Elliott Carter, 1908-2012

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Really really good article, sanantonio! And great youtube examples. I will probably use this to help introduce people to this wonderful composer—if you don't mind

[millionrainbows]

 I understand Elliott Carter as a sort of developed 'free atonalist,' who was using mostly thematic and melodic elements in the total chromatic as the main basis for his music's movement, development, and meaning. He developed the rhythmic aspects of music much more than Schoenberg (who was behind the game in this regard), so he sounds more modern and less traditional than Schoenberg most of the time.

He sounds more "musical" to me than some other serial composers for this reason. Whatever harmonic meanings I get from him are less sensual, more like entities. not sonorous gleamings or coloristic, like Boulez can be, but "meaty," solid objects of harmonic substance.

[bwv 1080]

I understand Elliott Carter as a sort of developed 'free atonalist,' who was using mostly thematic and melodic elements in the total chromatic as the main basis for his music's movement, development, and meaning. He developed the rhythmic aspects of music much more than Schoenberg (who was behind the game in this regard), so he sounds more modern and less traditional than Schoenberg most of the time.

He sounds more "musical" to me than some other serial composers for this reason. Whatever harmonic meanings I get from him are less sensual, more like entities. not sonorous gleamings or coloristic, like Boulez can be, but "meaty," solid objects of harmonic substance.

Yes, the dig on Schoenberg is that its 'Brahms with wrong notes' - not that Brahms is rhythmically simple (far from it),  but Carter did much more with rhythm, using large scale polyrhyhms to structure pieces and setting a polyphony of tempos.  Carter's harmonic and melodic language is derived from patterns of intervals (pitch class sets in theory jargon).  Typically a passage will emphasize a particular interval or group of them.

[millionrainbows]

And yet I still like Schoenberg more.

I can see that. There is a charm to Schoenberg, aside from the fact that he was a genius in everything he did. His music sounds more connected to tradition in its phrasing and rhythmic aspects, so I take your statement to mean that you like this aspect of Schoenberg, for those reasons, and more.

When I listen to the New Philharmonia recording of Carter's Concerto for Orchestra, though, I am fully satisfied that this is a singular, incomparable experience, and as good as it gets. I like to see Schoenberg's ideas developed to this degree. It gives modernism a real boost.

[millionrainbows]

Yes, the dig on Schoenberg is that its 'Brahms with wrong notes' - not that Brahms is rhythmically simple (far from it),  but Carter did much more with rhythm, using large scale polyrhyhms to structure pieces and setting a polyphony of tempos.  Carter's harmonic and melodic language is derived from patterns of intervals (pitch class sets in theory jargon).  Typically a passage will emphasize a particular interval or group of them.

The 12-tone method is just as concerned with intervals as well; set theory just developed those ideas. The net result of transposing tone rows is that the interval relations are preserved, so what's the difference? Even the conception of a tone row is not really related to specific pitch identity, and is stated arbitrarily from a starting note; but that starting note is certainly not a root or tonic, but a series of interval relations.

I see the Brahms reference as showing how Schoenberg went to a thematic, motivic means of providing his music with structural relations, in the absence of tonality.

[bwv 1080]

The 12-tone method is just as concerned with intervals as well; set theory just developed those ideas. The net result of transposing tone rows is that the interval relations are preserved, so what's the difference? Even the conception of a tone row is not really related to specific pitch identity, and is stated arbitrarily from a starting note; but that starting note is certainly not a root or tonic, but a series of interval relations.

Yes, that is correct - all the 2nd Viennese composers thought very carefully about the intervallic content of their rows.  And to muddy things further, Carter's later music focuses on 12-note chords where the pitches are fixed in a particular octiave, using  one or more as a structural component of the work.  Night Fantasies, for example, is based on 12-note chords that contain one of each interval (http://johnlinkmusic.com/JohnLinkSonusPaper.pdf)  The only difference is the emphasis on ordering with 12-tone / serial techniques

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Yes, that is correct - all the 2nd Viennese composers thought very carefully about the intervallic content of their rows.  And to muddy things further, Carter's later music focuses on 12-note chords where the pitches are fixed in a particular octiave, using  one or more as a structural component of the work.  Night Fantasies, for example, is based on 12-note chords that contain one of each interval (http://johnlinkmusic.com/JohnLinkSonusPaper.pdf)  The only difference is the emphasis on ordering with 12-tone / serial techniques

To add to this I'd say that Carter had his own fascination with all-interval chords as well, not encompassing all 12 chromatic pitches necessarily

[arpeggio]

Carter is my favorite whatever (I am afraid to say atonal or....) composer.

I have read the above posts and they are very interesting.

For me I have no idea whether he is a serial or cereal composer.  I just like the way his music sounds.  I also like Schoenberg.  They are different and viva la difference.

[CRCulver]

And to muddy things further, Carter's later music focuses on 12-note chords where the pitches are fixed in a particular octiave, using  one or more as a structural component of the work.  Night Fantasies, for example, is based on 12-note chords that contain one of each interval. The only difference is the emphasis on ordering with 12-tone / serial techniques

Lutoslawski's middle-period works used a similar technique. In spite of the total chromaticism and an approach very near to the serialists', the actual effect is so different.

[springrite]

I understand Elliott Carter as a sort of developed 'free atonalist,' who was using mostly thematic and melodic elements in the total chromatic as the main basis for his music's movement, development, and meaning. He developed the rhythmic aspects of music much more than Schoenberg (who was behind the game in this regard), so he sounds more modern and less traditional than Schoenberg most of the time.

He sounds more "musical" to me than some other serial composers for this reason. Whatever harmonic meanings I get from him are less sensual, more like entities. not sonorous gleamings or coloristic, like Boulez can be, but "meaty," solid objects of harmonic substance.

You summed it up beautifully. That's exactly how I feel about Carter's music.

[millionrainbows]

Yes, that is correct - all the 2nd Viennese composers thought very carefully about the intervallic content of their rows.  And to muddy things further, Carter's later music focuses on 12-note chords where the pitches are fixed in a particular octiave, using  one or more as a structural component of the work.  Night Fantasies, for example, is based on 12-note chords that contain one of each interval (http://johnlinkmusic.com/JohnLinkSonusPaper.pdf)  The only difference is the emphasis on ordering with 12-tone / serial techniques

That's very interesting. I always wonder how the harmonic aspects are taken care of...

[millionrainbows]

To add to this I'd say that Carter had his own fascination with all-interval chords as well, not encompassing all 12 chromatic pitches necessarily

From what I've read  about George Perle and Milton Babbitt's ideas, who were also interested in these special case sets, it was because that they behaved in certain ways under inversion and retrograde, and notes remained the same; so there was a certain predictability which allowed them more control over the overall content of the set, which translates into certain, more predictable or controllable sonorities drives from these sets. Less is more, they say. And when dealing with the complete chromatic, less note variety means more unity, more harmonic distinctness. Perle called it creating "tonalities" with sets, from his book 12 Tone Tonalities.

[Wendell_E]

To be released on Aug. 11:

[asin]B072K3PLCX[/asin]

1 Interventions (2007) for piano and orchestra*†
2 Dialogues (2003) for piano and chamber orchestra*‡
3 Dialogues II (2010) for piano and chamber orchestra*‡
4 Soundings (2005) for orchestra*†
5–7 Two Controversies and a Conversation (2011) for piano, percussion and chamber orchestra*-‡
8 Instances (2012) for chamber orchestra†
9–20 Epigrams (2012) for piano trio* **

Pierre-Laurent Aimard, piano*
Isabelle Faust, violin **
Jean-Guihen Queyras, cello **
Colin Currie, percussion -

Birmingham Contemporary Music Group ‡
BBC Symphony Orchestra †
Oliver Knussen, conductor

[blablawsky]

I'd like to hear some opinions and insights on the 1991 Juilliard Quartet recording of Carter's string quartets. For quite a while I found this recording to be less appealing than the 1974 release of quartets 2 and 3. Tonight, however, I found the 3rd quartet in the 1991 release to be one of the most appealing performances.

It seems to me that, in this recording, the instruments are most thoroughly integrated, while still retaining the spatial separation necessary for the work. Whereas other studio recordings of the 3rd quartet that I have heard (everything except for those by JACK Quartet and Composers Quartet) show the pieces and scaffolding that make up the players' understanding of its composition, the Juilliard Quartet seems to approach the work as a cohesive whole. Neither approach is necessarily better than the other, but I enjoyed the 1991 recording of the 3rd quartet because of its cohesive nature. Perhaps this difference in approaches contributed to my initial impression that the 1991 release was technically less secure than the 1974 release. I know that there are others who have this impression as well, and if you do, I encourage you to give this release another listen.

[snyprrr]

I'd like to hear some opinions and insights on the 1991 Juilliard Quartet recording of Carter's string quartets. For quite a while I found this recording to be less appealing than the 1974 release of quartets 2 and 3. Tonight, however, I found the 3rd quartet in the 1991 release to be one of the most appealing performances.

It seems to me that, in this recording, the instruments are most thoroughly integrated, while still retaining the spatial separation necessary for the work. Whereas other studio recordings of the 3rd quartet that I have estrd (everything except for those by JACK Quartet and Composers Quartet) show the pieces and scaffolding that make up the players' understanding of its composition, the Juilliard Quartet seems to approach the work as a cohesive whole. Neither approach is necessarily better than the other, but I enjoyed the 1991 recording of the 3rd quartet because of its cohesive nature. Perhaps this difference in approaches contributed to my initial impression that the 1991 release was technically less secure than the 1974 release. I know that there are others who have this impression as well, and if you do, I encourage you to give this release another listen.

ComposersQuartet for 1-2 (Nonesuch), and, yes, 1991 Julliard for, at least, No.3. Are you saying the JSQ also did an LP of 2-3 in 1974? (oh yes, on Testament??). I haven't checked the Arditti or the Pacifica...  I have Arditti on No.5...

[blablawsky]

ComposersQuartet for 1-2 (Nonesuch), and, yes, 1991 Julliard for, at least, No.3. Are you saying the JSQ also did an LP of 2-3 in 1974? (oh yes, on Testament??). I haven't checked the Arditti or the Pacifica...  I have Arditti on No.5...

There are two different JSQ recordings of the third quartet. One was released in 1974 and the other one was released in 1991. The Testament CD you are thinking of is the JSQ's first recording of the second quartet that was released alongside Berg and Schuman. This recording of the second quartet was made before the one released in 1974.

[North Star]

ComposersQuartet for 1-2 (Nonesuch), and, yes, 1991 Julliard for, at least, No.3. Are you saying the JSQ also did an LP of 2-3 in 1974? (oh yes, on Testament??). I haven't checked the Arditti or the Pacifica...  I have Arditti on No.5...

You need to hear the Pacifica if you like the music (and even if you don't, really).

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

You need to hear the Pacifica if you like the music (and even if you don't, really).

Seconded!

BTW here's my Carter 4tet preference matrix, as of now:

1
3, 4, 5
2

For whatever reason, I have never quite gotten into #2, even though it seems to be a critical favorite.

[bwv 1080]

To be released on Aug. 11:

[asin]B072K3PLCX[/asin]

1 Interventions (2007) for piano and orchestra*†
2 Dialogues (2003) for piano and chamber orchestra*‡
3 Dialogues II (2010) for piano and chamber orchestra*‡
4 Soundings (2005) for orchestra*†
5–7 Two Controversies and a Conversation (2011) for piano, percussion and chamber orchestra*-‡
8 Instances (2012) for chamber orchestra†
9–20 Epigrams (2012) for piano trio* **

Pierre-Laurent Aimard, piano*
Isabelle Faust, violin **
Jean-Guihen Queyras, cello **
Colin Currie, percussion -

Birmingham Contemporary Music Group ‡
BBC Symphony Orchestra †
Oliver Knussen, conductor

Cool, anyone heard this recording compared to Knussen's Bridge recording with Nicholas Hodges?

[kishnevi]

Cool, anyone heard this recording compared to Knussen's Bridge recording with Nicholas Hodges?

I never heard the Bridge, but I have the Ondine. It's good enough, and has enough premiere recordings, that you should get it no matter how it compares to the other.

BTW, I add my voice to those that like the Pacifica Quartet CDs.