Ravel's Rotunda

[Diletante]

I haven't heard much from Ravel (but I DEFINITELY will), but he holds a special place in my heart because every piece of his that I've heard I dislike at first, but I love it when I hear it for the second or third time.

The first time I heard La Valse was in an arrangement for two pianos played by Martha Argerich (whose playing I really like) and Nelson Freire. I didn't like it, to me it sounded like a bunch of noise. Then I downloaded a CD (mainly because it had the Boléro in it), listened to the orchestral version of it and loved it!

I checked out the Piano Concerto for the Left Hand merely out of curiosity, in a youtube video (which has sadly been taken down since), played by Leon Fleisher. Again, it seemed to me like a bunch of noise. Some weeks later, I heard it again (in the same video), and strangely this time I liked it! Now I love it!

I then checked out the Piano Concerto in G. I really didn't like it the first time I heard it. The jazzy tunes just weren't working for me. I stayed away from it for a good while. Some weeks later I carefully listened to it again and it has actually grown on me a lot and it's my current favorite piece.

That's it for me now. I'll surely check out some of the stuff that have been recommended in this thread. But I may not like them the first time I hear them. 

[yoyoman_hey]

Lethe, I'm not too familiar with Delius, but as far as Gershwin goes, I do see a certain resemblence between Ravel and he, but Ravel just seems to have that distinctive French... je ne sais quoi upper-hand  But I am definately a fan of Gersh's symphonic works.

Corey, Haven't heard anything by Frank Bridge before, I'll have to keep his name in mind, thanks.


Tanuki, I'm afraid I can't relate to your second or third hearing approach, but I'm glad that little Basque has burrowed a way into your brain! I can't help but love pretty much everything Ravel has written, especially the piano concerti; those jazz undercurrents are utterly infectious.

[Pierre]

Great, thanks for the reccomendation!

I think I have a recording of that piece; I think I'll check it out now.

Besides Debussy, is there any other composer with a similar style? I know that the two of them are often grouped together as 'impressionists', but I'd be curious to hear more from a lesser known composer. Perhaps someone influenced by Ravel?

-Justin

Another composer who it seems to me - on brief acquaintance - has a similarly poignant style is John Ireland. Certainly I love the songs recorded by Roderick Williams on Naxos, and there's also a series of his piano music available on the same label.

[haydnguy]

I bought the Ravel 3-fer of Orchestral works shown below and really like it but I'm wondering if anyone may have a recommendation or two of his Piano Works..... Thanks..... 

[Lilas Pastia]

One of my favourite Ravel works is La Valse. One of the most sophisticated musical pastiches. I've heard it in many, many versions, and t seem sto me the work keeps reinventing itself. No version is like another, and I keep raising an eyebrow at this or that detail. Latest I heard is Pierre Monteux with the LSO (last available on a Philips disc). Monteux is usually a very straightforward, no-nonsense conductor. But, man ! Here he transforms the harps into whores  . Maybe it's been done before, in which case it's a tribute to the work's freshness, or else he's on to something.

The contemporaneous Ma Mère l'Oye is excellent. It epitomizes what Monteux is most famous for: transparence of textures, lucidity of expression and a firm but never rigid grip on rythm, with no dawdling. A Monteux performance moves and flashes.

Other La Valse favourites include Martinon, Boulez (NYPO), and Dutoit (Decca).

[jowcol]

The Piano Concerto for left Hand is the bomb.  I adore it.  It may be too dark and brooding for some.

I have (I forget the artist) an arrangement of Mother Goose for two pianos and percussion that is exquisite.   Definitely a classic.

Mirroirs for Piano is one of the greatest collections of piano works I've every heard-- it belongs on the same shelf as Debussy's Preludes.

Although the full length Daphnis et Chloe gets a bit long for me in the middle, the first ten minutes is astonishing, and the ending, or course is a classic.


And Ravel's String Quartet sounds more like Debussy than Debussy's String quartet! go figure.

[karlhenning]

The Piano Concerto for left Hand is the bomb.  I adore it.  It may be too dark and brooding for some.

Wonderful piece; Pierre-Laurent Aimard just played it in Boston this past weekend.

[karlhenning]

My plea - don't forget the piano music, the songs, the chamber works. They are as fine as the orchestral music and as effective in every way. The Naxos twofer of all the songs (bar the Mallarme settings which are so superb) is surprisingly good. And a judicious combination of two or three discs (such as that I gave in the Ravel chamber thread) can get you great readings of all the chamber music quite easily - the BAT/Quartetto Italiano/Grumiaux disc of the Trio, the Quartet and the late violin sonata, and Chantal Juillet's disc of all the violin sonatas (including the violin/cello one), and the other violin works cover everything except the seductive mini harp concerto, the Introduction and Allegro (Nash Ensemble great for that...), and will leave you smiling...





there's another Nash Ensemble disc with some of the same works plus the two sets of songs with chamber accompaniment (the Madagascan ones and the Mallarme ones). These are terribly neglected, given that they are some of Ravel's finest, most interesting, most beautifuol and most touching pieces, and that disc is a nice way to get hold of them...

[karlhenning]

Samson Francois in the concertos is not perfect but he's something you must hear; the concertos themselves are absolutely unmissable pieces. The G major has that utterly sublime slow movement that melts the stoniest heart, but the left hand concerto is, all round, maybe the most sweepingly powerful score, a demonic and sarcastic score starting in the deepest depths of the orchestra, moving through moments of heartbreaking tenderness, towards hallucinatory jazzy central portion, and an astonishing breakdown/cadenza/coda to conclude.

[karlhenning]

. . . I absolutely adore Sibelius, but for every hard-won moment of granitic splendour or every surgingly overwhelming point of formal balance (oh, the 1st-2nd movement transition in the 5th symphony is running throuhg my head now!!!) that I derive from him and his large canvasses Ravel with his intricately detailed scores gives me countless moments of delight, bar after bar after bar of them. The hidden depths of his music move me deeply, he makes me gasp in astonishment, and makes me think. Technically speaking Ravel had one of the most complete equipments of any composer - as an orchestrator, as everyone says, but as a deeply individual harmonist and as a moulder of large forms too, for instance - and as a result he was able to compose like a wizard, repeatedly making sounds that no one else could make. One could say the same of Strauss...but, for me, Strauss's magic too often fails to work, he lacks Ravel's lightness and deftness and his humility too, I think - the humility that makes an airily-scored delicate work like Ma mere l'oye possible. All just IMO, just the way I hear things, and really to underscore that Ravel ranks so very, very high for me, not to denigrate the other two, who I love deeply also.

[karlhenning]

Well, and dadgummit, here's the Ravel Recordings thread.

[Scarpia]

Well, and dadgummit, here's the Ravel Recordings thread.

Don't go there.  When people discuss recordings by a composer, it just proves that no one is interested in that composer, at least when it comes to Sibelius (according to our Ravel advocates).   0:)

[Maciek]

Don't go there.  When people discuss recordings by a composer, it just proves that no one is interested in that composer, at least when it comes to Sibelius (according to our Ravel advocates).   0:)

Well, with that post you have undermined your line of reasoning. Since it clearly shows that posting in a composer's thread is not necessarily an endorsement of that composer's profundity/greatness/whatever.

(And Elgar's Hillside is still longer than Snowshoed Sibelius! )

[karlhenning]

(And Elgar's Hillside is still longer than Snowshoed Sibelius! )

(* chortle *)

[mc ukrneal]

So I finally got around to listening to some Ravel as mentioned in the listening thread, and I tried to take some of the positive comments about him into account. Here's the disc (listening to disc 2).


La Valse - This is a great piece - wonderful music. No arguments here! It's better than I remembered it being.
Pavane pour une infante defunte - I was happy to see this end. It's inoffensive, but I'll be hitting 'skip' next time I hear this disc.  I'll compare to the piano - perhaps that will work better for this piece.
Le tombeau de Couperin - A mixed bag. Prelude is super outstanding (perhaps a bit fast here). I've heard this elsewhere, and so I know it can work both ways.  Forlane - how can the brilliance of the Prelude be followed by such lousy music. It doesn't seem to go anywhere either (and it goes on for so long). All the enthusiasm generated by the Prelude just went out the window. Perhaps I am missing something, but the second part rubs me the wrong the way. Menuet was a welcome relief. It doesn't seem to do much, but at least it produces a beautiful sound. Rigaudon was ok.
Valses nobles et sentimentales This is split intro four tracks, meaning each contains 2 items. Modere - nice. Assez lent - overly dissonant to start, seems like a few effects, but then lovely, haunting melody emerges. Goes better from there.  Next four sounded like a continuation of the second item (of , which I guess is good, but no strong reaction. More excitement in 7 (moins vif) and some beautiful fading solitude in 8 (last 30-60 seconds was pretty wonderful). This piece didn't irritate me, but I don't find myself interested to hear it often. There doesn't appear to be anything lurking under the surface, though it has some beautiful moments here and there.
Menuet antique - short piece. Nice one.
Fanfare for collaborative ballet L'eventail de Jeanne - Pretty awful. Blessedly short.
Daphnis et Chloe, Suite No. 2 - I was rather looking forward to this one having never gotten this far in the disc (in fact, I don't think I'd ever heard the fanfare either). And wow, what a gorgeous opening to the Lever du jour. It makes your heart jump. Oh and some heavenly sound here. I am uplifted - oh! And voices too. Very moving indeed. Stunning music this and a hotline to your innermost being. And then a move to the Pantomime. And a minute in, the 'who-eee' sound! Some lovely flute playing here - simple, but effective.   And then on to the Danse generale we go. Started picking things up here (actually starts at the end of Pantomime). The Danse is pretty good as well. This is a piece I will come back to and now I need to look for a recording with the whole thing! I gather that this, the second suite, is the 'third part' of the complete piece?

So as I said, overall mixed. I liked La valse and I will look for a complete Daphnis and Chloe. But I will probably skip the rest for a while.

I think i dislike this one effect in Ravel, when he does this 'who-eee' sound (like in Der Freischutz after they say Sameal's name - that is what it reminds me of). It sounds good every now and then, but it sounds like a gimmick listening to several pieces in a row - it gets repetitive.

I found myself suffering fatgue from his music as the disc went on as well - a certain sameness of sound. That is, if I had listened to each piece separately, I wouldn't have noticed it. But because I listened to them all back to back (which I have never done before actually), they almost seemed to meld together. I can't think of any other composer that generates this reaction, so I suppose it could be seen as both a positice or negative.

[Scarpia]

Listened to La Valse today, Anermet's recording with the Suisse Romande.  I have it in a big "Ansermet edition."  I'm not sure if it is currently in print.  (It's a stereo version, there is probably a mono version out there too.)   I had listened to La Valse a little while ago, Dutoit's recording and the difference is stunning.

The difference is most evident in the dramatic conclusion, where Ravel plays with tempo changes, rhythmic syncopation and dynamics to whip the valse theme to a dramatic conclusion.  Perhaps some of the most brilliant music of the 20th century.  Dutoit's recording is an impressive display of orchestral virtuosity.  The dynamics (particularly those crescendos in the last few bars before the strings interrupt in unison) are executed to the hilt, with very wide dynamic range, and the rhythm has a lot of snap.   In Ansermet's recording the dynamic contrasts are not nearly as wide, there is more flexibility in the rhythm.   To sum up, Dutoit shows off his orchestras technical ability to a greater extent but Ansermet shows off Ravel's music to a much greater extent.  So much of the musical detail that is lost behind those huge dynamic explosions in Dutiot's recording bloom in Ansermet's.   When I listened to Dutiot last week I was very pleased, but no I see how much I was missing.  Wow!

[Sergeant Rock]

Listened to La Valse today, Anermet's recording with the Suisse Romande.  I have it in a big "Ansermet edition."  I'm not sure if it is currently in print.  (It's a stereo version, there is probably a mono version out there too.)   I had listened to La Valse a little while ago, Dutoit's recording and the difference is stunning.

The difference is most evident in the dramatic conclusion, where Ravel plays with tempo changes, rhythmic syncopation and dynamics to whip the valse theme to a dramatic conclusion.  Perhaps some of the most brilliant music of the 20th century.  Dutoit's recording is an impressive display of orchestral virtuosity.  The dynamics (particularly those crescendos in the last few bars before the strings interrupt in unison) are executed to the hilt, with very wide dynamic range, and the rhythm has a lot of snap.   In Ansermet's recording the dynamic contrasts are not nearly as wide, there is more flexibility in the rhythm.   To sum up, Dutoit shows off his orchestras technical ability to a greater extent but Ansermet shows off Ravel's music to a much greater extent.  So much of the musical detail that is lost behind those huge dynamic explosions in Dutiot's recording bloom in Ansermet's.   When I listened to Dutiot last week I was very pleased, but no I see how much I was missing.  Wow!

Nice comparative review. I have both recordings but haven't listened to either in quite some time. I'll give them a spin soon.

Sarge

[Scarpia]

Nice comparative review. I have both recordings but haven't listened to either in quite some time. I'll give them a spin soon.

Sarge

Thanks.  I'll be curious to hear your impressions.

Just listened to Ansermet's recording of Valses nobles et sentimentalis.  Ravel's bon-bons can have startlingly dissonant harmonies if you listen carefully and Ansermet brings them out.  There are parts, however, where I get the unmistakable impression that Ansermet's OSR is not playing entirely in tune.  I guess that is part of the French "style" of orchestral playing.   

(I can hear Ansermet in my head, speaking to the principal oboe.  "That c# was entirely in tune!  Maybe you'd rather play for the Chicago symphony,  monsieur!" )

[Mirror Image]

Our fellow GMG member Brian has reminded me today of Ravel's sensational opera L'Enfant et les sortileges. What a work this is! I would be curious what others think about this opera? If my member serves me correctly, I remember listening to it once and being completely taken by it and it's quite unusual for me to like an opera, but this one just works for me.

[Luke]

Well, when we had our little period of Ravel focus a few weeks ago, I think I made my opinion on this opera clear - eg

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17453.msg461868.html#msg461868
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17442.msg461465.html#msg461465
(some weird statements about the piece on that thread, page 5!)

Another fun little exchange about the piece recently, starting:
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17718.msg478607.html#msg478607
and then finishing with a retraction here
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17718.msg478626.html#msg478626