Dmitri's Dacha

Started by karlhenning, April 09, 2007, 08:13:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BasilValentine

Quote from: Mirror Image on April 25, 2021, 07:27:05 PM
You didn't ask me, but get the Borodin Quartet. I have both their complete cycle on Melodiya and their partial cycle on Chandos. I have been impressed with both, but definitely track down the one on Melodiya.

I also like the Borodin for the quartets. As others have said, the Adagio, the third movement of the Tenth Quartet, is a passacaglia.

BasilValentine

#2541
Quote from: Roasted Swan on April 26, 2021, 04:10:39 AM
a slightly off-topic but not wholly related question.  Why do people think that Passacaglia form seems so powerful in expressing/coveying a certain kind of implaccable fateful emotion. The DSCH works all seems to convey a weightier meaning but then so does Britten's use of Passacaglias in Pter Grimes (and many other works).  Brahms 4's finale seems to bring his set of symphonies to a powerfully satisfying conclusion because(?) of the form.  On a lighter note - Carl Davis brilliantly orchestrated the great Bach C minor passacaglia for the film Napoleon and called it St. Just.  But this is just scratching the surface - there are so many great passacaglias!

I suspect the long history of the form and traditions established by certain iconic works likely have something to do with it. I'd look especially at ground bass arias from the Baroque, like Purcell's "When I am laid in earth" (essentially a passacaglia) from Dido and Aeneas. Descending tetrachord bass lines as in the Purcell, along with diatonic versions, which have always been popular, have a fateful air about them because of their implacable doomed descent.

Karl Henning

Quote from: relm1 on April 26, 2021, 06:06:42 AM
Because it is basically an orchestrated crescendo.  As the the theme repeats, more tension, accompaniment, motion, dynamics swirl around it adding a sense of inevitability and usually there is an unexpected twist near the end that provides a tremendous unexpected release of tension like in Bach C minor Passacaglia reaching C major at point of maximum tension.  Since our expectations have been set and established for so long before, this sudden unexpected shift is quite dramatic and gives composers much room for innovative craftsmanship in exactly how and why they delay that transition and what they do once it is reached. 

Very good.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

bhodges

First time listening to one of my favorite Shostakovich sequences, the Allegro (2nd movement) of the Tenth Symphony, with the score. Thanks to many fine contributors on YouTube, who have synced scores with performances, you can see what the composer actually wrote, and then compare it to what you're hearing.

Anyway, here are Kirill Kondrashin and the Moscow Philharmonic. (I do like the interpretation, even if it might not be my favorite, but never mind.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxIUr-nD_vQ

--Bruce

relm1

So I've completed traversing the string quartets (Borodin Quartet on Melodiya).  My thoughts.  They are autobiographical.  They are best heard in order.  Like the symphonies, the order matters.  Youthful vitality, wit, playfulness, slowly gives way to sarcasm, depth, resignation.  I think if I never heard any of these I could immediately identify which was an early work and which was late period.  I think they are uniquely different from his symphonies yet consistent with his style if that makes any sense.  Two independent paths...sort of like a mountain hike and hiking through the meadows though both are an epic traversal.  I also found the works quite symphonic.  Like Rachmaninoff and Prokofiev, I just couldn't help hearing these as orchestral works transcribed for smaller ensembles.  I don't know if that reveals more about me or the composer.  So I sort of hear these as subsequent orchestral works on par with the massive symphonies.  The music felt so familiar yet I hadn't heard it before.  It was also introducing me to new friends I knew I would appreciate.

Mirror Image

#2545
Quote from: relm1 on May 04, 2021, 04:35:43 PM
So I've completed traversing the string quartets (Borodin Quartet on Melodiya).  My thoughts.  They are autobiographical.  They are best heard in order.  Like the symphonies, the order matters.  Youthful vitality, wit, playfulness, slowly gives way to sarcasm, depth, resignation.  I think if I never heard any of these I could immediately identify which was an early work and which was late period.  I think they are uniquely different from his symphonies yet consistent with his style if that makes any sense.  Two independent paths...sort of like a mountain hike and hiking through the meadows though both are an epic traversal.  I also found the works quite symphonic.  Like Rachmaninoff and Prokofiev, I just couldn't help hearing these as orchestral works transcribed for smaller ensembles.  I don't know if that reveals more about me or the composer.  So I sort of hear these as subsequent orchestral works on par with the massive symphonies.  The music felt so familiar yet I hadn't heard it before.  It was also introducing me to new friends I knew I would appreciate.

Glad you enjoyed them. 8) I believe these SQs to be vitally important to his oeuvre in general. I'd further this opinion in saying that if you don't like his SQs, then there's a good chance you're not really as into the composer as you thought you were.

krummholz

Quote from: BasilValentine on April 25, 2021, 10:06:18 AM
The slow movement of the Tenth Quartet is my favorite of his passcaglias.

+1. With the 4th movement of the 8th Symphony as a close second.

Madiel

#2547
Quote from: relm1 on May 04, 2021, 04:35:43 PM
I think if I never heard any of these I could immediately identify which was an early work and which was late period.

None of them are really early. Quartet no.1 is between the 5th and 6th symphonies, and Quartet no.2 is between the 8th and 9th.

Quote from: relm1 on May 04, 2021, 04:35:43 PM
Like Rachmaninoff and Prokofiev, I just couldn't help hearing these as orchestral works transcribed for smaller ensembles.

I couldn't disagree more, but if you like that sort of thing then you can go listen to the 'Chamber Symphony' versions of many of the quartets.
I am now working on a discography of the works of Vagn Holmboe. Please visit and also contribute!

Roasted Swan

Quote from: Madiel on May 04, 2021, 10:29:25 PM
None of them are really early. Quartet no.1 is between the 5th and 6th symphonies, and Quartet no.2 is between the 8th and 9th.

I couldn't disagree more, but if you like that sort of thing then you can go listen to the 'Chamber Symphony' versions of many of the quartets.

+1 - the utter genius of these quartets is the distillation of DSCH's musical thought into simply (nothing simple really!) 4 monophonic musical lines.  The very essence of chamber music.  One of the things I admire most about DSCH is the way he evolved two quite different/parallel/'authentic' musical voices (ignoring the populist/film side for a moment) - the public/orchestral voice and the private/chamber voice.  Personally I listen very rarely indeed to the Chamber Symphonies simply because they fall between those two stools for me....

relm1

Quote from: Roasted Swan on May 05, 2021, 01:56:13 AM
+1 - the utter genius of these quartets is the distillation of DSCH's musical thought into simply (nothing simple really!) 4 monophonic musical lines.  The very essence of chamber music.  One of the things I admire most about DSCH is the way he evolved two quite different/parallel/'authentic' musical voices (ignoring the populist/film side for a moment) - the public/orchestral voice and the private/chamber voice.  Personally I listen very rarely indeed to the Chamber Symphonies simply because they fall between those two stools for me....

It's frequently not 4 monophonic musical lines.  It's melodic with accompaniment.  Who is the melodic switches every few bars.  The very essence of symphonic music.  But we'll agree to disagree on this.

Roasted Swan

Quote from: relm1 on May 05, 2021, 06:07:18 AM
It's frequently not 4 monophonic musical lines.  It's melodic with accompaniment.  Who is the melodic switches every few bars.  The very essence of symphonic music.  But we'll agree to disagree on this.

monophonic as in the sense that its 1 note at a time in 4 parts - I'm not debating priomary or secondary material.  All the double stopping in the world won't really make string instruments polyphonic (unless you're Bach!)

Karl Henning

four single-line instruments.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Roasted Swan

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 05, 2021, 01:09:51 PM
four single-line instruments.

exactly - and better put than I did!

relm1

#2553
Quote from: Roasted Swan on May 05, 2021, 01:19:39 PM
exactly - and better put than I did!

I fully understand what both of you mean.  But consider my meaning more closely.  Take Shostakovich Suite for 2 pianos.  This is a symphonic work composed for two pianos.  Orchestral arrangers will hear the "single line instruments" as melodic intentions of the composer given limitations of the instrumentation.  This is not always the case with chamber music.  Mussorgsky's Picture's at an Exhibition is text book example of an orchestral work composed on the piano and it's not because of Ravel's arrangement, there are about 1,000 arrangements of it with Ravel being the most famous (and frankly most accomplished).  But perhaps I'm just crazy and as a composer and orchestrator myself, I always hear things arranged in different ways which again you need to grant me that license which I said "we need to agree to disagree" because we won't agree on this.  Here is something we can disagree on though, I belief Shostakovich is primarily an orchestral composer and hears everything as an orchestral composer would and then when necessary translates it to chamber music.  I have no proof of this, it's just how I hear it.  This is in contrast to Chopin or Liszt who I hear are chamber composers who then sometimes interpret their music for orchestras.  Scriabin is practically entirely a symphonic composer who mostly wrote for piano.

BasilValentine

Quote from: relm1 on May 05, 2021, 04:19:27 PM
I fully understand what both of you mean.  But consider my meaning more closely.  Take Shostakovich Suite for 2 pianos.  This is a symphonic work composed for two pianos.  Orchestral arrangers will hear the "single line instruments" as melodic intentions of the composer given limitations of the instrumentation.  This is not always the case with chamber music.  Mussorgsky's Picture's at an Exhibition is text book example of an orchestral work composed on the piano and it's not because of Ravel's arrangement, there are about 1,000 arrangements of it with Ravel being the most famous (and frankly most accomplished).  But perhaps I'm just crazy and as a composer and orchestrator myself, I always hear things arranged in different ways which again you need to grant me that license which I said "we need to agree to disagree" because we won't agree on this.  Here is something we can disagree on though, I belief Shostakovich is primarily an orchestral composer and hears everything as an orchestral composer would and then when necessary translates it to chamber music. I have no proof of this, it's just how I hear it.  This is in contrast to Chopin or Liszt who I hear are chamber composers who then sometimes interpret their music for orchestras.  Scriabin is practically entirely a symphonic composer who mostly wrote for piano.

If anything I think it's the reverse. But it's actually neither. Shostakovich's style is fundamentally contrapuntal and perfectly suited for both orchestral and chamber music. His quartet music is perfectly crafted for the ensemble. His quartets are the very heart of his output.

Madiel

#2555
The notion that Scriabin is an orchestral composer pretty much is a notion that you can ignore what someone wrote in favour of some kind of theoretical argument that playing that many notes on a piano is somehow wrong.

Edit: I just find most discussion and justification of arrangements and orchestrations fundamentally ignores the ways in which music was heard at the time and how different it is to the modern relationship to recorded music. There are any number of composers who demonstrated that they made a conscious choice as to what instruments to use, and it frankly mystifies me why so many people are so determined to ignore that choice. When a composer provided or agreed to multiple options, fine. Otherwise leave it the hell alone. If you wouldn't muck about with the notes, don't muck about with the texture either.
I am now working on a discography of the works of Vagn Holmboe. Please visit and also contribute!

foxandpeng

Listening to various concertos in the last few days has brought me back to the Shostakovich SQs, via the Carducci Qt release of 4, 8 and 11. I have found it really powerful, and as a result, have been listening again to the Borodin set of these incredibly moving works. Isn't it strange how sometimes you can be completely stopped in your tracks by beauty and deep feeling brought on by music?

I have revisited SQs 4, 15, 2 and 8 so far, and wonder at the emotive depth in each piece. I know each cycle has strengths, but I think this one will occupy my listening for a good few days.

"A quiet secluded life in the country, with the possibility of being useful to people ... then work which one hopes may be of some use; then rest, nature, books, music, love for one's neighbour — such is my idea of happiness"

Tolstoy

Mirror Image

Quote from: foxandpeng on July 01, 2021, 02:21:00 AM
Listening to various concertos in the last few days has brought me back to the Shostakovich SQs, via the Carducci Qt release of 4, 8 and 11. I have found it really powerful, and as a result, have been listening again to the Borodin set of these incredibly moving works. Isn't it strange how sometimes you can be completely stopped in your tracks by beauty and deep feeling brought on by music?

I have revisited SQs 4, 15, 2 and 8 so far, and wonder at the emotive depth in each piece. I know each cycle has strengths, but I think this one will occupy my listening for a good few days.

Excellent! Shostakovich's SQs are not only some of his most important works, but also a major contribution to classical music of any era.

foxandpeng

Quote from: Mirror Image on July 01, 2021, 06:28:16 AM
Excellent! Shostakovich's SQs are not only some of his most important works, but also a major contribution to classical music of any era.

Emotional, mournful  evocative... short break to lighter music while I breathe and then return, but these are glorious 
"A quiet secluded life in the country, with the possibility of being useful to people ... then work which one hopes may be of some use; then rest, nature, books, music, love for one's neighbour — such is my idea of happiness"

Tolstoy

Mirror Image

Quote from: foxandpeng on July 01, 2021, 10:43:56 AM
Emotional, mournful  evocative... short break to lighter music while I breathe and then return, but these are glorious

Take a deep breath --- Shostakovich will be awaiting your return. :)