Classical piano music video

[levdeych]

What do people think about presenting classical piano music with accompanying video interpretation. Here is an example of Rachmaninoff's Elegia

[j_menz]

What do people think about presenting classical piano music with accompanying video interpretation. Here is an example of Rachmaninoff's Elegia

I think it's a wonderful idea. It has been done, of course, but too many videos accompanying classical works - particularly non-orchestral works - tend to focus on the mechanics as if the only audience are a group of technique critics.

Music today has video, and often very good video, as part of the package. I see no reason why serious piano music shouldn't be given the same treatment.

[levdeych]

I think it's a wonderful idea. It has been done, of course, but too many videos accompanying classical works - particularly non-orchestral works - tend to focus on the mechanics as if the only audience are a group of technique critics.

Music today has video, and often very good video, as part of the package. I see no reason why serious piano music shouldn't be given the same treatment.

I do agree with you. So what do you think about the video in my example, is it something similar to what you have in mind?

[j_menz]

I do agree with you. So what do you think about the video in my example, is it something similar to what you have in mind?

I don't especially have anything in mind. There are a lot of options and I wouldn't like to restrict it.  Your video was good, btw, but only one of many possible approaches.

[faulty_damper]

I found the beginning of the video distracting, wondering what they're doing, what the point was.   And then the baseball cap.  What was that all about?  The visual had very little to do with the music so it wasn't helpful to illuminate the musical ideas.

As a musician, I hate having distracting imagery since it makes hearing harder to do.  As I watched it, I quickly started typing this reply so that I wouldn't have to watch it.  What I was hearing and what I was seeing were two different things so it was inducing cognitive dissonance.

[j_menz]

it was inducing cognitive dissonance.

I thought in your case that was natural, not induced.   


I take it you don't watch pop videos either.  Have you seen Fantasia, Allegro ma non troppo, or Aria?

[faulty_damper]

I thought in your case that was natural, not induced.   

I take it you don't watch pop videos either.  Have you seen Fantasia, Allegro ma non troppo, or Aria?

Never seen those.  What are the last two? 

[j_menz]

Never seen those.  What are the last two? 

Allegro ma non troppo is an Italian film along something of the same line as Fantasia with animated sequences illustrating various pieces. Many people regard it as a step up creatively.

Aria is a film where a variety of leading directors were given free reign to do what's essentially a video clip for an aria of their choice. Ken Russell, Robert Altman, Nicholas Roeg etc. Well worth checking out.

[levdeych]

I found the beginning of the video distracting, wondering what they're doing, what the point was.   And then the baseball cap.  What was that all about?  The visual had very little to do with the music so it wasn't helpful to illuminate the musical ideas.

Well, I do not think I could satisfactory explain the basic idea of this particular video to someone who did not grasp it at once. It is like explaining an abstract painting, but I can try to give one interpretation of what is happening. In the beginning of the video someone appears in the empty hall as a white spot, a ghost. Somebody playing the piano, but we do not see who. "The ghost" in everyday causal clothes with a baseball cap, emphasizing the causal nature of the dress, slowly approaching the piano. It is clear to us that this person is longing to touch the piano. Eventually, he opens the instrument, prepares to play, and, at this instant everything changes. He is now in concert clothes, and darkness surrounding him is changed to bright white light. He is in paradize, if you want. He is happy. But he knows that he cannot stay there forever, therefore his happiness is still quite sad. Eventually, the time comes when he has to leave. He closes the piano, gets his baseball cup, which is a symbol of his life without music, and vanishes.
I am not the author of this video, but to me this story that I invented agreed very well with the musical ideas of this piece the way they were presented to me.
I do not know if I convince you in anything, but this is my best try. 

[dima_76557]

Well, I do not think I could satisfactory explain the basic idea of this particular video to someone who did not grasp it at once.

And neither can one explain the meaning of the music if somebody doesn't grasp it at once.

Do you have any idea what an "elegy" is? It's a mournful or plaintive poem or song, especially a lament for the dead.

Can you understand now that the contents of the video clip have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the contents of the music?

[j_menz]

Can you understand now that the contents of the video clip have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the contents of the music?

You just fail to see the connection.

I'd also suggest that the relationship need not be as literal as you imply, nor need the music be the main idea - it may only support, in mood and tone, the idea that is in the film.

And surely it has as much or more to do with the music as a video of someone playing a steinway, which is the bog standard for ever piano clip out there.

[dima_76557]

You just fail to see the connection.

I'd also suggest that the relationship need not be as literal as you imply, nor need the music be the main idea - it may only support, in mood and tone, the idea that is in the film.

And surely it has as much or more to do with the music as a video of someone playing a steinway, which is the bog standard for ever piano clip out there.

It doesn't have to be literal, but I surely think that it should have something that makes you contemplate; thoughts turned inward, not focused on the flashy material world we see every day, otherwise it will lack spiritual balance, harmony.

[j_menz]

I surely think that it should have something that makes you contemplate; thoughts turned inward,

What prompts you to do that is a matter of yourself. I found it quite contemplative. But then I find many things spur me to contemplation.

[faulty_damper]

I am not the author of this video, but to me this story that I invented agreed very well with the musical ideas of this piece the way they were presented to me.
I do not know if I convince you in anything, but this is my best try. 

Since I was familiar with the piece long before I watched the video, I already had a conception of the musical ideas.  The piece starts off with an accompaniment pattern that sets the mood before the melody comes in.  And that's where things really diverge with the visual.

If I were to direct a music video with this piece, I would have used a much simpler story.  Someone would be shown in sadness and anguish, and soon she looks up with a glimmer of hope as it rises from the horizon.  She basks in it.  She becomes enveloped in it.  But that ecstasy is short lived.  And she realizes she's all alone again as the path before her is toward the dawning skies and the last light reflects off the cold fog.

At no point in the video will there be footage of a pianist playing the piano.  There's nothing romantic about it to be included in the video.

[dima_76557]

What prompts you to do that is a matter of yourself. I found it quite contemplative. But then I find many things spur me to contemplation.

We cannot do whatever we want. Rachmaninoff gave the piece a title. If that is not enough, he also gave a magnificent rendition that gives me shivers, even when it comes to us through a piano roll. No doubt there about the spirit of this piece.

Anything that accompanies Rachmaninoff's Elegy should be in line with the associations in the piece itself because of its added spiritual value. Anything that is not in line with these associations distracts and is therefore not Art, but a misplaced effort to attract attention.

[levdeych]

We cannot do whatever we want. Rachmaninoff gave the piece a title. If that is not enough, he also gave a magnificent rendition that gives me shivers, even when it comes to us through a piano roll. No doubt there about the spirit of this piece.

Rachmaninoff's rendition of this piece is magnificent, no doubt about it. But does it mean that no other interpretations are allowed? Surely not. There are 100 of different Elegias out there, which differ from each other tremendously, even if judging by the total time, which goes from about 4:32 in Rachmaninoff's performance to 6:30 in Gavrilov's rendition.  These different times reflect different moods, different degrees of sadness and gloominess in the piece. And all these different approaches are there in the notes. It would have been a very gloomy world indeed if everyone played everything like everybody else.

[levdeych]

Do you have any idea what an "elegy" is? It's a mournful or plaintive poem or song, especially a lament for the dead.

Can you understand now that the contents of the video clip have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the contents of the music?

I am not sure what prompted you to think that I need to be explained meaning of "elegy", it was quite presumptuous and unnecessary.

As for the content of the video, you, indeed, FAILED TO SEE A CONNECTION. Let me spell it for you. A dead pianist longing to be reunited with his piano appears as a ghost, finds himself basking in the light of paradise while imagining himself sitting once again behind his instrument, only to realize that it cannot last. But this last contact with the keybord gives him some kind of piece and he leaves this world again, this time for ever. How does it contradict to your description of what Elegie is? 

[dima_76557]

How does it contradict to your description of what Elegie is?  

No need to "spell it out" for me. The music expresses the mourning over a lost beloved one; it's the pain of the ones that were left behind, and not the joy of some ghost who gets the chance to play the piano one last time, however sad he may be in the A sections of the piece. Whatever turn you give to it, the images in the clip just don't match the intended spiritual content of the music by more than one parameter (faulty_damper already indicated something in that direction).
P.S.: The author of this clip should pick another piece of music for his/her purposes, maybe something in the popular genre "New Age", where rejoicing in oneself is more appropriate, but certainly not this emotionally charged piece.

[levdeych]

I don't especially have anything in mind. There are a lot of options and I wouldn't like to restrict it.  Your video was good, btw, but only one of many possible approaches.

Of course, there are many different ways of doing things, but what I meant was "videos with "stories" versus something like this

.

[levdeych]

No need to "spell it out" for me. The music expresses the mourning over a lost beloved one; it's the pain of the ones that were left behind, and not the joy of some ghost who gets the chance to play the piano one last time, however sad he may be in the A sections of the piece. Whatever turn you give to it, the images in the clip just don't match the intended spiritual content of the music by more than one parameter (faulty_damper already indicated something in that direction).
P.S.: The author of this clip should pick another piece of music for his/her purposes, maybe something in the popular genre "New Age", where rejoicing in oneself is more appropriate, but certainly not this emotionally charged piece.

Well, "there are some people to whom you cannot say unless they already know". But this is ok. I should not have tried to "spell out" such a concrete interpretation of the video in question, which simply narrowed the discussion. This is fine, if someone does not like what I personally find interesting and intriguing, we do not have to all like (or dislike) the same things, just as we should not impose our own understanding of any piece of music, especially in such narrow and concrete terms. The beauty of music is that it allows for a wide range of images and ideas.   

[dima_76557]

we do not have to all like (or dislike) the same things, just as we should not impose our own understanding of any piece of music, especially in such narrow and concrete terms. The beauty of music is that it allows for a wide range of images and ideas.

Within certain boundaries, yes, but: associations are only useful in Art if they are pure, not learned, artificial, or false/in conflict with other associations within the same context. Neither should the associations require an explanation. As soon as the audience has to do something intellectual to make a link, it's not Art.

P.S.: If you want to know for sure what something is about, ask a child. They are pure in their perception of associations.

Another option is to acquaint oneself with the spirit of other works by the same composer, for example what is considered by many as Rachmaninoff's finest achievement "All-Night Vigil" for a capella choir.

[levdeych]

As soon as the audience has to do something intellectual to make a link, it's not Art.

This is the funniest thing I heard in years.

[dima_76557]

This is the funniest thing I heard in years.

There is much truth in it though. Good Art happens. If it's really good, it simply overpowers you. You are in awe, and you don't know why exactly. Only later can you start analyzing the factors that perhaps lead to your state of mind at that moment.

[taler]

I want to express  my appreciation of this clip. “Elegia” has been played by many famous pianists, and one can find its many interpretations on youTube. It happened that I did not like those which were too “gloomy” with overpowering dramatics. So naturally, when the music started I already got the idea, but I was intrigued  by the visual story and did not turn it off.  At the moment when the pianist raises his hand to rich to his baseball  hat, I was rewarded   by new emotions and new understanding of “Elegia”.  The clip was telling me that while the music can exist just by itself, we still need a musician to be touched by it. Can you recognize a musician just by looking at him?  Music recognizes him first, despite of his jeans, a t-shirt, and a baseball hat. Suddenly "Elegia” tells a story  of someone who came, was recognized and gone, but never lost. I listened again through the clip and it was there in music, however without video I would fail to hear it. Thanks for this experience, because even at the concert I usually close me eyes  to absorb the sound better.

[j_menz]

We cannot do whatever we want. Rachmaninoff gave the piece a title. If that is not enough, he also gave a magnificent rendition that gives me shivers, even when it comes to us through a piano roll. No doubt there about the spirit of this piece.

Anything that accompanies Rachmaninoff's Elegy should be in line with the associations in the piece itself because of its added spiritual value. Anything that is not in line with these associations distracts and is therefore not Art, but a misplaced effort to attract attention.

“Film music should have the same relationship to the film drama that somebody's piano playing in my living room has to the book I am reading.” - Igor Stravinsky

Just for a different view.

[dima_76557]

“Film music should have the same relationship to the film drama that somebody's piano playing in my living room has to the book I am reading.” - Igor Stravinsky

Just for a different view.

Nothing in Rachmaninoff's output can be classified as "film music", especially not this piece. It is entirely self-sufficient and does not need other media to explain its meaning.

Before the author of this clip, I would make a case for getting to know the composer better through his other output before abusing any of his works in a way that is not appropriate. The moment you get to know most of his works, you develop a certain intuition, and you will be able to tell at a glance what he meant (as with a very close friend) and for what you can and can't do with his works: List of compositions by Sergei Rachmaninoff

[j_menz]

Nothing in Rachmaninoff's output can be classified as "film music", especially not this piece.
Before the author of this clip, I would make a case for getting to know the composer better through his other output before abusing any of his works in a way that is not appropriate. The moment you get to know most of his works, you develop a certain intuition, and you will be able to tell at a glance what he meant (as with a very close friend):
List of compositions by Sergei Rachmaninoff

You are assuming that the purpose of a video clip with music is for the video to reflect/support the music. That is not necessarily the case - it may be that the music supports the video, or that the two contrast or complement each other.

Rachmaninoff may never have written film music, but his music has provided the background to many films. Often successfully.

[dima_76557]

You are assuming that the purpose of a video clip with music is for the video to reflect/support the music. That is not necessarily the case - it may be that the music supports the video, or that the two contrast or complement each other.

I hold this composer and his music very dear. That is probably my "problem". The clip and the music are in conflict, and it feels like prostitution, not something my friend and spiritual mentor Rachmaninoff deserves.

Rachmaninoff may never have written film music, but his music has provided the background to many films. Often successfully.

Oh, but I can easily imagine situations in which it could be used with more dignity than is the case here.

[j_menz]

I hold this composer and his music very dear. That is probably my "problem". The clip and the music are in conflict, and it feels like prostitution, not something my friend and spiritual mentor Rachmaninoff deserves.

I've done far worse things to him than that, and I didn't need anything more than a piano.

And, yes, it is your problem. If you don't like it, don't watch, but Rachmaninoff's music is a gift to the world, not just to you.

Oh, but I can easily imagine situations in which it could be used with more dignity than is the case here.

**** wonders if I should mention one such film (at least) is a porno. 

[dima_76557]

@ j_menz

Judging by the poor contemporary concert culture and the declining quality standards in contemporary society as a whole, I am not at all surprised. Just disappointed.
P.S.: Rachmaninoff's works are his testament to us, not a gift with which we can do whatever we want. I think we should at least try to make use of it in accordance with his will and intention.

[j_menz]

we should at least try to make use of it in accordance with his will and intention.

We dishonour him by limiting ourselves so.

[dima_76557]

We dishonour him by limiting ourselves so.

It's the boundaries that make it so powerful, as is the case with many other things in life that have symbolic value. Take the boundaries away and you are left with nothing but emptiness.

[j_menz]

It's the boundaries that make it so powerful, as is the case with many other things in life that have symbolic value. Take the boundaries away and you are left with nothing but emptiness.

You'd have made a wonderful 19th century conservative fogey. You were born too late for your calling.

[outin]

We cannot do whatever we want.

But of course we can! When the composer puts his music out there his control is over.

Besides this was done 150 years ago as well, those times that were more "spiritual" as you would probably put it. The means were just more limited. If people those days had only done what was intended by their predecessors what would we have now? New ideas come from existing things, this is what creativity is about. How could anyone see that as a negative thing is beyond me... Sometimes a creation is disturbing because it is too contradictory to what we have in your mind, but so it must be. The problem is only in our mind.

[j_menz]

Sometimes a creation is disturbing because it is too contradictory to what we have in your mind, but so it must be. The problem is only in our mind.

To be fair, some creations are disturbing outside your mind as well...



(and yes, I know his name really isn't)

[dima_76557]

How could anyone see that as a negative thing is beyond me... Sometimes a creation is disturbing because it is too contradictory to what we have in your mind, but so it must be. The problem is only in our mind.

But is it? Imagine a guy sees a bunch of beautiful fresh flowers on a grave. He decides to get "creative", not limit himself, and takes those flowers to give them to his girlfriend, since he hasn't got enough money with him anyway. Since there's nobody around, there's no control over what will happen to those flowers, and the symbolic value of those flowers is a problem only in the mind of the survivors, right? For me, it's spitting in the face and soul of those who give symbolic meaning to it, far worse than simply stealing someone else's property.

[j_menz]

But is it? Imagine a guy sees a bunch of beautiful fresh flowers on a grave. He decides to get "creative", not limit himself, and takes those flowers to give them to his girlfriend, since he hasn't got enough money with him anyway. Since there's nobody around, there's no control over what will happen to those flowers, and the symbolic value of those flowers is a problem only in the mind of the survivors, right? For me, it's spitting in the face and soul of those who give symbolic meaning to it, far worse than simply stealing someone else's property.

Except in the case of music, which is infinitely reproducible, the flowers remain on the grave with all their symbolic power and are also given to the girlfriend and are thereby enriched with new meaning. One does not detract from the other. It's not a win-lose game.

[dima_76557]

Except in the case of music, which is infinitely reproducible, the flowers remain on the grave with all their symbolic power and are also given to the girlfriend and are thereby enriched with new meaning. One does not detract from the other. It's not a win-lose game.

In the strictly material sense, yes. Spiritually no, at least not for the ones who see it as their cultural heritage.

[j_menz]

In the strictly material sense, yes. Spiritually no, at least not for the ones who see it as their cultural heritage.

God save us from those who seek to own what is universal.

[outin]

But is it? Imagine a guy sees a bunch of beautiful fresh flowers on a grave. He decides to get "creative", not limit himself, and takes those flowers to give them to his girlfriend, since he hasn't got enough money with him anyway. Since there's nobody around, there's no control over what will happen to those flowers, and the symbolic value of those flowers is a problem only in the mind of the survivors, right? For me, it's spitting in the face and soul of those who give symbolic meaning to it, far worse than simply stealing someone else's property.

That's not the same thing. The person leaving those flowers did not leave them to be used by others. The composer on the other hand decided to sell his music to a publisher. He could have opted just to play it himself as he wanted.

[dima_76557]

God save us from those who seek to own what is universal.

Universal? I think it was meant for those who appreciate it in accordance with the intention with which it was given, no?

[j_menz]

Universal? I think it was meant for those who appreciate it in accordance with the intention with which it was given, no?

No.  The dead cannot bind the living.  And you do not get to decide what is "n accordance with the intention with which it was given".

That which is freed upon the world is free.

[outin]

(and yes, I know his name really isn't)

I'm not the picky one here!

[j_menz]

I'm not the picky one here!

No, but I'm not the only one.

[dima_76557]

No.  The dead cannot bind the living.  And you do not get to decide what is "n accordance with the intention with which it was given".

That which is freed upon the world is free.

This explains very well the deplorable state Classical Music is in; a comodity with virtually all of its intrinsic value robbed from it by people who have no idea what they're doing.

[j_menz]

This explains very well the deplorable state Classical Music is in; a comodity with virtually all of its intrinsic value robbed from it by people who have no idea what they're doing.

I repeat...

You'd have made a wonderful 19th century conservative fogey. You were born too late for your calling.

[outin]

This explains very well the deplorable state Classical Music is in; a comodity with virtually all of its intrinsic value robbed from it by people who have no idea what they're doing.

But wouldn't it also be rather arrogant to think that one really knows the composer's mind well enough to ensure one is not committing any such robbery?

[dima_76557]

But wouldn't it also be rather arrogant to think that one really knows the composer's mind well enough to ensure one is not committing any such robbery?

I don't know which side is more arrogant: the ones who want to guard the tradition or the ones who want to trample it. A law, for example, becomes a meaningless bunch of letters if you neglect the intention, the spirit with which is was written. The moment you start giving an entirely different meaning to its content, it becomes obsolete for the purpose it was intended for. I think what we see happening in Classical Music is very much the same.

[outin]

I don't know which side is more arrogant: the ones who want to guard the tradition or the ones who want to trample it. A law, for example, becomes a meaningless bunch of letters if you neglect the intention, the spirit with which is was written. The moment you start giving an entirely different meaning to its content, it becomes obsolete for the purpose it was intended for. I think what we see happening in Classical Music is very much the same.

How do you feel about piano trancriptions of operas or orchestral music then? Certainly the composer did not intend his ideas for voice or another instrument to be reduced to the limited means of a piano? Yet this crime was regularly committed by the 19th century composers.

[faulty_damper]

I didn't even think the man walking in the video was a ghost.  I just thought it was some weird cross fading as a way to present the pianist in the video.  I think the portrayal of him as a ghost could have been eerie, not so bright and on stage; so tangible.