Stockhausen's Spaceship

Started by Cato, September 21, 2007, 06:24:19 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

snyprrr

Quote from: James on October 15, 2012, 02:27:23 AM
Karlheinz Stockhausen "Leo" performed by CLOUD LUDUM
live at Berklee Performance Center

http://www.youtube.com/v/cb1XbSee_aM

Leo by Karlheinz Stockhausen
Arranged by Olga Karaseva


Pat Metheny on Paraquat Quaaludes?

snyprrr

Quote from: James on October 18, 2012, 03:01:30 PM

------------
Georges Aperghis - "Quatre pieces febriles" for Piano and Marimba (1995)
Heinz Holliger - "Romancendres" for Cello and Piano (2003)
Karlheinz Stockhausen - "Freude" for Two Harps, the Second Hour of "Klang" (2005)[/size]


[/font]

How many geeks in the world like me who think this is a great date night recital? I know, I know...

I would want my piece played alongside this group. That right there is all I'm looking for in a night, that kind of programming, just really common sense and no nonsense. Bravo!!

Marc

From the cycle Aus den sieben Tagen:

Treffpunkt (arrangement for organ).
Klaas Hoek, organ.

http://www.mediafire.com/?fr21xdo3jie4uxo

Mirror Image

Quote from: James on November 20, 2012, 02:48:28 AM
When I started to compose, after the war, there were many different directions in musical research which had been prepared by the great masters Schoenberg, Webern, Berg, Bartók, Stravinsky, Varèse. I had to go to the roots of their individual work, and find an underlying unity. It fell to me to synthesize all these different trends for the second half of the century, perhaps in a similar way that Heisenberg, in the first half of the century, had the role of bringing together the discoveries of Planck and Einstein in atomic physics. -Stockhausen

(from the lecture Musical Forming filmed by Allied Artists, London, 1971)


Of course, this was coming from a guy who made a career of making music that goes: bleep, poop, thump, screech, fart.

snyprrr

Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2012, 08:04:15 AM
Of course, this was coming from a guy who made a career of making music that goes: bleep, poop, thump, screech, fart.

uh... that's bleep, BLOOP!! >:D

Mirror Image


Mirror Image

Quote from: James on November 20, 2012, 09:07:35 AM
;D

One only needs to hear one Stockhausen work to know that the guy was a charlatan. Just my two cents.

San Antone

Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2012, 09:14:32 AM
One only needs to hear one Stockhausen work to know that the guy was a charlatan. Just my two cents.

I've noticed that your musical appreciation for later 20th century composers is fairly limited.  Earlier this week you referred to a piece by Salvatore Sciarrino as "gimmicky" and now Stockhausen is a charlatan.  You would do well to curb your need to denigrate that which you fail to appreciate and be satisfied with merely saying it is not for you.

:)

Mirror Image

#528
Quote from: sanantonio on November 20, 2012, 10:09:44 AM
I've noticed that your musical appreciation for later 20th century composers is fairly limited.  Earlier this week you referred to a piece by Salvatore Sciarrino as "gimmicky" and now Stockhausen is a charlatan.  You would do well to curb your need to denigrate that which you fail to appreciate and be satisfied with merely saying it is not for you.

:)

Said the guy who can feel nothing from Vaughan Williams' music. You're such a sad sack. Good luck to you.

By the way, I can like/dislike and say anything about any composer I want to, especially if I have a strong opinion about them. This is a forum after all. I mean nobody stopped you from coming to the RVW thread and giving your opinion, so I can come here any day, any time I want.

San Antone

Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2012, 11:03:09 AM
Said the guy who can feel nothing from Vaughan Williams' music. You're such a sad sack. Good luck to you.

The point is I phrased as "it does not move me";  I did not call him a charlatan.


Mirror Image

Quote from: sanantonio on November 20, 2012, 11:10:49 AM
The point is I phrased as "it does not move me";  I did not call him a charlatan.

Even if you did, it wouldn't mean anything to me. That's your opinion.

San Antone

Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2012, 11:13:18 AM
Even if you did, it wouldn't mean anything to me. That's your opinion.

If someone feels compelled to express that kind of opinion ("he's charlatan") about any composer, you're right, it does not mean anything to fans of the composer.  However, it does reflect poorly on the speaker (imo).


Mirror Image

Quote from: sanantonio on November 20, 2012, 11:21:41 AM
If someone feels compelled to express that kind of opinion ("he's a charlatan") about any composer, you're right, it does not mean anything to fans of the composer.  However, it does reflect poorly on the speaker (imo).

Again, your opinion.

Mirror Image

Quote from: James on November 20, 2012, 10:21:57 AM
"fairly limited" is an understatement .. we don't need to say much here; the fact that he shows up in these threads on a continuous basis offering his weightless floating "opinion" doesn't matter, just carry on ..

Yeah, it's true that late-20th Century music is much my bag, but in the process I've enjoyed, and continue to praise, Lutoslawski, Part, J. Adams, Reich, Ligeti, Xenakis, Dutilleux, Kurtag, a few Schnittke works, Gubaidulina, Sculthorpe, MacMillan, Norgard, Lindberg, Somers, Tippett, among others. I haven't explored all the music of the late 20th Century. I mean I've finally made a sizable dent in the early 20th Century (my favorite period of classical music). I've bitten quite a chunk out of the Romantic Era as well.

petrarch

Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2012, 11:03:09 AM
Said the guy who can feel nothing from Vaughan Williams' music. You're such a sad sack. Good luck to you.

Amazing how you take criticism personally, and devolve to insulting the person and ad hominem attacks.
//p
The music collection.
The hi-fi system: Esoteric X-03SE -> Pathos Logos -> Analysis Audio Amphitryon.
A view of the whole

Mirror Image

Quote from: petrarch on November 20, 2012, 01:48:41 PM
Amazing how you take criticism personally, and devolve to insulting the person and ad hominem attacks.

Considering I don't like the member I insulted, it shouldn't be that surprising that I attacked him.

petrarch

Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2012, 02:09:44 PM
Considering I don't like the member I insulted, it shouldn't be that surprising that I attacked him.

You understand that is childish, don't you?
//p
The music collection.
The hi-fi system: Esoteric X-03SE -> Pathos Logos -> Analysis Audio Amphitryon.
A view of the whole

Mirror Image

Quote from: petrarch on November 20, 2012, 02:18:24 PM
You understand that is childish, don't you?

You understand that this is an Internet forum, right? This isn't real life. In person, I would probably never even talk to this member. I can smell a rat a mile off.

San Antone

#538
Back to the topic of this thread -

Mantra

[asin]B000000R2N[/asin]

Originally written for the Kontarsky duo, this new recording by  Rosalind Bevan and Yvar Mikashoffis is really very good.

Stockhausen's Mantra was composed in 1970. It was the first piece to be based on the German composer's formula technique, which subsequently went on to inform all of his later compositional output, most expansively in the Licht opera cycle. This strictly-conceived approach to composition arose after a freer period during the sixties when Stockhausen experimented with open forms, such as the 'intuitive music' of the Stockhausen Group, a touring band who performed works by the composer the scores of which were sometimes limited to a short written text or a structural outline. With Mantra, presumably having grown tired of such liberties, Stockhausen returned to a controlled approach.

Mantra is scored for two pianists, calling for a third person as sound projectionist. Throughout, the pianos are subjected to electronic processing in the form of ring modulation, the pianists now and again also striking crotales and woodblocks to enliven the musical texture and create fissures in the piano discourse. The impression in performance is theatrical, the audience witnessing a duel between the pianists. The effect given to the sound by the ring modulation ranges from robotic to luscious, the music sometimes sounding as if heard from the bottom of the ocean, sometimes as if from inside a metal bowl.

The formula technique here works as follows. At the opening there is a bald statement of a thirteen note series, each note of which is assigned a dynamic and a characteristic musical quality (for example, 'regular repetition', 'accent at the end', and so on). The work that follows is made up of a sequence of thirteen statements of this series, over the course of which the series progressively grows longer and more elaborate, and each of which statements explore one of the different musical qualities. The large-scale form of the work in the end corresponds to the small-scale thirteen-part schema.

You don't need to follow these technical niceties, though, to enjoy the piece. Whatever cynicism you might have as to such theoretical pretensions, this work is undoubtedly thrilling. Though Mantra is decisively of its time, the lineage it shares with the Austro-Germanic tradition of piano theme and variations, the venerable examples of Bach and Beethoven shining forth, is never far away.


This quote is taken from a review of a different recording but offers a basic explanation of the piece.


petrarch

Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2012, 02:21:09 PM
You understand that this is an Internet forum, right?

That is rich. Way to deflect some constructive criticism. Not worth the bother.
//p
The music collection.
The hi-fi system: Esoteric X-03SE -> Pathos Logos -> Analysis Audio Amphitryon.
A view of the whole