Dmitri's Dacha

[vandermolen]

And I remember reading that this Soviet composer had arranged the first two movements of the 16th Symphony into a performable version, but I can't remember his name or find further details.  Petrov?

https://youtu.be/25GX2XNXg-M?t=19

During the 2015 premiere of Orango, the musicologist said there were boxes of unlabeled sketches and unfinished scores from Shostakovich where from time to time they make a big discovery (Orango was one of them).  Who knows, maybe the unfinished and unlabeled sketches of No. 16 are there.

Most interesting!

[Pohjolas Daughter]

Most interesting!

I wonder how often composers actually return to those boxes/drawers, etc. of sketches to work on a piece further?  Or is it more often a graveyard that only gets added into over time?

PD

[Roasted Swan]

I wonder how often composers actually return to those boxes/drawers, etc. of sketches to work on a piece further?  Or is it more often a graveyard that only gets added into over time?

PD

Don't forget Elgar was forever returning to notebooks and sketches of themes for use in often much-later works.  He made a point of jotting down any theme whenever and wherever it occured to him without the slightest clue about when it might end up in a piece (or not!)

[relm1]

I wonder how often composers actually return to those boxes/drawers, etc. of sketches to work on a piece further?  Or is it more often a graveyard that only gets added into over time?

PD

It's very common.  Basically, for Shostakovich and Mahler and Sibelius, there were loads of unfinished materials that usually the widow or family bequeaths to an institution.  The problem, it takes careful study to know what to make of it because lots of it are just unnamed sketches, ideas not fully worked out, etc.   Mahler's 10 sketches indicate lots of unused material.  Just imagine if these were not in a notebook but random pages, scholars would know it's late Mahler, but not necessarily what work it belongs to or was excised/aborted from. From personal experience, I have lots of abandoned works - some are just phrases, some are finished but I don't like them.  When working on a commercial project, I had to come up with themes for several characters (hero, villain, fate, romance, etc.) and each of those had five or six different versions.  All are finished but only one was selected.  Sometimes, maybe years later, I revisit some of those rejected cues and might turn it in to a finished piece.  Sometimes there are works I completely forgot about for whatever reason.  You can imagine over a lifetime how many sketches and abandoned projects accumulate.  Prokofiev had sketches of unfinished operas and Symphony No. 8 when he died but knowing what sketch belongs to what just isn't clear.  Creative people are basically always coming up with ideas but not necessarily using them.  It is my opinion that what is getting marketed as fragments from Sibelius's Symphony No. 8 are simply late ideas not related to the 8th symphony.  They are unlabeled and to me really show he was struggling to find his muse.  You might enjoy this essay with images of the discovered fragments but note, it isn't agreed that these belong to the 8th symphony. 

http://bis.se/BIS-2065-essay/BIS-2065_essay.pdf

[Wanderer]

I wonder how often composers actually return to those boxes/drawers, etc. of sketches to work on a piece further?

Medtner, who was in the habit of jotting his musical ideas down in notebooks, based the three cycles of Vergessene Weisen (Forgotten Melodies) on these snippets, themes and motifs committed to paper over the years (and then, as the title suggests, forgotten).

[Madiel]

Medtner, who was in the habit of jotting his musical ideas down in notebooks, based the three cycles of Vergessene Weisen (Forgotten Melodies) on these snippets, themes and motifs committed to paper over the years (and then, as the title suggests, forgotten).

Ah, I didn't know that was the origin of the title! Cool.

[Jo498]

I would never have thought that this title was referring to literally forgotten sketches! Rather some romantic notion like Liszt's Valse oubliée and similar pieces.

[Karl Henning]

I would never have thought that this title was referring to literally forgotten sketches! Rather some romantic notion like Liszt's Valse oubliée and similar pieces.

Indeed!

[Pohjolas Daughter]

For those of you who are currently composing, what system do you use to keep track of your fragments and works that you aren't completely happy with and think that you might want to rework it/them in the future?  And is almost all of your work in digital format these days?

PD

[relm1]

For those of you who are currently composing, what system do you use to keep track of your fragments and works that you aren't completely happy with and think that you might want to rework it/them in the future?  And is almost all of your work in digital format these days?

PD

For me, I save everything.  You never know when you might want to revisit it or in what context.  I go through a brain storming phase where I don't apply much criticism because that comes later.  In this stage, ideas and options are the goal.  You review it later and find some ideas work better than others and those you refine to a very small list until you ultimately decide on one, you'll live with.  Those other ideas are saved off.  Interestingly, sometimes, years later you look through those rejected ideas and might like them or think it shows some promise in ways you might not have realized at first...just needing refinement and more polish.  But vice versa might be true too...sometimes you liked something that you cringe at later.

[Roasted Swan]

For me, I save everything.  You never know when you might want to revisit it or in what context.  I go through a brain storming phase where I don't apply much criticism because that comes later.  In this stage, ideas and options are the goal.  You review it later and find some ideas work better than others and those you refine to a very small list until you ultimately decide on one, you'll live with.  Those other ideas are saved off.  Interestingly, sometimes, years later you look through those rejected ideas and might like them or think it shows some promise in ways you might not have realized at first...just needing refinement and more polish.  But vice versa might be true too...sometimes you liked something that you cringe at later.

That's very interesting - thankyou for sharing.  But how do you jot down those intial ideas?  Still on manuscript with a pencil or straight into a music programme?

One thing I wonder for musicologists of the future - there is a real fascination in seeing a composer's working out with bars added/deleted, expression and tempo marks amended - even when material is "missing" it can be seen where it was.  Unless every iteration of a score is digitally saved all you have these days is the final 'pristine' version of a work..... perhaps I'm very wrong about how this process works!

[Pohjolas Daughter]

For me, I save everything.  You never know when you might want to revisit it or in what context.  I go through a brain storming phase where I don't apply much criticism because that comes later.  In this stage, ideas and options are the goal.  You review it later and find some ideas work better than others and those you refine to a very small list until you ultimately decide on one, you'll live with.  Those other ideas are saved off.  Interestingly, sometimes, years later you look through those rejected ideas and might like them or think it shows some promise in ways you might not have realized at first...just needing refinement and more polish.  But vice versa might be true too...sometimes you liked something that you cringe at later.

That's very interesting - thankyou for sharing.  But how do you jot down those intial ideas?  Still on manuscript with a pencil or straight into a music programme?

One thing I wonder for musicologists of the future - there is a real fascination in seeing a composer's working out with bars added/deleted, expression and tempo marks amended - even when material is "missing" it can be seen where it was.  Unless every iteration of a score is digitally saved all you have these days is the final 'pristine' version of a work..... perhaps I'm very wrong about how this process works!

That's one of the things that I was wondering.  And also, how do you catalogue your fragments?  Or you don't?  Paper airplanes aimed at an open box?  Just kidding here!    Do you date them and jot down any thoughts on either the file or your paperwork, etc.?

PD

[relm1]

That's very interesting - thankyou for sharing.  But how do you jot down those intial ideas?  Still on manuscript with a pencil or straight into a music programme?

One thing I wonder for musicologists of the future - there is a real fascination in seeing a composer's working out with bars added/deleted, expression and tempo marks amended - even when material is "missing" it can be seen where it was.  Unless every iteration of a score is digitally saved all you have these days is the final 'pristine' version of a work..... perhaps I'm very wrong about how this process works!

Generally, I sketch in paper and pencil.  Not everyone does it this way, but it works for me.  It's just because I'm faster that way.  I know others who are faster straight in the DAW (digital audio workstation) and others who are faster in full score.  I like sketching and flushing out in full score later.   I break it down to the core ideas BEFORE crafting it all out.  I think this is the equivalent of a writer having an understanding of the backstory of a character before they write the story.  For instance, Hamlet is introduced with his loving father being dead at the hands of his uncle.  The backstory of Hamlet growing up loving his father doesn't really need to be stated.  It's understood.  Similarly, a theme might have a backstory that doesn't need to be stated...it's clear.  I generally approach musical through literal ways.  I've worked on projects where I had to adapt incomplete sketches from another composer (perhaps deceased).  In that case, you get your head around their style and sound world.  What first appears very difficult to translate eventually reveals itself becoming clear.  What's important is to understand translation isn't for the beginner but for the veteran.  It's sort of like translating a poem.  I think that's the same in any complex effort.  If we were talking about advanced rock climbing, you'd sort of plan out the approach.  Some of those approaches might be mistakes.  Novices will have more fails than successes.  Those that are accomplished can demonstrate a history of persevering through their failures.

[Roy Bland]

Exhaustive essay on 24 Preludes and Fugues
https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/28775/4/MUS_thesis_Ursova_2009.pdf


Because it is mainly on DSCH I moved it here

[Madiel]

Exhaustive essay on 24 Preludes

...and Fugues.

Which is important because Shostakovich also wrote "24 Preludes".

And it's not an essay, it's a thesis. And it's not simply on Shostakovich op.87, but also on a whole bunch of other works by other Soviet composers.

[staxomega]

I don't think I have any greater rationale other than reading positive reviews, then deciding to focus on those in a huge array of choices. Because I don't read music and can't follow a musical score, I don't know which interpretation sits closest to the composer's original intention. I can decide which reading I enjoy most, but there are so many skilled conductors/orchestras/recording engineers/acoustic architects that I find it hard to make anything other than deeply subjective picks. There are so many recordings to choose from that I often can't really tell which I prefer - particularly when relative timings are pretty similar. It often feels a bit 'finger in the wind'. Not just with DSCH, either.

These three I have heard lots 🙂. I don't think I am very sophisticated, tbh 🤔 😁

I've listened to M. Sanderling's cycle all the way through twice now, it's truly outstanding. If one wants modern sound M. Sanderling (no complete cycle from his old man, he was stunning in many of them), Petrenko or Caetani would all be easy recommendations.

I think Shostakovich is who I have the most number of complete symphony cycles of. Beethoven might eclipse him because of those big conductor box sets, but Shostakovich is the one I bought every single cycle separate from those conductor mega boxes. This music is too bloody good and varied in style.

[foxandpeng]

I've listened to M. Sanderling's cycle all the way through twice now, it's truly outstanding. If one wants modern sound M. Sanderling (no complete cycle from his old man, he was stunning in many of them), Petrenko or Caetani would all be easy recommendations.

I think Shostakovich is who I have the most number of complete symphony cycles of. Beethoven might eclipse him because of those big conductor box sets, but Shostakovich is the one I bought every single cycle separate from those conductor mega boxes. This music is too bloody good and varied in style.

Petrenko and Michael Sanderling continue to be my first choice!

[Pohjolas Daughter]

Petrenko and Michael Sanderling continue to be my first choice!

Roughly when were these two sets recorded?

PD

[Daverz]

Roughly when were these two sets recorded?

PD

The Sanderling recordings were originally released individually, each coupled with a different Beethoven symphony, from about 2015 to 2018.  Then they released separate boxes of just Shostakovich and Beethoven symphonies.



The Petrenko set was recorded between 2009 and 2014: https://www.naxos.com/CatalogueDetail/?id=8.501111

[Pohjolas Daughter]

The Sanderling recordings were originally released individually, each coupled with a different Beethoven symphony, from about 2015 to 2018.  Then they released separate boxes of just Shostakovich and Beethoven symphonies.



The Petrenko set was recorded between 2009 and 2014: https://www.naxos.com/CatalogueDetail/?id=8.501111

Thanks Dave! 

PD