Dmitri's Dacha

[relm1]

Does anyone know if there was an orchestral work by Shostakovich that had a prominent piano part besides the two concerti?  I vaguely remember the radio playing a 10-13 minute exciting piece for piano and orchestra but cannot find it in his list of works so might have incorrectly attributed it to Shostakovich.  I thought the title had something to do with October but the work I found was op. 131 and not the same piece.

[Karl Henning]

First Symphony?

[relm1]

No, not the first symphony.  I thought it was a concertante work.  It might have been from one of his film scores but like a 10 minute suite arranged for piano and orchestra.    I thought it had a very Rachmaninoff-ian feel to it...exuberant romanticism rather than L'Enfant terrible or tragic despair.   

EDIT: Ok, I found it!!  Not called October but The Unforgettable Year 1919.  Technically more Tchaikovsky than Rachmaninoff but gorgeous romanticism! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ntsvhH8E8U

[aukhawk]

[On CC1]

But, really, it IS that jaunty Benny Hill/Monty Python motto... sure you can turn it into a thousand things, but the zeitegesheit is still there,... at least, I know I know how to spot his theme in its various guises...

Of course it is.  Hal-lo old friend (sing it).

But it's not DSCH though. DSCH is D-Eb-C-B. Those notes, in that order. A derivation would involve those same notes, either in a different order, or with repeats or something like that.

Surely if a composer takes a motif (say for example D-Eb-C-B) and then repeats it obsessively throughout an extended musical work (or indeed through numerous works over a period) then in the process it is bound to get transposed many times, because that is the nature of this type of music. It may even first appear in its transposed form.  It may even appear in a slightly distorted form that is nonetheless a clear allusion to the original (like Bach inverting a fugue subject).  It is always still (IMHO) the 'DSCH' motif regardless of what the actual notes or pitches are.

[Karl Henning]

Surely if a composer takes a motif (say for example D-Eb-C-B) and then repeats it obsessively throughout an extended musical work (or indeed through numerous works over a period) then in the process it is bound to get transposed many times, because that is the nature of this type of music. It may even first appear in its transposed form.  It may even appear in a slightly distorted form that is nonetheless a clear allusion to the original (like Bach inverting a fugue subject).  It is always still (IMHO) the 'DSCH' motif regardless of what the actual notes or pitches are.

Indeed.

[Pat B]

Surely if a composer takes a motif (say for example D-Eb-C-B) and then repeats it obsessively throughout an extended musical work (or indeed through numerous works over a period) then in the process it is bound to get transposed many times, because that is the nature of this type of music. It may even first appear in its transposed form.  It may even appear in a slightly distorted form that is nonetheless a clear allusion to the original (like Bach inverting a fugue subject).  It is always still (IMHO) the 'DSCH' motif regardless of what the actual notes or pitches are.

Transposition, absolutely. Inversion, sure. Arbitrary reordering, maybe. But does G-Fb-Cb-Bb have any such relationship to D-Eb-C-B?

[Spineur]

Has any GMG members read this book and what do they think of it, more from a musical than political perspective, which seems to be Julian Barnes main focus.

[asin]1101947241[/asin]

[Karl Henning]

Transposition, absolutely. Inversion, sure. Arbitrary reordering, maybe. But does G-Fb-Cb-Bb have any such relationship to D-Eb-C-B?

Not so close as literal transposition or inversion, to be sure, but still an audibly close relation:

A. [ascending minor second] + [descending minor third] + [descending minor second]

B. [ascending minor second] + [descending perfect fourth] + [descending minor second]

These are clearly more closely related than (say) D-E^b-C-B and G-B^b-C^b-F^b:

A. [ascending minor second] + [descending minor third] + [descending minor second]

C. [ascending minor third] + [ascending minor second] + [descending perfect fifth]

Consider the traditional understanding of Beethoven's c minor symphony, that "the same idea" of three short notes and one long unites all four movements.  Thinking of the inaugural "Fate knocking" motif as a sufficiently close relation to (in the last movement, e.g.) the triplet pickups into a downbeat is more of a stretch than the relationship between A. and B.

[amw]

Not so close as literal transposition or inversion, to be sure, but still an audibly close relation:

A. [ascending minor second] + [descending minor third] + [descending minor second]

B. [ascending minor second] + [descending perfect fourth] + [descending minor second]

B should be [descending minor third] + [ascending perfect fifth] + [descending minor second] which is not really all that similar at all. Anyway it's as much a harmonic motive as a melodic one: E minor + E-flat major.

Side note: the earlier examples of that particular motive I can think of come from Ralph Vaughan Williams: Job (Satan's theme) and the 6th Symphony (where it is a driving force for the whole work, which opens with a juxtaposition of F minor and E major—the latter immediately self-correcting to E minor; is largely driven by this same progression [two chords a semitone apart, connected by ^3], always bringing instability as neither chord can be a "resolution" unless it's corrected to something else; and ends, once E minor has achieved "victory" over E major, with a pure oscillation between E minor and E-flat major triads, like the statement of a thesis, or like a slow realisation that the two triads are not an opposition at all but rather a duality). Rozhdestvensky did bring RVW symphonies to Russia a few times. Wonder if Shostakovich ever heard them <_< >_> (What he does in the 1st symphony, connecting F minor and D-flat minor with an Ab, is basically the same sort of thing of course.)

It might be interesting to play Mitya's CC1 straight after Rafe's Sixth. The Shostakovich work is driven by the same instability, begins with the exact same chords that ended the Vaughan Williams one, but ends up resolving the tension quite differently—instead of accepting the duality, the timpani simply asserts Eb major with brute force and brings proceedings to the abruptest of endings. A difference in philosophy I suspect.

[Karl Henning]

B should be [descending minor third] + [ascending perfect fifth] + [descending minor second] which is not really all that similar at all.

Gah, you're right, of course.  I should know better than tro try to write before I've finished my first cup of morning tea.

[Pat B]

Gah, you're right, of course.  I should know better than tro try to write before I've finished my first cup of morning tea.

FWIW I do agree that G-Fb-Cb-Bb sounds similar to the DSCH motif. I just don't accept that the former is a derivation of the latter -- and certainly not that they are the same.

[Karl Henning]

FWIW I do agree that G-Fb-Cb-Bb sounds similar to the DSCH motif. I just don't accept that the former is a derivation of the latter -- and certainly not that they are the same.

Fair enough.

[bhodges]

Andris Nelsons and the Boston Symphony Orchestra will be recording the complete Shostakovich symphonies for Deutsche Grammophon, and - perhaps even better news - the complete opera, Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk. More info here:

https://www.bso.org/brands/bso/press/press-releases/archived-press-releases/32416/may-2-2016-press-release.aspx

--Bruce

[vandermolen]

Andris Nelsons and the Boston Symphony Orchestra will be recording the complete Shostakovich symphonies for Deutsche Grammophon, and - perhaps even better news - the complete opera, Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk. More info here:

https://www.bso.org/brands/bso/press/press-releases/archived-press-releases/32416/may-2-2016-press-release.aspx

--Bruce

I saw him conduct No.10 in London and they were selling the DGG CD for £10 at the Albert Hall which is not too bad for a DGG CD. It is a very fine version which I listened to earlier this week.

[vandermolen]

What are the views of Shostakovich's admirers on Symphony 12 'The Year 1917'? I rather like it but many people don't considering it overtly cinematic and propagandist. For me it is a kind of guilty pleasure.

[Brahmsian]

What are the views of Shostakovich's admirers on Symphony 12 'The Year 1917'? I rather like it but many people don't considering it overtly cinematic and propagandist. For me it is a kind of guilty pleasure.

I enjoy it plenty, Jeffrey!  I remember Daniel (MadaboutMahler) also being fond of the 12th.

[Mirror Image]

I enjoy it plenty, Jeffrey!  I remember Daniel (MadaboutMahler) also being fond of the 12th.

Ray! Welcome back, my friend! Good to see you posting again. I hope everything is going well in your life.

[Mirror Image]

What are the views of Shostakovich's admirers on Symphony 12 'The Year 1917'? I rather like it but many people don't considering it overtly cinematic and propagandist. For me it is a kind of guilty pleasure.

I wouldn't claim the 12th being a profound work BUT it's great fun and I love all the aggressive energy of the music. It's far from a favorite, but worth listening to once in awhile.

[vandermolen]

Thanks Ray and John - good to hear. Have just ordered the Mravinsky version.

[Brahmsian]

Ray! Welcome back, my friend! Good to see you posting again. I hope everything is going well in your life.

Thank you, John.    I do browse the forum at least weekly, but haven't been in the mood to post.  Have had something difficult occur in my personal life, so working through that each day, and things are getting better.