Quiz: Mystery scores

[karlhenning]

In the can? Surely it's not that bad....

Here's hoping! ; )

[Guido]

Can means toilet.

Thinking about it are any Russian composers born during the Soviet era great? I can't think of any...

Weinberg, Gubaidulina, Schnittke, Ustvolskaya? Not convinced that any of them are truly top notch...

[karlhenning]

Yes, but in the can is Hollywoodspeak for "finito" . . . as in the physical film removed from the camera and stored in the metal drum.

[Guido]

Yes, but in the can is Hollywoodspeak for "finito" . . . as in the physical film removed from the camera and stored in the metal drum.

yeah but I think Luke was punning...

[Luke]

He was...

[karlhenning]

Aye.

[Guido]

Awkward.

[Luke]

*stares at feet*

[Luke]

ANYWAY..........


no one's had any guesses on my last two (link in list on previous page) nor on the subtle connection between them. Which is odd, because at least one of them is one of my favourite things, and very well known....

[rappy]

Luke, I have no clue, but if I had to guess, I would say the last one COULD be Janacek, as he often has these written-out-tremolos. The key and the fact that it is one of your favourites could also be hints?

[karlhenning]

[ Didn't mean to damp the flow of soul, chaps! ]

[karlhenning]

Can means toilet.

Thinking about it are any Russian composers born during the Soviet era great? I can't think of any...

Weinberg, Gubaidulina, Schnittke, Ustvolskaya? Not convinced that any of them are truly top notch...

I haven't investigated most of these (which might be construed as a ballot) . . . Schnittke verges onto top notch at times, perhaps.

[Luke]

...and Shostakovich certainly thought that Ustvolskaya did...

[Guido]

Yeah but he was also in love with her was he not. I'm not hugely enamoured with her music.

Schnittke is quite overrated as far as I can see - I think his popularity rests onthe facts that he is a bit like Shostakovich. I like the two cello sonatas fairly well, but in general the music seems like a third pressing of Shostakovich, which we already know is a third pressing of Mahler. Essentially I think there's nothing he does that Shostakovich doesn't do better, and his music can be extremely boring and just plain poor if you don't buy into the whole spiel of the depressed man/soviet angst thing that is carried over from Shostakovich (but is here even more extreme). Dunno - would like to get other's views on this - maybe I'll post on the Schnittke thread.

[Sydney Grew]

Schnittke is quite overrated as far as I can see - I think his popularity rests on the fact that he is a bit like Shostakovich. I like the two cello sonatas fairly well, but in general the music seems like a third pressing of Shostakovich, which we already know is a third pressing of Mahler. . . . his music can be extremely boring and just plain poor if you don't buy into the whole spiel of the depressed man/soviet angst thing that is carried over from Shostakovich (but is here even more extreme). Dunno - would like to get other's views on this - maybe I'll post on the Schnittke thread.

Well said; we entirely agree. (Except that being unfamiliar with the term "third pressing" we say "seventh rater" in application to both Shystercowitch and Schnittke.) They were both plebeians of course, which must have something to do with it.

[karlhenning]

Guido was being facetious by alluding to Boulez's scornful dismissal of Shostakovich, Syd. Shostakovich was in fact a phenomenal composer, and I am not in the least interested in un-packing your [off-topic, be it noted] scorn; your remark only indicates that your musical mind is too small to fathom Shostakovich's music.  So go back and listen to your pretty little classics.

[Luke]

Luke, I have no clue, but if I had to guess, I would say the last one COULD be Janacek, as he often has these written-out-tremolos. The key and the fact that it is one of your favourites could also be hints?

Sorry, Rappy, only just saw this reply - no, it's not Janacek, though I can see your logic. To clarify, the last three score examples are all from the same piece, I'm just being generous by giving extra samples, so, looking at the first of those three, I think it's clear why it isn't Janacek, and I hope it's clear why I might say what I said about it above. Which I'm not repeating because otherwise it is just TOO obvious.

The other one, the first one....well, I'd look closely at the scoring. It's a one-of-a-kind piece, by a composer with a big following on GMG

[Luke]

Boys, we need some progress here!! How about a few clues to my remaining ones? That's these fellas:

474 - Rachmaninov - ? - Karl
475 - ? -
476 - ? -
477 - ? -
478 - ? -
479 - ? -
481 - ? -
482 - ? -


OK, so, Karl saw 474 and straightaway called it as Rachmaninov's 2nd Piano Concerto. Which it isn't, but it is Rachmaninov, and is from an earlier piece; SR took this idea and used it in the concerto. Scored for a fairly odd combination (nothing massively outrageous, just a little odd).

475 - with those big Mahlerian lines...but not Mahler, of course. A famous contemporary, though, a composer with at least one very big thread on GMG. Take a look at the scoring too, if possible.

476 - a natty piece, this, scored for the very Henningesque ensemble of viola and piano (obviously), but the composer was also violinist, and a very famous one at that. Equally famous for his friendship with a great composer with whom this piece shows many similarities (some to be seen on this sample).

477 - a slightly unusual provenance, this piece by a great French composer; the music is a depiction of the waltz the wind sings down the chimneys of one of his Spanish castles (he didn't have any Spanish castles....)

478 - seriously, how hard can this be? Superb piece, this, and look at those clefs! To spell it out, these are two different G clefs, but the actual notes are the same; the violins are in unison. There is a programatic purpose to this which is to do with the French and Italian schools of composition (I think the score makes that pretty clear) - and the Muses are there because we are on Mt Parnassus

479 - like 477, an odd little scrap of almost-ephemera from a great composer, best known for his symphonies and tone poems.  Note the limited number of notes in the instrument on the lower stave - clearly some kind of folk instrument, wouldn't you say?

481 - no new clues, just remember what I said before: 1) look at the instrumentation; it's not immediately obvious, but a little Holmsian deduction (looking at clefs, key signatures and positioning in the layout) should tell you what the top three are. The bottom one....well, it's a little odd, isn't it? and 2) he's a much-discussed composer round here recently

482 (a, b and c) - the clue I gave was so big I don't want to give it again!

remember, there's a link between the last two, just for fun...

[rappy]

Sorry Luke, I'm sure I've never heard any of the pieces, so the clues can be totally obvious and still don't help me.

Have you recognized #38 of my quiz yet?

[Luke]

Haven't looked at it much yet....a question though (an obvious one): do these infuriating alterations you are making to the scores include matters of the clef? In otherwords - is this one oiginally in the alto clef, or is that one of the changes you are allowing yourself?