John Cage (1912-92)

Started by Lethevich, October 02, 2008, 10:22:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

torut

I only have the Mode album, and since it contains 3 versions, I thought that's enough ;D, but the Levine disc seems very interesting. (Not only Cage.)

Mandryka

#341
The only one I have listened to, and I love by the way, is Petr Kotik on Werga. I'll check out the others but I think people will enjoy the Kotik.



How unbelievable is that - Levine and the CSO playing a score like this, I will check it out. It seems to last 15 minutes!
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

milk

Quote from: Brewski on July 02, 2014, 10:12:28 AM
Sure, these two below. The first one is part of a terrific overall recording, worth having for the Carter Variations for Orchestra alone, but the Babbitt and Schuller performances are excellent, too. The second one, on Mode, is 3 discs: Atlas Eclipticalis and Winter Music, each performed separately and then simultaneously.

[asin]B000001GEW[/asin]

[asin]B000MDH6AC[/asin]

FYI, for your travel consideration, Levine and the MET Chamber Ensemble are doing Atlas next March:

http://www.carnegiehall.org/Calendar/2015/3/8/0500/PM/The-MET-Chamber-Ensemble/

--Bruce
The Arditti recording is only 3.96$ as a download on Amazon. Amazing price!

Mandryka

Quote from: milk on July 03, 2014, 03:43:37 AM
The Arditti recording is only 3.96$ as a download on Amazon. Amazing price!

There's this review on amazon's US website of Arditti's recording of the violin etudes, I've heard the sentiment expressed elsewhere

Quote from: A Customer in a review of Irvin Arditti's recording of the Freeman Etudes on amazon.comI have a real problem with Arditti doing Cage. I think when you consume your entire life with goal-oriented,incessant goals toward an aesthetic object, how is it possible to think in an oppositional way without some time lapse, some retreat into Zen to really feel the spatial time. Given these Freeman Studies puts a hold on Cage's more traditionally beautiful Zen excursions, still how do we appraise them then. A raw unhihibited virtuoso display, non-conceived abstraction for the pure spirit of what??. I find Arditti cold and uninspired. He is a consummate quartet leader and should remain one. What is required I think in performing Cage is you always need to consider the full Cage, and not a frationalized one with a one-dimensional cast.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

milk

Quote from: Mandryka on July 03, 2014, 09:24:17 AM
There's this review on amazon's US website of Arditti's recording of the violin etudes, I've heard the sentiment expressed elsewhere
Well maybe you get what you pay for then. I went for it. But It'll be a while until I try it out as I'm immersed in Xenakis.

Mandryka

#345
A comment by Sabine Liebner on the piano etudes

Quote"The unexpected happens, because there is nothing to expect in these etudes. There is no logical sequence of events – everything is a representation of the stars. What happens here is what Cage always wanted: that the contradiction between art and life be dissolved. Art and life should not hinder each other, but form a unity, and this succeeds perfectly in the 'Etudes Australes', because what happens is always unanticipated."

Is she saying that the etudes should be played in such a way as to maximise randomness, like a representation of a starry sky, the physical starry sky, in music? I think that's what she does, though I haven't felt the same sublime that I feel when I look at, e.g., the night sky on a Greek island.  That sounds very far from Griet Sultan's duet for two hands.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

torut

Quote from: Mandryka on July 03, 2014, 09:24:17 AM
There's this review on amazon's US website of Arditti's recording of the violin etudes, I've heard the sentiment expressed elsewhere
Arditti's Freeman Etudes is superb. Each note is played delicately and the violin tone is beautiful. Listening it is a rewarding experience for me.  That is one of Cage albums I listen to the most often.
Is there other performance you prefer?
Paul Zukofsky for whom Freeman Etudes was originally composed gave up in the middle. (he recorded only No. 1-8?) Cage once abandoned it, and completed the Etudes only after Arditti proved that it is playable.
There is a recent release (2011-12) by Marco Fusi. I have not heard it yet.

Mandryka

#347
Quote from: milk on June 22, 2014, 05:13:43 AM
I must admit I have a hard time with this part of Cage's output. I don't want to give up, but I have a hard time finding a way to enjoy the etudes.

Just listening today to Sabine Liebner play the etudes australes, listening in the sunshine, Sabine Liebner whose performace I've had some reservations about in the past. Listening today, in the sun, to Book 3 . . . it feels like the most beautiful music ever written.


I think one thing that helped me  is to see the unit as a whole book. When I tried to listen to them as individual etudes, to ask myself "how is this one different expressively or in terms of textures or whatever from that one?", I got nowhere with her way of playing them. Also helpful was just reading what Cage said about the function of music, to "sober and quiet the mind", I'm not sure what he meant by imitating nature.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

torut

I am interested in how improvisation was considered by Cage and related to the chance operation and indeterminacy, and I read a paper John Cage and Improvisation – An Unresolved Relationship by Sabine M. Feisst (http://artsites.ucsc.edu/faculty/abeal/4classes/feisstcageimp.doc). It was a good summary of Cage's thoughts about improvisation through different periods of his life. Cage disliked improvisation (and Jazz) because it was "the exercise of taste and memory" which he wanted to avoid, but tried to incorporate flexibilities of performers using indeterminacy. Still, what he wanted was unpredictability of each performance, not an expression of personal taste of each individual. It is interesting to read about the disastrous result of a performance of Atlas Eclipticalis in which Bernstein included free orchestra improvisation.

Quote from: Mandryka on July 04, 2014, 07:50:38 AM
A comment by Sabine Liebner on the piano etudes

Quote
"The unexpected happens, because there is nothing to expect in these etudes. There is no logical sequence of events – everything is a representation of the stars. What happens here is what Cage always wanted: that the contradiction between art and life be dissolved. Art and life should not hinder each other, but form a unity, and this succeeds perfectly in the 'Etudes Australes', because what happens is always unanticipated."

Is she saying that the etudes should be played in such a way as to maximise randomness, like a representation of a starry sky, the physical starry sky, in music? I think that's what she does, though I haven't felt the same sublime that I feel when I look at, e.g., the night sky on a Greek island.  That sounds very far from Griet Sultan's duet for two hands.

I was also curious about how Cage thought about the differences of interpretation of his notated scores but it was not discussed in the paper. My understanding is that he expected performers to follow the notations (very detailed) as accurately as possible to present the "unpredictability and uncontrollability". No tempo is specified in the score of Etudes Australes, and I guess Liebner tried to achieve the goal by playing each etude in almost the equal time period, so that the personality, strengths and weaknesses of the performer do not creep into the performance. (For example, not to play too fast a passage that is easy for her?)

milk

Quote from: torut on August 16, 2014, 08:19:55 PM
I am interested in how improvisation was considered by Cage and related to the chance operation and indeterminacy, and I read a paper John Cage and Improvisation – An Unresolved Relationship by Sabine M. Feisst (http://artsites.ucsc.edu/faculty/abeal/4classes/feisstcageimp.doc). It was a good summary of Cage's thoughts about improvisation through different periods of his life. Cage disliked improvisation (and Jazz) because it was "the exercise of taste and memory" which he wanted to avoid, but tried to incorporate flexibilities of performers using indeterminacy. Still, what he wanted was unpredictability of each performance, not an expression of personal taste of each individual. It is interesting to read about the disastrous result of a performance of Atlas Eclipticalis in which Bernstein included free orchestra improvisation.

Is she saying that the etudes should be played in such a way as to maximise randomness, like a representation of a starry sky, the physical starry sky, in music? I think that's what she does, though I haven't felt the same sublime that I feel when I look at, e.g., the night sky on a Greek island.  That sounds very far from Griet Sultan's duet for two hands.


I was also curious about how Cage thought about the differences of interpretation of his notated scores but it was not discussed in the paper. My understanding is that he expected performers to follow the notations (very detailed) as accurately as possible to present the "unpredictability and uncontrollability". No tempo is specified in the score of Etudes Australes, and I guess Liebner tried to achieve the goal by playing each etude in almost the equal time period, so that the personality, strengths and weaknesses of the performer do not creep into the performance. (For example, not to play too fast a passage that is easy for her?)
I've tried to be open minded about the etudes. I feel that my reactions are really pedestrian and have caused me to feel a little bit ashamed: the equivalent of "a child could do that" - which is ridiculous. I mean, I listen and I think, "what's the difference between these? Why not play the same one over and over again seeing as how I can't see much difference between them." But maybe those are the thoughts he wants me to have? I wanted to have some deep sense of wonder at these but, so far, I've felt nothing at all. I will try again. I'm curious how you feel about them? It seems that Cage wants to totally eliminate the performer from the performance. I think it's an interesting and challenging idea conceptually, but maybe I can't go a long with Cage in thinking that everything should be like that. But the influence of the idea is interesting. A computer could probably do what Cage wants better than a human being?   

torut

Quote from: milk on August 16, 2014, 08:45:04 PM
I've tried to be open minded about the etudes. I feel that my reactions are really pedestrian and have caused me to feel a little bit ashamed: the equivalent of "a child could do that" - which is ridiculous. I mean, I listen and I think, "what's the difference between these? Why not play the same one over and over again seeing as how I can't see much difference between them." But maybe those are the thoughts he wants me to have? I wanted to have some deep sense of wonder at these but, so far, I've felt nothing at all. I will try again. I'm curious how you feel about them? It seems that Cage wants to totally eliminate the performer from the performance. I think it's an interesting and challenging idea conceptually, but maybe I can't go a long with Cage in thinking that everything should be like that. But the influence of the idea is interesting. A computer could probably do what Cage wants better than a human being?   
My enjoyment of Cage's chance operation music is very superficial. I don't feel any deep sense of wonder, I just enjoy the feeling of sound. It's like enjoying the texture, the feel of surface, the color, the feel of mass, etc. of a stone. In that sense I prefer Freeman Etudes to Etudes Australes or Atlas Eclipticalis, because the violin has more variations in timbre (smooth or rough, squeaking, various attack sounds at a fast passage, etc.) and a solo reveals the raw sounds of the instrument more directly than orchestra. I don't know why it is so attractive, but once I start listening to one of Freeman Etudes, I usually keep listening until the end of at least one disc. If I repeat only one etude again and again, eventually I will memorize it and be tired of it. So, it is nice to have many etudes, even if each one does not have distinguishable characteristics.

I think Cage had many contradictions. If we take what he said literally, yes, ultimately randomly generated sounds by computer should work. But I feel that there is Cage's personality even in the chance operation works, because it was Cage who created the particular systems that generate the scores. There must be many limitations in order to make it playable, and there should have been Cage's preferences in deciding how to convert star charts or stains on paper to tones, dynamics, lengths of notes, etc. "a child could do that" is a valid criticism, if that is true, but the Etudes required incredibly complicated, elaborate work to realize, if I understand correctly. I wonder if anyone can create a system from scratch or "random" music with a minimal effort which is not boring and sounds even remotely comparable to Freeman Etudes, for example. (Actually, I feel similarity in Ferneyhough's works, which are of course not random music ...)

Mandryka

#351
Quote from: milk on August 16, 2014, 08:45:04 PM
I've tried to be open minded about the etudes. I feel that my reactions are really pedestrian and have caused me to feel a little bit ashamed: the equivalent of "a child could do that" - which is ridiculous. I mean, I listen and I think, "what's the difference between these? Why not play the same one over and over again seeing as how I can't see much difference between them." But maybe those are the thoughts he wants me to have? I wanted to have some deep sense of wonder at these but, so far, I've felt nothing at all. I will try again. I'm curious how you feel about them? It seems that Cage wants to totally eliminate the performer from the performance. I think it's an interesting and challenging idea conceptually, but maybe I can't go a long with Cage in thinking that everything should be like that. But the influence of the idea is interesting. A computer could probably do what Cage wants better than a human being?   

What does this mean?

The performer of the piano etudes has to make all sorts of very personal decisions, like choosing a basic tempo, a pulse. That choice, for example, is what makes Sabine Liebner's performance so special and IMO so very Zen.  The performances of these pieces are very  different one from the other.  The whole thing was inspired by an extremely musical concept -- Grete Sultan's style of playing like a duet for two hands.  All the pianist's range of expresses resources are available to make Cage's score worthwhile to hear, just as they are in any other piano music.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

Mandryka

#352
Quote from: torut on August 16, 2014, 11:39:22 PM
My enjoyment of Cage's chance operation music is very superficial. I don't feel any deep sense of wonder, I just enjoy the feeling of sound. It's like enjoying the texture, the feel of surface, the color, the feel of mass, etc. of a stone. In that sense I prefer Freeman Etudes to Etudes Australes or Atlas Eclipticalis, because the violin has more variations in timbre (smooth or rough, squeaking, various attack sounds at a fast passage, etc.) and a solo reveals the raw sounds of the instrument more directly than orchestra. I don't know why it is so attractive, but once I start listening to one of Freeman Etudes, I usually keep listening until the end of at least one disc. If I repeat only one etude again and again, eventually I will memorize it and be tired of it. So, it is nice to have many etudes, even if each one does not have distinguishable characteristics.

I think Cage had many contradictions. If we take what he said literally, yes, ultimately randomly generated sounds by computer should work. But I feel that there is Cage's personality even in the chance operation works, because it was Cage who created the particular systems that generate the scores. There must be many limitations in order to make it playable, and there should have been Cage's preferences in deciding how to convert star charts or stains on paper to tones, dynamics, lengths of notes, etc. "a child could do that" is a valid criticism, if that is true, but the Etudes required incredibly complicated, elaborate work to realize, if I understand correctly. I wonder if anyone can create a system from scratch or "random" music with a minimal effort which is not boring and sounds even remotely comparable to Freeman Etudes, for example. (Actually, I feel similarity in Ferneyhough's works, which are of course not random music ...)

I believe that one of the features of Claudio Chrismani's performance is that he finds tunes, tunes you can hum, you can almost here ideas coming back, being varied, and the result is that you can tell yourself that it's something more deep that's being made of the music. Sorrry, can't explain it better. But the result is that listening to his way with the etudes is more like listening to other music, Chopin or something. You find yourself saying to yourself : cool! that's cosmic! like op 111!

I expect that what he does is very contentious.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

milk

Quote from: Mandryka on August 17, 2014, 01:25:46 AM
I believe that one of the features of Claudio Chrismani's performance is that he finds tunes, tunes you can hum, you can almost here ideas coming back, being varied, and the result is that you can tell yourself that it's something more deep that's being made of the music. Sorrry, can't explain it better. But the result is that listening to his way with the etudes is more like listening to other music, Chopin or something. You find yourself saying to yourself : cool! that's cosmic! like op 111!

I expect that what he does is very contentious.
Yes, I see what you are saying. You and Torut. I think I'll come back to the etudes. I don't know the Freeman etudes. I'll have to check. It confuses me in a way because you're obviously right about the performer needing to make a host of choices and there being a radical range of interpretive possibilities. I'm not sure I know how to understand what Cage is saying. Generally, I've come to like what I feel is a kind of optimism in the American stuff from this time. Is it anti-romantic? And counter the image of the heroic performer? Perhaps I'm jumbling it up. Anyway, I will check it out again. Maybe I'll make a breakthrough with it.

torut

Quote from: Mandryka on August 17, 2014, 01:25:46 AM
I believe that one of the features of Claudio Chrismani's performance is that he finds tunes, tunes you can hum, you can almost here ideas coming back, being varied, and the result is that you can tell yourself that it's something more deep that's being made of the music. Sorrry, can't explain it better. But the result is that listening to his way with the etudes is more like listening to other music, Chopin or something. You find yourself saying to yourself : cool! that's cosmic! like op 111!

I expect that what he does is very contentious.
I listened to short audio samples of Chrismani's recording. It is very dynamic, and there is a sense of flow, not pointillistic like the other performance. For some reason I couldn't find it before, but the album is available on digital format. I'll check it out.

torut

https://www.youtube.com/v/03ze845nRYc
Excerpt from Freeman Etudes, Performed at the John Cage Centennial Festival Washington DC by Irvine Arditti
This is amazing.

torut

Quote from: milk on August 16, 2014, 08:45:04 PM
It seems that Cage wants to totally eliminate the performer from the performance.

Quote from: Mandryka on August 16, 2014, 11:56:23 PM
What does this mean?

The performer of the piano etudes has to make all sorts of very personal decisions, like choosing a basic tempo, a pulse. That choice, for example, is what makes Sabine Liebner's performance so special and IMO so very Zen.  The performances of these pieces are very  different one from the other.  The whole thing was inspired by an extremely musical concept -- Grete Sultan's style of playing like a duet for two hands.  All the pianist's range of expresses resources are available to make Cage's score worthwhile to hear, just as they are in any other piano music.
However, Cage expected impersonality in performances, I believe. Each performance should be different, but Cage didn't want personal taste or value judgement in that, and he suggested to use chance operation as one of the methods of decision making by performers for the works of indeterminacy. What I thought was that Sabine might have made that tempo decision in order to make the music sound impersonal and unpredictable as much as possible.
I am not saying that the existence of personality in a performance is good or bad. I think it is inevitable, and it may be that the conflict (or contradiction) between the intended impersonality and performers' personality makes his music interesting.
I am still not sure what Cage's real intention was, and that is the reason I like to read about him and hear opinions of you, milk or other members.

Mandryka

#357
Liebner's hard core - it's only for people who prepared to put in the major effort to relax and repose the mind enough to appreciate her. An etude for the listener.

In Liebner's there isn't much dynamic variation - just what comes naturally from playing several notes at the same time. Claudio Chrismani is very violent dynamically. And Chrismani imposes recognisable rhythms. As I said he even picks out tunes (quelle horreur!) Of couse in Liebner there are no recognisable rhythms and certainly nothing you can hum.  Again I think the result in Chrismani's is to underline events and the result is something which think James would see as more disciplined and meaningful. But I'm sure that this is contrary to Cage's intentions, both as an exercise for the performer and for the listener. Nevertheless , I think that what Chrismani does is quite attractive, at least, it is to anyone who can enjoy atonal piano music.

This is music for transforming people. Meditation music, and like Buddhist meditation, it's not easy.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

torut

Quote from: James on August 17, 2014, 09:10:04 AM
At least you admit it, but you should examine it more closely - you'll end up being disappointed if you do. It is surface color and nothing more, and he tinkers with it in a very arbitrary & meaningless fashion. Real music is much deeper than just mere color, and more cogent, sophisticated, disciplined etc.

Awful. Pretentious "virtuoso" finger gymnastics that don't amount to anything musical or meaningful. Real music has requirements that go far beyond this sort of child's play ..
I understand how the etudes were created and there is nothing in terms of musical theories like sonata form, 12-tone, serialism, etc.
However, Cage carefully designed his system and method that generated music that sounded as he expected. It was not arbitrary or meaningless. Cage made cogent arguments that many people found interesting and/or valid, his methods and scores are sophisticated, and discipline is what he regarded as important: '[...] Cage preferred chance operations to improvisation since for him "chance operations are a discipline, and improvisation is rarely a discipline"' (Feisst)

EigenUser

Quote from: James on August 17, 2014, 09:10:04 AM
At least you admit it, but you should examine it more closely - you'll end up being disappointed if you do. It is surface color and nothing more [...]
While I absolutely can't stand the Freeman Etudes, for argument's sake I will say that there isn't anything wrong with only surface color if that is what a listener is looking for.

Quote from: James on August 17, 2014, 09:10:04 AM
Awful. Pretentious "virtuoso" finger gymnastics that don't amount to anything musical or meaningful. Real music has requirements that go far beyond this sort of child's play ..
I would almost say the same thing about Paganini and much of the romantic-virtuoso-violinist gang (and I'm a violinist!). 8)
Beethoven's Op. 133 -- A fugue so bad that even Beethoven himself called it "Grosse".