Sorabji vs Microwave Background Radiation Hiss

[perfect_pitch]

I note Sequentia is currently in the lead...

HOW?!?

[thalbergmad]

The Hiss would have no votes against Beethoven. Against Sorabji it is close.

[ahinton]

The Hiss would have no votes against Beethoven. Against Sorabji it is close.

Isn't New Year's Day a most unfortunate occasion on which to have a hissy fit?

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I see you have still got the hangover.

[ahinton]

I see you have still got the hangover.

You see that who still has what hangover and from what?

Be that as it may or may not, the origin of the idea of this "hiss" in the present context remains entirely unclear. Perhaps there might be a clue in the late Yonty Solomon - a wonderful pianist who performed a number of Sorabji works and has a recording of one of them out there. Solomon was born and raised in South Africa and came to London in around 1963 to study with Myra Hess, of whom you recently wrote very positively; given his background, who knows? - perhaps he pronounced her name "Hiss"? That's the best that I can do to try to draw some kind of connection between a consequence of microwave radiation and a set of variations on a chant from many centuries ago on the Day of Wrath; not very good, I admit...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

You can get help you know.

[ahinton]

You can get help you know.

Who can get help for what? I doubt that anyone needs or wants any in order to develop an appreciation either of microwave radiation hiss or of anyone's motives in referring to it in the context of Sorabji's Sequentia cyclica but perhaps you have something else in mind, in which case some cogent and credible explanation (if any) might not come amiss.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Damn, that crap is winning.

[ahinton]

Damn, that crap is winning.

"Winning"? It's not a game or competition! The entire idea is, as I've stated, nonsensical, since any attempt to compare these two items would be about as useful as trying to compare a Carter string quartet with a bunch of grapes or your local parlour to an academic library.

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

.. compare..
 your local parlour to an academic library.

"I'D LIKE A MASSAGE..."

"But sir, this is a library!"

"Sorry!" (sotto voce) "with a happy ending!"

[ahinton]

"I'D LIKE A MASSAGE..."

"But sir, this is a library!"

"Sorry!" (sotto voce) "with a happy ending!"

!!!

By the way, another distinct difference between thiss and the hiss is that only the latter is featured on Pianostreet!

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

Damn, that crap is winning.

This music is not winning or losing for it has nothing to prove; it is merely stating itself. Anyone may freely engage with it or not. To engage with it and finding yourself unresponsive to it is an honest conclusion, but that conclusion does not mean the music has lost or you have lost.
To state this (or any) music is 'crap' without having engaged with it, and having no intent to do, so means simply, and sadly, that you lose. Not from anything or anyone, for you have not engaged with anything or anyone in any meaningful manner regarding this music. You have not lost an argument (for there is no argument), you have lost any credibility regarding any opinion about this music. And with showing you are willing to lose such credibility in this case, you are serious undermining your credibility in whatever opinion (positive or negative) you wish to utter about any other piece of music. Which, considering your serious interest in many pieces of music, and your willingness to investigate obscure and unknown music, is a great pity.

While I am not wont to refer to somewhat suspect things as the following, I do so nevertheless in this one case because I would want to hear from some who have a preset negative predisposition regarding the music of Sorabji. Especially those who will regurgitate the eternal nonsense of Sorabji's music being 'merely' huge and complex (a critique seldom encountered with such in other works of art even more huge and complex, such as, but not limited to, Ankor Wat, the Sistine Chapel murals or Dante's Divine Comedy). Personally, I find its shattering depth of expression wrought with the smallest of means comparable with very few other pieces of music I know, but could name the first movement of Shostakovich’s 15th Quartet an example. Or, perhaps, the Fugue in e-flat minor of Bach’s WTC I. The section I refer to is to be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjKvSXT5OL8. It left me, even in this far from perfect format, quite speechless.

All best,
gep

[thalbergmad]

Thanks HINTY2

[ahinton]

Thanks HINTY2

Your thanks is, or should be, appreciated. Gep, however, speaks for himself, as indeed do most people, including you; it's a pity that you seem so unwilling to recognise that, for whatever reason or none. For the record, whilst gep has known Sorabji's music for quite a few years, I have done so since long before I knew anything of gep; that's not in any sense to pull rank but to introduce some due proportionality into your frankly unfounded  and unwarrantable implied assumptions.

But let's simplify this, if only for the sake of trying to get away from these frankly stupid non-arguments. You do not like any or most of Sorabji's music; fine. Lots of people don't, just as lots of people don't like the music of Bach, Beethoven and Chopin. Where you reveal the threadbare nature of what passes for genuine argument on your part is in your implicit (and not so implicit) suggestions that those who do warm to it must somehow be deficient. You would not appreciate similar attitudes from people who might pour scorn on the 19th century concertos that mean a lot to you - and why should you?

In the meantime, just ask yourself (or better still ask Pianostreet) why Pianostreet is featuring Jonathan Powell's Sequentia cyclica recording and whether it might mean that your views (insofar as they might even be such) are possibly unrepresentative of the forum as a whole.

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

In the meantime, just ask yourself (or better still ask Pianostreet) why Pianostreet is featuring Jonathan Powell's Sequentia cyclica recording

This had not gone unnoticed on my part, and the question bears asking. He's not the only pianostreet member to have released commercial recordings of rarities..

[ahinton]

This had not gone unnoticed on my part, and the question bears asking. He's not the only pianostreet member to have released commercial recordings of rarities..

The number of members who have recorded anything remotely resembling microwave background radiation hiss is, however, vanishingly small.

Come to think of it and out of sheer curiosity, did Messiaen ever write any hissy pieces for micro-ondes martenot? Answers on no postcards at all, s'il vous plaît...

Best,

Alistair

[dogperson]

This had not gone unnoticed on my part, and the question bears asking. He's not the only pianostreet member to have released commercial recordings of rarities..

Personally, I don’t think any membership preference for Sorabji’s compositions   can be inferred  from what Piano Street recordings are highlighted... there is no master poll  they use to make a decision

... but I do find it quite sad that a well respected member’s commercial recordings are not highlighted 

[lostinidlewonder]

The amount of attention ahinton is giving to this thread makes me think that serious discussion about Sorbaji is not taxing his time online. Or perhaps here is the most activity where Sorabji is being discussed?

Losts predicted Hinty response: I neither am giving much attention to responses here to consider it an "amount" that requires any noticeable consideration or taxing my time due to any amount of attention you mistakenly consider should apply.

[thalbergmad]

Brilliant. A most l ike Hintoness response.

[thalbergmad]

This had not gone unnoticed on my part, and the question bears asking. He's not the only pianostreet member to have released commercial recordings of rarities..

And at least yours was actually music.

[ahinton]

The amount of attention ahinton is giving to this thread makes me think that serious discussion about Sorbaji is not taxing his time online. Or perhaps here is the most activity where Sorbaji is being discussed?

Losts predicted Hinty response: I neither am giving much attention to responses here to consider it an "amount" that requires any noticeable consideration or taxing my time due to any amount of attention you mistakenly consider should apply.

"Losts"? Quoi?...

You do seem to have a curious predilection for attempting to predict responses I might give to others, comments; a shame, since it does you no favours as they're invariably wrong.

That said, as the thread concerns - or rather at least refers to - a major Sorabji recording about to be released, my involvement in any such discussion is surely hardly surprising.

For the record, Pianostreet is by no means the place where the most discussion of the composer is taking place.

Beyond that I can muster scant interest is responding to your lucubrations, not least because you can't even be bothered to spell the composer's name correctly.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Brilliant. A most l ike Hintoness response.

Whatever that is supposed to be. Anyway, on the evidence of the actual response, it is clearly nothing of the kind.

Be all of the above as it may or may not, the recording has been made, it is being released and already I note comments about both the music and its performance that suggest a peak of the achievements of both composer and performer. At this point, I don't see that anything more need be said, although nothing ever needed to be said about microwaves, radiation or hissing in this context in the first place.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Personally, I don’t think any membership preference for Sorabji’s compositions   can be inferred  from what Piano Street recordings are highlighted... there is no master poll  they use to make a decision

Fair comment insofar as it goes, yet someone nevertheless did decide to feature it here (it didn't feature itself) and, given that this is a piano forum, one can only assume that whoever made that decision believed the recording to be sufficiently worthy of consideration to warrant drawing attention to it here.

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

And at least yours was actually music.

Oooh, Thalberg > Sorabji, controversial!

[thalbergmad]

Not even I would bother to state the obvious.

[ahinton]

Not even I would bother to state the obvious.

What I would state on this is that Thalberg was Thalberg and Sorabji was Sorabji and I have no problem with either; how "obvious" any of that might be it's not for me to say...

Best,

Alistair

[brogers70]

People sometimes post here saying, for example, that they hate Bach. I love Bach; I might suggest ways of listening to Bach that might get them to enjoy the music, but I certainly wouldn't offer a vigorous defense of Bach. He doesn't need my help.

[ahinton]

People sometimes post here saying, for example, that they hate Bach. I love Bach; I might suggest ways of listening to Bach that might get them to enjoy the music, but I certainly wouldn't offer a vigorous defense of Bach. He doesn't need my help.

Indeed He doesn't!

Best,

Alistair

[perfect_pitch]

C'mon people - surely we can't let the Sorabji win???

I'm standing up for the Microwave Radiation hissing... WHO WILL JOIN ME?

Make your vote now.

[thalbergmad]

There is a lack of taste on this forum if Sorabji wins.

[ahinton]

There is a lack of taste on this forum if Sorabji wins.

There is questionable taste on this forum purely by virtue of runnng this absurd "competition" in the first place!

The only thing of which we can all be certain, however - whatever the "result" of it might be - is that only one of the two will be released as a 7-CD boxed set.

Best,

Alistair

[brogers70]

There is a lack of taste on this forum if Sorabji wins.

I'm not a big fan of Sorabji, but his music is way more interesting to listen to than white noise. And you shouldn't be electioneering at the polling place.

[gep]

With regard to 'pitch', and with disregard of 'yaw', I am by now reminded of a rather famous experiment in cumbersome tardiness, to be viewed here

While I am very much interested in the reasons behind Cosmic Microwave Radiation (as the correct term is; microwaves usually do not radiate hiss in the background unless broken), in music I am so very interested in Sorabji's music for the very simple reason it contains so much more than quite a lot of other and far more famous music. But there will always be far more people who will decry the existence of mountains rather than learn to climb. And while I cannot scale any Sorabjian mountain by way of playing the music, I can – and do -  enjoy the view offered by those who can. But do feel free to enjoy the richly rewarding amazing musical complexities of something like "Spiegel im Spiegel".

[brogers70]

But do feel free to enjoy the richly rewarding amazing musical complexities of something like "Spiegel im Spiegel".

Crunchy music does have a certain intellectual snob appeal.

[ahinton]

Crunchy music does have a certain intellectual snob appeal.

"Intellectual snob appeal" has no place where Sorabji's work is concerned; indeed, Sorabji himself would profoundly have loathed the very idea, as indeed do I...

Best,

Alistair

[brogers70]

"Intellectual snob appeal" has no place where Sorabji's work is concerned; indeed, Sorabji himself would profoundly have loathed the very idea, as indeed do I...

Best,

Alistair

I was responding to gep, not to you.

[ahinton]

I was responding to gep, not to you.

I am of course aware of that; no problem.

Best,

Alistair

[fftransform]

There is a lack of taste on this forum if Sorabji wins.

In as much as you started this thread, I suppose there is some esoteric manner of correlation, thalbergmad . . .  Your timid, pearl-clutching tastes are definitely a drag.

[ahinton]

In as much as you started this thread, I suppose there is some esoteric manner of correlation, thalbergmad . . .  Your timid, pearl-clutching tastes are definitely a drag.

"Pearl-clutching"? That's a new one on me! "Clutching at straws", more like, methinks...

Ah, well...

Best,

Alistair

[ranjit]

"Pearl-clutching"? That's a new one on me! "Clutching at straws", more like, methinks...

Ah, well...

Bestm

Alistair

Never had a lucky charm, I gather?

[dogperson]

Never had a lucky charm, I gather?

It is not a reference to a lucky charm nor synonymous with clutching at straws
But a reference to holding onto past trends , as pearls are considered old fashioned taste

[ahinton]

It is not a reference to a lucky charm nor synonymous with clutching at straws
But a reference to holding onto past trends , as pearls are considered old fashioned taste

Thank you for that - but, intentionally or otherwise, an abiding sense of "clutching at straws" is nevertheless what manifests itself in the OP...

Best,

Alistair

[fftransform]

Pearls are for clutching, straws are for grasping, JEEZE

[fftransform]

[fftransform]

Ok, I'm listening to this piece.  No way I'm going to listen to all of it today.

Intro: Ok, whatever.  Dies Irae, gotcha, nothing going on here.

Vivace: Is this really the first variation?  It's so . . . extra.  Horrible transition from the intro.  Unpleasantly noisy, nice bits at 3:30, 4:45 and 5:30 but in general this is just aural junk.  The polyphony is so thick from the get-go that there is basically no dramatic arc.  The last third or so is definitely the best, but it's still quite noisy.  This has a "I didn't really know how to start this piece" feel.  He was right.

Moderato: Another very poor transition IMO, doesn't seem to be Powell's doing either.  But on its own merits, this movement is quite nice.  I especially like the modulation starting at 1:50, but it's too short, I'd have liked that passage expanded.  Overall reminds me of Djami and some slower parts from the Solo Concerto.  The Dies Irae gets completely (or merely effectively completely?) lost for large passages: Good.

Legato, suove e liscio: Another meaningless transition, I don't know what's up with that.  This one is -extremely- Scriabinistic and improvisatory, reminding me of the Sonata No. 1 with its pretty flourishes constantly being extinguished by brusque interjections of chords.  This is definitely giving me "Sorabji Fatigue" really quick (it's too all over the place and whenever I get interested for a moment, it shuts down whatever I was digging) even though it's not especially overwrought (relatively ofc).  The passage at 5:30 is nicely placed; it can be difficult to insert straightforward material into a free-flowing expressionist soundscape, but it's satisfying when it works.  Again, would have liked more of that rather than immediately jumping back to the perfume haze.

The next movement is 65 minutes and I just woke up.  So, later.

[ahinton]

Ok, I'm listening to this piece.  No way I'm going to listen to all of it today.

Intro: Ok, whatever.  Dies Irae, gotcha, nothing going on here.

Vivace: Is this really the first variation?  It's so . . . extra.  Horrible transition from the intro.  Unpleasantly noisy, nice bits at 3:30, 4:45 and 5:30 but in general this is just aural junk.  The polyphony is so thick from the get-go that there is basically no dramatic arc.  The last third or so is definitely the best, but it's still quite noisy.  This has a "I didn't really know how to start this piece" feel.  He was right.

Moderato: Another very poor transition IMO, doesn't seem to be Powell's doing either.  But on its own merits, this movement is quite nice.  I especially like the modulation starting at 1:50, but it's too short, I'd have liked that passage expanded.  Overall reminds me of Djami and some slower parts from the Solo Concerto.  The Dies Irae gets completely (or merely effectively completely?) lost for large passages: Good.

Legato, suove e liscio: Another meaningless transition, I don't know what's up with that.  This one is -extremely- Scriabinistic and improvisatory, reminding me of the Sonata No. 1 with its pretty flourishes constantly being extinguished by brusque interjections of chords.  This is definitely giving me "Sorabji Fatigue" really quick (it's too all over the place and whenever I get interested for a moment, it shuts down whatever I was digging) even though it's not especially overwrought (relatively ofc).  The passage at 5:30 is nicely placed; it can be difficult to insert straightforward material into a free-flowing expressionist soundscape, but it's satisfying when it works.  Again, would have liked more of that rather than immediately jumping back to the perfume haze.

The next movement is 65 minutes and I just woke up.  So, later.

Well, whilst I'll have to agree to disagree with you over a fair amount of that, at least you have gone to the trouble to express an opinion and provide some detail as to what lies behind it, which is appreciated.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Pearls are for clutching, straws are for grasping, JEEZE

And the Atlantic is for ensuring the perpetuation of a tradition of conflicting uses of English on either side of itself.

What's JEEZ for, though?(!)...

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

Quote from: gep on Yesterday at 05:59:07 PM

    But do feel free to enjoy the richly rewarding amazing musical complexities of something like "Spiegel im Spiegel".

Crunchy music does have a certain intellectual snob appeal.

 
I have no idea what ‚crunchy music’ is or is supposed to be, and how or why it would – whatever it is – appeal to the ‘intellectual snob’. I do have the impression you consider me an ‘intellectual snob’, though, so let’s go along that line.

A few questions to begin with.

Would you, or would you not, consider the idea that one could vote for the intrinsic artistic value of a piece of art? If so, why? What about starting to whine once that vote goes not the way the starter of the poll wanted, or perhaps expected?
Would you, or would you not, consider the stance that one can dismiss any piece of music without having heard one note of it, or intending to hear it, to be snobbish? What about dismissing the opinion of those who have heard the piece and regard it in a positive way? I will not ask if you would consider such behaviour ‘intellectual’.

As for my reference to that piece by Arvo Pärt. Yes I do not think much of that particular piece, even having heard it live. As I have various other pieces by the same composer, including rather larger and more complex ones, such as the 2-hour Kanon Pokajanen. Some I find more interesting than others. I have heard, if not live, other pieces that I find quite more interesting, such as the 4th Symphony. In short, though I have as yet not encountered any pieces by Pärt that I find myself very responsive to, I do not avoid it; if and when there is a concert that I would attend, and they play a piece by him, I will give it the same serious attention I will give any piece I hear in concert. Pärt, whatever I feel about his music, is I think a serious composer, and deserves therefor serious attention, which I do give. That I find music by, for example, Sorabji far more inventive and interesting is a matter of my particular taste. If anyone finds the opposite, and enjoys and is moved by the music of Pärt (or any other composer not to my taste), fine by me! The very wonderful thing about music is that it can move people!
But to return to the accusation of ‘snob’; I do think that decrying a piece of music one has not heard and has no intention of hearing on the basis of “it is written by X so hence it is rubbish by default, and whoever thinks otherwise is a fool” is snobbish to a high degree. And so typical of that kind of snob to call whomever disagrees a snob. But, as Sorabji already said ‘fascism is everybody else’s fascism but yours’; so very applicable here.

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’.

All best,
gep

[fftransform]

Y'all, nobody is reading that boring *** argument.  Take it outside. Alistair, you look small for getting dragged into line-by-line level pique. 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!

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?

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.

[fftransform]

For the next three movements (Ardito, Focosamente/Vivace e Leggiero/L'istesso Tempo) I was really distracted by Powell's vocalizations.  Sounds like some Sunn O))) stuff, lots of low growling (and then lots of HNNNNGH-ing on upbeats in the Valse afterward; is that the technical term?), now I am having trouble not noticing it haha

Here, at 2:05 for example:

And here, at 0:15 and especially 0:50 (legit wondered if he ripped a fart at 2:50):

These show up in the next movement a lot as well.  But overall I liked the two shorter movements a lot, especially the Vivace.  The first was a bit draining and 'generic Sorabji' for me.  The intro to the L'istesso Tempo was one of my favorite moments in the whole piece thus far; again, a shame that he didn't stick around to develop some of these less chromatic ideas.  In a piece this big, diversity is your friend.  The transition from the L'istesso Tempo to the Valse was just . . . completely ruined.  Was this done on different recording days?  Like, it was so meaningless it legit pissed me off.  If that's how it's written, then it should have been ignored, because it obviously doesn't work.

There's a GREAT passage in the Valse, btw, starting around (the always-auspicious) 4:20, that I would call clear genius:

But overall, this is another movement where I feel like I can 'get' most of it right out the box, and I disagree with a lot of the interpretative choices.  I think this movement would be worth really working on and coming back to as a solo piece; I'd shop it around to the usual suspects of pianists now that you have a rec.  I think there's a lot more quality here than could really be addressed by a performance which has to include the other seven or so hours.  There are definitely some little passages and licks that don't make a ton of sense to me, but overall this movement is the clear highlight of the piece so far.

I can recommend to everyone to at least listen to the 8th Variation "Tempo di valzer con molto fantasia,..."  Easily some of Sorabji's best writing.  The performance has a good overall Sorabji sound, but it's plain to me and probably to you that there is yet a lot more to mine, musically speaking, from this one.