Henning's Headquarters

[Karl Henning]

Well, I was (happily) mistaken in my feeling that excision and juggling was needed.  In the event, I found that something simpler still has "repaired" the whole:  I inserted one measure (4), and extended the pedal through m.7, and now (for the moment, anyhow) I am content with the start—and I still have additional sketches from yesterday and Thursday to fold in.

[Karl Henning]

And a reduced mp3 of this, which just squeaks in as an allowable attachment:

[Karl Henning]

About to head out for a cranium-clearing walk, but I have made some more progress.

[Monsieur Croche]

Well, I was (happily) mistaken in my feeling that excision and juggling was needed.  In the event, I found that something simpler still has "repaired" the whole:  I inserted one measure (4), and extended the pedal through m.7, and now (for the moment, anyhow) I am content with the start—and I still have additional sketches from yesterday and Thursday to fold in.

Do you use a spatula for that, and have you ever had occasion to use a whisk? 

[Karl Henning]

An iconic "paper knife"!

[Monsieur Croche]

An iconic "paper knife"!

Ever resorted to an X-Acto knife and a glued patch -- back in the ''all-paper only paper all the time'' days, natch [and well past the statutes of limitations], so -- it is now safe to confess! 

[Karl Henning]

Ever resorted to an X-Acto knife and a glued patch -- back in the ''all-paper only paper all the time'' days, natch [and well past the statutes of limitations], so -- it is now safe to confess! 

Close to it!

Separately . . . I think I have now set up the clarinet's entrance:

Edit :: old version deleted

[Sergeant Rock]

So where your patience is craved is, if/when you listen to the piece 1, 2 or 3 times, what is your ear's sense of how the piece coheres?

I've heard it now eight or nine times, enjoyed it from the first. It's a great piece. Looking forward to hearing the following movements when they become available. I did have trouble, initially, making sense of the stretch between 5:20 and 7:00. I don't know if it seems more coherent to me now because I'm just familiar with it, or whether it truly makes sense. Perhaps you can help clarify my thoughts. What was the composer's "intention" in that section?    And is that a deliberate allusion to Beethoven at 2:50? (It also reminds me of a cartoon soundtrack I can't quite identify.) Or maybe I just have an overactive imagination. In any case, I love it, and love the way those repeated notes return and figure in the end.

Sarge

[Karl Henning]

My dear chap, I am touched by your gracious enthusiasm for the piece! Thank you, indeed. When I'm at home, I'll check the timings, and follow up with such answer as I may in fairness make

[Karl Henning]

I've heard it now eight or nine times, enjoyed it from the first. It's a great piece. Looking forward to hearing the following movements when they become available. I did have trouble, initially, making sense of the stretch between 5:20 and 7:00. I don't know if it seems more coherent to me now because I'm just familiar with it, or whether it truly makes sense. Perhaps you can help clarify my thoughts. What was the composer's "intention" in that section?    And is that a deliberate allusion to Beethoven at 2:50? (It also reminds me of a cartoon soundtrack I can't quite identify.) Or maybe I just have an overactive imagination. In any case, I love it, and love the way those repeated notes return and figure in the end.

Sarge

You know, Cato asked the same thing about 02:50 (m.136—hmmm . . . m.136 of the Op.136?...) Maybe every literate listener will hear that, but (pace that certain other thread) I don't believe I intended it    More anon . . . must suit up and push along to the bus.

[Karl Henning]

. . . I did have trouble, initially, making sense of the stretch between 5:20 and 7:00. I don't know if it seems more coherent to me now because I'm just familiar with it, or whether it truly makes sense. Perhaps you can help clarify my thoughts. What was the composer's "intention" in that section? 

When I was first writing the passage that begins at 05:20 (m.208ff.) I was myself nagged!  One thing was that practically all of the piece so far—even the pared-back Poco adagio of what we might call the subordinate theme—is athletically directional, where at m.208 I start to play a bit coyly with "hang on, I just want to repeat this again a couple of times" minimalism.  The clarinet (and the left hand in an inverted answer) points right to the first measure, which I've disassembled into its components, which in turn I am extending and repeating. (And even the dyads in the right hand, though the rhythmicization is a distraction, points to the same material.)

It's just distant enough (the disassembly and the slower tempo) that your initial puzzlement is explicable (and perhaps even welcomed).  Its derivation from the opening (I think) may become subtly clearer when the metrical modulation brings us back to Tempo primo at [ P ] (m.234), and m.208ff. comes back at the "correct" tempo (m.250ff.)  All that musical insinuation may have subtly "normalized' the m.208ff. passage, so that your ear finds nothing problematic in it now.

[Karl Henning]

I did some scribbling for the second movement yesterday.

The pastor at the church whose choir I direct will retire at the end of June.  I shall miss him;  he was entirely welcoming to me, from the evening of my first audition, and he has been a faithful (and musical) stalwart in the tenor section.  After the service the Sunday he generally announced his retirement, I asked him (since this is his last season with our choir) if he had any special musical requests, any pieces he wants to sing.  He did not nominate anything specific, but said simply, "You know I like the classics."

The year when I served as Interim Choir Director at St Paul's, I had the choir sing an easy Victoria motet on Palm Sunday, Puer Hebraeorum.  Thinking that this is a piece which my HTUMC Choir can manage (and that we have weeks to prepare it), most of my musical work last night was in preparation of an English singing edition.

I am also thinking of the Agnus Dei from the Byrd Mass for three voices.

[Sergeant Rock]

When I was first writing the passage...

Your nod towards minimalism was something I immediately noticed. Thanks for the explication of that passage, Karl. I will keep it in mind when next I listen.

Sarge

[Mirror Image]

I'd like to hear Karl compose a march. Am I the only who feels this way?

[Karl Henning]

Well, we shall see if any occasion arise.

[Karl Henning]

Yes, I think so.

http://www.americancomposers.org/2015/10/06/unmr-submission-guidelines-2016/

Well, I guess I do know what the non-communication means:

If Selected
•Composers will be notified Late January 2016.

[Cato]

Well, I guess I do know what the non-communication means:

Incomprehensible.

And yet...The Remnant is still waiting for your next work!  0:)

[Karl Henning]

"I mustn't disappoint my public! They are few, but most agreeable!"

[Karl Henning]

Well, here I think it is . . . I'm coming away from it sort of thinking, egad, how horrid this is, trying to sing it in English.  But maybe it's not really all that horrid . . . .

[Karl Henning]

. . . and it may just be that all the counterpoint, the independence of the voices, may just be too tough for my choir.  I'm going to try to teach them, though;  they may just really groove to it.

Easier (and therefore, what I shall start them off with in tomorrow evening's rehearsal) is the Sanctus from the Byrd Mass for three voices.  Tonight, I'll prepare English-language editions of both the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei.

(Easier, both for the choir, and for taping out the English textual underlay . . . .)