Piano Forum

Poll

What would you rather listen to?

Microwave Background Radiation hiss
8 (38.1%)
Sequentia Cyclica
13 (61.9%)

Total Members Voted: 21

Voting closed: January 08, 2020, 12:08:48 PM



Rhapsody in Blue – A Piece of American History at 100!
The centennial celebration of George Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue has taken place with a bang and noise around the world. The renowned work of American classical music has become synonymous with the jazz age in America over the past century. Piano Street provides a quick overview of the acclaimed composition, including recommended performances and additional resources for reading and listening from global media outlets and radio. Read more >>

Topic: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss  (Read 17379 times)

Offline gep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 747
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #100 on: January 07, 2020, 09:15:09 PM
@fftransform: great to read your comments! At least someone is listening with the intent to listen in order to form an informed personal opinion; hope to read your comments regarding the rest of the work too! While I do not agree with some things (which is perfectly OK and a matter of taste), I do quite appreciate your tendency to not wrap your feelings and findings in artful and artificial "high spake" but write plainly as you see fit yet without the aim to bash for the sake of bashing.
In the long run, any words about music are less important than the music. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not worth talking to (Shostakovich)

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #101 on: January 07, 2020, 10:58:58 PM
Arthur C. Clarke once said “My favourite definition of an intellectual: 'Someone who has been educated beyond his/her intelligence.”. This could be changed appropriately here in ‘My favourite definition of an snob: someone who is judgemental beyond his/her level of (and/or desire of) understanding’.
Curiously, in his very first letter to me, Sorabji made the self-same reference; I don't know if he was aware of the Clarke one or indeed when Clarke made it, but the thinking is along precisely the same lines.

All the rest of your points are as well made as I would expect from you!

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #102 on: January 07, 2020, 11:03:43 PM
Alistair, you look small for getting dragged into line-by-line level pique.
Oh, maybe so; it certainly has felt rather like that. All so incredibly tiresome...

This thread is to promote a major musical moment in history with the release of this gargantuan piece that was for a long time just a fable!
Dead right it is!

Tranquillo e Piano: The transition into this movement makes much more sense.  This is squarely in Sorabji's later style (heavily influenced by Baroque forms), though as the title suggests softer to the ears than most.  The first section (up til 11:30) was well-composed, but I'm not sure how pianistic it is.  I say this because this movement is the first that's direct enough for me to be able to 'interpret in my head' along with a first listen, and I almost never agreed with Powell's interp.  But it seemed highly plausible in most cases that it could have been just too hard to mitigate the density in terms of getting some of what seemed to be the right/obvious affects and articulations in a classical setting.  In other words, I'd say the piece is better than the recording, for this part of the movement, it being unclear whose fault that is.

The next section is more nocturnal (up to 28:30); it's all well and good, but it extends for such a period of time as to really lose all relation to the first section, and certainly wipe it completely clean from my memory.  The effect of this extended nocturne sort of conflicts with an aurally intelligible structure for the movement, so I'm not sure that this should have been conceived as a single variation.  I would say that this section overall is pleasant listening, but nothing especially captivating or engrossing.  It's followed by a brief climax that was welcome, but which also meandered a bit, though maybe it should be considered a separate 'section' in its own right - but that doesn't really change my impression.

Around 32:50 we get a novel transformation and the start of another big section (which sounds *insanely* hard in places, props to Powell on getting a lot of nice colors in this section) which functions as the start of an enormous tension in the piece.  I was fully ensconced in the piece for this section, so that probably means it's good.

About ten minutes later we got the start of a reprise of the tension built up in the previous section, and the introduction of a bell motif that comes in and out, and really reminded me of the first movement of the 2nd Mosolov Sonata.  VERY close to that in terms of both form and function, though the Mosolov would have been so obscure at the time that I'm sure there could be no claim of 'borrowing.'  Or actually, Alistair, do you know whether Sorabji had any familiarity with Mosolov's stuff?
Sorabji was indeed aware of Mosolov's work but quite how intimately I cannot say with certainty.

So yeah, there was this massive structure all thrusting toward a huge, dramatic climax . . . but it fizzled.  There was a smidge of uproar toward the end of this section, but it just wasn't enough.  I was really let down.  It would be like if you took the presto at the end out of the Bach Chaconne, the whole piece was propelling itself toward something and then we were denied.  I guess that was his choice, but it left me simply unsatisfied.

Now at 47:30ish we're back to a more nocturnal setting, though with more sense of resolution than before by injecting more classical harmony.  It seems like he was going for a Messiaen-like 'big church' sort of feel, but again it never really built to anything.  Just a swamp of chords.  He pulls the rug out one more time with this contrapuntal finale section (which actually often takes a Chaconne form), but it also refuses to climax.  This movement needed a Viagra.  I liked a lot of this ending section, especially the Lisztian modal sections with the big arpeggios which were incredibly beautiful.  I liked the little 'jazz interlude' with all the Impressionist chords, too, it fit in oddly well with the rest of the piece.  The ending went on FOREVER though, downright-boring.

So, overall I liked the vast majority of this movement, but it had some macro structural problems that really left me high and dry.  The highlight IMO is the first section, namely up to 11:30ish.  Do I think it warranted the 65 minute time stamp?  Hell no.  I think its enormity didn't contribute, and if anything detracted a bit by obscuring the relations between the sections.
Again, we must beg to differ on quite a few details but, again, many thanks for going to the trouble of expressing your considered thoughts on this.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline thalbergmad

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16730
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #103 on: January 10, 2020, 01:42:06 PM
Oh well, the crap won.
Some people on this forum have bad taste.
Thal
Curator/Director
Concerto Preservation Society

Offline brogers70

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1603
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #104 on: January 10, 2020, 01:46:34 PM
It's your own fault. I'm not a big fan of Sorabji, but there are definitely plenty of interesting moments in there, even some beautiful ones. Obviously, it's going to win against white noise. Be serious.

Offline perfect_pitch

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8496
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #105 on: January 10, 2020, 02:24:00 PM
Oh well, the crap won.
Some people on this forum have bad taste.
Thal

I'm sorry, but I have to agree with this...

Also, Thal - you're starting to develop the same bad habit as Alistair does, in that he signs every post with his name. Beware... it's a slippery slope...

Next, you'll start liking Sorabji      ;D

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #106 on: January 10, 2020, 03:23:03 PM
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with this...
You don't have to; no one is forcing anyone's opinion here!

Also, Thal - you're starting to develop the same bad habit as Alistair does, in that he signs every post with his name. Beware... it's a slippery slope...
Who says that it's a "bad habit"? For that matter, Thal's been doing it for more years that I have!

Next, you'll start liking Sorabji      ;D
Nothing's impossible! Try this -
...

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline thalbergmad

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16730
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #107 on: January 10, 2020, 04:09:54 PM
That isn't as offensive as some of his dross , but it is still 7 plus minutes of puerile note spinning.
Curator/Director
Concerto Preservation Society

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #108 on: January 10, 2020, 04:23:56 PM
That isn't as offensive as some of his dross , but it is still 7 plus minutes of puerile note spinning.
In your personal opinion, to which of course you are entitled as is anyone else who would disagree with it.

It is indeed 7+ minutes, though; I'll give you that!

What do you think of the playing?

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline brogers70

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1603
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #109 on: January 10, 2020, 04:28:42 PM
That isn't as offensive as some of his dross , but it is still 7 plus minutes of puerile note spinning.

I don't get it. Did Sorabji have an affair with your wife? If you don't like it, don't listen. How hard is that? Why get riled up because other people do like him?

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #110 on: January 10, 2020, 04:37:46 PM
I don't get it. Did Sorabji have an affair with your wife?
At the risk of answering for Thal when it would be better for him to do so for himself, I am unaware that Thal has/had a spouse and, in any case, Sorabji, who was non-heterosexual, died more than 30 years ago and had been receiving full time care in a nursing home for a while before that, so I think that, on the basis of all of that, the answer to your question is clearly "no"!

If you don't like it, don't listen. How hard is that? Why get riled up because other people do like him?
Good questions; perhaps Thal will answer them.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline thalbergmad

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16730
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #111 on: January 10, 2020, 04:43:37 PM
I don't get it. Did Sorabji have an affair with your wife? If you don't like it, don't listen. How hard is that? Why get riled up because other people do like him?
I was asked to "try this" so I did.
Would have been rude not to and not give my opinion.
I have no wife and Sorabji was as bent as a boomerang.
Curator/Director
Concerto Preservation Society

Offline gep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 747
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #112 on: January 10, 2020, 04:52:28 PM
Quote
I have no wife
Ever tried a Dutch wife? Perhaps you could deflate a bit together...  8)

Quote
Sorabji was as bent as a boomerang.
As in 'keeps coming back no matter how hard you try to trow it away'?

In the long run, any words about music are less important than the music. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not worth talking to (Shostakovich)

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #113 on: January 10, 2020, 05:15:30 PM
Would have been rude not to and not give my opinion.
You've omitted to give your opinion on the playing, though.

I have no wife
I was of course aware of that but felt that confirmation would be better coming from you.

Sorabji was as bent as a boomerang.
Interesting; he never even visited Australia, so I wonder how that could be.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #114 on: January 10, 2020, 05:16:25 PM
As in 'keeps coming back no matter how hard you try to throw it away'?
Ah, yes, I think perhaps you have something there!

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline perfect_pitch

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8496
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #115 on: January 10, 2020, 11:23:22 PM
Nothing's impossible! Try this -
...

No... there are many things that are impossible. We can't travel back in time, we can't exceed the speed of light.

And no matter how many times you try to dress up the music, that doesn't sound ANYTHING like Debussy. What it sounds like, is the aforementioned monkeys playing random notes... possibly with a cat walking across the keys as they do so.

Offline ted

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3987
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #116 on: January 11, 2020, 12:18:12 AM
Try this
Best,

Alistair

I find that very beautiful. I used to dislike most modern piano sounds until over the years I found bits of my improvisation were starting to produce much the same effects. That opened the gates for me and I began to expand the variety of composed music I listened to. I remember "quantum" on our forum said a similar thing happened with him. I expect to broaden my taste still further in my later years, I couldn't bear standing still.
"Mistakes are the portals of discovery." - James Joyce

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #117 on: January 11, 2020, 06:19:25 AM
And no matter how many times you try to dress up the music
Who is trying to "dress it up" and by what means?

What it sounds like, is the aforementioned monkeys playing random notes... possibly with a cat walking across the keys as they do so.
Your experience is clearly wider than mine as it includes no such points of reference; moreover, why is the possible cat not playing with the monkeys?

You omitted a couple of words; your sentence should have begun "What it sounds like to me".

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline perfect_pitch

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8496
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #118 on: January 11, 2020, 11:10:58 AM
You omitted a couple of words; your sentence should have begun "What it sounds like to me"

Nah - I worded it rather accurately, and it was correct in my original post.

Offline dogperson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #119 on: January 11, 2020, 11:25:46 AM
Nah - I worded it rather accurately, and it was correct in my original post.


No, it is not the correct wording—- as this is just your personal opinion.  You may consider your opinion to be superior, but that doesn’t mean it is shared by everyone here nor by everyone in the musical world.

It has become quite tiring to have repeatedly implied ‘no one can find any interest in this music, because I don't’.  The more you are insistent on the worthlessness of the music, the more I begin to question and to spend time listening.  The insistence on negativity now seems quite petty to read. 

Offline gep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 747
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #120 on: January 11, 2020, 12:37:14 PM
Quote
And no matter how many times you try to dress up the music, that doesn't sound ANYTHING like Debussy. What it sounds like, is the aforementioned monkeys playing random notes...
Well, I guess that if you regard anything and everything above and/or beyond your level of knowledge, experience and understanding as stupid, there must be many things you regard as stupid. There are many things (currently or eternally) above or beyond my level of knowledge, experience and understanding; personally, I regard these as opportunities to learn more, know more and understand more. But, of course, that means mentally wanting to leave the safety of the inside of your own skull, the outside of which is a huge and, for many, scaring place because outside there is no echo of your own thoughts to prove you are always right.

Very much the opposite, in fact of
I find that very beautiful. I used to dislike most modern piano sounds until over the years I found bits of my improvisation were starting to produce much the same effects. That opened the gates for me and I began to expand the variety of composed music I listened to. I remember "quantum" on our forum said a similar thing happened with him. I expect to broaden my taste still further in my later years, I couldn't bear standing still.
Good for you! By the way, you will also broaden your tastes by finding out, by exposure and experience, what you do not like, or start to like less; growth is change!

Quote
possibly with a cat walking across the keys
Well, nothing wrong with that!


By the way, even Debussy sounds flat compared to something like this (music which for me stops time itself for a while)


All best,
gep
In the long run, any words about music are less important than the music. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not worth talking to (Shostakovich)

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #121 on: January 11, 2020, 03:10:37 PM
even Debussy sounds flat compared to something like this (music which for me stops time itself for a while)
As indeed it does for me; it's relatively unusual for a Sorabji slow movement in largely eschewing the more decorative filigree passages and complex multi-layered textures to be found in his pieces genre "tropical nocturne" such as Le jardin parfumé and Djâmî which precede it and The garden of Iram (from the Symphonic variations) and Gulistān that postdate it by several years; in fact, it is notable for a reticence that, in such slow moving music from him, one finds elsewhere perhaps only in the Interlude from the earlier Prelude interlude and fugue.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline thalbergmad

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16730
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #122 on: January 13, 2020, 08:22:58 PM
Gulistan is tolerable to my ears but shows very little craft or skill.
Curator/Director
Concerto Preservation Society

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #123 on: January 13, 2020, 08:49:34 PM
Gulistan is tolerable to my ears but shows very little craft or skill.
OK, but could you explain to the membership the specific grounds on which you arrive at that particular conclusion - i.e. what particular lack of "craft or skill" you perceive therein? Thank you in advance.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline thalbergmad

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16730
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #124 on: January 13, 2020, 09:42:33 PM
It has no melody and no tune. No development, just an endless stream.
You could put the end at the beginning, the beginning at the end, play it backwards or with 200 wrong notes and it would not diminish the composition, nor would the majority be any the wiser.
Remove one note from a Beethoven Sonata and it would be diminshed. That is skill.

Thal
Curator/Director
Concerto Preservation Society

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #125 on: January 13, 2020, 10:18:30 PM
It has no melody and no tune. No development, just an endless stream.
You could put the end at the beginning, the beginning at the end, play it backwards or with 200 wrong notes and it would not diminish the composition, nor would the majority be any the wiser.
Remove one note from a Beethoven Sonata and it would be diminshed. That is skill.
Well, thank you for your response. I have nevertheless to say that it represents your own personal opinion (and indeed there's no reason why it shouldn't as long as it is understood to do just that and no more); frankly, I confess that my most notable shortcoming as a composer is melodic invention amd imagination and I wish that I possessed this facility to the extent that Sorabji did.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline perfect_pitch

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8496
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #126 on: January 14, 2020, 12:38:45 AM
I have nevertheless to say that it represents your own personal opinion

Actually, there is truth to Thalbergmads statement. I have perfect pitch, so I know that when people waste their lives learning crap like this, they spend ages trying to learn and play the correct notes - and I can tell when they deviate from that.

As Thal said, you could literally play the piece with wrong notes galore, and I doubt ANYONE on this thread or this forum would know unless they have a VERY keenly tuned ear with perfect pitch.

You ASSUME that what the player is playing is correct, but he could deviate mildly from the score and almost NO one would realise... that's not art.

Do you consider Jackson Pollock an artist?



Personally, I believe he is an overhyped fraud when he paints crap like this. The above is worth $140,000,000 - just picture that. This painting is basically the visual equivalent of Sorabji's music - messy, unstructured and without any finesse. People have tried to hype it up to being something it clearly isn't.

Offline lostinidlewonder

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #127 on: January 14, 2020, 03:02:26 AM
Totally agree with you perfect_pitch. It may be just our opinion but certainly it is a mainstream opinion :)
"The biggest risk in life is to take no risk at all."
www.pianovision.com

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #128 on: January 14, 2020, 06:04:24 AM
Actually, there is truth to Thalbergmads statement.
No; it is, as I wrote, a personal opinion, to which of course he is perfectly entitled.

I have perfect pitch
I had ssumed from your ID that this is the case; so, for that matter, do I.

so I know that when people waste their lives learning crap like this, they spend ages trying to learn and play the correct notes - and I can tell when they deviate from that.
Are you seriously suggesting that anyone's performance of a work like this could ever be 100% note perfect? Jonathan Powell is a distinguished pianist, composer and musicologist
of more than 30 years' standing; again, are you seriously suggesting that someone of his calibre is so ignorant that he would "waste" his life (or at least a part of it) in preparing and performing this music? Likewise, Fredrik Ullén is not only a remakably gifted pianist but also a widely admired neuroscientist and Abel Sánchez-Aguilera a similarly gifted pianist and (until recently) a respected microbiologist / oncologist; do you really suppose that they would devote the time that they have to Sorabji's music (in the latter's case  including the preparation of numerous typeset critical editions of his scores) if it is as you describe it?

As Thal said, you could literally play the piece with wrong notes galore, and I doubt ANYONE on this thread or this forum would know unless they have a VERY keenly tuned ear with perfect pitch.
So you and any other member with absolute pitch could do this but no one else could? Is that what you are implying? and, if so doing, are you suggesting that only members possessing absolute pitch could recognise whether there are correct or incorrect notes in the Dies Iræ theme upon which this work is based?

You ASSUME that what the player is playing is correct, but he could deviate mildly from the score and almost NO one would realise... that's not art.
On such a basis, any music of sufficient difficulty must also be as you describe this piece because of that risk; that would cast aside a great deal of repertoire, not just Sorabji!

Do you consider Jackson Pollock an artist?
I do, but a very different one to Sorabji and any comparison between them fraught with problems.



Personally, I believe he is an overhyped fraud when he paints crap like this. The above is worth $140,000,000 - just picture that. This painting is basically the visual equivalent of Sorabji's music - messy, unstructured and without any finesse. People have tried to hype it up to being something it clearly isn't.
Most Sorabji scores sell for well less than one millionth of that sum but, in each case, the "worth" of which you write is solely down to what someone is prepared to pay for it. I agree that $140m is a very large sum for a single work. I do not propose to comment on the motivation for or content of the Pollock piece that you show here, but to suggest that the Sorabji variations are "messy, unstructured and without any finesse" is to deny that they embrace any contrast in character and to assert instead that they consist merely of notes put onto paper and then played on the piano indiscriminately and without concern for accuracy or meaning and that they took - or needed to take - very little time for the composer to set down on paper, the editor/typesetter to edit/typeset and the pianist to prepare and perform, all of which is self-evidently a nonsense.

It is a pity that such as you and Thal who wilfully adopt this standpoint purely because you happen not to like the music (which of course is fine) seem so unprepared to accept that it is not based upon hard facts and with the apparent implication that anyone who thinks otherwise about it must be wrong; so entrenched an attitude of mind ill becomes anyone who cares about music enough to listen to it.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #129 on: January 14, 2020, 06:12:16 AM
Totally agree with you perfect_pitch. It may be just our opinion but certainly it is a mainstream opinion :)
"Mainstream"? Do you suppose that this music is "mainstream" and that its listeners are part of a "mainstream"? Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin, Wagner and Brahms are not "mainstream" either! It's all relative - a fact which I would have thought to be obvious and indeed most of the music discussed on this forum is anything but "mainstream".

Still, at least the "discussion" here appears for the time being to have moved away from "microwave radiation hiss", so prhaps one should be thankful for mercies, however small and possibly short-lived...

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline perfect_pitch

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8496
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #130 on: January 14, 2020, 08:23:03 AM
Here - let me demonstrate with this here pie chart...

See if I can clear things up.



Offline lostinidlewonder

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #131 on: January 14, 2020, 08:53:14 AM
hahahahahah PP



"Mainstream"?
Yes, go take a random 100 people from the street and see what the average of the opinion turns out to be.
"The biggest risk in life is to take no risk at all."
www.pianovision.com

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #132 on: January 14, 2020, 09:16:10 AM
Here - let me demonstrate with this here pie chart...

See if I can clear things up.

Clearly your can't do so and haven't done so because you'd need hard evidence in order to do this. But who cares anyway? As I wrote earlier, it's all relative. Ask a random selection of 1,000 in the street how many of them like the music of Bach or Wagner and you'll encounter some who have not heard of either; ask the same whether they like the music of Scriabin, Magnard, Reger, Lyapunov and you'll likely find a far greater proportion who have not heard of some or all of them.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #133 on: January 14, 2020, 09:19:29 AM
hahahahahah PP
It's amazing how little it takes to amuse some people!

Yes, go take a random 100 people from the street and see what the average of the opinion turns out to be.
See my response to perfect_pitch above (who incidentally mentioned 1,000, not 100). This is a piano forum; does everyone here love Chopin, Liszt, Alkan, Busoni and Rachmaninoff equally and unreservedly?

All members here spend most of their time here discussing music that is a minority interest in the greater scheme of things; are they therefore wasting their time in so doing?

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline lostinidlewonder

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #134 on: January 14, 2020, 10:13:50 AM
It doesn't take much to laugh since he is explaining something very clearly to you which you pretend not to understand :) Oh yes now please write a thesis of how you are not pretending anything at all :) I've made the task easier, just take 100 and see what you get, otherwise just surround yourself with the small group who share your interests and feel safe.

All members here spend most of their time here discussin music that is a minority interest in the greater scheme of things; are they therefore wasting their time in so doing?
This is a discussion you are creating on your own, have fun with it on your own. You are certainly wasting your time in useless threads, why do you like to do that? Fans of Sorabji works are a minority amongst the minority. That is a small minority :P
"The biggest risk in life is to take no risk at all."
www.pianovision.com

Offline ronde_des_sylphes

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2934
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #135 on: January 14, 2020, 10:23:49 AM

It is a pity that such as you and Thal who wilfully adopt this standpoint purely because you happen not to like the music

I suspect you have this the wrong way round, and that it is more likely that they find the music disorganised and incoherent, therefore they don't like it.
My website - www.andrewwrightpianist.com
Info and samples from my first commercial album - https://youtu.be/IlRtSyPAVNU
My SoundCloud - https://soundcloud.com/andrew-wright-35

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #136 on: January 14, 2020, 11:04:33 AM
It doesn't take much to laugh since he is explaining something very clearly to you which you pretend not to understand :)
I "understand" it perfectly and "pretend" nothing.

Oh yes now please write a thesis of how you are not pretending anything at all :)
Sorry to disappoint; no theseis required - just what I have written above.

I've made the task easier, just take 100 and see what you get, otherwise just surround yourself with the small group who share your interests and feel safe.
There is no task so you have not made one any easier or more difficult. For the record, however, I do not at all confime myself and my activities to a group of any size that shares my interests and, in any case, I suspect that you refer here to one specific interest only rather than all of them. Moreover, there is little "safety" in the interests that I do pursue.

This is a discussion you are creating on your own, have fun with it on your own. You are certainly wasting your time in useless threads, why do you like to do that? Fans of Sorabji works are a minority amongst the minority. That is a small minority :P
On the contrary, I am not creating a discussion and you admit yourself that I did not initiate this thread. Whilst I agree with you that the principle behind this thread was/is useless", oney might well ask why you waste your own time on it but, that said, despite the false premise of the OP, it has at yielded something of use from time to time.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #137 on: January 14, 2020, 11:06:59 AM
I suspect you have this the wrong way round, and that it is more likely that they find the music disorganised and incoherent, therefore they don't like it.
Not at all. I don't doubt your assumption that those people find the music (or most of it) disorganised and incoherent but that does not of itself make it so; indeed, the tasks of editing typesetting its score and preparing and giving performances of it would surely be utterly unbearable were this actually the case!

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline lostinidlewonder

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #138 on: January 14, 2020, 11:59:34 AM
I "understand" it perfectly and "pretend" nothing.
Thats good at least perfect_pitch has enforced your education.

Sorry to disappoint; no theseis required - just what I have written above.
Why would you think I would be dissapointed? It still is the same in nature to what I knew you would respond with.

There is no task so you have not made one any easier or more difficult.
It has made the task 10 times easier, pp used 1000 sample, i suggested 100 sample. Much easier, do you deny that? If you don't want to take the task up in the first place that is meaningless because the potential logistics of the task still remains if one ever wants to take it up and educate themselves.

For the record, however, I do not at all confime myself and my activities to a group of any size that shares my interests and, in any case, I suspect that you refer here to one specific interest only rather than all of them. Moreover, there is little "safety" in the interests that I do pursue.
Then you should allow people to express their opinion that Sorabji is crap music without having to debate them in such a feeble manner. It makes you look so weak trying to debate people for hating Sorabji's music. Let them have that opinion without you having to try and limit its value.

On the contrary, I am not creating a discussion and you admit yourself that I did not initiate this thread. Whilst I agree with you that the principle behind this thread was/is useless", oney might well ask why you waste your own time on it but, that said, despite the false premise of the OP, it has at yielded something of use from time to time.
You are misquoting me and taking what I said out of context. The discussion I mentioned you are creating is all in the quote that I quoted from you nothing else. YOu are trying to change what I am suggesting which is wrong and then allows you to talk off in your own world. You don't ask a question with a question, so why are you wasting your time in a thread which is anti Sorabji and goes against what you want to promote?

Not at all. I don't doubt your assumption that those people find the music (or most of it) disorganised and incoherent but that does not of itself make it so.
This is a rather arrogant response pretty much saying people can have opinion but they are wrong. People can find it discorganised and incoherent and THAT DOES MAKE IT SO FOR THEM and, AND, the vast majority of people you ask. Go ahead go into public and ask them to listen to a many hour long Sorabji work, who of them could manage it, which of t hem will say it is AMAZING and want to listen to it all? You wont get much at all. So the mainstream opinion that the music is disorganised and incoherent remains as a mainstream fact for the majority of listeners.
"The biggest risk in life is to take no risk at all."
www.pianovision.com

Offline thalbergmad

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16730
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #139 on: January 14, 2020, 12:50:56 PM
Here - let me demonstrate with this here pie chart...

See if I can clear things up.


Brilliant. Pissed myself
Curator/Director
Concerto Preservation Society

Offline klavieronin

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #140 on: January 14, 2020, 01:08:09 PM
I have to say, I find all the contempt for Sorabji's music quite baffling. I always found his music incredibly intriguing. It's colourful, original, and exquisitely pianistic. Why all the hate?

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #141 on: January 14, 2020, 01:10:13 PM
Thats good at least perfect_pitch has enforced your education.
Not so.

Why would you think I would be dissapointed? It still is the same in nature to what I knew you would respond with.
It is not, although whether or not you are disappointed is of no concern to me.

It has made the task 10 times easier, pp used 1000 sample, i suggested 100 sample. Much easier, do you deny that? If you don't want to take the task up in the first place that is meaningless because the potential logistics of the task still remains if one ever wants to take it up and educate themselves.
To me, there is no task as it would be a largely pointless exercise given that almost all of the music listened to, played and discussed on this forum is a minotiry interest and the only qualification of that is that some is more of a minority interest than others.

Then you should allow people to express their opinion that Sorabji is crap music without having to debate them in such a feeble manner. It makes you look so weak trying to debate people for hating Sorabji's music. Let them have that opinion without you having to try and limit its value.
But I do. I am not interested in persuading people whose view of certain music (not only Sorabji) I happen not to share to change their minds about it, still less that what is after all their personal opinions are "wrong"; discussing it and reading others' reactions to any such music is by no means synonymous with wanting to do either and if anyone decides to change their mind about any music it's up to the music to do that for them, not you or me.

You are misquoting me and taking what I said out of context. The discussion I mentioned you are creating is all in the quote that I quoted from you nothing else. YOu are trying to change what I am suggesting which is wrong and then allows you to talk off in your own world.
Were that true, your should ensure that your specific context is expressed with greater clarity. I am not trying to "change" anything, nor do I need your permission to write as I choose.

You don't ask a question with a question
How else would anyone ask a question?!

why are you wasting your time in a thread which is anti Sorabji and goes against what you want to promote?
Given that I wrote previously that one might as well ask why you are wasting yours in a thread that you have stated that you regard as useless, you would do well to concern yourself with the use of your own time rather than that of anyone else.

This is a rather arrogant response pretty much saying people can have opinion but they are wrong.
It is nothing of the kind because I have said nothing of the kind. One cannot in any case disagree per se with a personal opinion; one can only either share it or not share it. I have never stated that anyone is "wrong" not to share any of my musical tastes and values and I have no interest in so doing.

People can find it discorganised and incoherent and THAT DOES MAKE IT SO FOR THEM and, AND, the vast majority of people you ask. Go ahead go into public and ask them to listen to a many hour long Sorabji work, who of them could manage it, which of t hem will say it is AMAZING and want to listen to it all? You wont get much at all. So the mainstream opinion that the music is disorganised and incoherent remains as a mainstream fact for the majority of listeners.
Much the same could be said for many other works that exceed the attention spans of some of those whom one might ask if minded to do so; Sorabji has no exclusivity in that respect. "The majority of listeners" indeded wouldn't listen to this music but they also wouldn't listen to most of the music discussed here; as I stated previously, it's all relative - and the specific listener statistics for any music (such as one could ever come by reliable ones in any case) would be of scant interest to anyone other than statisticians. Moreover, it seems necessary to point out - again - that most of Sorabji's works are not several hours in duration in any case.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #142 on: January 14, 2020, 01:12:33 PM
Brilliant. Pissed myself
Never mind, Thal, accidents can happen  and you can always put your trousers in the washing machine. To be serious, though, the "pie chart" is based on no evidence and would be of little interest and value even if it were.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #143 on: January 14, 2020, 01:15:34 PM
I have to say, I find all the contempt for Sorabji's music quite baffling. I always found his music incredibly intriguing. It's colourful, original, and exquisitely pianistic. Why all the hate?
It seems to be a habit of certain individuals who loke to try to make a lot more noise than the music does without backing it up with substance, but that's neither your problem nor mine; I don't expect everyone to respond to this or any other music as you or I might do, but one of the more disturbing elements of these kinds of expression (insofar as one can take them seriously) is a narrow-mindedness and dogmatism not so much about the music itself but that implies that people either can't or don't or shouldn't ever change their minds about any music.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline perfect_pitch

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8496
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #144 on: January 14, 2020, 01:40:06 PM
To be serious, though, the "pie chart" is based on no evidence

It's anecdotal evidence... that's a 'type' of evidence.

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #145 on: January 14, 2020, 02:04:05 PM
It's anecdotal evidence... that's a 'type' of evidence.
It is indeed a 'type' of evidence but its attainment of value as such is by definition dependent upon the nature, content and extent of the anecdote/s; you would presumably not wish, for example, to witness someone being convicted of a crime on the basis of evidence that was purely anecdotal...

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline brogers70

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1603
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #146 on: January 14, 2020, 02:54:06 PM
I quite like Jackson Pollock. Anyone who thinks is structureless pointless spatters should try to do an abstract painting in Pollock's style. It's not easy, and most attempts are far less interesting to look at than the real thing. Ditto for lots of abstract art - if you think a child could do it, go ahead and try. It's not as easy as it looks.

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #147 on: January 14, 2020, 03:11:07 PM
I quite like Jackson Pollock. Anyone who thinks is structureless pointless spatters should try to do an abstract painting in Pollock's style. It's not easy, and most attempts are far less interesting to look at than the real thing. Ditto for lots of abstract art - if you think a child could do it, go ahead and try. It's not as easy as it looks.
Indeed - and just consider the extraordinary works that JMW Turner painted during his last five years or so in the latter 1840s, to which most responses were along the lines that he had taken leave of his senses; even Rain, Steam and Speed, one the less uncompromising of these, raised more than a few eyebrows at the time...

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive

Offline lostinidlewonder

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #148 on: January 14, 2020, 03:18:34 PM
Not so.
Indeed it has by your very own words was  [I "understand" it perfectly and "pretend" nothing.]
So indeed it has enforced your education given your "perfect" understanding.

It is not, although whether or not you are disappointed is of no concern to me.
It is but because I said you would say exactly what you did, except it was shorter than I suspected but exactly of the same nature.

To me, there is no task as it would be a largely pointless exercise given that almost all of the music listened to, played and discussed on this forum is a minotiry interest and the only qualification of that is that some is more of a minority interest than others.
It is irrelevant if you think it is pointless or not or any other postulations, the fact is if someone was to undergo such a research my route would be 10 times easier since it is 10 times less people to interview. If you disagree then I'm sorry you are just ignorant of maths.

But I do. I am not interested in persuading people whose view of certain music (not only Sorabji) I happen not to share to change their minds about it, still less that what is after all their personal opinions are "wrong"; discussing it and reading others' reactions to any such music is by no means synonymous with wanting to do either and if anyone decides to change their mind about any music it's up to the music to do that for them, not you or me.
You will have to work hard on your persuasive skills because the way you try to change peoples minds by putting down their opinions doesn't really open them up to anything you have to offer. Sugar catches more flies than vinegar, that is good to mediate upon if you want to sharpen some of your persuasive tools.

Were that true, your should ensure that your specific context is expressed with greater clarity. I am not trying to "change" anything, nor do I need your permission to write as I choose.
"Were that true" lol, it is true because I discussing what I wrote, I wrote it not you. You are taking what I wrote and trying to make it apply somewhere else, you need to read more carefully. Now that I have clarified that you took it out of context you still refuse to go back and read again, so I will also refuse to restate it and clarify. You are complaining that I was not clear enough, again you are putting down someone else to give an excuse for your failing, that is not very good use of persuasive skills coming of you.

How else would anyone ask a question?!
I asked you why you waste your time here on a thread which is meant to be against Sorabji's works, you respond with a similar question back to me without answering the question asked of you first. Evasive.

Given that I wrote previously that one might as well ask why you are wasting yours in a thread that you have stated that you regard as useless, you would do well to concern yourself with the use of your own time rather than that of anyone else.
But you are asking me a question that I am asking you but for you it is more important because you have some duty to the work of Sorabji and should be interested to promote it, however your attempts to promote it on a thread which is meant to ridicule Sorabji is a rather unprofessional move and perplexing. And that you continue and continue and continue here is just fascinating I can't get away from it :P

It is nothing of the kind because I have said nothing of the kind.
Your quote was:
" I don't doubt your assumption that those people find the music (or most of it) disorganised and incoherent but that does not of itself make it so.

You are simply saying it is all their opinion and it has no effect on Sorabji's music one bit. You are putting down an audience reaction to the music and simply saying, ok you can have that opinion but the music is not what you think it is. Maybe for YOU it is opposing what they are saying and you see all the beauty and amazing things, fine good great! Read what you wrote, maybe you can see how you have not been clear enough to hold value of other peoples opinions and simply try to make them look null and void.

One cannot in any case disagree per se with a personal opinion; one can only either share it or not share it. I have never stated that anyone is "wrong" not to share any of my musical tastes and values and I have no interest in so doing.
You wrote:
"...those people find the music (or most of it) disorganised and incoherent but that does not of itself make it so."

Perhaps you should reevaluate how you manage peoples opinions, to say that their opinion "does not of itself make it so" is a very obvious remark putting down someone opinion. It is real to them and you are saying well its just in your own head and its not a truth. It is a truth, their opinion and it is a mainstream truth.


Much the same could be said for many other works that exceed the attention spans of some of those whom one might ask if minded to do so; Sorabji has no exclusivity in that respect.
Irrelevant. The fact remains everything I said would still occur, just because others would be in the same boat is inconsequential.

"The majority of listeners" indeded wouldn't listen to this music
Good you have some sense..


Oh no there a BUT.... lets see...

....but they also wouldn't listen to most of the music discussed here;
Ok inconsequential just because it happens elsewhere is irelevant. I guess at least Sorabji is not alone in mainstream dislike for certain composers.

...as I stated previously, it's all relative - and the specific listener statistics for any music (such as one could ever come by reliable ones in any case) would be of scant interest to anyone other than statisticians.
It is important when considering what a mainstream ideology would be and that was the point of my response to this thread. It is a mainstream opinion that Sorabji's music is not worth peoples time to listen to, that doesn't mean Sorabji is terrible music for everyone, some of it I find is nice (the shorter works which to me avoid being self-absorbent rambling junk yards of music with a few salvagable bits here and there, those works which run hours and hours and to which I find pp artistic comparisons worked very well), but because i find it nice doesn't mean that it should be nice for everyone otherwise they are mistaken and wrong, most people hate it, so the mainstream hate it and I acknowledge that and share that same boat for the majority of the works from Sorabji.

Moreover, it seems necessary to point out - again - that most of Sorabji's works are not several hours in duration in any case.
Though in any case the works described here run for many hours.
"The biggest risk in life is to take no risk at all."
www.pianovision.com

Offline ahinton

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12144
Re: Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss
Reply #149 on: January 14, 2020, 04:24:04 PM
Indeed it has by your very own words was  [I "understand" it perfectly and "pretend" nothing.]
So indeed it has enforced your education given your "perfect" understanding.
You are allowing words to tie yourself in knots; not a recommend pursuit.

It is but because I said you would say exactly what you did, except it was shorter than I suspected but exactly of the same nature.
You're now doing much the same with meaning.

It is irrelevant if you think it is pointless or not or any other postulations, the fact is if someone was to undergo such a research my route would be 10 times easier since it is 10 times less people to interview. If you disagree then I'm sorry you are just ignorant of maths.
"If" someone was to undertake such research - the importance of the conditional here cannotg be over-stressed - especially since no one has! Of course interviewing 100 would take less time than interviewing 1,000 but neither would guarantee a meaningful result and, as I stated, no one has in any case actually done either. By the way, this isn't about "maths"; it's arithmetic, which is just one branch of maths.

You will have to work hard on your persuasive skills because the way you try to change peoples minds by putting down their opinions doesn't really open them up to anything you have to offer. Sugar catches more flies than vinegar, that is good to mediate upon if you want to sharpen some of your persuasive tools.
I need to do nothing of the kind; as I have already stated, it's up to each listener to decide what he/she feels about any music, it's up to the music itself and its performance to influence this insofar as it can and, let's not forget, humans have minds that they can change. Have you never changed your opinion on any music since first you listened to it?

"Were that true" lol, it is true because I discussing what I wrote, I wrote it not you. You are taking what I wrote and trying to make it apply somewhere else, you need to read more carefully. Now that I have clarified that you took it out of context you still refuse to go back and read again, so I will also refuse to restate it and clarify. You are complaining that I was not clear enough, again you are putting down someone else to give an excuse for your failing, that is not very good use of persuasive skills coming of you.
Poor grammar, careless and imprecise expression  and, in any case, I'm not "complaining"; merely drawing attention to something is not synonymous with "complaining" and it's no skin off my nose anyway.

I asked you why you waste your time here on a thread which is meant to be against Sorabji's works, you respond with a similar question back to me without answering the question asked of you first. Evasive.
If this thread is meant to be "against Sorabji's works" (although the OP mentioned only one of more than 100 of them), that doesn't preclude argument in favour of them; nothing "evasive" about that.

But you are asking me a question that I am asking you but for you it is more important because you have some duty to the work of Sorabji and should be interested to promote it, however your attempts to promote it on a thread which is meant to ridicule Sorabji is a rather unprofessional move and perplexing.
Pointing out the sheer risibility of the OP (and don't forget that you have yourself described this thread as "useless") is hardly tantamount to "promoting" Sorabji's work (even though you are of course correct that I have a duty to do this where and when appropriate, albeit a duty that I have chosen for myself at very considerable expense rather than one that was in any sense thrust upon me); in any event, rather than "ridiculing" Sorabji, it "ridicules" the OP (or would risk doing so were it to be taken seriously). There is therefore nothing either "unprofessional" or "perplexing" in my responses thereto.

Your quote was:
" I don't doubt your assumption that those people find the music (or most of it) disorganised and incoherent but that does not of itself make it so.

You are simply saying it is all their opinion and it has no effect on Sorabji's music one bit.
Of course. How indeed could it be otherwise? Not only is there a world of difference between personal opinion and value judgement, neither can possibly have any "effect on Sorabji's music" because it's already been written and the composer is hardly likely to revise any of it now!

You are putting down an audience reaction to the music and simply saying, ok you can have that opinion but the music is not what you think it is.
Not so. I am certainly not sharing what certain people have said about it, but I leave it to each listener to decide what the music is and what's in itt; that's all.

Maybe for YOU it is opposing what they are saying and you see all the beauty and amazing things, fine good great!
"Opposing" doesn't mean that I am telling others that they are wrong; it merely means that, like many others, I do indeed see much in this music - no more, no less.

Read what you wrote, maybe you can see how you have not been clear enough to hold value of other peoples opinions and simply try to make them look null and void.
I have never suggested that the opinions of people about any music that I happen not to share are "null and void"; those are your words, not mine. Not sharing such opinions and saying so is just that - no more, no less.

You wrote:
"...those people find the music (or most of it) disorganised and incoherent but that does not of itself make it so."
Now you're repeating yourself (or repeating me)...

Perhaps you should reevaluate how you manage peoples opinions, to say that their opinion "does not of itself make it so" is a very obvious remark putting down someone opinion. It is real to them and you are saying well its just in your own head and its not a truth. It is a truth, their opinion and it is a mainstream truth.
A personal opinion, however sincerely held, is never a truth; indeed, it cannot be so, whether it's mine or anyone else's. I do not "manage", or seek to "manage", people's opinions; merely declaring that I do not share some of them is in no sense indicative of a will to "manage" them.

It is important when considering what a mainstream ideology would be and that was the point of my response to this thread. It is a mainstream opinion that Sorabji's music is not worth peoples time to listen to, that doesn't mean Sorabji is terrible music some of it I find is nice (the shorter works which to me avoid being self-absorbent rambling junk yards of music with a few salvagable bits here and there, those works which run hours and hours and to which I find pp artistic comparisons worked very well), but because i find it nice doesn't mean that it should be nice for everyone otherwise they are mistaken and wrong, most people hate it, so the mainstream hate it and I acknowledge that and share that same boat for the majority of the works from Sorabji.
Though in any case the works described here run for many hours.
The OP mentions only one Sorabji work and it does indeed run for a long time - just over 500 minutes. I accept in principle what you write about a "mainstream ideology", but seeking to apply one or discuss one in the context of Sorabji and many other composers of Western art music both alive and dead seems to be on a Haydn to nothing. As I wrote more than once, this is all relative; there are many composers whose music has a far wider audience than does Sorabji's and many whose music has less, but all Westen art music (loose though I realise that term is) falls outside any semblance of "mainstream ideology".

Again, as far as reaching out to audiences is concerned, Sorabji is far more widely listened to now than he was up to the 1970s; he is not exceptional in that, though, since far more people now listen to Mahler, Bruckner, Godowsky, Medtner, Schönberg and others than was once the case.

In writing that it is "a mainstream opinion that Sorabji's music is not worth peoples time to listen to", your assertion is rather less than demonstrably accurate; I think that it could have been somewhat more so had you written that many people might answer not only that they would question the extent to which they might consider Sorabji's music (or at least some of it) "worth the time to listen to" but more informative and proportionate again had you added that the same might be said of the music of many other Western art music composers.

You then write "that doesn't mean Sorabji is terrible music some of it I find is nice"[/quote]
OK - and, not unnaturally, I'm pleased to hear it - but, again, some people might not find "nice" the pieces that you do so, once again, were are in the territory of personal opinion; nothing wrong with that insofar as it goes, of course. You then write "but because i find it nice doesn't mean that it should be nice for everyone otherwise they are mistaken and wrong"; indeed - and I just said as much.

However, you continue "most people hate it, so the mainstream hate it and I acknowledge that and share that same boat for the majority of the works from Sorabji". I think that there would need to be more evidence of people's actual "hatred" of this music, not least because the very fact that it is far from "mainstream" means that most people will never even have heard any of it - and one cannot hate any music to which one hasn't listened.

It seems that, now that you are revealing more of what you think and why (which I appreciate), it is the sheer length of certain Sorabji works that you find discouraging or worse; fair enough insofar as it goes, of course. All that I would add here, for what it might or might not be worth to you or anyone else reading this, is that, had Sorabji's creative motivations been mired in megalomania above all else, he would never have written the many shorter works of which you make passing mention.

In discussion with Sorabji many years ago, we touched briefly on one occasion on the question of duration and it was clear that he was very conscious of this as an issue, even though he seemed unconcerned at that time as to whether his works, long, medium or short, would be performed (and, as a consequence, maybe didn't even realise just how long some of the larger ones would turn out to be in performance); he did, however, say that he was always anxious to ensure as far as possible that no passages in any of his works were too long or too short or disproportionate to those on either side of them, adding that the larger the scale of any work, the harder it sometimes seemed to be to feel confident of having gotten this right. Having written a few large scale works myself (though nothing of remotely Sorabjian proportions), I can well empathise with this.

Best,

Alistair
Alistair Hinton
Curator / Director
The Sorabji Archive
For more information about this topic, click search below!
 

Logo light pianostreet.com - the website for classical pianists, piano teachers, students and piano music enthusiasts.

Subscribe for unlimited access

Sign up

Follow us

Piano Street Digicert