The Classical Chat Thread

[karlhenning]

It is confusingly stated.  If the writer meant that the piano score was completed on 15 August 1905, it were clearer to say piano score rather than completed score.

[MN Dave]

So I was wrong? Do composers ever write notes without thinking of particular instruments for them?

[karlhenning]

So I was wrong? Do composers ever write notes without thinking of particular instruments for them?

No, you were on the right track, Dave.  The notes were (if we are reading the confusing text aright) in place on a piano grand-staff score*;  and later the composer did the actual orchestration.

* Or a so-called "short score" of three or four staves.

[Opus106]

No, you were on the right track, Dave.  The notes were (if we are reading the confusing text aright) in place on a piano grand-staff score*

* Or a so-called "short score" of three or four staves.

And is this what people refer to usually when they say, "I was following the score as I was listening..."?

[karlhenning]

Could be following any score, I suppose;  but generally, I think people follow the full score.  The piano score is normally the composer's intermediate tool, and may not necessarily be released for publication.

[MN Dave]

I've never followed a score except when playing an instrument.

[karlhenning]

Then you probably weren't following the score; you were playing a part.

(You might consider that a technical quibble . . . score in general speech tends to be used as a synonym for, well, any music notation.)

[MN Dave]

Oy.

[Opus106]

Could be following any score, I suppose;  but generally, I think people follow the full score.  The piano score is normally the composer's intermediate tool, and may not necessarily be released for publication.

The clarification is appreciated.

[MN Dave]

Karl shoots!

He SCOOOOORES!!! 

[MN Dave]

Ugh.

I purchased some Brahms violin sonatas forgetting I already have two or three versions. I hate when I do that. And it proves I buy too much music.

[karlhenning]

Got to curb that Brahmslust!

[MN Dave]

Indeed.

I was actually just testing out Arkiv's download feature and I got a bit hasty. It was late and I was out of it. At least I didn't download the same recording again.

[Opus106]

Ugh.

I purchased some Brahms violin sonatas forgetting I already have two or three versions. I hate when I do that. And it proves I buy too much music.

Look on the brighter side: you won't feel like leaving GMG again for sometime.

[MN Dave]

Yeah, I pretty much listen to all classical these days.

[Brian]

Import from the listening thread:

PROKOFIEV | Alexander Nevsky Cantata
Czech Philharmonic Chorus and Orchestra
Karel Ancerl

For me this piece will always be inextricably linked with my first listen - in live performance. As hugely enjoyable as this is at home, hearing the Nevsky Cantata live was just a mind-blowing experience. There's a lot of 20th-century music that's that way. Two of my favorites, Janacek's Sinfonietta and Sibelius' Fifth, are also pieces I heard for the first time at a live concert. It's a pretty interesting coincidence - except that I don't think it's a coincidence. When I heard the First Symphonies of Barber and Mahler live a couple weekends ago, I had heard them before on record and enjoyed them, but they, too, offered a whole new level of impact live. By contrast, with Beethoven or something like that (even the romantics), for as awesome as they are in concert, I can pretty much crank up the volume in my room to con blasto levels and love them just the same. The same broad pattern holds true for my parents; my mother was totally sold on Shostakovich and Prokofiev by live concerts, but she doesn't even think of listening to them at home. Is there something about 20th century music that makes it more enjoyable, more visceral, more follow-able live?

[karlhenning]

When you are present in the space, the experience is much richer.  Interestingly, I was having a similar conversation with the chap in the classical section of a cd shop this morning (when I snaffled the Boulez & Chávez discs).

[MN Dave]

If I were rich, I'd totally hire one of you as my Music Purchaser; that way I wouldn't have to make any decisions. 

[MN Dave]

I was looking at the booklet in my Audite Furtwangler set and saw that the LvB 5th and 6th were meant to be complementary, and that the 6th was written first. I don't think I knew that before.

[Lethevich]

I was looking at the booklet in my Audite Furtwangler set and saw that the LvB 5th and 6th were meant to be complementary, and that the 6th was written first. I don't think I knew that before.

Indeedie - in the first concert where the 5th and 6th premiered, their numbers were the other way around to how we currently know them. The 4th was composed after both of them too