What are you listening 2 now?

[vers la flamme]

Ludwig van Beethoven: Piano Sonata No.31 in A-flat major, op.110. Maurizio Pollini

[Que]

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

OK, I have a pretty wide range of appreciation as far as cover art goes, but this one made me go wha—? Are we supposed to conclude that Stokowski is slow, or leaves a slimy trail? Oh I get it: listening to Stokowski is good for the skin.    

(Great looking program, by the way.)

-Bruce

I dislike the photo though I like the snail in the pic. The music is great.

[Linz]

Beethoven String Quartets No. 11 Opus 95 and String Quartet No. 15 Opus 132, Végh Quartet

[JBS]

OK, I have a pretty wide range of appreciation as far as cover art goes, but this one made me go wha—? Are we supposed to conclude that Stokowski is slow, or leaves a slimy trail? Oh I get it: listening to Stokowski is good for the skin.    

(Great looking program, by the way.)

-Bruce

I'm fairly sure that cover has appeared in the Worst Cover Art thread.
TD
Bits and bobs of Bach, some of them being transcriptions,  the longest being the Aria Variata and the Concerto After Marcello.

Second CD from this

[Linz]

Bruckner Symphony No. 1 in C Minor, 1877 Linz version with revisions Ed. Robert Haas, Bernard Haitink

[atardecer]

He wasn't referring to other composers. That's where you've gone wrong. He was talking about pianists. He was explaining that pianists don't go for Faure because Faure's music is not flashy.

He's hardly the first person to make this point, either. For starters it's pretty much said in the liner notes for the Kathryn Stott set I was listening to earlier. Faure's music is incredibly difficult to play but frequently doesn't SOUND like it, and so a pianist doesn't get the reward of an audience going "wow" over the sheer technical ability involved. A point that Hamelin, with his repertoire, is well equipped to make.

Your claim that the inferiority of Faure's harmony is near an objective statement frankly tells me you've fallen into exactly that trap of thinking that something has to sound impressive to be impressive. Faure's harmony is incredibly subtle, gliding almost imperceptibly until you find you've moved through all sorts of distant keys. Perhaps it's not until you try to play some of these pieces that you realise how amazing they are, but I don't know whether anyone else could write something like the 5th Barcarolle. And I suspect a lot of very good pianists couldn't manage to play it with the kind of flow Faure always needs. I sure as hell couldn't, but God I loved trying to play the last page in particular.

Edit: honestly, Hamelin is a little stilted in some of the earlier Barcarolles.

I think he was talking about both pianists and composers. The 'flash over substance' seemed to be referring to other composers. The composers Hamelin considers more flashy and less substantial than Fauré. Hamelin's comments were deliberately provocative and he has succeeded in getting us to discuss them and his recording. I don't disagree that there is subtle harmonic brilliance in Fauré's music. I don't wish to downplay that or deny it but it was Debussy who revolutionized harmony. As Bartók put it: "Debussy's great service to music was to reawaken among all musicians an awareness of harmony and its possibilities". Ravel was able to see the possibilities and find his own unique voice within that new sound world. It was Ravel who composed the first impressionistic piano piece with Jeux d'eau. I think of all composers Ravel in particular was so dialed-in to his own immaculate and unique sense of harmony. He was able to express himself with profound precision and expressivity within that language. Harmony is where Ravel excelled. Over-all Fauré's harmonic language sounds generic in comparison, and not particularly distinct for a post-Wagnerian composer. 

[Madiel]

I think he was talking about both pianists and composers. The 'flash over substance' seemed to be referring to other composers. The composers Hamelin considers more flashy and less substantial than Fauré. Hamelin's comments were deliberately provocative and he has succeeded in getting us to discuss them and his recording. I don't disagree that there is subtle harmonic brilliance in Fauré's music. I don't wish to downplay that or deny it but it was Debussy who revolutionized harmony. As Bartók put it: "Debussy's great service to music was to reawaken among all musicians an awareness of harmony and its possibilities". Ravel was able to see the possibilities and find his own unique voice within that new sound world. It was Ravel who composed the first impressionistic piano piece with Jeux d'eau. I think of all composers Ravel in particular was so dialed-in to his own immaculate and unique sense of harmony. He was able to express himself with profound precision and expressivity within that language. Harmony is where Ravel excelled. Over-all Fauré's harmonic language sounds generic in comparison, and not particularly distinct for a post-Wagnerian composer.

You realise that he never mentions either Debussy or Ravel, and yet your reaction is entirely driven by a desire to elevate those 2 composers that you yourself inserted into the narrative. And to do it by constantly denigrating Faure.

Ravel was 30 years younger and also Faure's PUPIL, but you've decided that they must be contemporaries. Your rhetorical question about who else could be mean only proves that a lot of other composers of the era have fallen out of public consciousness, not that they didn't exist. Because you only know about 3 great French composers, you conclude all on your own that Hamelin must be casting aspersions on the other 2.

There is absolutely nothing generic about his harmonic language. Goodbye.

[atardecer]

You realise that he never mentions either Debussy or Ravel, and yet your reaction is entirely driven by a desire to elevate those 2 composers that you yourself inserted into the narrative. And to do it by constantly denigrating Faure.

Ravel was 30 years younger and also Faure's PUPIL, but you've decided that they must be contemporaries. Your rhetorical question about who else could be mean only proves that a lot of other composers of the era have fallen out of public consciousness, not that they didn't exist. Because you only know about 3 great French composers, you conclude all on your own that Hamelin must be casting aspersions on the other 2.

There is absolutely nothing generic about his harmonic language. Goodbye.

He was speaking about French composers contemporary to Fauré, and went on to talk about how certain other composers get more attention from pianists. So if we are talking about French composers contemporary to Fauré that get performed and recorded more often then the other composers that have 'fallen out of public attention' are not relevant to the discussion, nor would anyone argue they are superior to Fauré in harmony or melody. I think he could've made his point without bringing these other unnamed composers into the equation. Saying 'no contemporary French composer surpassed Fauré in harmony' in my view is clearly incorrect. It was not my intention to denigrate Fauré's music, but I think Hamelin went too far with his comment - specifically the one relating to harmony.

Perhaps in terms of the other comment as you and jlopes point out he was merely referring to other pianists perceptions.

[JBS]

A Prestopackage landed today.
First up

I'm not sure why the front cover doesn't mention that the CD includes de Falla's Noches en los jardines de España.
The two Ravel concertos were recorded in July 2022, the de Falla in June 2023. Perhaps it was a late substitution for something else...but it has a liner note, track listing, and is listed on the back cover like normal, so why not fix the front cover if that was the case?

[Madiel]

He was speaking about French composers contemporary to Fauré, and went on to talk about how certain other composers get more attention from pianists. So if we are talking about French composers contemporary to Fauré that get performed and recorded more often then the other composers that have 'fallen out of public attention' are not relevant to the discussion, nor would anyone argue they are superior to Fauré in harmony or melody. I think he could've made his point without bringing these other unnamed composers into the equation. Saying 'no contemporary French composer surpassed Fauré in harmony' in my view is clearly incorrect. It was not my intention to denigrate Fauré's music, but I think Hamelin went too far with his comment - specifically the one relating to harmony.

Perhaps in terms of the other comment as you and jlopes point out he was merely referring to other pianists perceptions.

This is still not accurate. I suggest you go and watch the video again. So that you stop blurring together separate sentences in it.

In particular, the fact that one sentence or phrase is comparing Faure to his (unnamed) contemporaries does NOT mean that everything else in the rest of the video is a comparator to other composers. It just isn't. The statements about Faure not being recorded and not being played are not "in comparison to other composers", they are "in comparison to what Faure deserves".

And now it really is goodbye because I've spent enough time on this. You will see above that I'm not the only person who thinks you've misunderstood the video.

[JBS]

CD 11 of 12



A cyclic effect here for the box, which started off with a recording of K 452 (with Serkin)
and now at the almost-close ends with another (with Casadesus).

The final album in the set btw is a jazz album--music of Ornette Coleman.

[brewski]

Bruckner Symphony No. 1 in C Minor, 1877 Linz version with revisions Ed. Robert Haas, Bernard Haitink

Thanks for posting this, which also alerted me to this Bruckner collection, of which I was not aware. I'm not buying many recordings these days (after getting rid of a ton a couple of years ago), but might have to consider this one.

-Bruce

[Scion7]

After all these years, still unsurpassed (the first recordings). Great midnight music. 

[AnotherSpin]

[ando]

Wasn't necessarily in the mood for this but once I heard the quality I was hooked. 

Debussy/Ravel Selections (1963, RCA Victor Reel To Reel) Side A
Boston Symphonies Orchestra
Charles Munch

[Madiel]

I thought I was coming home to 2 more eBay purchases and just discovered 4 on the doorstep. No idea what to listen to! 

[Papy Oli]

I thought I was coming home to 2 more eBay purchases and just discovered 4 on the doorstep. No idea what to listen to! 

Obviously, the next opus number in Fauré, Shostakovich, Haydn, Dvorak...op.1 for another composer!! 

[Que]

Morning listening:



An oddly programmed recording. The idea was to showcase the diversity in Renaissance styles  (Roman, Franco-Flemish,  English late Gothic). I guess that's a different way of saying that there is very little connection between the pieces.... But it does give us an stunning performance of rare music by Thomas Ashwell. Before this recording I had no idea that the Huelgas would be so exceptional in English music - they give any British ensemble a run for their money....and win hands down... A succes that has unfortunately only been repeated with their Eton Choirbook recording.

The other performances are great as well, but the world was not in desperate need of yet another recording of Lassus' Missa tous le regretz and of the Palestrina mass one movement was left out to make the total playing time fit.... Brilliant... 

[Que]

Nice, very nice. Stimmwerck at their best!