Vaughan Williams's Veranda

Started by karlhenning, April 12, 2007, 06:03:44 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

lukeottevanger

Quote from: Christo on September 02, 2008, 11:20:28 AM
For Addison's complete verse, see: http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/w/r/wriftbod.htm (with the music added for free, in a superb performance).  ;)

One of the most necessary smilies I can remember, that. Take heed, folks!

karlhenning

Very interesting, Christo (and Luke), thanks!

J.Z. Herrenberg

Quote from: Christo on September 02, 2008, 11:20:28 AM
As far as I know, the words Vaughan Williams really had in mind, are those from a hymn from 1712 by Joseph Adison on the same (Thomas Tallis) melody, and especially its first line: "When rising from the bed of death" (I've always been humming these words with the music and they fit rather well, in all respects  ;-)  :'( :) 8)


I think you are right. This line is referred to in the documentary "O thou transcendent" I watched yesterday...
Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything. -- Plato

lukeottevanger

In case no one's mentioned it, 'The Passions of Vaughan Williams' is on BBC in less than 15 minutes. I'd record it, but don't have access to the equipment at the moment. If anyone else was tempted to, though.....  ;) ;) ;)

Lethevich

Quote from: lukeottevanger on September 02, 2008, 02:07:40 PM
In case no one's mentioned it, 'The Passions of Vaughan Williams' is on BBC in less than 15 minutes. I'd record it, but don't have access to the equipment at the moment. If anyone else was tempted to, though.....  ;) ;) ;)

I wonder how possible it is to rip the iPlayer version of it... The sound will probably be miserable, though.
Peanut butter, flour and sugar do not make cookies. They make FIRE.

Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich

Quote from: Lethe on September 02, 2008, 02:15:27 PMI wonder how possible it is to rip the iPlayer version of it... The sound will probably be miserable, though.
I once used this, in order to create a flash animation of what happens on my computer..
http://sourceforge.net/projects/camstudio/

vandermolen

Quote from: lukeottevanger on September 02, 2008, 02:07:40 PM
In case no one's mentioned it, 'The Passions of Vaughan Williams' is on BBC in less than 15 minutes. I'd record it, but don't have access to the equipment at the moment. If anyone else was tempted to, though.....  ;) ;) ;)

I recorded it when it was on before If anyone wants a copy let me know, but it might take a little while to get a copy done.
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm" (Churchill).

'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).

eyeresist

Quote from: sound67 on September 01, 2008, 01:12:44 AM

London Symphony: Thomson-Chandos, Haitink-EMI, Handley-EMI-LPO (the earlier one), Arwel-Hughes-ASV, Barbirolli-Dutton
Pastoral Symphony: Boult-Decca, Previn-RCA, Thomson-Chandos
4th Symphony: Berglund-EMI, Thomson-Chandos, Vaughan Williams-Dutton
5th Symphony: Thomson-Chandos, Handley-EMI, Hickox-Chandos (his only really fine one), Barbirolli-EMI (not the earlier Barbirolli-Dutton)

9th Symphony: Slatkin-RCA, Thomson-Chandos, Handley-EMI

After all this Thomson listing, I am seriously considering his boxset. Thanks.

vandermolen

Quote from: eyeresist on September 03, 2008, 01:26:54 AM
After all this Thomson listing, I am seriously considering his boxset. Thanks.


He was an underrated conductor. Try his Walton Symphony No 1 or Bax tone poems (Christmas Eve etc) on Chandos.
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm" (Churchill).

'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).

eyeresist

#769
Since noticing the " 'Ave a banana" musical quote in the London symphony (with some assistance from Bill Bailey!) I've been wondering what the origin of that musical phrase is. The only thing I could find via Google was an assertion that it is from an 1897 musichall song called "Let's all go down the Strand". I guess it's unlikely someone here would know more about this, but...

EDIT: Oops, I did find the lyrics after all, but the way the phrase is used suggests it was previously extant. Maybe it was just an old Covent Garden "cry"?

scarpia

#770
I've previously had a superficial familiarity with some of V-W's most popular pieces, and have been working my way through Boult's set of orchestral works on EMI.  I've been working backwards, from symphony #9.  Sad to say, the more I hear of V-W, the less impressed I am.  Symphony #9 had engaging middle movements, but the outer movements struck me as wandering, having some interesting sonorities and harmonies distributed throughout, but the major plan escaped me.  Symphony #8 had a wonderful first movement (variations without a theme) but the other three movements made a similar impression, interesting passages, not clear to me what the organizing principal is.  Symphony #7, listened to last night, is the low point so far.  Here at least I know what he is getting at, and there were passages of great beauty, but every time I'm about to get into it, there's that idiotic wind machine again.  It is frustrating because a lot of V-W's interestingly dissonant harmony and counterpoint is very attractive to me, but none of it comes within a context that makes sense to me.

I get the impression that 4, 5, and 6 are considered V-W's best, and they are next on my list.  I try to remain optimistic, but as things are going, it looks like I'll be keeping this set just to remind myself never to waste my money on another recording of music by V-W.  If you've got the Tallis fantasy, you've got all of the V-W you need, it would appear.


Sergeant Rock

Quote from: scarpia on September 04, 2008, 07:14:33 AM
I've previously had a superficial familiarity with some of V-W's most popular pieces, and have been working my way through Boult's set of orchestral works on EMI.  I've been working backwards, from symphony #9.  Sad to say, the more I hear of V-W, the less impressed I am.  Symphony #9 had engaging middle movements, but the outer movements struck me as wandering, having some interesting sonorities and harmonies distributed throughout, but the major plan escaped me.  Symphony #8 had a wonderful first movement (variations without a theme) but the other three movements made a similar impression, interesting passages, not clear to me what the organizing principal is.  Symphony #7, listened to last night, is the low point so far.  Here at least I know what he is getting at, and there were passages of great beauty, but every time I'm about to get into it, there's that idiotic wind machine again.  It is frustrating because a lot of V-W's interestingly dissonant harmony and counterpoint is very attractive to me, but none of it comes within a context that makes sense to me.

I get the impression that 4, 5, and 6 are considered V-W's best, and they are next on my list.  I try to remain optimistic, but as things are going, it looks like I'll be keeping this set just to remind myself never to waste my money on another recording of music by V-W.  If you've got the Tallis fantasy, you've got all of the V-W you need, it would appear.



I think we have proof positive that Scarpia and M are, in fact, the same person  ;D

Sarge
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

lukeottevanger

Somehow I feel - and hope - that 4-6 won't disappoint. I don't have the problems you describe with 7-9, but I can understand them completely. 4-6, though, are real 'symphonic' symphonies, with the most magnificent sweep and conviction that only the best symphonies have. I hope you find that too.

OTOH, liking VW for things like the Tallis Fantasia is hardly a bad thing! That's a work that strikes a certain vein very deeply, and that explains its success (if you like it you will probably like the slow movement of the 5th particularly, but then only someone with no heart wouldn't like that one). In VW successfulness tends to indicate that he's really hit upon something special, not that he's compromised for reasons of popularity - The Lark Ascending is the other ultra-popular work which thoroughly deserves its status. In the same highly lyrical vein is the Serenade to Music - and that leads nicely back to the symphonies IMO, especially no 5.

scarpia


I like the idea of liking V-W, but I think that wind machine put me over the edge.  The idea of listening to any more of it puts me in a bad mood. I've wanted time to listen to some Martinu,  so I think the V-W set is going back on the shelf.  Given how much music there is that I want to listen to and how little time I have available, it may be decades before it comes down again. 

Quote from: lukeottevanger on September 04, 2008, 07:23:40 AM
Somehow I feel - and hope - that 4-6 won't disappoint. I don't have the problems you describe with 7-9, but I can understand them completely. 4-6, though, are real 'symphonic' symphonies, with the most magnificent sweep and conviction that only the best symphonies have. I hope you find that too.

OTOH, liking VW for things like the Tallis Fantasia is hardly a bad thing! That's a work that strikes a certain vein very deeply, and that explains its success (if you like it you will probably like the slow movement of the 5th particularly, but then only someone with no heart wouldn't like that one). In VW successfulness tends to indicate that he's really hit upon something special, not that he's compromised for reasons of popularity - The Lark Ascending is the other ultra-popular work which thoroughly deserves its status. In the same highly lyrical vein is the Serenade to Music - and that leads nicely back to the symphonies IMO, especially no 5.

drogulus

Quote from: scarpia on September 04, 2008, 07:14:33 AM
I've previously had a superficial familiarity with some of V-W's most popular pieces, and have been working my way through Boult's set of orchestral works on EMI.  I've been working backwards, from symphony #9.  Sad to say, the more I hear of V-W, the less impressed I am.  Symphony #9 had engaging middle movements, but the outer movements struck me as wandering, having some interesting sonorities and harmonies distributed throughout, but the major plan escaped me.  Symphony #8 had a wonderful first movement (variations without a theme) but the other three movements made a similar impression, interesting passages, not clear to me what the organizing principal is.  Symphony #7, listened to last night, is the low point so far.  Here at least I know what he is getting at, and there were passages of great beauty, but every time I'm about to get into it, there's that idiotic wind machine again.  It is frustrating because a lot of V-W's interestingly dissonant harmony and counterpoint is very attractive to me, but none of it comes within a context that makes sense to me.

I get the impression that 4, 5, and 6 are considered V-W's best, and they are next on my list.  I try to remain optimistic, but as things are going, it looks like I'll be keeping this set just to remind myself never to waste my money on another recording of music by V-W.  If you've got the Tallis fantasy, you've got all of the V-W you need, it would appear.



    I was lucky to have picked up on RVW before I had much knowledge of other composers, so my ideas about what constitute musical development are conditioned by the example of a composer who clearly differs quite a bit. And I don't seem to have suffered any damage since I have no problem with Beethoven or Mahler or Hindemith. I'm actually a little surprised at how the stature of RVW has been elevated in recent years, though I'm certainly happy to see the recognition he's received. His music shouldn't make sense for most listeners, so what does it mean that it so often does?

     If avant-gardists can eschew development entirely, why would it be "wrong" to pursue a different idea of it, unless the tonal composer is supposed to conform? Why shouldn't RVW have the same freedom as the ultras are accorded? It seems strange to me, a kind of unconscious double standard. If I complain about how some avant-gardiste doesn't make sense, that says something about my narrow-mindedness, right? But if I have the same complaint about RVW, it's assumed that the composer is to blame. Really? What I'd like to see is all composers treated with the same consideration in this respect. You don't have to like the way their music departs from what you're used to, or what you like best. If the ultramodernist can be exempted from a particular standard, then so can less radical innovators. I can see this makes a hash of qualitative judgments generally, which is no doubt part of the attraction for me, but it really explains better than anything else how we can simultaneously reward the innovator and scourge the "conservative" for their departures from what's usually accepted as orthodox. How else can you explain how it is that one of the giants of the 20th century writes music that "doesn't go anywhere" when it's clear that many highly sophisticated listeners are convinced it does? (as well as unsophisticated listeners like me, who don't understand what going anywhere is supposed to mean, other than a subjective "rightness")

     
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

lukeottevanger

Quote from: scarpia on September 04, 2008, 01:21:40 PM
I like the idea of liking V-W, but I think that wind machine put me over the edge.  The idea of listening to any more of it puts me in a bad mood. I've wanted time to listen to some Martinu,  so I think the V-W set is going back on the shelf.  Given how much music there is that I want to listen to and how little time I have available, it may be decades before it comes down again. 


Just give the 5th a spin before you do anything so hasty  ;D And then move on to Martinu's stunning 4th - another radiant war-time work, for that matter.

imperfection

"Vaughan Williams: A British Sibelius."

How accurate is this statement, and in what ways? I read it from a classical music magazine couple weeks ago.  :)

scarpia

Quote from: drogulus on September 04, 2008, 02:28:00 PM
    I was lucky to have picked up on RVW before I had much knowledge of other composers, so my ideas about what constitute musical development are conditioned by the example of a composer who clearly differs quite a bit. And I don't seem to have suffered any damage since I have no problem with Beethoven or Mahler or Hindemith. I'm actually a little surprised at how the stature of RVW has been elevated in recent years, though I'm certainly happy to see the recognition he's received. His music shouldn't make sense for most listeners, so what does it mean that it so often does?

     If avant-gardists can eschew development entirely, why would it be "wrong" to pursue a different idea of it, unless the tonal composer is supposed to conform? Why shouldn't RVW have the same freedom as the ultras are accorded? It seems strange to me, a kind of unconscious double standard. If I complain about how some avant-gardiste doesn't make sense, that says something about my narrow-mindedness, right? But if I have the same complaint about RVW, it's assumed that the composer is to blame. Really? What I'd like to see is all composers treated with the same consideration in this respect. You don't have to like the way their music departs from what you're used to, or what you like best. If the ultramodernist can be exempted from a particular standard, then so can less radical innovators. I can see this makes a hash of qualitative judgments generally, which is no doubt part of the attraction for me, but it really explains better than anything else how we can simultaneously reward the innovator and scourge the "conservative" for their departures from what's usually accepted as orthodox. How else can you explain how it is that one of the giants of the 20th century writes music that "doesn't go anywhere" when it's clear that many highly sophisticated listeners are convinced it does? (as well as unsophisticated listeners like me, who don't understand what going anywhere is supposed to mean, other than a subjective "rightness")

I don't know what you are talking about.  If a piece of music is going to last more than 10 minutes, it has to have some structure to it, or I will find it unintelligible.  I don't care if it is avante-guard or pseudo-romantic like Vaughan-Williams   It doesn't have to have an established structure, like theme an variations or sonata form, it can have a structure that is improvised, but it must have something.  Strauss tone poems, like Tod und Verklarung or Don Juan have structure, Sibelius's Symphony #7 has structure, Schoenberg's chamber symphonies have structure.  These Vaughan Williams pieces don't give me a sense that there is more to them than a succession of interesting sounds.  There are interesting parts and boring parts, and the boring parts do not have any relation to the interesting parts (that I can perceive).  At least in classical symphony I get the idea that the boring parts are there to lead into the interesting parts.  I'd like to separate the interesting parts out and transform one of those 45 minute V-W blobs into a set of symphonic etudes lasting 7 minutes.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on September 04, 2008, 02:31:23 PM
Just give the 5th a spin before you do anything so hasty  ;D And then move on to Martinu's stunning 4th - another radiant war-time work, for that matter.

Well, maybe that would be prudent.  Do you have a favorite recording of Martinu's 4th?

eyeresist

Scarpia, I agree with you about the wind machine basically diminishing the 7th symphony. For the 8th and 9th, these are works that need a strong grip by the conductor, and I suspect many are afraid of interpreting such supposedly "enigmatic" works.

Unlike most RVW fans, I didn't start with Boult, having generally been disappointed by him. (I have his EMI set on the way, though.) My first was Previn, who is terrific in 2, 3 and 4 (his less explosive interpretation of this has won me over), and very good in 5, though I feel he could have been more emotional (looking forward to hearing the Barbirolli/EMI recording). His 6 fails in the last, mysterious movement (lacks mystery). 7 has wind machine and fruity spoken parts by Ralph Richardson, but is otherwise grand; 8 and 9 are unconvincing for the reasons given above.

I think you've made a mistake starting with the last symphonies - give 4-6 a go, perhaps with someone besides Boult.

lukeottevanger

Quote from: scarpia on September 04, 2008, 05:33:35 PM
Well, maybe that would be prudent.  Do you have a favorite recording of Martinu's 4th?

YHM