Difficulty of being yourself and happiness

[Grazioso]

Will do, thanks.

BTW, what do you make of Rossini? Great composer or a buffoon? 

You know, I've been listening to classical music for a couple decades now, but I've yet to hear an entire Rossini piece. I need to rectify that... Of course, I do know this version

http://www.youtube.com/v/55G7T8VdWEs

[Florestan]

That's a good start, actually. 

Next, try this:

http://www.youtube.com/user/coloraturafan#p/u/82/Ml-6xn2H6Bg

[DavidRoss]

http://www.youtube.com/v/Ml-6xn2H6Bg

[DavidRoss]

http://www.youtube.com/v/ysGFMx6NOEY

[The Diner]

If you're not happy being yourself, be some other self.  0:)

[karlhenning]

If you're not happy being yourself, be some other self.  0:)

Pow!

[Luke]

I'm talking about top-tier composers, the biggest of the big canonical "greats," of which more than a few in your list aren't normally included. Guys like de Falla and Wolf aren't usually talked about in the same company as Hadyn, LvB, Mahler, Stravinsky, etc.

Nope, guys like Wolf aren't talked of as top tier composers by those who put symphonies centre stage. By those who put lieder there, they are.

Be that as it may, I said "at least have grappled with the symphony," so I do include youthful stabs at the genre. I also hold an inclusive view of the genre and take a composer at his or her word: if he or she called it a symphony, it's a symphony. Therefore all the names in your final paragraph count as composers who attempted the genre.

The reason I don't is because the very act of qualifiying the title of a symphony with some other added words indicates either a) that the symphony in question is at least as much something else (e.g. Alpine Symphony, which is at least as much programmatic description as it is symphony) or b) that the composer is uncomfortable with the baggage and implications of Having Written A Symphony (e.g. Stravinsky's Symphony in C and Symphony in Three Movements, where the qualifiers are really unnecessary, and can only be there to deflate the initial word somewhat)

There are some errors in your list: Smetana, Holst, Suk, Schoenberg, and Messiaen all wrote symphonies.  Mussorgsky started one, but it's lost.

Holst's, as pointed out, are a 'Symphony in F' and a 'Cotwolds Symphony', Suk's is an 'Asrael' one, Messaien's a Turangalila one, Schoenberg's two are 'Chamber' symphs, and Smetana's a 'Triumphal' - kind of my point

[Scarpia]

Have we not yet learned that making up rules to determine who is "great" and who is just "very good" is a pointless endeaver?

[Florestan]

Have we not yet learned that making up rules to determine who is "great" and who is just "very good" is a pointless endeaver?

Apparently not.

[Henk]

The point is Naxos should release again recordings of the main composers. Actual performances. The existing recordings have become old.

[Scarpia]

The point is Naxos should release again recordings of the main composers. Actual performances. The existing recordings have become old.

  Old?  Old performances can be as good as new ones, I would think.  I'd rather see Naxos continue to record odd repertoire.  There are lots of inexpensive recordings of standard repertoire.  Really, I'd like to see Naxos do whatever it can do to stay in business.

[Mirror Image]

The point is Naxos should release again recordings of the main composers. Actual performances. The existing recordings have become old.

As Scarpia points out, Naxos are more known for less well-known repertoire. They should stick to doing what they do best.

[Henk]

  Old?  Old performances can be as good as new ones, I would think.  I'd rather see Naxos continue to record odd repertoire.  There are lots of inexpensive recordings of standard repertoire.  Really, I'd like to see Naxos do whatever it can do to stay in business.

Old recordings are not attractive for people unknown to classical music. Also high prices for a cd is not attractive. The commercial labels competed with Naxos by releasing old material at a budget price. With a very aggressive strategy, trying to outbound Naxos.

What only works to reach a greater public is to release new recordings, nicely packaged at a low price with the works of the main composers. Beethoven, the nocturnes of Chopin, Bach, Mozart, Debussy etc. Not Brahms, neither Mahler, because they are controversial.

Henk

[Florestan]

What only works to reach a greater public is to release new recordings, nicely packaged at a low price with the works of the main composers. Beethoven, the nocturnes of Chopin, Bach, Mozart, Debussy etc. Not Brahms, neither Mahler, because they are controversial.

What's controversial about them, I wonder? 

[Florestan]

http://www.youtube.com/v/ysGFMx6NOEY

Although I find her voice a bit too heavy for Rosina, especially in the first part, the "cento trappolle" were perfect. Thanks for posting.

[Grazioso]

Have we not yet learned that making up rules to determine who is "great" and who is just "very good" is a pointless endeaver?

Please see the earlier posts in this thread, wherein we already covered that ground I believe, as I already argued, that while the "greatness" game is a somewhat arbitrary endeavor--and one that can be easily abused--it can also be a useful exercise, insofar is it might encourage renewed critical examination. I should add, too, that my symphony-oriented definition of greatness was very clearly presented as a consciously personal standard, not a universal truth.

Nope, guys like Wolf aren't talked of as top tier composers by those who put symphonies centre stage. By those who put lieder there, they are.

Lieder are, in the grand scheme of classical music, usually treated as a byway. Orchestral, chamber, instrumental, and opera tend to dominate the classical music world's attention.

The reason I don't is because the very act of qualifiying the title of a symphony with some other added words indicates either a) that the symphony in question is at least as much something else (e.g. Alpine Symphony, which is at least as much programmatic description as it is symphony) or b) that the composer is uncomfortable with the baggage and implications of Having Written A Symphony (e.g. Stravinsky's Symphony in C and Symphony in Three Movements, where the qualifiers are really unnecessary, and can only be there to deflate the initial word somewhat)

Point taken, and yet if a composer didn't want the work to be considered in the company of other symphonies, did not want their piece to be saddled with the implications of the term, he could opt not to use it. Further, a programmatic or descriptive title in no way necessarily vitiates a composer's goal of creating a symphony that consciously builds on or reacts to that genre's traditions. Does giving a piano piece a poetically descriptive title instead of a merely prosaic, technical one like "Sonata in A" necessarily undermine its status as a piano sonata?

Holst's, as pointed out, are a 'Symphony in F' and a 'Cotwolds Symphony', Suk's is an 'Asrael' one, Messaien's a Turangalila one, Schoenberg's two are 'Chamber' symphs, and Smetana's a 'Triumphal' - kind of my point

And there's Beethoven's Pastoral, Schumann's Spring, Mendelssohn's Italian, Mahler's Resurrection... Are these not commonly considered symphonies, indeed landmarks of the genre? Btw, Suk also wrote an unnamed Symphony No. 1 in E, Op. 14, as well as Epilogue, which, in the recording I have, is called a symphony, though I'm not sure that's universally done--anyone know?

[Grazioso]

The point is Naxos should release again recordings of the main composers. Actual performances. The existing recordings have become old.

Huh? Naxos hasn't existed long enough for any of their recordings to be reasonably deemed old, at least in terms of sound quality. It's not like some old "historical" recording from the 40's, where you can clearly hear the age.

And from this collector's perspective, Naxos re-releasing the core repertoire they've already recorded would be a horrible waste. I'd vastly rather see them release pieces that have rarely or never been recorded.

[Grazioso]

What's controversial about them, I wonder? 

Well, there was that riot in Paris over Brahms's beard, the infamous "with or without scandal":



-or-



I can hardly bear to look 

[Florestan]

Lieder are, in the grand scheme of classical music, usually treated as a byway.

I wasn't very keen on lieder till I saw Ian Bostridge singing Winterreise on youtube --- a decade ago. Then I bought the Brilliant Classics Schubert Lieder box and in a matter of days I was completely hooked. IMO this is perhaps the most underrated, yet the most intimate classical music genre. It is also the most difficult: there is no place for gimmicks or pyrotechnics, there is nothing to hide behind. Just a voice and a piano; the slightest error, the tiniest desyncronization ruins it for good. But when the fusion between the two is complete, then Heavens open up.

EDIT: It is also the one vocal genre when the text is often of the highest litterary calibre --- which can't be said of opera, for instance.

[Florestan]

Well, there was that riot in Paris over Brahms's beard, the infamous "with or without scandal":



-or-



I can hardly bear to look 

Can't see the second picture, sorry.