Kill one Composer

[gep]

The problem is that the idea of "beauty" is very heavily indoctrinated from a young age and often becomes integral to a musician's fragile sense of self.

There are quite a few composers whose music, when I first encoutered it, were hermetic to me because of the way it sounded. Yet somehow they had something fascinating too, so I persisted in listening to them (sometimes only occasionally over many years). These composers have, without exception, become part of the composers I love most. I might name such better known names as Bruckner and Mahler, but also composers like Pettersson and Sorabji.
Unfortunatley, lots of people shy away from music du moment it isn't appealing to them first go. "The composers of the past composing much better music". And they forget along the way that those composers of the past that are the best known today were the avant-garde of their day, and treated much the same way as the avant-garde today. Beethoven's late Sonatas and Quartets weren't top-hits in their day...
Sadly, most people in concerts and shops want music they already know utterly, so as not to get "nasty" surprises. That's why we have got a hundred or so recordings of Vivaldi's Four Seasons, and (to my knowledge) none of Glonti's Metamorphosen Concerto.

By the way, there are composers whose music, when I first encouneterd it, were utterly hermetic to me and did also not fascinate me in any way. Despite repeated new encounters this music has remained invariously closed to me. I could name Stockhausen in this respect. Yet I would never want to stop anyone from listening to it, if he/she likes it.

Gep

[indutrial]

I attended a show presented by the Orpheus Ensemble earlier last year, primarily because they were premiering a new work by Charles Wuorinen called 'Synaxis' for four soloists and ensemble. Of course, to get the gig, they opened with Respighi's 'The Birds' and followed the intermission with a full performance of The Four Seasons, featuring the added bonus of a superstar violinist named Sarah Chang. All of the performances were excellent and Chang was flawless, but the ensemble seemed so incredibly bored playing the Vivaldi works. The Wuorinen piece was by far the most spirited piece to watch, but the audience was getting very uneasy and unsettled by the heavy-handed dynamic hits and otherworldly dissonance, not to mention the four soloists, who were swaying and lurching to keep in time with the demanding rhythms in the work (which in Wuorinen's pieces, can be downright maddening for performers). What pissed me off was how some people in the audience were talking sh*t (and talking and texting people during the performance) and acting as if the inclusion of a modern work was an insult to the genre and all this other bollocks, even though it was the only piece that was keeping the instrumentalists' eyes open.

Vivaldi's 'Four Seasons' has been hemming in people's potential appreciation of classical music for decades. I would love to kill that work in the hope that people might shift their attention towards baroque composers who are worthy of more attention. Tangentially related, I've really wanted to hear a full performance of Darius Milhaud's Four Seasons concertinos (spring for violin/orch., summer for viola/9 instruments, autumn for 2 pianos/orch., and winter for trombone/orch.). Instead of seeing three dozen more versions of Vivaldi's set hitting the shelves, it'd be nice to get one of Milhaud's, even if it's just a budget disc from Naxos or something.

[retrouvailles]

I attended a show presented by the Orpheus Ensemble earlier last year, primarily because they were premiering a new work by Charles Wuorinen called 'Synaxis' for four soloists and ensemble. Of course, to get the gig, they opened with Respighi's 'The Birds' and followed the intermission with a full performance of The Four Seasons, featuring the added bonus of a superstar violinist named Sarah Chang. All of the performances were excellent and Chang was flawless, but the ensemble seemed so incredibly bored playing the Vivaldi works. The Wuorinen piece was by far the most spirited piece to watch, but the audience was getting very uneasy and unsettled by the heavy-handed dynamic hits and otherworldly dissonance, not to mention the four soloists, who were swaying and lurching to keep in time with the demanding rhythms in the work (which in Wuorinen's pieces, can be downright maddening for performers). What pissed me off was how some people in the audience were talking sh*t (and talking and texting people during the performance) and acting as if the inclusion of a modern work was an insult to the genre and all this other bollocks, even though it was the only piece that was keeping the instrumentalists' eyes open.

Vivaldi's 'Four Seasons' has been hemming in people's potential appreciation of classical music for decades. I would love to kill that work in the hope that people might shift their attention towards baroque composers who are worthy of more attention. Tangentially related, I've really wanted to hear a full performance of Darius Milhaud's Four Seasons concertinos (spring for violin/orch., summer for viola/9 instruments, autumn for 2 pianos/orch., and winter for trombone/orch.). Instead of seeing three dozen more versions of Vivaldi's set hitting the shelves, it'd be nice to get one of Milhaud's, even if it's just a budget disc from Naxos or something.

Did that concert happen to be on May 10, 2008, or sometime around there? I found a live recording of it and can't wait to hear Synaxis. The soloist list looks interesting.

[ahinton]

Andrew Lloyd Webber.

Then again, I'm not sure if he qualifies as a composer.

(I'm sure Malcolm Williamson said "Andrew Lloyd Webber is everywhere - but so is AIDS".)

Yes, he did; he was, however, wrong, since neither is actually omnipresent. Lord Lloyd Webber qualifies as someone who has provided quite a lot of work for people in West End theatres in London over some four decades. I am disinclined to say more than that.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

The "modernists" do not allow us to hate their favourite composers and they get very upset when we do. If we do not like some 20th Century music, it is because of a lack of intelligence on our part &  our inability to endure hours of music we do not like, in order to find something that we do.

I do not know who your "modernists" may be (and since you mention "20th century music", it must be a pretty broad term, since that takes us back almost 109 years) but, whilst I cannot speak for others, I can confirm that it is certainly not a habit of mine to deprecate per se people's dislike of any music of any era; when, on the other hand, people make unintelligent and unenlightening remarks about music on which they are insufficiently familiar to pronounce but which they happen to believe they do not like, that is quite another matter.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Pierrot Lunaire is the musical work that I have listened to most times , and i dont even understand german or normaly listen to this kind of music  I have no interrest of understanding what its about or reading the score, there is just something weirdly magical about it that I never get tired of. There are also a movie to it that I ordered from Amazon, where Pierre Boulez   conducts and Christine Schäfer sings. awsome.

Much as I've admired that work for a long time and much as I adore a good deal of what Schönberg wrote before it, it has never really done a whole lot for me; that said, it earned fulsome compliments from Ravel and Puccini...

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

Lord Lloyd Webber qualifies as someone who has provided quite a lot of work for people in West End theatres in London over some four decades.

Hmmm, the weapons industry has provided quite more work to quite more people over a quite longer time. So weapons industry is better in this respect?
Joking of course(!!), I'd rather have LW in my ear than a gun, provided he doesn't stay there too long.

talking and texting people during the performance

Ah yes, that's an eternal "joy of Man's desire".....
"Is that a trombone that guy is playing?"
"No, that's a harp"
"Are you sure?"
"Yes, a trombone is played with bow, you fool!"
"But what's that man doing there?"
"What man?"
"There, that guy in the middle, having an spasm"
"Oh, that's the conductor"
"Doesn't he have to face the orchestra then?"
"Yes. Strange, seems to be looking on this direction..."
"Not at us, surely!"
"Of course not, don't be a fool!"
"But that gun he's got is pointing at me!!"

I won't even start about those parents taking their 3 year old to a Schönberg concert to afflict them with culture, or whole schoolclasses pressganged to be there by their teachers. I've "enjoyed' both. Unfortunately, homicide is illegal, even in those circumstances....

The "modernists" do not allow us to hate their favourite composers and they get very upset when we do.

"We" don't, "we" merely get very upset if people talk gibberish about it (especially when done so during performance), along the lines of "I don't like it, so why are you still playing that crap!"
Has nothing to do with intelligence....

our inability to endure hours of music we do not like

I fail to understand why on earth you would, or should, endure music you don't like! I most certainly don't. If you don't like it, avoid it. Luckily with classical music of all ages, you can pretty much avoid anything you don't like. Unlike pop and (oh horror) muzak (musak, however it's spelled), which is blared at you from pretty much all angles, be it shops, streets (why don't their heads implode with the 160dB racket?? There certainly isn't much matter in between their ears to prevend collaps...), trains, whereever.

Gep

[indutrial]

I fail to understand why on earth you would, or should, endure music you don't like! I most certainly don't. If you don't like it, avoid it. Luckily with classical music of all ages, you can pretty much avoid anything you don't like.

A further bit of advice to modern music naysayers would have to be "get over yourselves." It's just comes across as ludicrous when someone that doesn't compose or perform on par with even a modestly-busy musician gets it in their head that their humble opinion makes them correct about anything. Let me spoil the ending of the argument in advance - people who think modern music is garbage are wrong. If they were right, the thousands of conductors, music professors, and performers of superior ability who've promoted that music since the 1920s would have never touched that music. The classical music world's acceptance of dodecaphonic music, et al. is VALID. It's not some big mistake that nobody's yet picked up on. Also, lest you forget, composers are not writing for you. The incorporation of 12-tone structures and bizarre rhythms is part of their own self-discovery, which thank god, is not subject to formal limitations these days. If you want to feel like a composer is out to coddle your precious ears, kindly direct yourself to the movie soundtracks or look around on www.sibeliusmusic.com for a bit.

I, of course, sound like a hypocrite, since despite my above argument, I still think badly of most minimalist composers, especially Glass and Reich. My problem there lays in the idea that their large appeal enables lots of musicians and listeners to pass over tons of other music from the same time period, instead intoxicating them with their prog-rock-in-disguise/may-as-well-be-electronica charlatanism. I'm not saying that classical music should adhere to some sort of unceasing uphill climb in terms of harmony/complexity/rhythm, since that, of course, would give us nothing but a bunch of Ferneyhoughs and Finnissys, but the monster appeal of second-rate movie composers like Glass seems noxious and saps away loads of attention that could be paid to composers who truly understand the craft and respect the past and present history of the music they create.

[thalbergmad]

A further bit of advice to modern music naysayers would have to be "get over yourselves." It's just comes across as ludicrous when someone that doesn't compose or perform on par with even a modestly-busy musician gets it in their head that their humble opinion makes them correct about anything.

There is no correct or incorrect. All any of us can have is an opinion.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

I fail to understand why on earth you would, or should, endure music you don't like!

Well Doris, I do not believe in criticising that which i have not heard. I have spent a fair amount of time listening to 20th century music, in order to find something i like.

This has sometimes been unpleasant, but i must continue the suffering.

Thal

[retrouvailles]

There is no correct or incorrect. All any of us can have is an opinion.

Thal

Sure, there are opinions, but there are opinions which are well-informed or poorly-informed. Sure, there is no right or wrong, but there is a way to qualitatively judge an opinion. You still have a lot to learn about the "modernists" and "modernist music" that you dismiss as trash or laugh at all the time.

[thalbergmad]

Sure, there are opinions, but there are opinions which are well-informed or poorly-informed. Sure, there is no right or wrong, but there is a way to qualitatively judge an opinion. You still have a lot to learn about the "modernists" and "modernist music" that you dismiss as trash or laugh at all the time.

Whether one is well informed or poorly informed is not going affect whether one likes or dislikes a certain piece of music, nor does it validate/invalidate a personal preference.

Some "modernist" music does make me laugh, but not half as much as some of the "intellectual" posters on this thread.

I think you need to realise that there are people who simply do not like some 20th century music and they should not have to be able to "compose or perform on par with even a modestly-busy musician composer" in order to express their preferences.

Somehow, i think i am not the only one that needs to get over myself.

Thal

[retrouvailles]

Whether one is well informed or poorly informed is not going affect whether one likes or dislikes a certain piece of music, nor does it validate/invalidate a personal preference.

Some "modernist" music does make me laugh, but not half as much as some of the "intellectual" posters on this thread.

I think you need to realise that there are people who simply do not like some 20th century music and they should not have to be able to "compose or perform on par with even a modestly-busy musician composer" in order to express their preferences.

Well, I think you're just missing part of the point. 20th century suffers from a form of hate that is different from when people dislike other kinds of music, such as a person who does not like Baroque music. Baroque music is much more homogeneous than 20th century music, which is extremely varied and impossible to pigeon-hole, given all of the sub-genres within it. That is why that I implied that your opinion, and the opinions of many others, is not well-informed, simply because you don't know enough of it to just dismiss it. So, basically, I ask that a person hears enough music of a certain sort before forming any sort of opinion that they would attempt to pass off as intelligent (or even otherwise). It would really save all of this useless bickering.

[drpiano]

- people who think modern music is garbage are wrong. If they were right, the thousands of conductors, music professors, and performers of superior ability who've promoted that music since the 1920s would have never touched that music. The classical music world's acceptance of dodecaphonic music, et al. is VALID. It's not some big mistake that nobody's yet picked up on. Also, lest you forget, composers are not writing for you.

There is simply too much variety in "modern music" for someone to legitimately think that it is all "garbage." Composers have made fascinating new discoveries, and others have written fundamentally traditional masterpieces. There really is something for everyone, even if it may not be so easy to find!
I'm not so sure that pulling rank, so to speak, is such a good idea though. What of the many conductors, performers and professors who don't value anything written after 1900 (or 1800 in some cases!)? Additionally, people positively involved with modern music may have motivations distinct from those of the audience. For example, performers may find the experience of preparing a new work invigorating, but they may not appreciate the work in the same manner as they do more traditional music. (In other words, rewarding to play doesn't necessarily mean rewarding to listen to. The same goes for scholarly study.) Likewise, a conductor may sometimes have to program music to satisfy certain funding requirements (ie, a certain amount of new or local content as a grant condition)

[indutrial]

I think you need to realise that there are people who simply do not like some 20th century music and they should not have to be able to "compose or perform on par with even a modestly-busy musician composer" in order to express their preferences.

Somehow, i think i am not the only one that needs to get over myself.

Thal

The previous post I made wasn't meant to imply that I myself "compose or perform on par, etc.." I don't even come from any level of classical music background at all. The problem as I see it (and this is and was never directed at anybody specific on this forum) is that too many students of music and performers see fit to indulge their individual tastes above and beyond approaching the whole of music with any level of open-mindedness or respect. Too many conservatories are bogged down with shitty lackluster musicians who are there because they're not good at anything else and the universities are more than happy to take their parents' money. The musical talent pool has pretty much become a mile wide and an inch deep. When enough of this underwhelming 'artists' flood out a conservatory, it's not long before the local concert schedule becomes systematic and drab. I piss and moan about these types of folks because I interact with a lot of them on a regular basis. They all perform reasonably well, but none of them give a rat's ass about hearing a new piece of music (whether it's a new discovery from the romantic era or a modern work that was composed last year). First and foremost comes the good old jadedness, by which a bad musician will willingly send new music in one ear and out the other. Oftentimes, they'll have some kind of preset opinion distorting any approach to a rational critique of the work. In the worst cases, they'll pretend to know what they're talking about while clearly having no legs to stand on (the Richard Kastles of the world). I don't quite know how to adequately describe my own background, but I feel like I approach newer music with far more humility than some of these folks. Most of them don't even seem to listen to music that much, as it gets in the way of talking on the phone, Facebooking, and rehearsing music they don't care about.

So don't think that I'm going after you, Thal, or anyone else on this forum. At least you try to listen to new works, just as I consistently try to find out what's so damned interesting about some of the romantic concertos people rave about but to me sound terribly similar to other romantic concertos.

[thalbergmad]

So, basically, I ask that a person hears enough music of a certain sort before forming any sort of opinion

I have done & continue to do so, but as Gep wisely said, why should i continue to endure music that i don't like.

Thal

[retrouvailles]

I have done & continue to do so, but as Gep wisely said, why should i continue to endure music that i don't like.

Thal

You should continue to endure it for all of the reasons I mentioned. You have only scratched the surface, my friend.

[argerichfan]

Much as I've admired that work for a long time and much as I adore a good deal of what Schönberg wrote before it, it has never really done a whole lot for me; that said, it earned fulsome compliments from Ravel and Puccini...

Yeah, I studied that particular Schönberg work at uni.  I went through the motions, made my grade.  But seriously, Ravel and Puccini admired this work?

Odd, because Puccini loved Korngold's music and kept in contact with the 'genius' until his untimely  death. Don't know about Ravel.  The well known story regarding his interaction with Gershwin is overly familiar, but I still wonder what Ravel heard in Schönberg, though I suppose that is not for me to question.   

Personally, I don't have any major issues with Schönberg; actually in piano class I shocked my classmates by sight reading the first several pages of the piano concerto, but this is an area that I have tended to excel.  (Doesn't make a great musician, though it helps.) 

But with all due respect to the academia, I fail to understand why I should love Schönberg; his 12 note music does not speak to my heart, and that is really the bottom line, is it not?  Give me that gorgeous Berg Violin Concerto, but then it in turn hardly matches Elgar's profoundly felt concerto. 

Life is so wonderful, we take the questions as they come up and do our best to provide answers. 

[gep]

Quote from: gep on June 12, 2009, 11:53:10 AM

I fail to understand why on earth you would, or should, endure music you don't like!

Well Doris, I do not believe in criticising that which i have not heard.

Ah well, Guinnevere, but my remark contained the assumption that you have indeed heard that what you found to be not to your liking.

I have spent a fair amount of time listening to 20th century music, in order to find something i like.

This has sometimes been unpleasant, but i must continue the suffering.

This would seem to indicate that you listen to 20th Century music with (quite) some prejudice. But at least you listen, there are untold numbers of fools (yes!) that go like "When did that composer live?" "He's still alive." "Oh... Nah, thanks..."

as Gep wisely said

Awwwww, Thal! This coming from you! I've gone all blushing....

But seriously, Ravel and Puccini admired this work?

Odd, because Puccini loved Korngold's music and kept in contact with the 'genius' until his untimely  death.

And why shouldn't Puccini have been able to like/admire both Korngold and Schönberg? If I can quite comfortably listen to Lloyd and Xenakis, or Bernstein and Sorabji, why then should a musical mind rather more huge than my miserably small one not be able to like the works of two rather various composers?

I still wonder what Ravel heard in Schönberg

An independent and truly original musical thinker, perhaps? Not unlike hisself?

Enjoy discovering!

Gep

[thalbergmad]

This would seem to indicate that you listen to 20th Century music with (quite) some prejudice.

Awwwww, Thal! This coming from you! I've gone all blushing....

1. I do not think it is possible to listen to something you have never heard before "with prejudice"

2. It probably won't happen again Doris.

Thal

[retrouvailles]

1. I do not think it is possible to listen to something you have never heard before "with prejudice"

Oh, but it is, for you might have some preconceived notion about what you are about to hear, which might have an influence on how much you like it or hate it. When you listen to something new (doesn't matter what it is), it is best to just clear your mind and concentrate on just what you are listening to, without any sort of preconceived notion about the kind of music it is.

[thalbergmad]

If you have never heard the composer or the piece you are going to listen to, it would be pretty darned difficult/stupid to listen with prejudice.

Thal

[retrouvailles]

If you have never heard the composer or the piece you are going to listen to, it would be pretty darned difficult/stupid to listen with prejudice.

Well, as stupid as it is, people still do it. It's not that difficult, really. I used to listen to pieces with plenty of prejudice. However, I realized that I was going to be too close-minded about what I liked, so I stopped.

[thalbergmad]

Me too old boy.

I am totally open

[ahinton]

Me too old boy.

I am totally open

To what? Come on, Orestes, tell us (sorry - had to do something about all that "Doric" crap...)

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I keep my mind open to the possible "wonders" written in the last half of the 20th century.

Who is Doric??

Thal

[ahinton]

I keep my mind open to the possible "wonders" written in the last half of the 20th century.

Who is Doric??

Think about it (as if you needed to) in relation to the fictitious and irrelevant "Doris" of your evidently compromised imagination...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

How did the Sorabji Organ Symphony concert go?

Or has it not finished yet??

Thal

[ahinton]

How did the Sorabji Organ Symphony concert go?

Or has it not finished yet??

Only the finale of the Second Organ Symphony was performed last Sunday, but brilliantly by Kevin Bowyer who now proposes to perform the entire symphony at around this time next year; had you been in Glasgow, you could have heard the evidence for yourself.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Regretfully i was suffering from an ingrowing toenail.

Queuing for hours to get a ticket would have been rather uncomfortable.

Thal

[ahinton]

Regretfully i was suffering from an ingrowing toenail.

From which I sincerely hope that you have now recovered.

Queuing for hours to get a ticket would have been rather uncomfortable.

For whom?

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

For whom?

For the Sorabji concert, obviously.

[ahinton]

For the Sorabji concert, obviously.

Not "obviously" at all; let me hasten to assure you that your presence there would by no means have been "uncomfortable" either for the organist or for anyone else present; in any case, it is far from "obvious" how an actual "concert" could feel "uncomfortable", as your post implies might have been possible under the particular circumstances that you sought to describe..

Best,

Alistair

[argerichfan]

You guys... at least it is all entertaining to read.

I actually had an interest in the Sorabji, but am currently in Helsinki for most of June.  

Church goer I am, Finland wins the award for the most dour Lutherans.  Yikes!, makes me question the ultimate outcome of the 30 Years War.  Sort of along the lines of the -so-called- 'American Revolution', screw the French, the Yanks had no right to win the tax rebellion.  Do you guys have ANY idea how much it cost Britain to prosecute that silly nonsense?  

And look what the planet got:  the meanest, most menacing threat this planet has ever experienced.  Literally every current political problem can in some way be traced to the ugly and greedy policies of Washington DC.

Do I hate the US?  Yes, I do. 

 

[thalbergmad]

in any case, it is far from "obvious" how an actual "concert" could feel "uncomfortable"

I was referring to queuing for the tickets.

Camping outside the Cathedral for 5 days then spending hours waiting to get in, would have been uncomfortable.

Thal

[gep]

I do not think it is possible to listen to something you have never heard before "with prejudice"

One only has to read your many posts to have concrete-solid proof that it is not only possible, but virtually a basic state of mind for some....

I keep my mind open to the possible "wonders" written in the last half of the 20th century.

This is so much in contradiction with so many things you write, and the way you write them, that I'm amazed your beard doesn't melt...

How did the Sorabji Organ Symphony concert go?

Or has it not finished yet??

Indeed not the slightest shred of any prejudice whatsoever about music you haven't heard...

Regretfully i was suffering from an ingrowing toenail.

Regretfully the rest of the world suffers from you ingrown musical mind...

One has just to mention the names "Sorabji" or "Hinton" (or "Gep", as it sow seems), and you show an openess of mind that can only be compared to the openess of the very universe (especially the main ingredient thereof, which is huge expanses of cold vacuum punctuated by small orbs of hot gas...)

The dedication of Opus Clavicembalisticum seems in place here:
"To the everlasting glory of those few (..) blessed and sanctified in the curses and execrations of those MANY whose praise is eternal damnation".

Enjoy your Khrennikov's, that man seems to have had the kind of mind and attitude you might relate to perfectly....

Gep

[thalbergmad]

Listen Doris, you take far too seriously what i write.

It would be best if you ignored my posts and i ignored yours.

I have been verbally jousting with Alistair for years. He does not take seriously what i say and neither should anyone else.

Now be a good girl and bog off.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

At least you try to listen to new works, just as I consistently try to find out what's so damned interesting about some of the romantic concertos people rave about but to me sound terribly similar to other romantic concertos.

Within reasonable parameters, this is a valid point and i would agree that the variety is not as evident as it is with the compositions i have heard from the mid to late 20th Century.

The advantage however, is that if you like one romantic concerto, you are pretty much guaranteed to like a lot of others.

My tastes are reasonably simple. Give me a nice melody, a good development, some crashing chords and octaves, a lyrical slow movement and a big bang to end with, i will be reasonably happy.

Perhaps that is why I like Dreyschock.

Thal

[indutrial]

Within reasonable parameters, this is a valid point and i would agree that the variety is not as evident as it is with the compositions i have heard from the mid to late 20th Century.

The advantage however, is that if you like one romantic concerto, you are pretty much guaranteed to like a lot of others.

My tastes are reasonably simple. Give me a nice melody, a good development, some crashing chords and octaves, a lyrical slow movement and a big bang to end with, i will be reasonably happy.

Thal

I finally got recordings of both the Milhaud piano/orchestra works (including five full concertos) and the Martinu concertos. I'd be curious to hear what you think of those works. Both composers write in dense polytonal languages, so it often approaches modern-sounding harmonies from more traditional springboards. I had never heard Milhaud's later concertos before and some of them demand intense virtuosity from the soloist. Tonight I plan on checking out a recording I picked up that has Henri Sauguet's third concerto played in its two-piano arrangement.

Are you a fan of the more popular 'early modern' twentieth-century repertoire, including the concertos by Bartok, Prokofiev (especially his later ones and the one for left hand alone), and Hindemith?

[thalbergmad]

I have really only scratched the surface with my 20th Century concerto listening and a lot of the ones i have listened to have romantic tendencies to differing degrees, ie Bowen, Ogdon, Dohnanyi, de Greef, Bloch, Palmgren, Rubbra, Korngold etc.

I have not listened to the Prokofiev concerti for some time, but i do not remember them making much of an impression on me, but perhaps that was Ashkenazy's fault.

To be honest i am completely ignorant of Milhaud. One of my internet buddies is a huge fan, but i have yet to listen to any of his works for piano and orchestra. Sauguet would probably be towards the bottom of my listening pile as i once read he was a inheritor of the Satie tradition.

However, I am in "French" mode at the moment with works for piano and orchestra by Loeffler & Koechlin scheduled in for listening. Perhaps they might ease me in for some Milhaud. Hinson's guide for Piano & Orchestra, highly recommends them.

Thal

[ahinton]

I have really only scratched the surface with my 20th Century concerto listening and a lot of the ones i have listened to have romantic tendencies to differing degrees, ie Bowen, Ogdon, Dohnanyi, de Greef, Bloch, Palmgren, Rubbra, Korngold etc.

I have not listened to the Prokofiev concerti for some time, but i do not remember them making much of an impression on me, but perhaps that was Ashkenazy's fault.

To be honest i am completely ignorant of Milhaud. One of my internet buddies is a huge fan, but i have yet to listen to any of his works for piano and orchestra. Sauguet would probably be towards the bottom of my listening pile as i once read he was a inheritor of the Satie tradition.

However, I am in "French" mode at the moment with works for piano and orchestra by Loeffler & Koechlin scheduled in for listening. Perhaps they might ease me in for some Milhaud. Hinson's guide for Piano & Orchestra, highly recommends them.

Thal

OK, so concerti they ain't exactly, but what about d'Indy's once very popular Symphonie Cevenole? - and the piano quintet by Florent Schmitt (one of the great works of French chamber music that might arguably be seen as a piano concerto in all but name) and Chausson's Concert (for piano, violin and string quartet which is even closer to that descriptor despite also being a work of chamber music)?...

Best,

Alistair

[retrouvailles]

OK, so concerti they ain't exactly, but what about d'Indy's once very popular Symphonie Cevenole? - and the piano quintet by Florent Schmitt (one of the great works of French chamber music that might arguably be seen as a piano concerto in all but name) and Chausson's Concert (for piano, violin and string quartet which is even closer to that descriptor despite also being a work of chamber music)?...

I personally think Thal would greatly enjoy the Chausson concerto, despite it having a violin soloist in it (I know he doesn't care for that much, going off his opinion of the Szymanowski). I personally don't care for the d'Indy Symphonie (I assume it is the same one as the one on a French Mountain Air). I found it just a bunch of superficial tunes. I did like the Schmitt quintet, and he is one composer I need to listen to more of.

Regarding Milhaud, Martinů, and the whole French/neoclassical school (if you could even call them that), I would greatly urge you to listen to them, Thal. Not all of them are great, seeing that many of these composers composed MASSIVE quantities of music, which means that the quality of a good number of the pieces is diminished. There are still some gems, though. The 4th Martinů piano concerto, his concerto for 2 pianos, Milhaud's 3rd piano concerto, and his Carnaval d'Aix are only a small portion of the gems these composers have to offer. I personally think they're much better than the concertos of Hindemith, who excelled more at chamber music than anything else (he has some wonderful sonatas with piano both as a soloist and accompanist, but I'm sure you already knew that).

Oh, and yes, get some better recordings of the Prokofiev concertos. Ashkenazy is one of the worst. The best complete set in my opinion is the one with Horacio Gutiérrez, Boris Berman, Neeme Järvi, and the Concertgebouw Orchestra. These are some of the most important piano concertos to come out of the 20th century and all pianists should be familiar with them in my opinion.

[thalbergmad]

OK, so concerti they ain't exactly, but what about d'Indy's once very popular Symphonie Cevenole?

The only piece i (think) I slightly remember from D'indy is the Jour d Ete la Montagne.

I tend to like my works for piano and orchestra to be "piano dominant" and i sometimes feel the French composers (bar Saint Saens), tend to favour a more equal role.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

Ashkenazy is one of the worst.

I should have known better, but it was in a sale. It is a shame, but a bad performance can put one off a great work.

Thal

[retrouvailles]

I tend to like my works for piano and orchestra to be "piano dominant" and i sometimes feel the French composers (bar Saint Saens), tend to favour a more equal role.

Not really. The French composers just sometimes use a bit more colorful and noticeable orchestration (I am grossly generalizing here), but the piano is still very much to the fore. Martinů (who can seem French influenced at times) wrote a few pieces for piano and orchestra where the piano and orchestra are equal, such as the Toccata e Due Canzoni, but those aren't his better works, in my opinion.

[thalbergmad]

Not really. The French composers just sometimes use a bit more colorful and noticeable orchestration (I am grossly generalizing here), but the piano is still very much to the fore.

I can see where you are coming from, but perhaps French composers do not treat the piano so much as a virtuoso vehicle, so its prominence is less apparent.

That is not a criticism, but i do like my concerti to contain some fireworks, peasant that i am.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

OK, so concerti they ain't exactly, but what about d'Indy's once very popular Symphonie Cevenole?

I think i would be more interested in the Sur les cimes Carpathiques, by his pupil Stan Golestan.

Cannot find a recording.

Thal

[ahinton]

The only piece i (think) I slightly remember from D'indy is the Jour d Ete la Montagne.

This and the similarly inspired Symphonie Cévenole can be found on the same CD (Marek Janowski conducting, if memory serves me correctly); there's also a substantial piano sonata and a fine sonata for violin and piano by him, amongst quite a lot else.

Best,

Alistair

[retrouvailles]

I can see where you are coming from, but perhaps French composers do not treat the piano so much as a virtuoso vehicle, so its prominence is less apparent.

That is not a criticism, but i do like my concerti to contain some fireworks, peasant that i am.

Well, there are plenty of fireworks in the concertos I have mentioned, so you needn't worry about that. Fireworks are one thing that has never gone out of style. it's just that the methods of creating said fireworks have changed over the years, much like many other things in said pieces.

[indutrial]

Well, there are plenty of fireworks in the concertos I have mentioned, so you needn't worry about that. Fireworks are one thing that has never gone out of style. it's just that the methods of creating said fireworks have changed over the years, much like many other things in said pieces.

Milhaud's concertos will certainly not appeal 100% to pianists who are after the bravura found in Rachmaninov-ish works, especially not his second concerto, which was purposely written in a way that allowed Milhaud himself to perform the work (he was a good pianist, but definitely not a virtuoso on level with someone like Tansman). His fourth concerto is a different story entirely, as Milhaud was urged by the work's commissioner Zadel Skolovsky to include all sorts of technical hurdles, to the point where some consider the piece to be rather 'unpianistic.' Many of his works are indeed indicative of what Thal described as a less-prominent solo instrument, but Milhaud's works often seem to push both the soloist and the conducted ensemble towards virtuostic unities that one would not easily find in traditional concertos. The younger Milhaud went as far as to compose a ten-minute set of Etudes for piano and orchestra (op. 63) that set out to push the format to its limits. Amongst these, there's a section that has four separate fugues (each in a different key) in motion amongst the orchestra and soloist, another section that uses mirroring methods to create a reflective arc in the overall composition, and a ton of polytonal methods underpinning the overall set of pieces. The premiere of this work, like Stravinsky's Rite of Spring, caused the audience to wig out and the police ended up clearing the hall.

There are definitely fireworks to be found in Alexandre Tansman's 2 concertos, of which only the 2nd is available on recording.

I don't really know Martinu's concertos quite well, but I know that his piano writing is consistently strong. I've recently been enjoying a disc on the Supraphon label that includes two concert pieces Martinu wrote for piano trio and orchestra. Someone here mentioned Martinu's tendency towards French sounds, and it certainly makes sense when you hear these works (I should also mention that Martinu spent most of the 1920s into the 1930s living in Paris). Throughout these works, polytonality commands the harmonic language and tons of classical and baroque elements abound, allowing the work to exude a timelessness that is refreshing and unsettling at the same time. I'm certain his piano concertos are every bit as excellent.

Sauguet is definitely not one to write off, least of all since his works haven't been properly explored to begin with. One must remember that all the 'Les Six' composers followed Satie's example to some extent, though I'd argue that they all transcended it over time (except Durey, who all but disappeared after the 1920s). Sauguet was amongst the Ecole d'Arcueil composers who were influenced by not only Satie, but Les Six and Koechlin as well. Unfortunately, Sauguet is one of too many modern composers whose work doesn't fit into any defined category and, as a result, is easily pushed aside. As far as major piano works, I've only heard the two-piano reduction of his third piano concerto ('Concerto for the Underworld', 1963), an extremely intense and stylistically-diverse work that's definitely worth hearing. It reminds me somewhat of Auric's Partita for two pianos and some of Dutilleux's early works. His first concerto dates from 1936. The second is a mystery to me.