Composers you don't get

[Mirror Image]

For me it's Messiaen, i started out trying to listen to his piano music, his birdsong music, and it's just random chaos to my ears, also his organ music leaves me feeling empty, it goes nowhere, so i'm really put off by him, the only thing i somewhat like is his theme and variations for violin and piano, i'm thinking of listening harder to his Vingt Regards Sur L'Enfant Jesus, or maybe i just need to admit i'll never get him.

I can certainly sympathize with your remarks. He's a tough nut to crack, which for me it might be he's just not the composer for me, which is fine, because, as it's been said about women: there are plenty of fish in the sea.

[lescamil]

As a total Messiaen fanatic, I can say that if you start with Messiaen's earliest works and then work forward chronologically, everything will be unfolded gradually. Elements of his later works are hidden in his earlier works, and his earlier works are a great preparation for his later, (perhaps) more difficult works. Still, on the whole, I honestly see Messiaen as really one of the more upfront, hear-on-his-sleeve composers that really aimed to make his music visceral and easy to understand, and I think he succeeded. Perhaps you just haven't heard the right works? The bird pieces are some of his most difficult works, but if you must listen to them, try out Le Loriot and Le Merle Bleu first. These are the most accessible and the best, in my opinion. Also, the Petites Esquisses d'Oiseaux.

[Luke]

For me it's Messiaen, i started out trying to listen to his piano music, his birdsong music, and it's just random chaos to my ears, also his organ music leaves me feeling empty, it goes nowhere, so i'm really put off by him, the only thing i somewhat like is his theme and variations for violin and piano, i'm thinking of listening harder to his Vingt Regards Sur L'Enfant Jesus, or maybe i just need to admit i'll never get him.

Have had this sort of discussion before - obviously it is no concern of mine whether anyone likes composer x or not, but in the case of Messiaen, when I see it described as 'random chaos to my ears' I'm left wondering what of the music you've been listening to. Doubtless there are harder nuts to crack in his music - I would never start with the Sept Haikai or Chronchromie or the Livre d'Orgue - but he is one of the least 'random' or 'chaotic' composers I can think of. Almost every note operates within the parameters of at least one kind of system. That isn't a guarantee of quality of course, and in pieces such as the two I just named the systems can be quite hard to discern. But in much of the music the glorious and idiosyncratic pattern-making is right there to beguile the ear. Sometimes the ear just needs to be led in the right direction once, and then the music clicks. Anyway, try something earlier, obvious things like the Quatuor or Turangalila or the Vingt Regards, and try to listen deep, to the patterns of notes and rhythms. In among the more arcane movements (but all the arcana beautifully presented in these works) there are many movements which show just how capable of 'conventional' tonal beauty Messiaen was.

[Luke]

Haven't got time to edit it, but reading back that post I realise how horifically patronising it sounds and that wasn't my intention at all! Only to try to describe how my understanding of Messiaen is different. Apologies! But I do love my Messiaen...

[Octo_Russ]

Haven't got time to edit it, but reading back that post I realise how horifically patronising it sounds and that wasn't my intention at all! Only to try to describe how my understanding of Messiaen is different. Apologies! But I do love my Messiaen...

Certainly no offence taken!, in fact you've been very helpful, i actually listened at random to a few pieces of Vingt Regards, yes it's a tough nut to crack, but i can hear certain phrases i like, in "Regard Des Anges", there's a reoccurring  phrase about 10 seconds in, where the right hand plays high in the treble, while the left hand hammers away deep in the bass, sounds wonderful, and it's good that it keeps coming back, but the rest i need to listen to some more, i also like "Par Lui Tout E Ete Fait", it's incessant, very Prokofievian, i've only skimmed the surface, but certainly Catalogue d'Oiseaux put me off him, and i'm not a big fan of organ music either.

Also do you have a recommendation for Vingt Regards?, i'm thinking of getting Joanna MacGregor's set, is she any good?.

[lescamil]

For the Vingt Regards, Steven Osborne, hands down. Aimard is also a nice alternative. Joanna MacGregor's is a bit weird to me, and it doesn't quite work for my ears, much like how Ogdon's doesn't work for me either. It might work for others, though. Still, Osborne's is probably your best bet.

[Luke]

Certainly no offence taken!, in fact you've been very helpful, i actually listened at random to a few pieces of Vingt Regards, yes it's a tough nut to crack, but i can hear certain phrases i like, in "Regard Des Anges", there's a reoccurring  phrase about 10 seconds in, where the right hand plays high in the treble, while the left hand hammers away deep in the bass, sounds wonderful, and it's good that it keeps coming back, but the rest i need to listen to some more, i also like "Par Lui Tout E Ete Fait", it's incessant, very Prokofievian, i've only skimmed the surface, but certainly Catalogue d'Oiseaux put me off him, and i'm not a big fan of organ music either.

Also do you have a recommendation for Vingt Regards?, i'm thinking of getting Joanna MacGregor's set, is she any good?.

Peter Serkin's is a very good option. It goes without saying that Loriod should be heard. An unusual one I didn't expect to uncover is this one - http://takecare-maready.blogspot.com/search/label/John%20Ogdon -John Ogdon's, free to download and worth the hearing.

[Luke]

Yes, that Muraro is intense. It's on youtube - check out his Par Lui tout a ete fait, but don't forget to pick your jaw off the floor afterwards.

http://www.youtube.com/v/dtE0Y7wUfCQ

[karlhenning]

Yes, that Muraro is intense. It's on youtube - check out his Par Lui tout a ete fait, but don't forget to pick your jaw off the floor afterwards.

http://www.youtube.com/v/dtE0Y7wUfCQ

I love this stuff . . . Luke, you bring awful forces to bear upon a chap's budget ; )

[Josquin des Prez]

Not Kapustin, though, not yet anyway. 

Well, he's not a decadent composer, so its hard to fully appreciate his music if you are among those who has internalized resolving cognitive dissonances as a form of intellectual gratification. With that, i mean nothing insulting or damning, just an impassioned observation. Kapustin is neither a modernist nor a modern (that is, his music is not actually Jazz). That's puts him in a very unfortunate position in this day and age.

[karlhenning]

Well, he's not a decadent composer, so its hard to fully appreciate his music if you are among those who has internalized resolving cognitive dissonances as a form of intellectual gratification.

Thanks for the chuckle!

[Josquin des Prez]

I think Luke probably knows what i'm talking about.

[karlhenning]

 

I think Luke probably knows what i'm talking about.

Sure. Possibly, I may, as well.

[lescamil]

If you like people like Mantovani & Liberace & Doc Severinsen, Kasputin sure is the "composer" for you. Serious classical music lovers have better things to concern themselves with; so do serious pop & jazz fans

Well, Kapustin isn't as tough a sell if you are a classical pianist and can understand just how thankful some people have some music like his to play and listen to. It admittedly isn't great music if you're just a serious casual classical music listener, but it isn't terrible either. Comparing it to Liberace et al is a bit of a stretch. Hell, the second sonata is still enough to be called a masterpiece! Let's see Liberace write a jazzy piece in perfect sonata form like that one.

[Luke]

Actually having played a lot of Kapusitn myself (above all the Preludes and Fugues, which I think may be his best work anyway) and looked through dozens and dozens of his score, I am well aware of his qualities. He is undeniably a very skillful composer. What eludes me about him is - what is the point of it all? For all its dazzling effects the music doesn't feel very...well, I could say 'profound' here, but that leads to difficulties! What I mean is that I don't sense a strong personality at work in Kapustin's music, and neither do I find a strong aesthetic there - much more than Alkan, Kapustin's work seems to me to effect its undeniable effect by means of shock-and-awe: the music is very hard to play, it is a complex blitz of notes, and there is an impressive compositional skill involved in uniting a variety of disparate trends (complex counterpoint, post-Lisztian virtuosity, the harmonic and rhythmic syntax of jazz...). So yes, these things leave me very impressed, but that is all. They don't leave me with that sense of an almost moral struggle that I get from Alkan. I feel about Kapustin somewhat as some people feel about Alkan - that there is a lot of show but little substance. But just as that is utterly to misrepresent and misunderstand Alkan, I am very prepared to admit that I am wrong about Kapustin too. In fact, I'd love to be convinced that there is more there than I have realised. And I will keep playing it, in the hope of being thus convinced....and because it is fabulous music, and fun to play. 

[Josquin des Prez]

If you like people like Mantovani & Liberace & Doc Severinsen, Kasputin sure is the "composer" for you. Serious classical music lovers have better things to concern themselves with; so do serious pop & jazz fans

Serious classical music lovers are apparently a bunch of clueless morons. This is me mocking the posting style of James.

[Josquin des Prez]

The point of Kapustin is that his music is actually inspired, note for note. This is of course very rare in a modern composer, modernity being by definition antithetical to genuine artistic inspiration. Granted, i'm speaking to a group of people who can't tell the difference between Chopin and Liszt in terms of actual inspiration, so how could i possibly convince anybody here of the worth of a composer like Kapustin? Its an act in futility.

[Luke]

1) You could easily convince us (or me) by actually showing us (me) some examples of these every-note-is-inspired music, and telling us (me) something of the inspiration you discern there, not-by-note. In the intermin between my last post and this I've been here - http://classicscore.hut2.ru/K.html (fabulous score resource btw) - and re-looking through  the considerable amount of Kapustin they have there. I want to love this music (I already like and am impressed by some of it). But every note inspired? That is, I think, demonstrably not true. There is a hell of a lot of rather turgid passgework and motivically empty written-out improv over fixed left hand chord sequences which seems to me very empty. (I prefer his preludes and fugues to anything else of his, they are as close as he gets to real stature I think, but even in those there are banal moments aplenty). As with Alkan, where I said I'd be happy to go through the music bar-by-bar, I'd happily look at Kapustin note-by-note, but when I do, it leaves me relatively cold.

2) The game you play is easily played (I'm not quite sure how your cage got rattled about this, btw, I think I've been very fair and reasonable). You question others' ability to 'tell the difference between Chopin and Liszt in terms of actual inspiration'; it would be just as easy to call into question your own listening prowess in a 'you really think Kapustin is that good? You leaden-eared fool!' kind of way. But I wouldn't do that. Your ears are perfectly fine; why make imputations about others'? 

[karlhenning]

The point of Kapustin is that his music is actually inspired, note for note. This is of course very rare in a modern composer . . . .

Thanks for yet another chuckle!

[DieNacht]

Kapustin´s chamber works are often delightful - such as his string quartet and pieces for cello and piano or
saxophone and cello, all on you-tube. The selection of chamber works there has now been supplemented
by a piano quintet and a trio for flute, cello and piano.

The piano works can sound a bit too alike, but I´ve recently come to appreciate a work like the 8th Sonata,
which can somehow be easier related to the sonatas of, say, Prokofiev. It has promoted more interest
in the field of his piano music.