Finally, a modern classical composer that doesn't alienate the audience!

[lelle]

Unconventional but who wouldn't want this music playing in their stereo?

[ramseytheii]

I love this!  Look at the page turner!

Walter Ramsey

[lostinidlewonder]

That noise was made up during the Baroque period it's not modern at all and it is alienating me this very moment, not the composer themselves but the noise.

[Bob]

There's an audience back there!


So who files a report with the police?  The audience, the piano?  Both?

I thought it was a joke with the page turner.  At least he's wearing socks.

And the composer comes up at the end.  Haha.  It would be funnier if he decked the composer instead of shaking hands.

Just before 3:46 there appears to be dripping sweat from his brow.... Or he's drooling.

[ramseytheii]

And the composer comes up at the end.  Haha.  It would be funnier if he decked the composer instead of shaking hands.

Just before 3:46 there appears to be dripping sweat from his brow.... Or he's drooling.

You're braver than I am; I didn't get that far!

Walter Ramsey

[lelle]

You're braver than I am; I didn't get that far!

Walter Ramsey

Then you must have missed the best part (except the foot). Check out 2:44 and the three following seconds a few times and you'll see what I mean.

[redbaron]

It's a shame when the gimmick of the composition is more important thant the composition itself.

Not that this is what I'd called a composition. It's just tuneless drivel.

[djealnla]

It's just tuneless drivel.

No it isn't. 

[Bob]

Then you must have missed the best part (except the foot). Check out 2:44 and the three following seconds a few times and you'll see what I mean.

Ah 2:44....  (No, I just clicked around before, although I did watch/listen to a few minutes.)   Is it a sneeze?  Some sort of ragged breathing fit caused by the intensity of the music?  Or did you mean the amazement that comes with realizing an audience member appears to be sitting back down in the audience instead of leaving?

It's all on high intensity throughout the whole performance.  At least the performer seems to be matching what's written, if there is anything written or whatever is on that page.  *Bob wonders if someone could transcribe this.*

[richard black]

Delightful. You've got to hand it to Noda - he may or not play all the right notes all the time (who would ever know either way?) but he sure as hell gets a lot of notes down per second, and does it with great conviction. Reminds me of a favourite quote, from George Crumb of all people: 'What a composer needs from a performer is bravura'.

[john11inc]

Yes, the piece uses standard notation.  Nobody takes Hikari Kiyama very seriously, I promise.

Also, this isn't even close to the most bombastic or Avant-Garde music.

[lelle]

Yes, the piece uses standard notation. 

Oh my God, I must have the sheet music! Do you know where one can get it?? 

[thalbergmad]

Incredible, thoroughly enjoyed it.

I am not sure which compostition this is though. It is either the "Dyskinesia Sonata" or "Rhapsody on a Theme by Jackie Chan"

Does anyone know??

Thal

[djealnla]

EXCLUSIVE VIDEO! Hamelin sightreading Xenakis with Ian Pace as page turner! 

[ahinton]

EXCLUSIVE VIDEO! Hamelin sightreading Xenakis with Ian Pace as page turner! 

Which we would all have know it wasn't without even looking! (any more than it would have been however else you might have arranged the three names Hamelin, Xenakis and Pace); even the alleged exclusivity barely espouses credibility!...

Best,

Alistair

[prongated]

Incredible, thoroughly enjoyed it.

I am not sure which compostition this is though. It is either the "Dyskinesia Sonata" or "Rhapsody on a Theme by Jackie Chan"

Does anyone know??

Thal

None of those, Thal. It's "Pavane for a defunct otaku". And yes, it is something that I empathise with immediately from the very first note.

[minor9th]

He hit a wrong note at 1:13 and misread a rhythm at 3:07; otherwise, it was quite stunning.

[thalbergmad]

He hit a wrong note at 1:13.

I noticed that.

Left foot, 3rd toe.

Thal

[djealnla]

Has anybody listened to the video I linked to? It's insanely hilarious, I think.

[lelle]

Has anybody listened to the video I linked to? It's insanely hilarious, I think.

It would generally be more respectful if you posted your link in a new thread of your own instead of trying to hijack another topic.

[djealnla]

It would generally be more respectful if you posted your link in a new thread of your own instead of trying to hijack another topic.

A crappy thread such as this one is worthy of nothing but derision. The same goes for the childish attitude towards contemporary classical music that you and others have.

[Bob]

I noticed that.

Left foot, 3rd toe.

Thal

I think it would have been better to use the fourth toe myself.  It's a better toeing for that part.

There are those socks that have individual toes.  He could have worn those instead too.

[ramseytheii]

A crappy thread such as this one is worthy of nothing but derision. The same goes for the childish attitude towards contemporary classical music that you and others have.

So if we don't like someone banging for five minutes on the piano with hands and feet like a monkey, that makes us childish towards contemporary piano composition?  That's a fair trade; I'll take it.

Walter Ramsey

[ramseytheii]

I think it would have been better to use the fourth toe myself.  It's a better toeing for that part.

There are those socks that have individual toes.  He could have worn those instead too.

Actually, the score called for standard Hanes brand socks.  Had he worn socks with individual toes, he clearly would have been subverting the composer's intentions and might as well just compose a piece of his own with individual toe holes, rather than infect the original intent of someone else's hard work.

Walter Ramsey

[chopinmozart7]

One word.             











UNLISTENABLE!!!!!

[chopinmozart7]

Incredible, thoroughly enjoyed it.

I am not sure which compostition this is though. It is either the "Dyskinesia Sonata" or "Rhapsody on a Theme by Jackie Chan"

Does anyone know??

Thal

None of those, Thal. It's the "I am a total idiot Sonata"

[gep]

Had a look/listen at the piece. Hmmm. Rather virtuosic and inventive. That Noda is a superlative technical pianist I already knew.
I am a bit lost to understand what the fuss in this thread is all about, really. Nancarrow takes things rather much further (even when he doesn't require a real live pianist to play his music, nor could do so). What about "prepared piano" pieces by Cage (et al)?

So if we don't like someone banging for five minutes on the piano with hands and feet like a monkey, that makes us childish towards contemporary piano composition?  That's a fair trade; I'll take it.

This is a bit like "my 4 four year old daughter could do that" when it comes to some modern painter (Pollock, Rothko, Miró, Fillinyourown), right? Laughing at things is so MUCH more easy that making an effort and trying to actually understand things. And so we progress...

I for one wouldn't mind hearing the guy live some time. Since the composer lives in The Netherlands too, such might be possible.

all best,
gep

[thalbergmad]

Laughing at things is so MUCH more easy that making an effort and trying to actually understand things.

I think I will have to stick with the laughing as I will never understand anything like this.

It is simply a man banging the crap out of a piano, burning about 2,000 calories and being rewarded by muted applause.

I would also like to hear him live, but would not have to go to Holland to do this. If the wind is in the right direction, I should comfortably hear him from England.

Thal

[chopinmozart7]

I would not listen to him playing the piano even if he would knock on my door begging me to listen.

[ramseytheii]

This is a bit like "my 4 four year old daughter could do that" when it comes to some modern painter (Pollock, Rothko, Miró, Fillinyourown), right? Laughing at things is so MUCH more easy that making an effort and trying to actually understand things. And so we progress...

That supposes there is something to understand.  We can't always give the credit to the composer and assume that we are the stupid ones.  We've got to exercise critical thinking.

Walter Ramsey

[djealnla]

So if we don't like someone banging for five minutes on the piano with hands and feet like a monkey, that makes us childish towards contemporary piano composition?  That's a fair trade; I'll take it.

My post wasn't concerned with the quality of this piece, but with the fact that this thread clearly promotes the notion that contemporary classical music is nothing but senseless noise.

[gep]

That supposes there is something to understand.  We can't always give the credit to the composer and assume that we are the stupid ones.  We've got to exercise critical thinking.

Walter Ramsey

I did not imply anyone being stupid if some music (or art) is not to that anyone's liking. Learning what works for you, or to what you are attuned, is acquiring a taste. Simply bashing that what you do not understand first go, that is stupid.
What I would want is that people suppose that there indeed might be something to understand. But finding that out, now that takes serious and active attention. For how would you do the "critical thinking" (something that is highly important!) without giving that about which you do want to think critically some serious attention?

I think I will have to stick with the laughing as I will never understand anything like this.

A laugh a day keeps the doctor away, they say! But has it never happend to you that at one point you saw/heard/read (or at least looked at) something that made you think "I will never understand that", only to find out, to your pleasant delight perhaps, that (quite) some time of study/experience later, you now do understand? 20 years ago, I'd never believed I would understand English in any proper way, and here I am today, as fluitive as you pleace!

Happy learning!

all best,
gep

[ahinton]

20 years ago, I'd never believed I would understand English in any proper way, and here I am today, as fluitive as you pleace!

I didn't realise that you play the flu(i)te! Does anyone really "understand" English? (the language, that is, rather than those who live in England, speak it and call themselves English). De la Rochefoucauld once said that language was given to man to conceal his thoughts - and I am inclined to think that it may have been the English language rather than his own native tongue that he may have had in mind when so saying - although, of course, his remark might have been possessed of even greater potency again had he been thinking about musical language! Anyway, gep, your fine grasp of the English language, not least some of the more curious of its unique idiosyncrasies of nuance and the like, is enviable, even for someone whose native tongue is Dutch (and I write "even" because so many Dutch people speak English almost as well - and in some cases perhaps even better - than some English people do).

Best,

Alijstaijr

[minor9th]

My post wasn't concerned with the quality of this piece, but with the fact that this thread clearly promotes the notion that contemporary classical music is nothing but senseless noise.

I like many thorny composers--Sessions, Carter, Shapey, Martino, Sorabji, Rihm, Reimann--even a little Xenakis--but this piece is just ridiculous. If you are trying to make converts out of the more conservative members here, I don't this is the piece with which to do it!

[djealnla]

If you are trying to make converts out of the more conservative members here, I don't this is the piece with which to do it!

Sure, but the fact that this thread involves a "joke" about this piece shows that they have pretty much rejected contemporary piano music as a whole, which is what my comment was aimed at.

[bigswifty]

I enjoyed the performance for two reasons. I found the composition stimulating to some sort of a degree (although challenging - it isn't easy listening), and I found the performance novel. However, I do feel that there is a certain amount of pretension about the piece, and it is like Don Vliet's Trout Mask Replica in that I think that anybody claiming to fully understand it is a pretentious liar.

[perfect_pitch]

I enjoyed the performance...

REALLY? I thought it was S H I T ! ! !

[bigswifty]

I think a lot of people think it's sh*t. I think it's quite a good good piece, because I derive entertainment for it. A lot of people try to pretend there's more to music than entertainment, but there is not. An entertaining piece is a good piece (just as long as it is entertaining in the way it is intended to be).

[ahinton]

A lot of people try to pretend there's more to music than entertainment,

They do, do they? "Pretend", specifically?

but there is not.

If I thought for a moment that you might be right, I should have packed up composing years ago; fortunately, I do not, any more than you make the slightest attempt to provide so much as a shred of evidence in support of your little assertion.

Best,

Alistair

[bigswifty]

Music, both when listening to it and composing it, provides mental stimulation. We derive entertainment from being mentally stimulated, which is why I believe music is almost entirely for entertainment purposes - it is a very interesting branch of physics, and also a practical one (there is the application of sound as treatment and the use of ultrasound to create images), but I believe that, fundamentally, what people derive from music (as both composers and listeners) is entertainment.

[thalbergmad]

I should have packed up composing years ago;

You said it.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

I think it's quite a good good piece, because I derive entertainment for it.

I derived entertainment from it.

I pissed my pants with laughter.

Thal

[djealnla]

Mike Britchfield
Curator / Director
The A Hinton Archive

 

Is that your name Thal? Or just a fake one?

[cmg]

Never, ever have I heard a better executed toe trill or, for that matter, full frontal foot tremolo.  And did you notice the quotes from "Tristan" and "Albert Herring" throughout?  Extrordinary.

[thalbergmad]

***NEW RELEASE***

Hanon - The Virtuoso Toeist

Available from Thalbooks Ltd

Price: $15.99

Thal

[cmg]

***NEW RELEASE***

Hanon - The Virtuoso Toeist

Available from Thalbooks Ltd

Price: $15.99

Thal

A most worthy offering, I must say, and ultimately expectable given Hanon's mother was a noted pedicurist from  Pilzphlegm (an Eastern German duchy well-known for phoot phetishism).  Hanon, of course, a lucky man STILL to be the object of interest and controversy in our neutered times, got his toe-hold on history, as you very well know, at an early age.  Crippled we may be by his exercises, but nobler for them, I'm sure!

Thank you, Thal, for making available this incredible offering.  Clearly, the Technique Tome to usher us into the music of the future!

Gratefully yours,

cmg

[pies]

a

[ahinton]

You said it.

Ah, the gentle art of selective quotation! - i.e. carefully ignoring "If I thought for a moment that you might be right...fortunately, I do not"...

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

I wil resort to a higher authority here:

How great are your works, O Lord, how profound your thoughts! The senseless man does not know, fools do not understand.  Psalm;92;5,6"

Of course, "Lord" reads "JSBach" in my case, but you will get the point of the 2nd sentence...

all best,
gep

[djealnla]

Any ridiculously complex music like Kiyama and others is mostly written by a small group of charlatans one-upping each other, I think.  It's like post-modern philosophy; if you strip away the extreme pretentiousness and try to analyze it, it's just gibberish.

While we're at the topic of pseudo-intellectualism, this is one of the most worthless rants I have ever read:

"As the program notes point out, this composition has to do with language. To what extent is music a language; to what extent can one treat music *like* a language without regard to how far it actually succeeds in fulfilling the linguistic norms that pertain in structuralist discourse? But, far more, this particular piece examines the degree to which, historically speaking, Sprachähntlichkeit -- the 'speech resemblance" which was one of the main models or ideologies of expression at the turn of the century -- remains a viable gestural or rhetorical vehicle for organizing and assessing music. All these things enter into my Fourth Quartet, and, if I assert that it has to do with the 'history' of only a limited tradition of the string quartet, of course it's the history of my reception of certain quartets -- in particular, Schoenberg's Second String Quartet -- which I feel is a work of exceptional interest by virtue of initially attempting to be a string quartet, and then absolutely failing to achieve that goal. I have a theory concerning what I call 'threshold works,' a category of compositions typified by what I understand to be a *surplus* of meaning, caused by their straddling the divide or fault line between one way of perceiving and another in a way somehow embodied in the actual texture. Parts of my Fourth Quartet are, in fact, quite narrative, and certainly the narrative of Schoenberg's Second String Quartet is that of the dissolution of the string quartet genre as such -- of the predominately discursive logic of the genre as defined, say, by Haydn through to late Beethoven. In a sense, the final Beethoven quartets are a paradigmatic example of this quality, and one can imagine that, at the time, it must have been difficult to imagine a continuation of that remarkable phenomenon of dis-balance between the imposition of the subjective self on Beethoven's part (representing, if you will, an exemplar of prevailing humanistic attitudes towards self-formation) and the various relatively stabilized conventional forms into which the quartet had congealed in the preceding decades. If we compare the early, middle, and late quartets, we can distinctly perceive this transformation taking place. it seemed to me, when beginning to think about my own quartet, that -- as with the concept of post-histoire which everyone has been talking about lately -- the logic of this linear progression from generally objectively viable forms of musical communication to subjectively authentic but communally no longer sustainable 'languages' (or, at the very least, stylized forms of intercommunion) that had reached such a decisive stage in the last works of Beethoven has, during the course of this century, led to what can only be termed a certain degree of subjectively imposed gratuitousness. In fact, though, if we consider Schoenberg's Second Quartet, we see that one *could* take a further step, precisely when the genre found itself in the grip of self-dissolution, that is, when the very problem itself is turned, inside-out, into its own solution. There is a sort of transcendence which comes about with the introduction of the voice immediately subsequent to the awesome breakdown of the scherzo second movement, where we witness the total automation, the sort of pataphysical, self-destructive logic of late tonal thinking in which the interwoven harmonic patterns typical of early Schoenberg are no longer capable of carrying the discourse for more than a handful of measures at a time, with the consequence that matters grind to a halt. The gears need oiling before the piece can move on. It is apparent right from the beginning of the third movement that Schoenberg has crossed his Rubicon, emblematized by the participation of the voice and supported by the intensely imagistic, almost religious fervor of the text. This Steigerung, this surplus of expressive energy serves to mobilize one last time (and to tremendous effect) the tradition fo Sprachähnlichkeit towards both the almost metaphysical investiture of language with a transmundane concept of communication and the total realization of the self at the instant of its eruptive radiation as expressive intelligence. All this fascinated me a great deal. In so far as one perceives, assesses and rethinks the nature of linear creation and dissolution of genre-like phenomena in a progressive and contiguous historical continuity (and one can only really envisage 'history' within the circumscribed domains of conventionalized genres) I imagine Schoenberg pushing the Beethoven closure one step further, and thus closing-off that specific option for our time. One of the conditions for the commission leading to my Fourth Quartet was that it should be performed as a sort of companian piece to the Schoenberg, in the same concert. For me, this was a daunting challenge, even though I had suggested the conjunction myself: one of the works I take as representing major turning-points of 20th century music was to be my touchstone, my constant point of reference. I am not suggesting a direct comparison of the two works, since I was by no means pursuing the same train of thought: I don't take Sprachähnlichkeit for granted; in fact, the appropriateness of the concept was part of the problem I set myself. What I tried to do in this work was to honor Schoenberg by suggesting that the particular approach to transcendence he adopted was actually to have few direct consequences, that is, that it was no longer possible to adhere to that particular analogical line whose main ingredient is the supposition that verbal and musical modes of expression and intimately and immediately interrelated. In some ways, of course, Schoenberg drew the same inferences himself, through the development of dodecaphonic techniques and the circling-back to forms of referential relationship -- even if necessarily somewhat dialectical in tone -- to received notions of classical forms. In my Fourth Quartet, I set myself the task of examining, one more time, how, and if, the phenomenon of verbal language and the essentially processual nature of much recent musical composition could be coaxed into some kind of Einklang, some mutually illuminating co-existence."

This is what Ferneyhough wrote about his own 4th String Quartet. I'm not sure if it's more worthless than his music, though.