Topic: Stockhausen's Spaceship

[springrite]

I don't think anyone would understand what the "science of writing" means. Adding the word "science" doesn't make it sound better. He is a good writer for sure. But let's not use pointless words just because it is a good word.

I will have the home all to myself this afternoon so I just might play some youthful Stockhausen at full blast and see if the neighbor notices.

[petrarch]

I didn't think you did .. but i was referring to the level of his skill in musical writing ..

So his notations look like rigorous technical documents. For the most part, unfortunately they aren't--beyond reflecting the obstinacy of the composer.

No, that is not a joke .. Stockhausen was well informed/versed into the nature of physical acoustics,

Myth. See how he abused basic concepts of physics and acoustics in his articles.

information theory,

Myth. So he had a few classes at a time that information theory was a burgeoning field of science. His application of it, however, was not above that of a dilettante.

phonetics

Now that one was probably the most significant extra-musical area of study for Stockhausen, and the one he followed more systematically. We owe several masterpieces to his study of phonetics.

[petrarch]

petrarch none of that stuff is myth .. he was informed & and had plenty of practical experience .. it definitely aided his approach, ear & musical thinking/writing. And a special art & science it was, his.

With regards to being "well informed/versed", it most definitely is myth. He was a dilettante in those areas. And indeed they aided his approach and guided his ear. Coupled with perseverance and obstinacy (there's your practical experience), we can now enjoy a number of works among the greatest. But don't let your admiration influence your objectivity; if you read his writings, it becomes all too clear.

[petrarch]

It's not a myth. And I'm thinking about how it's manifested in his body of work - not his articles.

Self-imposed ignorance is really the most difficult to overcome. What better expression is there of his musical thinking than his own writings, in which he had plenty to say about his approach, his ideas and his music (to the tune of 10 volumes of Texte and countless analyses, introductory and explanatory texts)?

And compared to what came before? .. he was definitely informed in these areas!

It's almost a case of a little bit of information being worse than none at all.

But that's fine, I also find the "theory" and all of the ideas quite fascinating and enthralling.

[snyprrr]

It is certainly one of the most extravagant ideas for a work I have ever seen--although sonically it is not that interesting as a quartet (or, to put it another way, I'd rather listen to other pieces if I want to delight on the sounds being extracted from the string quartet). I like it, though, most probably because my exposure to it was through Frank Scheffer's film in the late 90s, which gives it some behind-the-scenes context.

Well, it's not really a string quartet per se, is it, haha? The notes say:



HELICOPTER STRING QUARTET
for string quartet, 4 helicopters with pilots and 4 sound technicians, 4 television transmitters, 4X3 sound transmitters, auditorium with 4 columns of televisions and 4 columns of loudspeakers; sound projectionist with mixingconsole; moderator (ad lib)



That does seem to send it in to the realm of Art-as-Logistical-Nightmare,... almost like the 'effort', I suppose, he meant, when he said that 9/11 was a work of art.

[snyprrr]

Hmmm, no. You could say that of Xenakis, but not of Stockhausen. If you read his articles--e.g. starting with How time passes...--you'll see that the scientific basis is very thin; what we have is a pseudo-science with home-grown terminology, concepts and inferences behind a façade of rigor and thoroughness that is as arbitrary and fanciful as most other creative endeavors. But he was a creative and imaginative genius, that he was.

I like this a lot,... reminds me of new age baloney vs. simple 'scientific'... I have to say, I don't understand James's characterization of Xenakis. I just don't want to start nuthin!!!








btw- are you guys dating???

[snyprrr]

I like this a lot,... reminds me of new age baloney vs. simple 'scientific'... I have to say, I don't understand James's characterization of Xenakis. I just don't want to start nuthin!!!








btw- are you guys dating???

I'm just sayin,... it's 11:30 on a Saturday night,... and... here we are... on the Stockhausen Thread ,... I mean, I'm not sayin anything ...

 

[snyprrr]

Self-imposed ignorance is really the most difficult to overcome. What better expression is there of his musical thinking than his own writings, in which he had plenty to say about his approach, his ideas and his music (to the tune of 10 volumes of Texte and countless analyses, introductory and explanatory texts)?

It's almost a case of a little bit of information being worse than none at all.

But that's fine, I also find the "theory" and all of the ideas quite fascinating and enthralling.

I'm with you on all this.


I feel like I want to bring up the Urantia book...

[petrarch]

The best expression of it is the art itself .. clearly words are NEVER enough, and don't come close.

Why then do you care whether he was well versed and informed in the areas you mentioned?

The art is beyond question, but so is the inaccuracy of the "well versed/informed" assertion.

[petrarch]

I'm just sayin,... it's 11:30 on a Saturday night,... and... here we are... on the Stockhausen Thread ,... I mean, I'm not sayin anything ...

It's 11:45 AM where I am, and I am just killing time before I go out to have lunch with my wife. I'll be back in the 11:45 PM timezone in about 3 months.

[snyprrr]

It's 11:45 AM where I am, and I am just killing time before I go out to have lunch with my wife. I'll be back in the 11:45 PM timezone in about 3 months.

haha,... ok, I'm the nerd , haha... got me good on that one!!

oy,... yea,...well,...here I am! :-[haha

[petrarch]

I never said 'i cared' i only mentioned it in passing .. it's a well known aspect and it is self evident in the work .. being informed in those areas and whatnot & and it's absolutely true too ..  i didn't expect to get into an argument about it.

If you claim it is not a myth you better back it up. "Well-known", "self-evident" and "absolutely true" just don't cut it when the evidence to the contrary is abundant in the texts he wrote for 50 years (including the extensive liner notes on the CDs).

[petrarch]

You're just cranky & looking for a fight that's all, . To step in from out of nowhere and say it's 'a myth' is just to go to the other extreme. You even admitted that 'it indeed aided his approach & guided his ear'. Nuff said.

Ha! great exit strategy And James displays once more his refined oratorial skills.

[petrarch]

Hey petrarch .. you happen to have this in your collection?  .. the samples sound intriguing enough.

Stockhausen Edition no. 17.1
(For Times To Come)

Not yet, but it is on the list for my next order. As a continuation of Aus den sieben Tagen, I gave it lower priority than other SV titles I wanted to focus on (but now that there's a healthy amount of non-vocal Klang works--and Strahlen and Jubiläum--the time is coming to pull the trigger again).

Sonically it is quite interesting, with a very contemplative atmosphere and with pointillistic events framed by long silences. Are you finally warming up to this kind of sonority?

[edward]

I got a copy of Cosmic Pulses from a friend of mine, and on first listening it's impressed me a lot more than most later Stockhausen. I also get the feeling that KS was pushing much more outside his comfort zone than in some of the 'formula' compositions that made up Licht (there are certainly some Ligetian resonances to the rhythmic interactions here, and very much thicker textures than I've heard in other late Stockhausen). It'd be good to hear it in the surround sound the work demands rather than mere stereo, though.

I've sometimes found later KS to impress me a lot on first listening and not really hold that attention after repeats; I'm a bit more optimistic about this work's long-term potential, though.

[MDL]

Cosmic Pulses is a monster of a piece .. it's perceptual overload really, the disc doesn't do it justice clearly; but like most Stockhausen repeated listening reveals more and more .. I'd love to experience it in the flesh in an auditorium with the proper sound projection at max levels etc .. it must be overwhelming! I'd actually like to experience a lot of his work live!

Another way to get to know the Cosmic Pulses music I am finding is to listen to it's children pieces Klang Hrs. 14-21, which peel the layers of it's polyphony 3 at a time with an added soloist in registers lowest to highest.

I absolutely love the musical variety, fluency & unity of the late cycles, Klang & especially Licht. I've always had a high opinion of Stockhausen but digging into these late cycles has made me a much, much bigger admirer of his music than ever before.

I heard it in the Royal Albert Hall in 2008 as part of the Stockhausen Day Prom. It was impressive live, in a noisy, spinning, clattering kind of way, but unlike Oktophonie which I heard in the old Billingsgate Fish Market a few years earlier and was genuinely impressed by, I've never felt the urge to hear it again.

[MDL]

Lucky you .. if they programmed it again, you think you'd check it out one more time tho?
I love Oktophonie lots .. KS's electronic music is so inspirational.

Yes, I would. It's always fascinating to hear Stockhausen's electronic works "live". Odd thing about Oktophonie; even though I heard it in proper octophonic sound, I found it hard to perceive the sounds actually going up and down. Left, right, back and forth, easy. Up and down? My ears struggled. And I had a good seat quite near the middle of the hall.

[MDL]

20.36
Stop
for orchestra

24.40
Ylem
for 19 players



Stop, an ensemble work originally written in 1965 but here in a version specially conceived in 1973 for the London Sinfonietta, is a fine example of how German composer Karlheinz Stockhausen subtly loosened the straightjacket of his earlier rigorous serial composition to allow a breath of fresh air. Performed with incomparable brilliance by the Sinfonietta under the watchful eye and baton of the composer, Stop is, at one and the same time, uncompromisingly experimental and viscerally engaging. Ylem, which dates from 1972, is what happened when the composer broke through to the other side of the wall by abandoning traditional notation in favor of "intuitive," even "telepathic" (i.e. improvised) procedures. Conceived as a musical and theatrical metaphor for the expanding and contracting of the universe (no less!), the piece starts out with all 19 instrumentalists clustered around the piano for an opening "big bang" which sends them out individually into and beyond the concert hall. They subsequently return for another explosion, only to disperse again, the work ending when all the musicians are effectively out of earshot. Like many of Stockhausen's concepts, it's laughably simple on paper, but stunningly effective when heard. D.W.

Before I bought this LP in the '80s, I'd read some disparaging reviews so my expectations weren't too high. But I was really impressed by Stop, which was surprisingly varied, atmospheric and expressionistic. I've never taken to Ylem, though. OK, the chaotic sections around the tam-tam strokes are quite exciting, but I've never been able to make sense of the main body of the work.

[snyprrr]

http://www.sfbg.com/pixel_vision/2011/10/25/interview-master-pumpkin-carver

 

[snyprrr]

I finally got that Gruppen/Punkte disc.

1) Surprised,... I thought it was Wergo.

2) The packaging is infuriating. I am so sick of these stupid fold-outs, with no sleeve for the cd so it can get scratched or what not.

3) I guess I'm so used to the Abbado that this recording knocked me a bit. It felt like a completely different experience than the DG. Surely, the recording is much clearer, and the playing sounds more...uh...'important'?? Still, I really get the sense of 'joy' in the DG version that I just didn't hear here, as if this recording really were 'serious business'. I will most certainly have to go back and forth here.

I did enjoy the more up front electric guitar here. Yes, one certainly can hear a lot more stuff here. And the spatial aspect can sort of be heard (maybe this was part of my 'huh?' here,... the recording venue seems to have an (unobtrusive) 'bubble' around it so one can hear things closer and farther away.


For me, Punkte was the BigDeal here. What a strange 30mins.! It feels like music is being 'raked', a very strange 'trawling' sound that really made me feel 'dark', a very industrial, post-war Germany of hopelessness,... this is the most depressing BA Zimmermann piece i've ever heard! It reminded me of the buzzing whoosh of radiation saturated Chernobyl, a bleak landscape of industrial blackness. I was really kind of creeped out by the music (in a good way of course), it really had a strange, subterranean sound. And that 'grating' 'raking' sound was very original,... it remind me of some industrial aspects of Xenakis. It reminds me of the Xenakis of Terretekhtorh and Nomos Gamma.

And, at @30mins., it's pretty long and involved too. And, seeing as it was revised very late, it, I suppose, has some late 'thoughts' in it, and one surely is able to get a snapshot of KS through this piece: it is a very complex impression, let me assure you!

This cd left me scratching my head. Gruppen I can figure out, but Punkte is like impenetrable (a very imposing piece),... almost reminds me of some Zorn in its blackness. Yea, I just interpreted it as some of the blackest 'normal' music I've ever heard. It left a very chilling aftertaste.

Also, because of the dates of revision, it's impossible (for me) to think of this piece as being from the '50s or '60s,... I don't know, it just sounded like 'where DID this come from?'.





I'm wondering if I should have heard this music earlier in my studies. Hearing it now, after all the other raucous music I've exposed myself to, it is quite the head scratcher,... I just can't seem to 'place' it. Well, it's thought provoking to say the least.