Ravel's Rotunda

[Dancing Divertimentian]

The Maazel recording here.

+1 Although mine is the original DG issue (on CD that is). I would think the double disc "Originals" reissue would have librettos, although that's solely based on another "Originals" reissue I have of a Handel opera which does include a libretto.

Ansermet's recording is very fine too, but again I don't know if it comes with the libretto..

I like Ansermet, too. I would probably choose Maazel in a grunge match but they're both solid sets. (My Ansermet is a French import and has a French-only libretto ).

[North Star]

The box set contains a damn libretto?  That has to be the first and last time such a thing will happen!

Librettos to both of the operas, and a 6 pages long essay, too. 

[Moonfish]

*bump* [8 months!!!]

Listened to a couple of Ravel pieces championed by Ansermet and the OSR forces. Very dreamy and delicate throughout. I wonder if I would be able to distinguish Ravel from Debussy in a blind test?  I must admit that I have not experienced the actual ballets apart from reading about them (a synopsis). I have been avoiding much of Ravel, Debussy and Stravinsky and now I am wondering why? Ansermet seems like a great gateway into this dreamy tonal world!

Ravel: Daphnis et Chloé                Les Choeurs de la Radio Romande Lausanne/L'Orchestre de la Suisse Romande/Ansermet




Ravel: Ma mère l'oye               L'Orchestre de la Suisse Romande/Ansermet

[Mirror Image]

Peter, perhaps you just weren't 'ready' for Ravel, Debussy, or Stravinsky? Of course, these were composers I took to very quickly and Ravel has remained in my top 5 for years. Do give Ravel's PCs and chamber works a listen at some point. Definitely some of my favorite music of any composer.

[EigenUser]

Do give Ravel's PCs and chamber works a listen at some point. Definitely some of my favorite music of any composer.

Yes! Not to mention the solo piano works. (I'm listening to Gaspard de la Nuit right now!). Ravel (along with Bartok) is easily my favorite solo piano composer.

My favorite work by Ravel, though, is his Introduction and Allegro. It is like a miniature harp concerto accompanied by flute, clarinet, and string quartet. I'd give it a listen while you're at it -- it's only 10 minutes long.

Everyone (myself included) seems to pair Debussy and Ravel. If you really think about it, though, they aren't all that similar (aside from their SQs, which do sound similar). A qualitative (and probably superficial) rule of thumb I go by is that Ravel tends to be "flashier". A more quantitative (or, at least more technical) rule of thumb I go by is that Ravel tends to be more concerned with classical forms. It's hard (and often a bad idea) to make generalizations about composers, but I would say that Debussy looks forward through a romantic lens whereas Ravel looks backward through a modern lens.

[Mirror Image]

Yes! Not to mention the solo piano works. (I'm listening to Gaspard de la Nuit right now!). Ravel (along with Bartok) is easily my favorite solo piano composer.

My favorite work by Ravel, though, is his Introduction and Allegro. It is like a miniature harp concerto accompanied by flute, clarinet, and string quartet. I'd give it a listen while you're at it -- it's only 10 minutes long.

Everyone (myself included) seems to pair Debussy and Ravel. If you really think about it, though, they aren't all that similar (aside from their SQs, which do sound similar). A qualitative (and probably superficial) rule of thumb I go by is that Ravel tends to be "flashier". A more quantitative (or, at least more technical) rule of thumb I go by is that Ravel tends to be more concerned with classical forms. It's hard (and often a bad idea) to make generalizations about composers, but I would say that Debussy looks forward through a romantic lens whereas Ravel looks backward through a modern lens.

There's not a work by Ravel that I haven't heard except for his Prix de Rome works. Introduction and Allegro is a beautiful work. Yes, I never understood the constant pairing with Debussy either. Both composers couldn't be more different.

[Rons_talking]

Everyone (myself included) seems to pair Debussy and Ravel. If you really think about it, though, they aren't all that similar (aside from their SQs, which do sound similar). A qualitative (and probably superficial) rule of thumb I go by is that Ravel tends to be "flashier". A more quantitative (or, at least more technical) rule of thumb I go by is that Ravel tends to be more concerned with classical forms. It's hard (and often a bad idea) to make generalizations about composers, but I would say that Debussy looks forward through a romantic lens whereas Ravel looks backward through a modern lens.
[/quote]


Composer Ned Rorem wrote an interesting passage where he compares composers who use short melodies and build upon them (Beethoven, Stravinsky) with those who write longer melodies (Mozart, Mahler). His list is extensive and in the case of Debussey/Ravel, the former uses shorter, additive themes while Ravel writes longer, "complete" themes. While I haven't made this comparison with all their works it sounds about right.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Well, let's bring it here, lads!

I'll bet euros to éclairs that Luke would argue effectively against that 

A wise bet

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,9583.msg239591.html#msg239591

Yes, Luke's advocacy for both of Ravel's operas hasn't been lost on little ol' me. In fact, I'm the one who took the heat the first time I posted a pic of those Previn recordings with the Chuck Jones covers. And, so, here we are again...serves me right for invoking the ghost of Chuck Jones!

Anyway, man, it seems like only yesterday that Luke and I had our last discussion regarding this very topic (only *ahem* "incidentally" touching on the Chuck Jones covers . See earlier in the thread). That's when I learned of Luke's intense admiration for L'Enfant, with L'Heure apparently hard on its heels.

Fair enough. I hope to never stand in the way of a man and his likes/dislikes when it comes to entertainment. Doesn't seem to serve any meaningful purpose (apparently not everyone agrees with this, however). Of course I've been known to get itchy to speak out occasionally when something I read on this board jolts me like a brick to the head (and it takes a lot with my hard head).   

One such brick: a provocative statement whereby L'Enfant is hoisted as hors concours in Ravel's output, with L'Heure number two.   

*BRICK*!!

Well, a brick for me, anyway. Not for Luke!

Looking back I'd never have guessed that it was seven years ago that I first got whacked by that brick. Not that I haven't recovered! But more than anything else that day has never left my memory, since there isn't a single thing I dislike more than being left in the wake by those folks with a discerning enough nose to sniff out something worthwhile and I can't. 

But, unfortunately, just following someone else's lead doesn't always generate results. So that kinda leaves a person (like me) to using their (my) own nose in certain situations. And this is one such situation...unfortunately. I'd love it if the switch could be turned on for me in Ravel's operas but so far I can only generate a qualified "decent" when it comes to the question of what they mean to me.

Not that I haven't tried. And tried. And tried. And to be honest, to invoke yet another ghost from GMG's past, our own long, lost Nigel Wilkinson - Mr. Opera Lover himself - actually had no use for these two operas at all! And that's putting it charitably! (Yes, this is burned in my memory as well). (I've searched but can't as of yet locate his posts). Not that this is of any real substance in the current context but I only rehash it to illustrate that, as with a great many works of art, opinions can and do run the gamut. So, simply put, some adore these operas, some loathe them. I'm in the middle. So far.

Discuss?

[Mirror Image]

Don't feel bad, DD. I like L'enfant et les sortileges, but don't care much for 'the other one' (aka L'heure espagnole). We can't all enjoy the same things and if we occasionally run into someone else who likes the same work, then that's great of course, but it's not the end of the world because someone dislikes something that we like. Too often people seem to take someone's dislike to heart (I have been guilty of this in the past), but I don't worry about this much anymore. If something moves me, then that should be all that matters.

[North Star]

Larderet's Ravel is essential - mostly because it has the world premiere recording of a mature, major Ravel piano work. Why nobody had ever before recorded Ravel's transcription of three movements from Daphnis, when it's very-nearly-but-not-quite on the same level as Stravinsky's three movements from Petrushka, is a total mystery. It's 20 minutes long, you hardly ever miss the sound of the orchestra, and Larderet plays with great enthusiasm.

Wow! I'm sure I've heard of this before - and that Larderet album art looks familiar.
Here it is on YT, apparently played by Claire-Marie Le Guay. And also the Larderet arrangement's recording.

(You say transcription, as does IMSLP, but taking into account that the solo piano score was published first, I am inclined to believe that the ballet is the transcription. The Larderet appears to be an arrangement of some sort, though.)

https://www.youtube.com/v/Un0ZW4TWw5I  https://www.youtube.com/v/r415pQYOHok

[Jaakko Keskinen]

PC for the left hand is really beautiful. Listening to it right now. The opening crescendo reminds me of Debussy.

[Karl Henning]

It is exquisite!

[Brian]

PC for the left hand is really beautiful. Listening to it right now. The opening crescendo reminds me of Debussy.

A year or two ago somebody created a poll asking what everyone's favorite solo cadenza was, and the first 2-3 replies were Ravel's PC for the left hand.

[North Star]

A year or two ago somebody created a poll asking what everyone's favorite solo cadenza was, and the first 2-3 replies were Ravel's PC for the left hand.

a) that somebody was you
b) first of those is your own OP
c) the second is my reply

Ilaria, Luke, and John joined the choir, too. (Matthew and Mark were busy, I assume)

[Brian]

a) that somebody was you
c) first of those is your own OP

*slightly embarrassed*

[Uhor]

Ravel's attention to the minuscule, transparency, present construction, texture!, is a noble standard to welcome back.

[Rons_talking]

A year or two ago somebody created a poll asking what everyone's favorite solo cadenza was, and the first 2-3 replies were Ravel's PC for the left hand.

I agree 100%. Many of Ravel's works can yield me dimishing returns, brilliant as they are, but there's something about the LH Concerto that sticks. Also, his SQ (imo) is unique in the genre for its lyricism.

[vandermolen]

Been listening to Ansermet's Decca recording of 'Ma mere l'oye'. It is from 1951 but it is an excellent performance. The very opening notes brought to mind Vaughan Williams's 'A Pastoral Sumphony'. I think that Ravel had a great influence on the English composer who studied with him in his 30s (VW). Vaughan Williams said that Ravel taught him how to orchestrate in colour rather than line. Anyway Ansermet's 'Mother Goose Suite' is charming and I find the end moving. I love the story about Ravel (from here I think) that although he composed one of the greatest musical depictions of dawn in 'Daphnis and Chloe' (also on the double Ansermet Decca set) he never got out of bed before 11.00am.

[Luke]

Ravel's sleep patterns were quite mixed up, I think. I'm not sure how accurate this is, but when I visited his marvellous house at Montfort l'Amaury I was told that he sometimes ended up sleeping late or into the day due to nocturnal insomnia  - but that in his bedroom he had special shutters made with star-shaped holes cut into them so he could still deceive himself into thinking it was night... which doesn't really make sense, if you think about it. That was how the guide explained those shutters, anyway - but what they also demonstrate, as does so much else in that house, and of course so much in his music, is Ravel's love of the artificial, his preference for a screen from reality. 

[Mirror Image]

Ravel's sleep patterns were quite mixed up, I think. I'm not sure how accurate this is, but when I visited his marvellous house at Montfort l'Amaury I was told that he sometimes ended up sleeping late or into the day due to nocturnal insomnia  - but that in his bedroom he had special shutters made with star-shaped holes cut into them so he could still deceive himself into thinking it was night... which doesn't really make sense, if you think about it. That was how the guide explained those shutters, anyway - but what they also demonstrate, as does so much else in that house, and of course so much in his music, is Ravel's love of the artificial, his preference for a screen from reality.

Utterly fascinating anecdote, Luke. Thanks for sharing. My own thoughts: when Ravel removes the artificial, or the mask(s), if you will, we really get a glimpse of the man's beating heart IMHO and it never fails to move me deeply.