Started by kentel, January 06, 2010, 01:53:00 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: some guy on January 06, 2010, 02:44:37 PMYes, thanks kentel. I'd never noticed the Shadowland or the ECM CDs. I'll have to buy those right now.I have the other ones you mentioned, and I'd like to put a good word in for the Arditti album, which I bought because I buy every Arditti album I see, and which I play over and over again, because I like the Sørensen and Rasmussen quartets.
Quote from: Sean on January 07, 2010, 02:33:34 AMHello kentel, I just borrowed the Birds and bells CD- will give it my best attention.
Quote from: bhodges on January 06, 2010, 02:18:42 PMThanks for the excellent post on Sørensen, whose work I don't know that well. I am pretty sure I have the Bridge CD with Speculum Musicae called The New Danes with The Deserted Churchyards, but don't recall if I've listened to it much. Also, I hear a good bit of choral music and recall some of his work in that area, but I don't have a strong image of his style. Your list gives me some ideas, though. --Bruce
Quote from: snyprrr on January 07, 2010, 09:24:42 AMThe Rasmussen is,...eh,...I don't like it, but I like the "boring" Sorensen. I also only like the Italian Concerto by R. That's a great little piece, especially the Castiglioni section (also one of my favs).
Quote from: Sean on January 09, 2010, 06:25:42 AMkentel, I can have limited enthusiasm for this music- it's fairly unpretentious and unobtrusive, an example of the soundscapes of a number of composers including Wolff, Pintscher and Neuwirth, but basically more rummaging around the ruins of the post-tonal landscape by composers who obviously have limited grasp of what art is.
Quote from: Sean on January 09, 2010, 06:25:42 AMbut basically more rummaging around the ruins of the post-tonal landscape by composers who obviously have limited grasp of what art is.
Quote from: Sean on January 09, 2010, 06:25:42 AMobviously have limited grasp of what art is.
QuoteAs to me, the connection is more relevant with Benjamin, Sciarrino, Murail, Lachenmann, Nono etc; that kind of "sound" composer, interested in unexpected orchestral compositions and roughly orbiting around the spectral aesthetics initiated by Scelsi.
QuoteYou're right when you talk about "soundscape" : that's what Sørensen's works are : you don't seem to be fanatic of the idea, but I think that there's a fair amount of 20th century's masterpieces which are "only" soundscapes eg static and descriptive.
Quote from: kentel on January 09, 2010, 08:23:55 AMAs I'm not a native English speaker, I fear not to understand quite well what you mean here . "post-tonal" is a gross term, which embraces a significant number of composers : could you be more specific about who you're thinking about when you talk about "the ruins of the post-tonal landscape" ?
Quote from: Guido on January 09, 2010, 09:03:12 AMErr... I think you can safely assume that they know what art is... I know you hate academicism so I'm sure you're not going to limit the people who 'know what art is' to the musicologists and philosophers (which is the angle that your general satements about art and music seem to be coming from).
Quote from: Sean on January 09, 2010, 09:32:09 AMNono's a fair comparison and maybe a little Sciarrino but I wouldn't agree about the others- you may know different works to me though... Scelsi is a much more interesting figure
Quote from: Sean on January 09, 2010, 09:32:09 AMMurail has done some vaguely interesting work around post-Messiaen harmonic thinking but again nothing that's going to last.
Quote from: Sean on January 09, 2010, 09:32:09 AMI'm very interested in soundscapes when they make overall aesthetic logic as well as the pink fluff of the moment, but this is only seriously possible in tonality.
Quote from: Sean on January 09, 2010, 09:37:06 AMThe likes of Sorensen are the direct product of the idiot academic establishment.
Quote from: Sean on January 09, 2010, 09:32:09 AM...nothing that's going to last.
Quote from: some guy on January 09, 2010, 12:37:10 PMInteresting how often this idea comes up in conversation. It's as if it had some special, magical quality, guaranteeing agreement or at least making disagreement impossible.But what is it, really? It is no more than conjecture. There is no way to make it anything more than conjecture, either, since it's about a region which none of us can have any knowledge of, the future. We can guess only. We cannot know.Far from being the nice knockdown argument it always masquerades as, it is a grade one chimera.(Even, I cannot resist adding, if it were possible to know this, does anyone genuinely care what one's grandchildren's grandchildren will or will not be listening to? These are people not yet born, people none of us will ever know. I wonder why it's always assumed that these people will have impeccable taste.)
Page created in 0.033 seconds with 26 queries.