Unfamiliar Composers To Me

[Josquin des Prez]

Check out Jacques Loussier's swung Bach. He has a trio that takes thematic material from "classical" music and improvises with it... fun stuff.

Come on. Kapustin is more serious then this.

[Josquin des Prez]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdHcgLapP3I

What do you know, his string quartet is actually on youtube. This the last movement, a fugue in Jazz style. And here's two of his prelude and fugues:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlnKo2YZju4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFHkG7cdasw

[Josquin des Prez]

Not really ... i'm afraid. Check out this guy too ...


http://www.youtube.com/v/KycMwdw4C6M

Are all the body contortions really necessary? Reminds me of Keith Jarrett. Improvising on someone else's music isn't what Jazz is about anyway.

[Josquin des Prez]

Yikes! ... pretty trite stuff. No mystery to this stuff whatsoever.

If i'd showed you a chamber piece by Brhams, and told it was by a modern composer you would have probably said the same thing too. Kapustin is what a true traditional composer ought to sound like. No neo-romantic pandering, but real craftsmanship and mastery of older techniques. I'd challenge anybody today to write a traditional fugue with all those crazy Jazz rhythms and make it sound so deliciously addicting.

[Brian]

WOW. Kapustin's String Quartet is by far the coolest Kapustin I've heard, and that is saying a lot. I have been deliberating writing a "jazz string quartet" since 2008, and have even got around to finishing (mentally, not on paper) a draft of the slow movement*. But the fugue movement, especially, is making me think I should just give up. That piece does all the things I wanted to do, and does them better. Simply amazing!

*The slow movement was to be four variations and a fugue, all in the tempo and idiom of the Argentine tango, on the theme of Schubert's "Ave Maria."

[Josquin des Prez]

Well ya .. it'd be out of touch & lazy 'if' it were by a composer living today.

Which is ridiculous of course, because the craftsmanship, mastery and originality went into the work would be the same. The problem with neo-romantics and other pandering traditionalists is that their music would have been boring and uninspired even back when Romanticism was new.

Interesting how you use the word 'traditional' ... as if understanding and studying 'that tradition' means having it so utterly obvious, transparent and derivative. Pastiche; to merely repeat, re-combine, mix & imitate what has been done.

Is the music of Bach merely a pastiche of Buxtehude, Vivaldi and Couperin? Is Brahms nothing more then an utterly obvious and transparent imitation of Beethoven, Schumann and Mendelssohn?

[Josquin des Prez]

Well ya ... Brahms was a master and his best pieces are invaluable but it's very much of it's time. His music has been completely absorbed aswell. So if a composer cloned that, put his own name to it, and put it out there 'today' as his own, it would be a joke.

But that's not the scenario i envisioned. Imagine that the real Brahms never existed, and that somebody today was writing that music.

Kapustin is no Bach or Brahms of 'our time' either

That's not what i claimed, but if you are going to call his music a "pastiche" then Bach and Brahms qualify as such as well. There is no difference in how those three composers utilize their influences. And for the recording, i consider Kapustin to be on a level with the various "second tier" composers of those times, I.E., Zelenka, Haydn, Schumann ect.

Shorter or Corea

Dude, Shorter is not that great and Corea just plain sucks.

but I really don't think he has a strong & fresh identity of his own musically.

Strange, because i think he has one of the most instantly recognizable voices among modern artists. And for the love of god, stay away from those hyperion discs. They aren't that good.

[snyprrr]

guys,... by all means, continue

[Mirror Image]

Kapusin is greater then either. You seem to have somewhat of a problem understanding the true import of polyphony.

It's not a lack of understanding of polyphony, but more of an extreme dislike for a composer who writes music whose whole aesthetic seems to be mimicking jazz piano music. He's just not my cup of tea. If I want to listen to a real jazz pianist I'll listen to some Bill Evans or early Herbie Hancock or Thelonious Monk or Oscar Peterson. This guy's music is a waste of my time. There's nothing great about it, but to each his own.

[Josquin des Prez]

It's not a lack of understanding of polyphony, but more of an extreme dislike for a composer who writes music whose whole aesthetic seems to be mimicking jazz piano music.

He's not "mimicking" Jazz music anymore then Scarlatti was "mimicking" Spanish music.

If I want to listen to a real jazz pianist I'll listen to some Bill Evans or early Herbie Hancock or Thelonious Monk or Oscar Peterson.

Right. And when i feel like listening to a classical musician, i listen to Kapustin. I fail to understand your point.

[Josquin des Prez]

I have this album .. it's excellently performed, and the performance is actually better than the music itself (which is hardly inventive or original); with it's mix of Garner, Tatum, Desmond, Peterson etc .. imitations of various American jazz styles, notated improv bits, excess notes .. Chopin ..  but little Kapustin is to be found.

Steven Osbourne is an average musician and doesn't compare with Kapustin in general, let alone at playing the composer's own music. And we've already established that Kapustin is NOT Jazz, thus, i don't understand why the comparison keeps getting brought up. Also, what excess of notes? Are you talking about his contrapuntal texture, which imitate Bach in terms of density?

[(poco) Sforzando]

Classic response from a superficial listener who probably only has an approximate understanding of Bach in the first place.

Ad hominem comments will get you everywhere. James and Mirror Image are entirely right. From the excerpts posted here, Kapustin doesn't sound like Bach, and it doesn't sound like good jazz.

[Josquin des Prez]

Ad hominem comments will get you everywhere.

This is an ongoing feud i have with James. Ad hominem attacks are necessary to fuel the animosity. 

James and Mirror Image are entirely right. From the excerpts posted here, Kapustin doesn't sound like Bach, and it doesn't sound like good jazz.

Kapustin is nearly indistinguishable from Bach (besides the fact the latter is a greater composer), but you have to look at it from the right perspective. Of course, its pretty hard to see the connection unless one understands Bach in the first place. I know that Mirror Image, for instance, still doesn't (and i know that he doesn't, because i didn't either, at one point. So i'm speaking from experience here). I thought James knew better, but his comment about the "excess of notes" makes me wonder.

And of course Kapustin doesn't sound like good Jazz, since his music is NOT Jazz.

[(poco) Sforzando]

JdP: "Kapustin is nearly indistinguishable from Bach (besides the fact the latter is a greater composer), but you have to look at it from the right perspective. Of course, its pretty hard to see the connection unless one understands Bach in the first place. I know that Mirror Image, for instance, still doesn't (and i know that he doesn't, because i didn't either, at one point. So i'm speaking from experience here)."

I've been playing and listening to Bach for at least 45 years, so I'm not too worried about my level of experience there. Based on the excerpts presented, I hear nothing in Kapustin to remind me of Bach, other than the obvious fact that the latter is immeasurably greater. But the same can be said of Bach in relation to most composers.

[Josquin des Prez]

Two similarities come to mind. First, that both composers have an encyclopedic approach to form. Second, that their music is extremely dense, but not just in terms of volume, they are ripe with real substance. At first Kapustin sounded like a modern day Scarlatti to me, but eventually i think Bach is a more apt comparison, or perhaps a cross between the two.

I hear nothing in Kapustin to remind me of Bach, other than the obvious fact that the latter is immeasurably greater.

Immeasurably now. I think Kapustin is the equal of Scarlatti, which places him well below Bach, but above a whole lot of composers.

[Josquin des Prez]

those rhythms aren't that 'crazy' (or jazzy)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_6r4Nn9tXk

Pedestrian, right. He's got four different syncopated lines going at the same time. Near night impossible is more like it.

Here's another one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5eYnVZTWLE&feature=related

And again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFUGvjRPPRk&feature=related

[Josquin des Prez]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbTeiXf1qiQ&feature=more_related

Maybe this will help visualize the vertical structure of the music. Or maybe if you listen to his treatment of a familiar theme:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L6VxsLRUjo&feature=more_related

[Josquin des Prez]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvrwIjVTpsc&feature=related

Ha, his concerto for saxophone is up. Good effort considering he is primary a composer for the piano.

[Josquin des Prez]

And here's three character pieces showing off some interesting piano effects, demonstrating his "systematic" approach to form and musical development:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AW6h6hTPVU&feature=more_related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr31LqDmf-0&feature=more_related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7aFpN23t-M&feature=more_related

The last one means "grapes".

[Brian]

As a side note, I posted a Kapustin link on Facebook and two friends who are curious about classical music but not intensely into it got completely addicted. Now they're sending ME links of obscure Kapustin they found! Awesome