter of Sorabji's works! Lucky for us then that he has so far recorded more than any other peformer, and played even more!

Do you know Hamelin's recordings ?

A few, besides the Sorabji Sonata you mention I have him on a number of Alkan CD's and Rzewski. The Alkan are jawdropping...

Michael Habermann

Only on 3 Sorabji CD's (which are reprints of early Sorabji recordings, first issued on LP). He plays well but, as, said, to my taste they lack something. This dosn't mean they are bad, of course, my opinion says only something about my opinion, not anything about the pianist!

A concerto for solo piano ? A piano symphony ? What the hell is that ?

A concerto for solo-piano is a work in which the piano plays both the solo-part as well as the "orchestra" part, meaning they are quite distinct. The earliest example is perhaps Bach's Italian Concerto (in which the "solo" and "orchestra" parts are further distinguished by way of different registrations on the harpsichord, somthing that can't be done on a piano, of course. Alkan's Concert for Solo Piano is another such solo-concerto.
A piano symphony is a work which has all the characteristics of a symphony (i.e. symphonic though, developements etc.), but played on a solo piano. Something like an organ symphony (Widor and Vierne are notable examples in this). To quote Sorabji (sort of), "a piece written orchestrally for the piano in terms of the piano". If you play a Liszt piano-transcription of a Beethoven symphony, you have a symphony for piano. Now think of a similar piece, but written straight away for the piano.

Hope the above is a bit helpful to you!

Best wishes,
Gep

[ahinton]

The above is all very useful and helpful. Anyone wishing to listen to the Sorabji works recorded by Michael Habermann may also do so from other sources in many cases, including
Fantaisie Espagnole (Donna Amato on Altarus)
Pastiche i (Fredrik Ullén on BIS)
Pastiche ii (Carlo Grante on Altarus)
Pastiche iii (Marc-André Hamelin on Hyperion)
Djami (Jonathan Powell on Altarus)
Le Jardin Parfumé (Yonty Solomon on Altarus)
St. Bertrand de Comminges (Jonathan Powell on Altarus)
Gulistan (Charles Hopkins on Altarus / Jonathan Powell on Altarus)
Quaere Reliqua Hujus Materiei Inter Secretiora (Donna Amato on Altarus)
Fantasiettina (Ronald Stevenson on Altarus / Murray McLachlan on Dunelm)
Passeggiata Veneziana (Jonathan Powell on Altarus)
Pasticcio Capriccioso (Fredrik Ullén on BIS).

Whilst my position as curator of The Sorabji Archive and the composer's literary executor requires me to exercise due discretion in expressing views of performances, recordings, &c., of the composer's work, I must agree with "gep"'s view on the comparative merits of the recordings of Opus Clavicebalisticum. Geoffrey Douglas Madge has to date been that work's most frequent performer, having so far given six performances of it, the others having been given by the composer (1), John Ogdon (2 public + 1 private hearing at the home of Ronald Stevenson), Dan Vandewalle (2) and Jonathan Powell (4 public + 1 private hearing at The Sorabji Archive). Mr Madge's 1982 performance (his first complete one), which I attended, certainly made Sorabjian history in that it was the first time that the work had been heard complete in public for more than half a century; it is an edited version of this that appeared on the now defunct LPs that "gep" mentions, whereas his BIS recording was of his 1983 Chicago performance the following year. I did not hear his complete performances of OC in Chicago, Montréal (1984, where the page-turner for its Pars Seconda was a Canadian pianist in his mid-20s named Marc-André Hamelin!) or Berlin (2003) or any of his various partial performance of it, but I did also attend his Bonn performance in 1983 and the one he gave in Paris just six days before the composer's death in 1988. Of all the OC performances by Mr Madge that I have heard, the Paris one struck me as being by far the best. John Ogdon's recording was a studio one rather than taken and/or licensed from a public performance; the instrument and recording are infinitely finer and there seems to me to be a much clearer idea of what the work is all about (and it is worth remembering in this context that Mr Ogdon had lived with this piece since his late 'teens when he was given a copy by Peter Maxwell Davies, from which he performed the entire work in private in 1959 on the 29th anniversary of the composer's public première).

The available source documents at the time of performance and recordings of OC are also worth mentioning in this context. The composer had only his manuscript; the publication did not appear until several months after his première of the work. Mr Madge had access only to a published copy of it, whereas Mr Ogdon also had access to copies of both the manuscript and the annotated publication proofs. Another vital source only became accessible later; in the early 1940s, Sorabji had given what he called his "working copy" publication, (bearing many annotations and emendations in his own hand) to his friend Dr. Duncan Irving, an English ophthalmologist (now retired), who very kindly donated it to The Sorabji Archive 12 years ago tomorrow and which then became the source material for our revised master copy from which we have made all subsequent copies of that publication. Mr Vandewalle and Mr Powell have therefore had the advantage of access to this and, in fact, the latter had studied all the available sources before giving his performances. The next and final stage is, of course, the forthcoming new Abrahams edition that I mentioned earlier and whose creation will benefit from all those sources as well as some input from Mr Powell himself, including some re-setting of certain passages on less staves than the composer had used.

Best,

Alistair

[bachfanatic]

Hi, everybody ! I've never heard any of Sorabji'music. Though I have heard that it is atonal. I'm not familiar with atonal music. Is it very atonal as Schoenberg, Berg or Webern ? I heard some music of this composers and I couldn't understand it. Should I be familar with atonal music to like Sorabji ?

[ahinton]

Hi, everybody ! I've never heard any of Sorabji'music. Though I have heard that it is atonal. I'm not familiar with atonal music. Is it very atonal as Schoenberg, Berg or Webern ? I heard some music of this composers and I couldn't understand it. Should I be familar with atonal music to like Sorabji ?

Sorabji's music is not atonal. I have no idea from whom you may have heard otherwise, but whoever it was had, like yourself, presumably heard none of it.

Best,

Alistair

[richard black]

Sorabji's music is not atonal.

Strictly true, of course, though it does rather depend on what one means by 'tonal'. Anyone whose use of the terms is restricted to 'tonic and dominant' would presumably describe Sorabji's music as atonal!

[ahinton]

Strictly true, of course, though it does rather depend on what one means by 'tonal'. Anyone whose use of the terms is restricted to 'tonic and dominant' would presumably describe Sorabji's music as atonal!

Some of Beethoven's and Chopin's too, no doubt! Why the fuss about its tonality or otherwise, though? (not that I'm asking YOU that, of course!)...

Best,

Alistair

[scottmcc]

Much as Will Rogers never met a man he didn't like, I never met an atonal work that I liked.  If I have a tool like that for instantly dismissing a piece of music, without needing to think about it, I'm gonna use it. 

But seriously, the trouble is that people are using the word atonal as a euphemism for terrible-sounding, which clearly isn't technically correct, but shows the lack of good euphemisms.  My suggestions would be craggy, thorny, dense, difficult, or just plain bad (clearly there's some bad music out there, right?).

Please know that the above in no way refers to Sorabji's music, but rather to the usage of the word atonal.  thanks. 

[ahinton]

Much as Will Rogers never met a man he didn't like, I never met an atonal work that I liked.  If I have a tool like that for instantly dismissing a piece of music, without needing to think about it, I'm gonna use it. 

But seriously, the trouble is that people are using the word atonal as a euphemism for terrible-sounding, which clearly isn't technically correct, but shows the lack of good euphemisms.  My suggestions would be craggy, thorny, dense, difficult, or just plain bad (clearly there's some bad music out there, right?).

Please know that the above in no way refers to Sorabji's music, but rather to the usage of the word atonal.  thanks. 

Yes, I do indeed know that - so now let's get off tonality/atonality issues and back to the topic!

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

If I have a tool like that for instantly dismissing a piece of music, without needing to think about it, I'm gonna use it. 

Which you are free to do, of course. Personally, I would not like to dismiss a piece of music (or any art) without thinking bout it. I do not think (well, I do, of course, sometimes) that there is any music that is 100% purely tonal, the present Western tonal system in itself is "atonal" since the tempered scale is not harmonicaly pure (i.e. a third or a fifth aren't completely pure), so all music as played (barring "historical correct") presently is in factly slightly dissonant.

Sorry to veer of the subject again, back to Sorabji!

[worov]

I have been at the library and borrowed the recording of Sonata no. 1 by Hamelin. I have listened to it last night and found it very interesting. I will look for further recordings of Sorabji's works.

Does anyone know why this sonata has only one movement ?

[retrouvailles]

Does anyone know why this sonata has only one movement ?

Because that is how he wrote it. What's wrong with a one movement sonata?

His Sonata No. 4 has three movements. Perhaps that one will bother you less.

[anne126]

Personally I find this fellow Sorabji's supposed "music" to be utter nonsense and garbage.

I'm absolutely willing to change my current opinion, if anyone cares to persuade me with a convincing argument, or perhaps a composition.

[ahinton]

Personally I find this fellow Sorabji's supposed "music" to be utter nonsense and garbage.

I'm absolutely willing to change my current opinion, if anyone cares to persuade me with a convincing argument, or perhaps a composition.

I have no idea what you may or may not have heard of Sorabji's work but, whatever your opinion may or may not be, it should at least be based upon a reasonable amount of listening experience, which is the only thing likely to change it if indeed it can be changed; that said, there is - or should be - a difference between finding that you do not care to listen to something and finding it to be "utter nonsense and garbage", so it would be as well if you can both appreciate and define that difference in some detail before trusting what you believe yourself to "find".

Best,

Alistair

[anne126]

I have no idea what you may or may not have heard of Sorabji's work but, whatever your opinion may or may not be, it should at least be based upon a reasonable amount of listening experience, which is the only thing likely to change it if indeed it can be changed; that said, there is - or should be - a difference between finding that you do not care to listen to something and finding it to be "utter nonsense and garbage", so it would be as well if you can both appreciate and define that difference in some detail before trusting what you believe yourself to "find".

In regards to what I have "heard" from Sorabji, is the following:

Quaere reliqua hujus materiei inter secretiora, for piano
St. Bertrand de Comminges ("He Was Laughing in the Tower"), for piano
Toccatinetta sopra C. G. F., for piano
Passeggiata arlecchinesca sopra un frammento di Busoni, for piano
Sutras (2) sul Nome dell'amico Alexis, for piano Sutra per il caro amico quasi Nipote - Alexis
Sutras (2) sul Nome dell'amico Alexis, for piano Sutra sul nome dell'amico Alexis
Opus clavisymphonicum
Symphony No. 3
Opus Clavicembalisticum
Passeggiata veneziana, for piano
Fantasia Ispanica
Concerto per suonare da me solo
Piano Symphonies

All of these are from various CDs that I have borrowed, and I must have forgotten some.

"there is - or should be - a difference between finding that you do not care to listen to something and finding it to be "utter nonsense and garbage",

Indeed I do care to "listen" to Sorabji, perhaps the trouble is I find nothing in the music to listen to. Please inform me of what I am missing, if anything.

[minor9th]

I think I own every CD yet recorded, and I saw Jonathan Powell play 'OC' in NY (and Dona Amato play the 5th Symphony for Piano in the same week!), so I am obviously a huge fan. Occasionally, he uses a bit too much step-wise motion for my taste, but that is a minor niggle. I love reveling in the counterpoint and multi-layers of sound.

[edwardweiss]

 Well, anne126, if you really have listened to all those pieces listed and you can't delineate what you are supposed to be listening for-I suggest that you and others who simply don't get Sorabji just don't bother those of us who can and do any longer. I for one have become totally weary of those who can't understand Sorabji as a composer at all-let alone as the very great one that I believe him to be-almost as weary as I am of the 10 year-olds who constantly equate speed of execution with great piano playing. If you are a good pianist then get a copy of O.C. and study it. I got mine from a second-hand shop in Scarborough in 1978-along with a copy of Godowsky's E minor Passacaglia by some strange twist of fate-and there have not been many months since that time when I have failed to play some part of both these great works. Sticking the copy on the music stand and your hands on the keyboard is by far the best way to get to know music, even today. Then if you still don't like it, well, O.K.

[anne126]

Well, anne126, if you really have listened to all those pieces listed and you can't delineate what you are supposed to be listening for-I suggest that you and others who simply don't get Sorabji just don't bother those of us who can and do any longer.

I am not trying to "bother" anyone. If I have bothered you, I suppose that I apologize? However, that was not my intention.

I for one have become totally weary of those who can't understand Sorabji as a composer at all-let alone as the very great one that I believe him to be-almost as weary as I am of the 10 year-olds who constantly equate speed of execution with great piano playing.

Would you claim to understand Sorabji?

I've already taken consideration that I dislike his music because I have yet to "understand" it, whatever that means. If you (or ahinton) would help me understand, I would be most grateful. Otherwise, you've said nothing so far, save

If you are a good pianist then get a copy of O.C. and study it.

That might help. I'm sure that I can find it somewhere. :)

[ahinton]

get a copy of O.C. and study it. I got mine from a second-hand shop in Scarborough in 1978-along with a copy of Godowsky's E minor Passacaglia

B minor, surely?! Or do you mean the E minor Sonata?

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

In regards to what I have "heard" from Sorabji, is the following:

Quaere reliqua hujus materiei inter secretiora, for piano
St. Bertrand de Comminges ("He Was Laughing in the Tower"), for piano
Toccatinetta sopra C. G. F., for piano
Passeggiata arlecchinesca sopra un frammento di Busoni, for piano
Sutras (2) sul Nome dell'amico Alexis, for piano Sutra per il caro amico quasi Nipote - Alexis
Sutras (2) sul Nome dell'amico Alexis, for piano Sutra sul nome dell'amico Alexis
Opus clavisymphonicum
Symphony No. 3
Opus Clavicembalisticum
Passeggiata veneziana, for piano
Fantasia Ispanica
Concerto per suonare da me solo
Piano Symphonies

All of these are from various CDs that I have borrowed, and I must have forgotten some.

This is mighty interesting, since Opus Clavisymphonicum has as yet never been performed, and neither has Symphony 3 (that last one would be a bit hard, since there are only Symphonies 1 and 2). Of the Piano Symphonies only nos 4 and 5 have been performed, but these as yet hev not been recorded for CD. So I wonder how you got those CD's?

[anne126]

Actually, you're quite right. I could be mistaken, because I'm not exactly sure what I've heard (my friend, who likes Sorabji, made me a few CDs of most of his pieces in order to convince me). I simply went to wikipedia and looked at his list of compositions in order to remember what was on the CDs. ;)

I could have confused some pieces with others.

Still, this seems irrelevant. From what I've heard (at least 4 cds worth)—I dislike his music entirely—and my opinion still holds, for me. Until someone that "understands" these works, that seem only like vain waves of chromaticism, says something, I'm afraid I still think it's nonsense.

I would expect something from ahinton since he or she is the president or administrator or however it's called, of the Sorabji Archive. But he or she has yet to say anything. So I shall assume there is nothing to say about this composer's work, and it speaks for itself.

[weissenberg2]

I typically don't like Sorabji but I like the prelude interlude and fugue. But I have not listened to much of his music.

[gep]

I simply went to wikipedia and looked at his list of compositions in order to remember what was on the CDs.

Tip: there are special pens with which you can write on a CD (the top that is, not the bussiness side! )

From what I've heard (at least 4 cds worth)—I dislike his music entirely—and my opinion still holds, for me.

Which is entirely OK. You've sampled the music, and it doesn't work for you. Sampling music and so finding out what you like or like not as how one aquires a personal taste. We all have our likes and dislikes, that makes discussing them so interesting!

Until someone that "understands" these works, that seem only like vain waves of chromaticism, says something, I'm afraid I still think it's nonsense.

I think you confuse some things here. First of all, nobody can explain to you or anyone why you should like or dislike any music. As said, such things are a matter of taste.
Please also do not confuse "I do not like this" with "this is nonsense". What you, or I, or anyone likes or likes not says absolutely nothing whatsoever about the "quality" of whatever music. You've tried it, and Sorabji's music doesn't "work" for you. This is absolutely OK. But that does not make it nonsense! Your friend likes it, so for him it makes sense, after all. It works for me too, so that makes two against one, but does that make us "win"?
Don't judge something in art purely on your personal tastes, likes and dislikes. We've got critics for that...

So I shall assume there is nothing to say about this composer's work, and it speaks for itself.

There's a lot to say about this music, or any. But indeed the music should speak for itself, as any music, or art. Whether or not you, me, or anyone "hears" it is purely based on our individual, and different, mental ears.

[ahinton]

I can, I think, do no better than echo the sentiments of "gep" in response to "anne126" in respect of the music of Sorabji in that, if it happens not to grab certain listeners by the ears immediately or at some later stage, then so be it. One can, of course, substitute any composer's name for that of Sorabji here. There are even those who feel that way about the music of Bach (incredible as that may seem), yet does that fact identify it as "nonsense"? Clearly not.

It happens that the curator/director of The Sorabji Archive has been out of the country for almost two weeks without internet access but, even had that not been the case, it still does not fall to him to seek to persuade people to respond to Sorabji's music in any particular way by means of the provision of explanatory justification.

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

There are even those who feel that way about the music of Bach (incredible as that may seem),

Well, I fear it's credible, as I once read about a performing artist (big name too) who said in an interview that he could not understand all the fuss about Bach, since it left him unperturbed in any way. To me, that is saying something like, "oxygen? Nah, can see what everybody sees in it.."

It happens....

[indutrial]

My experience with Sorabji has been somewhat topsy-turvy over the years, as I've gone through periods of extremely active interest in his work followed by months where his music is just about the last thing I want to hear. To me, he's a very difficult composer to like, regardless of how interesting his work is to behold. His work is extremely dramatic, difficult to sit through, and hard to connect with. Studying small parts of his gargantuan works is always a rewarding experience in the microcosmic sense, but listening to an hour or two of these sort of great small ideas coming and going and going and coming inevitably has a dulling and depressing effect on my ears and brain.

That said, I have been studying the score for the Sequentia Cyclia on and off all year long.

[nearenough]

Sorabji, as much as I would sympathetically *want* him to be justified as a great composer, for all the notes he wrote, remains a pretender. I listened to Opus Clavicembalisticum at least 5 times (Ogdon), completely, in different months, trying to enjoy and understand the gargantuan production, but the miasma of note-spinning remained largely background piano noise. No further comment at this time.

I must warn the buyer of a certain CD (I cannot find it right now but I will) that it contains only 17 minutes of sound (I can't call it "music"). I found this utterly disheartening, that a company would try to sell a product that is not only compositionally poor, but short.  A travesty? No -- a blessing.

[thalbergmad]

Sorabji, as much as I would sympathetically *want* him to be justified as a great composer, for all the notes he wrote, remains a pretender. I listened to Opus Clavicembalisticum at least 5 times (Ogdon), completely, in different months, trying to enjoy and understand the gargantuan production, but the miasma of note-spinning remained largely background piano noise. No further comment at this time.

Well, you have listened to it twice more than i have and i can only echo your comments.

To listen to it was a torture that i do not wish to endure again. It does not matter who plays this, it is impossible to polish a turd.

Thal

[ahinton]

It does not matter who plays this, it is impossible to polish a turd.

If you have not heard anyone else play this work (and one must assume from your remarks that you have not), on what basis can you feel so certain as to your stance on it? I would really counsel you to listen to the piece - or at the very least some parts of it - played by Jonathan Powell before you make such snap judgements based upon a single hearing of a single performance; I'm not necessarily suggesting that you actually do this; what I am recommending is that you do so if you really want to place yourself in a position to make a more informed judgement as to what you feel about it. Again, the fact - if it still turns out to be one - that you cannot get along with OC even after you've listened to all or parts of it played by Jonathan Powell need not in any case signify that you would respond to any or all other works by its conposer in the same way; yes, there are longer Sorabji piano works than OC - and there are dozens of shorter ones, too, so, in an output that embraces piano sonatas of c.20 minutes to c.300 minutes, series of aphoristic fragments, studies, Spanish-inspired pieces, pieces in the "tropical nocturne" genre, pieces based on stories of the supernatural by Montague Rhodes James, transcriptions of Bach, Bizet, Rimsky-Korsakov, Chopin, Ravel and Richard Strauss and much more, you might well find something that grabs you more than OC does - but you won't unless you give any of these things a fair chance as a listener.

So much for the first part of your sentence; as to the second, do you write with the authority conferred upon you by personal experience?...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I must warn the buyer of a certain CD (I cannot find it right now but I will) that it contains only 17 minutes of sound (I can't call it "music"). I found this utterly disheartening, that a company would try to sell a product that is not only compositionally poor, but short.  A travesty? No -- a blessing.

Must you? Well, I think that we'd all rather you identify that CD first and then explain why you appear to believe that its contents are poor and its results disheartening to you and yet you decribe it as a blessing rather than a travesty; unless there is some particular subtley that I'm missing here, a little elucidation might not come amiss...

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

Sorabji, as much as I would sympathetically *want* him to be justified as a great composer, for all the notes he wrote, remains a pretender. I listened to Opus Clavicembalisticum at least 5 times (Ogdon), completely, in different months, trying to enjoy and understand the gargantuan production, but the miasma of note-spinning remained largely background piano noise. No further comment at this time.

I must warn the buyer of a certain CD (I cannot find it right now but I will) that it contains only 17 minutes of sound (I can't call it "music"). I found this utterly disheartening, that a company would try to sell a product that is not only compositionally poor, but short.  A travesty? No -- a blessing.

Ah, the all-time great "since I don't like it, it by definition nonsense" syndrome!

"A certain CD"? Can't remember the title, perhaps?

I'd guess it's the Fantaisie Espagnole. Altarus has issued a number of "short" Sorabji CD's, but always announced those as CD-singles and priced them accordingly. So if anyone has payed full price for such a CD he/she's been ripped of by the reseller, not by the company.

a company would try to sell a product that is not only compositionally poor

Yes, let's convince all record companies to first check with you; if you like it, it's going into the market, otherwise it's not. Can't have with music that is not up to your tastes or above your mental horizon, now can we!

it is impossible to polish a turd.

But despite that you still wash yourself I hope?

[thalbergmad]

based upon a single hearing of a single performance;

There are some complex mathematics here.

1. nearenough said he had listened to it at least 5 times.

2. I said that was 2 more than me.

3. This means i have listened to it 3 times.

4. I am therefore not basing my comments on hearing a single performance.

5. You need to accept the fact that some people simply do not like this OC thing.

Thal

[gep]

5. You need to accept the fact that some people simply do not like this OC thing.

Personally I do not have the slightest problem with that, assuming (as I do) you did indeed hear the work. What I do have a problem with is that you dismiss the composer and his complete works as "a turd" because you don't like the music you've heard (so far). What you (or I or anyone) likes or dislikes says all about your (or mine or anyone's) taste, nothing about the composer, his work or its performance. I'd guess what Alistair meant is something along these lines, but that's for him to confirm or not, of course!

For the record, OC, much as I like it, is not the most popular Sorabji work with me. If only because I believe it to be not typical of his way of writing a big piece even when it's music is fulle representative (much like the Turangalîlâ Symphonie isn't typical of Messiaen writing a big piece).

Ever tried "St. Bertrand", or "Jadin parfumé"?

Gep

[ahinton]

There are some complex mathematics here.

1. nearenough said he had listened to it at least 5 times.

2. I said that was 2 more than me.

3. This means i have listened to it 3 times.

4. I am therefore not basing my comments on hearing a single performance.

Sorry, but you are doing just that! To begin with, what you're talking about is not mathematics per se but arithmetic (which is merealy a branch of mathematics). I accept that I was wrong in writing "a single hearing of a single performance; the words "hearing of a single" should have been omitted. However, as I stated previously, you have said that you've only listened to one performance - the recorded one by John Ogdon. I don't wish to pull rank here, but I have listened to that many times, I was present throughout the recording sessions for it, I've heard three of Geoffrey Douglas Madge's six public performances of it as well as his two recordings (each of which were, broadly speaking, taken from his public performances, although the latter recording, on BIS, was taken from one of his live performances that I was unable to attend), I heard John Ogdon's two public performances of it and I have heard three performances of it by Jonathan Powell; does that experiential record suggest that I might be somewhat better qualified to judge my own take on OC than you are to judge yours?

You need to accept the fact that some people simply do not like this OC thing.

Whether or not I actually "need" to do so is up to each invididual who can be bothered  to think about it to decide for him/herself, but that is hardly the point, since I have "accepted" that ever since I first encountered the score!

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Personally I do not have the slightest problem with that, assuming (as I do) you did indeed hear the work. What I do have a problem with is that you dismiss the composer and his complete works as "a turd" because you don't like the music you've heard (so far). What you (or I or anyone) likes or dislikes says all about your (or mine or anyone's) taste, nothing about the composer, his work or its performance. I'd guess what Alistair meant is something along these lines, but that's for him to confirm or not, of course!

It was - and I agree - although it hardly matters whether or not anyone might agree, since it's sheer common sense that an averagely intelligent chold of six could grasp without undue difficulty!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

It was - and I agree - although it hardly matters whether or not anyone might agree, since it's sheer common sense that an averagely intelligent chold of six could grasp without undue difficulty!

Cannot comment, as i have never met an averagely intelligent chold.

[ahinton]

Cannot comment, as i have never met an averagely intelligent chold.

Then that saves us the trouble of having to read another comment from you that was as uninformed as that which you made about your view of OC; mind you, that said, I've never met a chold of any level of intelligence...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I don't wish to pull rank here, but I have listened to that many times, I was present throughout the recording sessions for it, I've heard three of Geoffrey Douglas Madge's six public performances of it as well as his two recordings (each of which were, broadly speaking, taken from his public performances, although the latter recording, on BIS, was taken from one of his live performances that I was unable to attend), I heard John Ogdon's two public performances of it and I have heard three performances of it by Jonathan Powell; does that experiential record suggest that I might be somewhat better qualified to judge my own take on OC than you are to judge yours?

All this suggests to me is that you have a strange idea of what constitutes a good evenings entertainment. If you want to spend 4 hours listening to someone pointlessly banging a piano that is entirely up to you.

I don't care if you have heard the blasted piece a 100 times and are the Worlds greatest authority on this obnoxious absurdity, but this does not make any difference to my personal preferences nor that of anyone else who has spent time listening to this appalling mess.

Thal

[ahinton]

All this suggests to me is that you have a strange idea of what constitutes a good evenings entertainment. If you want to spend 4 hours listening to someone pointlessly banging a piano that is entirely up to you.

If all that my remarks suggest to you is as you write above, then you are clearly either unable or unwilling (or perhaps both) to pick up much from what anyone might write. What you may mean by "a good evening's entertainment" may be open to question and is in any case up to you to decide for yourself, but not for anyone else. Some people would find listening to the Goldberg Variations, Hammerklavier Sonata or Alkan Studies an unwelcome experience, but that does not make a performance of any of them into "someone pointlessly banging a piano" (unless, of course, the pianist knows and is capable of nothing better than that); furthermore, given that the only performance of OC you have heard is John Ogdon's recording, would you not consider it insulting to the memory of that great artist to describe his account of a work that was one of a handful of piano pieces on the top of his list of priorities as "someone pointlessly banging a piano"? For the record, I have never sat and listened to anyone doing that for anything like that amount of time.

I don't care if you have heard the blasted piece a 100 times and are the Worlds greatest authority on this obnoxious absurdity,
The piece was written using pen, ink and paper rather than blasted, I have not listened to it 100 times, I am not (nor do I claim to be) the world's greatest authority on it, it is anythying but obnoxious and it is bnot remotely absurd, so you don;t have to care about any of that.

but this does not make any difference to my personal preferences

I am not seeking to alter or even criticise your personal preferences.

nor that of anyone else who has spent time listening to this appalling mess

Apart from the work being neither appalling nor a mess, who are you to speak of or for anyone else in terms of their personal preference for this or anything else? That is where you overstep the mark, Thal - in claiming, overtly or by implication, that your personal preferences typify those of listeners to piano music. In addition to the fact that you have only ever listened to one recording of this piece and have never heard it live, you have not discussed the work with many other people who have listened to one of more performance of it and are therefore in even less of a position to pontificate about their alleged personal opinions than you would be if you had. What you need to do is to accept the fact that there are plenty of people out there who hold the work in high regard and want to listen to it; were that not the case, why do you suppose Altarus still be selling copies of Ogdon's recording 20 years after is original release, why would BIS have issued their recording of Geoffrey Douglas Madge playing it several years later and why would Simon Abrahams go to the trouble of preparing a new typeset edition of it as he is now in the throes of doing?

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

What you need to do is to accept the fact that there are plenty of people out there who hold the work in high regard and want to listen to it

Good, i am very happy for them. What you need to get into YOUR head is that there are also people who don't like the work.

It has nothing to do with how many live recordings they have heard or how many people they have discussed it with. It is nothing to do with having the intelligence of a 6 year old chold or whether they could smell the pianists armpits whilst turning the pages. It is simply a matter of personal taste. No more or no less.

I do not think that listening to this again and again by different pianists would make any difference to my PERSONAL view. However if this long heralded recording you keep prattling on about ever actually happens, I will gladly dedicate a few megs of hard drive space if i am still alive.

Perhaps Richard Clayderman would do as good a job as anyone else.

Thal

[ahinton]

Good, i am very happy for them. What you need to get into YOUR head is that there are also people who don't like the work.

At the risk of repeating a certain G Bush - read my lips (or rather read my words); I've already stated that this is something of which I have been aware ever since I encountered a score of the work and which subsequent experience has not dimmed - but I don;t have a problem with that as you appear to do with the fact that people do want to listen to the piece.

It has nothing to do with how many live recordings they have heard or how many people they have discussed it with. It is nothing to do with having the intelligence of a 6 year old chold or whether they could smell the pianists armpits whilst turning the pages. It is simply a matter of personal taste. No more or no less.

Thank goodness you at last appreciate that!

I do not think that listening to this again and again by different pianists would make any difference to my PERSONAL view.

OK, so maybe it wouldn't (and, again, no problem with that in principle) although, until you've actually put that to the test, you would be unqualified to say for certain...

However if this long heralded recording you keep prattling on about ever actually happens, I will gladly dedicate a few megs of hard drive space if i am still alive.

I am sorry not to be able to give more specific details as to when this recording will be made, let alone released (much as I would like to), I note (with a whiif of surprise) your apparent disappointment at this, although (a) I do not "keep prattling on about" it, (b) I would not be asking you to set aside any disk space for it but to purchase a copy like anyone else who wants one and (c) I most sincerely hope that, when it does finally materialse, you will be well and truly alive.

Perhaps Richard Clayderman would do as good a job as anyone else.

At what? Thal appears here to have wandered off-topic, it would seem...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Thank goodness you at last appreciate that!

I have always appreciated that, but you appear to be the one with the problem in accepting that some people do not like this piece and they do not have to have listened to it for 500 times in order to express their dislike.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

(a) I do not "keep prattling on about" it

It was mentioned in another one of your posts only today and in God knows how many others over the years of your membership.

I only pray this "Holy Grail" of a recording happens sooner than later, as the suspense is killing me. Undoubtedly Amazon will need to hire another warehousman to cope with the demand.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

This chap ought to be hired for the next OC performance.

He appears to have the required technique.

Thal

[ahinton]

I have always appreciated that, but you appear to be the one with the problem in accepting that some people do not like this piece and they do not have to have listened to it for 500 times in order to express their dislike.

Again (and wearisomely again), read what I wrote about that; you (and others) do not have to warm to it at first, third or tenth listening and neither I nor anyone else in his/her right mind (assuming him/her to have one such in the first place) would seek to claim otherwise, but just because you don't happen to care for it doesn't mean that (a) it's a "turd" (as you so delightfully put it) or (b) that anyone other than you should  expected to assume that it is anything of the kind just because you say so. No, Thal - it is obviously you who has the problem; you don't like the piece (which is fine) and would rather very few others do (which is none of your business), yet the recordings keep selling and the performances occur and there is nothing that you can, or need, or should expect to be able, to do about any of these things.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

It was mentioned in another one of your posts only today

In response to you, perhaps...]

and in God knows how many others over the years of your membership.

Now don;t you start bringing God into this! You well know where that might well lead!...

I only pray this "Holy Grail" of a recording happens sooner than later, as the suspense is killing me.

I doubt that and, as I mentioned earlier, no one here wishes for your life to be shortened by anythying - not even this...

Undoubtedly Amazon will need to hire another warehousman to cope with the demand.

Is "warehousman" a relative of the poet A E of that ilk who happens to hail from Ware in Hertfordshire? Anyway, it's not my worry how Amazon or any other retail outlet will deal with it; that's a matter for the record company...

Best,

Alistair