Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Yet another "Pictures" orchestration.....
255 views
Skip to first unread message
The Historian
Sep 30, 2012, 5:08:10 AM9/30/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009FODNQU/ref=sr_1_album_32_rd?ie=UTF8&child=B009FODSZQ&qid=1348994253&sr=1-32
Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
Dances.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009FODNQU/ref=sr_1_album_32_rd?ie=UTF8&child=B009FODSZQ&qid=1348994253&sr=1-32
Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
Dances.
J
Sep 30, 2012, 8:32:42 AM9/30/12
to
Naxos also offers a performance by the Nashville Symphony under
Leonard Slatkin, in which each "picture" is orchestrated by a
different arranger.
Leonard Slatkin, in which each "picture" is orchestrated by a
different arranger.
Ricky Jimenez
Sep 30, 2012, 8:48:01 AM9/30/12
to
The Nursery before. I assume it is another set of piano pieces. I
don't understand your comment about its connection with the Ravel
orchestration. Do you have the same reaction to all other orchestsral
versions of the Pictures? This one seems to have many original ideas.
The Historian
Sep 30, 2012, 9:03:29 AM9/30/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Sep 30, 8:48 am, Ricky Jimenez <ricky...@bestweb.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 02:08:10 -0700 (PDT), The Historian
>
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 02:08:10 -0700 (PDT), The Historian
>
> <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
>
> >http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009FODNQU/ref=sr_1_album_32_rd?ie=U...
> >This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
>
>
> >Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
> >Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
>
> >Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
> >avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
> >Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
> >Dances.
>
> This looks like a disc to get. I don't think I had ever even heard of
> The Nursery before. I assume it is another set of piano pieces. I
> don't understand your comment about its connection with the Ravel
> orchestration. Do you have the same reaction to all other orchestsral
> versions of the Pictures? This one seems to have many original ideas.
Most orchestrations of Pictures stem from the orchestrator's belief
> >Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
> >Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
>
> >Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
> >avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
> >Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
> >Dances.
>
> This looks like a disc to get. I don't think I had ever even heard of
> The Nursery before. I assume it is another set of piano pieces. I
> don't understand your comment about its connection with the Ravel
> orchestration. Do you have the same reaction to all other orchestsral
> versions of the Pictures? This one seems to have many original ideas.
that Ravel got something wrong - that Ravel wasn't "Russian" enough in
his treatment, or that he omitted a Promenade, etc. But the result is
usually the orchestration either sounds like Ravel with some small,
worse choices, or it goes out of the way to sound completely unlike
Ravel.Like it or not, the Ravel orchestration has come to be thought
of as the definitive Pictures. It reminds me of Olivier's film and
stage perfomances of Richard III - the actor and director wanting to
avoid echoes of a performance everyone saw and no one could match were
forced into some odd choices. (Richard Dreyfus' gay Richard III in The
Goodbye Girl is a brilliant spoof on directors and actors trying to
avoid comparison to Olivier.)
The Historian
Sep 30, 2012, 9:21:50 AM9/30/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Sep 30, 8:48 am, Ricky Jimenez <ricky...@bestweb.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 02:08:10 -0700 (PDT), The Historian
>
>
> <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
>
> >http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009FODNQU/ref=sr_1_album_32_rd?ie=U...
> >This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
>
>
> >Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
> >Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
>
> >Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
> >avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
> >Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
> >Dances.
>
> This looks like a disc to get.
On Amazon, it appears to be download only.
> >Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
> >Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
>
> >Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
> >avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
> >Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
> >Dances.
>
> This looks like a disc to get.
Kerrison
Sep 30, 2012, 10:53:06 AM9/30/12
to
shown in this Wiki article ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pictures_at_an_Exhibition
Dufus
Sep 30, 2012, 11:53:35 AM9/30/12
to
>On Sep 30, 9:53 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Since Mussorgsky obviously knew how to write for orchestra, was there
a reason he himself did not orchestrate " Pictures." ? Thanks.
Since Mussorgsky obviously knew how to write for orchestra, was there
a reason he himself did not orchestrate " Pictures." ? Thanks.
Gerard
Sep 30, 2012, 1:42:46 PM9/30/12
to
Dufus <steve...@gmail.com> typed:
He wrote them as piano works.
Why should he (have to) orchestrate them?
Why should he (have to) orchestrate them?
Kip Williams
Sep 30, 2012, 7:14:54 PM9/30/12
to
Dufus wrote, On 9/30/12 11:53 AM:
Kip W
>> On Sep 30, 9:53 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Since Mussorgsky obviously knew how to write for orchestra, was there
> a reason he himself did not orchestrate " Pictures." ? Thanks.
He didn't want to be compared to Ravel.
>
> Since Mussorgsky obviously knew how to write for orchestra, was there
> a reason he himself did not orchestrate " Pictures." ? Thanks.
Kip W
M forever
Oct 1, 2012, 12:17:21 AM10/1/12
to
On Sep 30, 9:03 am, The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 30, 8:48 am, Ricky Jimenez <ricky...@bestweb.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 02:08:10 -0700 (PDT), The Historian
>
> > <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
>
> > >http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009FODNQU/ref=sr_1_album_32_rd?ie=U...
>
> > >Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
> > >Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
>
> > >Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
> > >avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
> > >Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
> > >Dances.
>
> > This looks like a disc to get. I don't think I had ever even heard of
> > The Nursery before. I assume it is another set of piano pieces. I
> > don't understand your comment about its connection with the Ravel
> > orchestration. Do you have the same reaction to all other orchestsral
> > versions of the Pictures? This one seems to have many original ideas.
>
> Most orchestrations of Pictures stem from the orchestrator's belief
> that Ravel got something wrong - that Ravel wasn't "Russian" enough in
> his treatment, or that he omitted a Promenade, etc. But the result is
> usually the orchestration either sounds like Ravel with some small,
> worse choices, or it goes out of the way to sound completely unlike
> Ravel.Like it or not, the Ravel orchestration has come to be thought
> of as the definitive Pictures.
Completely agree. That opinion is just based on some very clichéed
> On Sep 30, 8:48 am, Ricky Jimenez <ricky...@bestweb.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 02:08:10 -0700 (PDT), The Historian
>
> > <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
>
> > >http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009FODNQU/ref=sr_1_album_32_rd?ie=U...
>
> > >Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
> > >Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
>
> > >Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
> > >avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
> > >Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
> > >Dances.
>
> > This looks like a disc to get. I don't think I had ever even heard of
> > The Nursery before. I assume it is another set of piano pieces. I
> > don't understand your comment about its connection with the Ravel
> > orchestration. Do you have the same reaction to all other orchestsral
> > versions of the Pictures? This one seems to have many original ideas.
>
> Most orchestrations of Pictures stem from the orchestrator's belief
> that Ravel got something wrong - that Ravel wasn't "Russian" enough in
> his treatment, or that he omitted a Promenade, etc. But the result is
> usually the orchestration either sounds like Ravel with some small,
> worse choices, or it goes out of the way to sound completely unlike
> Ravel.Like it or not, the Ravel orchestration has come to be thought
> of as the definitive Pictures.
ideas of what "French" music is supposedly always like ("light,
brilliant and elegant") and what Russian music is supposedly always
like ("dark and earthy").
Total nonsense, of course. The reality is that Ravel studied Russian
music very thoroughly, and a lot of his ideas about instrumentation he
actually got from the brilliant use of colors and effects of some
Russian composers, notably Rimsky-Korsakov and his highly inventive
use of the orchestra in his operas and orchestral works. So the kind
of sound Ravel achieved for Pictures isn't "un-Russian" at all. I
guess Koussevitzky knew what he was doing when he commissioned the
orchestration from Ravel.
The Historian
Oct 1, 2012, 12:43:23 AM10/1/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
sections are set in France, Italy, and Poland, for instance. It's an
odd argument that Ravel wasn't effective enough impersonating a
Russian composer giving his impressions of a Russian artist giving his
impressions of France.
That said, I do find some other Pictures orchestrations interesting,
at least in parts. Cailliet's 1937 orchestration for Ormandy and The
Philadelphia Orchestra, for instance, has a brilliant version of the
Ballet of the Chicks in their Shells. But when Ormandy recorded
Pictures in stereo, he used the Ravel orchestration....
Steve de Mena
Oct 1, 2012, 2:08:55 AM10/1/12
to
On 9/30/12 5:48 AM, Ricky Jimenez wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 02:08:10 -0700 (PDT), The Historian
> <neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009FODNQU/ref=sr_1_album_32_rd?ie=UTF8&child=B009FODSZQ&qid=1348994253&sr=1-32
>>
>> Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
>> Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
>>
>> Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
>> avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
>> Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
>> Dances.
>
> This looks like a disc to get.
The Ravel orchestration is phenomenal. Plus it's imprinted in all of
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 02:08:10 -0700 (PDT), The Historian
> <neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This time by a conductor with a long history with Naxos.....
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009FODNQU/ref=sr_1_album_32_rd?ie=UTF8&child=B009FODSZQ&qid=1348994253&sr=1-32
>>
>> Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition - Songs & Dances of Death - The
>> Nursery (Orchestrated by Peter Breiner)
>>
>> Judging from the sound clips, it comes across as working very hard to
>> avoid sounding like Ravel's orchestration. That said, I like the "Old
>> Castle" movement, which sounds like Respighi's Ancient Airs and
>> Dances.
>
> This looks like a disc to get.
our minds.
I have heard others and I keep them mostly for their curiosity value.
Are there any that people here prefer to the Ravel orchestration?
Just my two cents.
Steve
Oscar
Oct 1, 2012, 4:06:33 AM10/1/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
Steve, I was listening to Jim Svejda's show on KUSC-FM about six weeks ago and he played the Stokowski orchestration in a recording by Oliver Knussen and the Cleveland Orchestra. When it ended, he firmly claimed it as his 'preferred' version of Puctures. http://tiny.cc/j2phlw
Kerrison
Oct 1, 2012, 4:41:13 AM10/1/12
to
On Oct 1, 9:06 am, Oscar <oscaredwardwilliam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Steve, I was listening to Jim Svejda's show on KUSC-FM about six weeks ago and he played the Stokowski orchestration in a recording by Oliver Knussen and the Cleveland Orchestra. When it ended, he firmly claimed it as his 'preferred' version of Puctures.http://tiny.cc/j2phlw
I guess Stokowski's version counts as the main "runner-up" to Ravel's,
> Steve, I was listening to Jim Svejda's show on KUSC-FM about six weeks ago and he played the Stokowski orchestration in a recording by Oliver Knussen and the Cleveland Orchestra. When it ended, he firmly claimed it as his 'preferred' version of Puctures.http://tiny.cc/j2phlw
as far as recordings are concerned, with three by Stokowski himself
(Philadelphia, All-American Youth and New Philharmonia); plus Knussen
and the Cleveland; Serebrier and the Bournemouth Symphony; Bamert and
the BBC Philharmonic; Sedares and the New Zealand Symphony; and
Rozhdestvensky and the USSR State Symphony. Any I've missed?
Kerrison
Oct 1, 2012, 11:03:43 AM10/1/12
to
to Rimsky-Korsakov (see the Mussorgsky Wiki article) his scores "were
very defective, teeming with clumsy, disconnected harmonies, shocking
part-writing, amazingly illogical modulations or intolerably long
stretches without ever a modulation, and bad scoring." In the case of
A Night on Bare Mountain, for example, it's the Rimsky edition which
is invariably played and recorded, despite the availability of the
composer's 'original' score. Here is Abbado's recording of that
original version ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zje-1VjG0I8
Here is Stokowski's version, conducted by Jose Serebrier ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm3ZDYngBGo
Here is Rene Leibowitz's version, with a weird Schoenbergian
ending ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0h6H_vcSKc
Here is Mussorgsky's own choral version from Sorochinsty Fair,
conducted by Rozhdestvensky ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sEpa89mSm4
This Japanese version evidently combines parts of Mussorgky's original
with the Rimsky edition ! ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgFC-Y8gbTU
In this Reader's Digest recording, Sir Adrian Boult conducts Charles
Gerhardt's re-scoring ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhXiPdJ6Z-8
Doubtless there are others but those will do to be going on with.
Gerard
Oct 1, 2012, 11:19:38 AM10/1/12
to
Kerrison <kerrison1...@yahoo.co.uk> typed:
version had become very popular long before the original version was recorded
(by Lloyd Jones).
A lot of people prefer the original version, and with good reason. The Rimsky
version is just another work.
> Here is Abbado's recording of that
> original version ...
Abbado has recorded this version three times (RCA, Sony, DG).
> On Oct 1, 9:41 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Oct 1, 9:06 am, Oscar <oscaredwardwilliam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Steve, I was listening to Jim Svejda's show on KUSC-FM about six
> > > weeks ago and he played the Stokowski orchestration in a
> > > recording by Oliver Knussen and the Cleveland Orchestra. When it
> > > ended, he firmly claimed it as his 'preferred' version of
> > > Puctures.http://tiny.cc/j2phlw
> >
> > I guess Stokowski's version counts as the main "runner-up" to
> > Ravel's, as far as recordings are concerned, with three by
> > Stokowski himself (Philadelphia, All-American Youth and New
> > Philharmonia); plus Knussen and the Cleveland; Serebrier and the
> > Bournemouth Symphony; Bamert and the BBC Philharmonic; Sedares and
> > the New Zealand Symphony; and Rozhdestvensky and the USSR State
> > Symphony. Any I've missed?
>
> Apropos Mussorgsky knowing how to write for the orchestra, according
> to Rimsky-Korsakov (see the Mussorgsky Wiki article) his scores "were
> very defective, teeming with clumsy, disconnected harmonies, shocking
> part-writing, amazingly illogical modulations or intolerably long
> stretches without ever a modulation, and bad scoring." In the case of
> A Night on Bare Mountain, for example, it's the Rimsky edition which
> is invariably played and recorded, despite the availability of the
> composer's 'original' score.
I don't know if this original score always has been available. The Rimsky
> > On Oct 1, 9:06 am, Oscar <oscaredwardwilliam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Steve, I was listening to Jim Svejda's show on KUSC-FM about six
> > > weeks ago and he played the Stokowski orchestration in a
> > > recording by Oliver Knussen and the Cleveland Orchestra. When it
> > > ended, he firmly claimed it as his 'preferred' version of
> > > Puctures.http://tiny.cc/j2phlw
> >
> > I guess Stokowski's version counts as the main "runner-up" to
> > Ravel's, as far as recordings are concerned, with three by
> > Stokowski himself (Philadelphia, All-American Youth and New
> > Philharmonia); plus Knussen and the Cleveland; Serebrier and the
> > Bournemouth Symphony; Bamert and the BBC Philharmonic; Sedares and
> > the New Zealand Symphony; and Rozhdestvensky and the USSR State
> > Symphony. Any I've missed?
>
> Apropos Mussorgsky knowing how to write for the orchestra, according
> to Rimsky-Korsakov (see the Mussorgsky Wiki article) his scores "were
> very defective, teeming with clumsy, disconnected harmonies, shocking
> part-writing, amazingly illogical modulations or intolerably long
> stretches without ever a modulation, and bad scoring." In the case of
> A Night on Bare Mountain, for example, it's the Rimsky edition which
> is invariably played and recorded, despite the availability of the
> composer's 'original' score.
version had become very popular long before the original version was recorded
(by Lloyd Jones).
A lot of people prefer the original version, and with good reason. The Rimsky
version is just another work.
> Here is Abbado's recording of that
> original version ...
Dufus
Oct 1, 2012, 11:37:29 PM10/1/12
to
>On Oct 1, 10:03 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
So, Mussorgsky did not do an orchestral version himself because :
(a) He did not know how,or,
(b) He did not think they should be orchestrated as he preferred the
solo piano version, or,
(c) The work was not popular enough during his lifetime to warrant the
effort , or,
(d) He did not live long enough ,or.........
So, Mussorgsky did not do an orchestral version himself because :
(a) He did not know how,or,
(b) He did not think they should be orchestrated as he preferred the
solo piano version, or,
(c) The work was not popular enough during his lifetime to warrant the
effort , or,
(d) He did not live long enough ,or.........
John Wiser
Oct 2, 2012, 12:04:05 AM10/2/12
to
"Dufus" <steve...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:841492e6-30e0-40f4...@p5g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
Too squiffed on bad vodka to keep track of which page he was on.
jdw
news:841492e6-30e0-40f4...@p5g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
jdw
Tassilo
Oct 2, 2012, 2:46:41 AM10/2/12
to
Which version of Mussorgsky's original piano piece did Stokowski use as the basis for his instrumentation? Ravel spent a year trying to get his hands on a version that was not edited by Rimsky before giving up and orchestrating the Rimsky edition.
-dg
-dg
Gerard
Oct 2, 2012, 4:39:21 AM10/2/12
to
Dufus <steve...@gmail.com> typed:
> (c) The work was not popular enough during his lifetime to warrant the
> effort , or,
> (d) He did not live long enough ,or.........
Beethoven didn't orchestrate his piano works either.
> > On Oct 1, 10:03 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk>
> > wrote:
>
> So, Mussorgsky did not do an orchestral version himself because :
>
> (a) He did not know how,or,
> (b) He did not think they should be orchestrated as he preferred the
> solo piano version, or,
There was no other version to be preferred.
> > wrote:
>
> So, Mussorgsky did not do an orchestral version himself because :
>
> (a) He did not know how,or,
> (b) He did not think they should be orchestrated as he preferred the
> solo piano version, or,
> (c) The work was not popular enough during his lifetime to warrant the
> effort , or,
> (d) He did not live long enough ,or.........
Ricky Jimenez
Oct 2, 2012, 10:05:48 AM10/2/12
to
On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 08:03:43 -0700 (PDT), Kerrison
<kerrison1...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Here is Mussorgsky's own choral version from Sorochinsty Fair,
>conducted by Rozhdestvensky ...
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sEpa89mSm4
The notes on youtube say that Mussorgsky's original Night on Bare
<kerrison1...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Here is Mussorgsky's own choral version from Sorochinsty Fair,
>conducted by Rozhdestvensky ...
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sEpa89mSm4
Mountain was a work for piano and orchestra. Has it ever been
recorded?
Gerard
Oct 2, 2012, 10:24:45 AM10/2/12
to
Ricky Jimenez <rick...@bestweb.net> typed:
See Wikipedia:
""Work for piano and orchestra (early 1860s)
Rimsky-Korsakov declares in his memoirs (Chronicle of My Musical Life) that in
the early 1860s Mussorgsky, under the influence of Franz Liszt's Totentanz, had
written a version of the Bare Mountain music for piano and orchestra. However,
it is believed that Mussorgsky did not hear Liszt's work until 1866, by which
time he was planning the orchestral tone poem St. John's Night on the Bare
Mountain (see below). No trace of a work for piano and orchestra has survived
outside Rimsky-Korsakov's recollections, so it is assumed that the score was
lost, or, more likely, that it had never existed.""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_on_Bald_Mountain
""Work for piano and orchestra (early 1860s)
Rimsky-Korsakov declares in his memoirs (Chronicle of My Musical Life) that in
the early 1860s Mussorgsky, under the influence of Franz Liszt's Totentanz, had
written a version of the Bare Mountain music for piano and orchestra. However,
it is believed that Mussorgsky did not hear Liszt's work until 1866, by which
time he was planning the orchestral tone poem St. John's Night on the Bare
Mountain (see below). No trace of a work for piano and orchestra has survived
outside Rimsky-Korsakov's recollections, so it is assumed that the score was
lost, or, more likely, that it had never existed.""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_on_Bald_Mountain
O
Oct 2, 2012, 11:21:09 AM10/2/12
to
In article <578af$506af918$5356543a$29...@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>,
under the influence of Totentanz. Things looked pretty bad until I
hired my lawyer, by the name of Richard Wagner. He bailed me out along
with three Rhinemaidens who were charged with prostitution. (whether
they had a positive or negative charge was not determined.)
-Owen, who also failed to negotiate a turn:
Me: I'd like to turn please.
Car: That will be 5 gallons of gas.
Me: Too expensive.
Car: <crash!>
Don't you love copspeak?
-O
Gerard <ghend-nos...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> See Wikipedia:
>
> ""Work for piano and orchestra (early 1860s)
> Rimsky-Korsakov declares in his memoirs (Chronicle of My Musical Life) that in
> the early 1860s Mussorgsky, under the influence of Franz Liszt's Totentanz,
I got pulled over by the cops the other night and charged with being
> See Wikipedia:
>
> ""Work for piano and orchestra (early 1860s)
> Rimsky-Korsakov declares in his memoirs (Chronicle of My Musical Life) that in
> the early 1860s Mussorgsky, under the influence of Franz Liszt's Totentanz,
under the influence of Totentanz. Things looked pretty bad until I
hired my lawyer, by the name of Richard Wagner. He bailed me out along
with three Rhinemaidens who were charged with prostitution. (whether
they had a positive or negative charge was not determined.)
-Owen, who also failed to negotiate a turn:
Me: I'd like to turn please.
Car: That will be 5 gallons of gas.
Me: Too expensive.
Car: <crash!>
Don't you love copspeak?
-O
M forever
Oct 2, 2012, 8:12:20 PM10/2/12
to
On Oct 1, 10:19 am, "Gerard" <ghend-nospam_rik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> typed:
The recording on Sony is yet another different version from the ones
on RCA and DG.
> Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> typed:
on RCA and DG.
M forever
Oct 2, 2012, 8:27:46 PM10/2/12
to
On Oct 1, 10:03 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Oct 1, 9:41 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 1, 9:06 am, Oscar <oscaredwardwilliam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Steve, I was listening to Jim Svejda's show on KUSC-FM about six weeks ago and he played the Stokowski orchestration in a recording by Oliver Knussen and the Cleveland Orchestra. When it ended, he firmly claimed it as his 'preferred' version of Puctures.http://tiny.cc/j2phlw
>
> > I guess Stokowski's version counts as the main "runner-up" to Ravel's,
> > as far as recordings are concerned, with three by Stokowski himself
> > (Philadelphia, All-American Youth and New Philharmonia); plus Knussen
> > and the Cleveland; Serebrier and the Bournemouth Symphony; Bamert and
> > the BBC Philharmonic; Sedares and the New Zealand Symphony; and
> > Rozhdestvensky and the USSR State Symphony. Any I've missed?
>
> Apropos Mussorgsky knowing how to write for the orchestra, according
> to Rimsky-Korsakov (see the Mussorgsky Wiki article) his scores "were
> very defective, teeming with clumsy, disconnected harmonies, shocking
> part-writing, amazingly illogical modulations or intolerably long
> stretches without ever a modulation, and bad scoring."
Rimsky-Korsakov had better technique but Mussorgsky had the greater
> On Oct 1, 9:41 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 1, 9:06 am, Oscar <oscaredwardwilliam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Steve, I was listening to Jim Svejda's show on KUSC-FM about six weeks ago and he played the Stokowski orchestration in a recording by Oliver Knussen and the Cleveland Orchestra. When it ended, he firmly claimed it as his 'preferred' version of Puctures.http://tiny.cc/j2phlw
>
> > I guess Stokowski's version counts as the main "runner-up" to Ravel's,
> > as far as recordings are concerned, with three by Stokowski himself
> > (Philadelphia, All-American Youth and New Philharmonia); plus Knussen
> > and the Cleveland; Serebrier and the Bournemouth Symphony; Bamert and
> > the BBC Philharmonic; Sedares and the New Zealand Symphony; and
> > Rozhdestvensky and the USSR State Symphony. Any I've missed?
>
> Apropos Mussorgsky knowing how to write for the orchestra, according
> to Rimsky-Korsakov (see the Mussorgsky Wiki article) his scores "were
> very defective, teeming with clumsy, disconnected harmonies, shocking
> part-writing, amazingly illogical modulations or intolerably long
> stretches without ever a modulation, and bad scoring."
genius, by far I would say. R-K was a far more conventional and
academic musician. How much of the unusual features in M's works were
innovative and intended to be unusual or just caused by his lack of
conventional training is hard to say, but the music *and* the
instrumentation of the original "Night" strike me as the work of an
epic, highly original genius. Whether R-K simply couldn't see that or
whether he thought he was doing M a favor by making his works more
acceptable to the mainstream is hard to say.
The Historian
Oct 2, 2012, 11:37:56 PM10/2/12
to
Dickinson's poetry... or various early editions of Shakespeare that
corrected his grammar. Was it Pope who changed "this was the most
unkindest cut of all" to "this, this was the unkindest cut of all" to
get rid of the 'barbaric' double superlative?
Terry
Oct 4, 2012, 11:46:14 PM10/4/12
to
solo piano, and -- guess what? He did so.
--
Cheers,
Terry
Terry
Oct 4, 2012, 11:46:14 PM10/4/12
to
compulsion to orchestrate all of his piano sonatas?
--
Cheers, Terry
Kerrison
Oct 5, 2012, 3:14:34 AM10/5/12
to
On Oct 5, 4:46 am, Terry <address...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Beethoven himself orchestrated the Funeral March from his own Piano
Sonata No. 12 in Ab and very good it sounds too (click the You Tube
link below). He should have orchestrated a few more of his piano
works. Maybe he did. Where is there a list of his own arrangements so
we can see what else he did? ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDoSLRpVL7A
Sonata No. 12 in Ab and very good it sounds too (click the You Tube
link below). He should have orchestrated a few more of his piano
works. Maybe he did. Where is there a list of his own arrangements so
we can see what else he did? ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDoSLRpVL7A
Dufus
Oct 5, 2012, 8:03:12 AM10/5/12
to
>On Oct 4, 10:46 pm, Terry <address...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> ... It never occurred to him to do so. He set out to compose a piece for
> solo piano, and -- guess what? He did so.
And thus may not have approved or cared for orchestrations ? And why
> ... It never occurred to him to do so. He set out to compose a piece for
> solo piano, and -- guess what? He did so.
some prefer the piano version.
Gerard
Oct 5, 2012, 1:22:45 PM10/5/12
to
Dufus <steve...@gmail.com> typed:
Questions like these do more than suggest that you post while being drunk.
Dufus
Oct 5, 2012, 2:45:20 PM10/5/12
to
><On Oct 5, 12:22 pm, "Gerard" <ghend-nospam_rik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Questions like these do more than suggest that you post while being drunk.
" Remember, a dead fish can float downstream, but it takes a live one
> Questions like these do more than suggest that you post while being drunk.
to swim upstream. "
W. C. Fields
Gerard
Oct 5, 2012, 3:49:29 PM10/5/12
to
Tassilo
Oct 10, 2012, 3:59:37 PM10/10/12
to
> A Night on Bare Mountain, for example, it's the Rimsky edition which
> is invariably played and recorded, despite the availability of the
> composer's 'original' score.
See several threads on Mussorgsky’s Boris that include posts by me in which I describe in some detail the objections raised by Debussy, Ravel, Stravinsky, and Boulez to Rimsky’s orchestrations of Mussorgsky and their strong preference for the originals. The three Frenchmen in particular were inordinately fond of Mussorgsky’s music, far preferring the original to Rimsky’s “improvements.” Debussy knew Mussorgsky’s music far better than most other musicians in history, having sought out as many of the songs and opera scores as he could get his hands on during his sojourn in Russia. Stravinsky’s attitude toward Mussorgsky was somewhat more ambivalent, as one’s attitude towards one’s sources and one’s father figures so often can be. The place in which Stravinsky’s debt to Boris is most obvious is in Rossignol, but let us not forget that before there was Stravinsky’s Les noces, a ballet about a Russian peasant wedding the rhythmic construction of which was heavily indebted to Russian prosody, there was an unfinished opera by Mussorgsky entitled The Wedding, the text setting in which was extraordinarily faithful to spoken Russian, influencing Debussy’s similar approach to French in Pélléas.
> is invariably played and recorded, despite the availability of the
> composer's 'original' score.
-david gable
Christopher Webber
Oct 10, 2012, 9:34:47 PM10/10/12
to
On 10/10/2012 20:59, Tassilo wrote:
> The three Frenchmen in particular were inordinately fond of Mussorgsky�s music, far preferring the original to Rimsky�s �improvements.�
More fools them. It's a silly argument. Always was, always will be. Mere
'Musical Correctness'. And it's most ungrateful to Rimsky, without whom
his friend Mussorgsky would have been totally forgotten, and lost to
posterity. He never described his admirable versions as "improvements"
(at least not in "My Musical Life") as he was far too self-abnegating.
He described them as "practical reworkings". Though to many of us they
sound much brighter and more interesting musically. Others daren't say
so, for fear of offending the thought police.
What Rimsky himself has to say on the subject is more or less contained
in the idea that he'd taken great care to preserve MM's original scores
and sketches, in case later generations wanted to go back to them and
make their own judgement.
When Shostakovich felt that Mussorgsky's scoring and harmonies were
horribly clumsy (and occasionally unplayable) I'd go with him, rather
than the French composers and Russian exiles who had no access to MM's
sparse originals.
In fact you can't even play MM's originals practically without some sort
of editorial intervention. It's merely a question of degree.
Personally I sometimes feel in the mood for MM's original hair-shirt
versions, but I always go back to Rimsky with gratitude for the full
dramatic effect of "Boris" in particular - he got so much more out of
MM's marvellous basic material. And of course "Khovantschina" simply
would not exist without him (though again, Shostakovich made an
admirable new version which is very different in effect.)
> The three Frenchmen in particular were inordinately fond of Mussorgsky�s music, far preferring the original to Rimsky�s �improvements.�
More fools them. It's a silly argument. Always was, always will be. Mere
'Musical Correctness'. And it's most ungrateful to Rimsky, without whom
his friend Mussorgsky would have been totally forgotten, and lost to
posterity. He never described his admirable versions as "improvements"
(at least not in "My Musical Life") as he was far too self-abnegating.
He described them as "practical reworkings". Though to many of us they
sound much brighter and more interesting musically. Others daren't say
so, for fear of offending the thought police.
What Rimsky himself has to say on the subject is more or less contained
in the idea that he'd taken great care to preserve MM's original scores
and sketches, in case later generations wanted to go back to them and
make their own judgement.
When Shostakovich felt that Mussorgsky's scoring and harmonies were
horribly clumsy (and occasionally unplayable) I'd go with him, rather
than the French composers and Russian exiles who had no access to MM's
sparse originals.
In fact you can't even play MM's originals practically without some sort
of editorial intervention. It's merely a question of degree.
Personally I sometimes feel in the mood for MM's original hair-shirt
versions, but I always go back to Rimsky with gratitude for the full
dramatic effect of "Boris" in particular - he got so much more out of
MM's marvellous basic material. And of course "Khovantschina" simply
would not exist without him (though again, Shostakovich made an
admirable new version which is very different in effect.)
Christopher Webber
Oct 11, 2012, 5:05:10 AM10/11/12
to
As a footnote to my diatribe, I'd be interested to read where and when
Debussy praised Mussorgsky's original versions.
Although as a student he was house pianist for Madame von Meck for three
periods 1880-2, he spent most of those times in Switzerland, France and
Italy, only visiting Russia twice:
1. Two months Moscow during summer of 1881, three months after
Mussorgsky died in St Petersburg. He could not have seen Mussorgsky's
manuscripts at that time, as Rimsky was for years ordering and
cataloguing the chaotic archive (neglected during MM's long years of
alcoholism) his friend had left behind, before putting the collection in
the St Petersburg Conservatory library towards the end of his life.
2. Less than one month spent at von Meck's country estate outside Moscow
in September 1882, after which he went with her to Vienna.
It seems therefore highly unlikely that he had personal access to MM's
manuscripts. Nor could he have had first hand experience any of MM's
music (except of course for a few songs and piano works).
He had got hold of a printed score by 1893, 15 years before the opera
was first seen in the West: As his friend Chausson tells us: "For hours,
for whole evenings, Debussy, indefatigable at the piano, initiated us to
this extraordinary work".
This would have to have been from a rare copy of the 1874 piano vocal
score, as Rimsky's version was not available until 1896 (1908 in full
score). So I'd be interested to see when and where he voiced an opinion
about the Rimsky edition vis-a-vis the original he certainly knew.
Debussy praised Mussorgsky's original versions.
Although as a student he was house pianist for Madame von Meck for three
periods 1880-2, he spent most of those times in Switzerland, France and
Italy, only visiting Russia twice:
1. Two months Moscow during summer of 1881, three months after
Mussorgsky died in St Petersburg. He could not have seen Mussorgsky's
manuscripts at that time, as Rimsky was for years ordering and
cataloguing the chaotic archive (neglected during MM's long years of
alcoholism) his friend had left behind, before putting the collection in
the St Petersburg Conservatory library towards the end of his life.
2. Less than one month spent at von Meck's country estate outside Moscow
in September 1882, after which he went with her to Vienna.
It seems therefore highly unlikely that he had personal access to MM's
manuscripts. Nor could he have had first hand experience any of MM's
music (except of course for a few songs and piano works).
He had got hold of a printed score by 1893, 15 years before the opera
was first seen in the West: As his friend Chausson tells us: "For hours,
for whole evenings, Debussy, indefatigable at the piano, initiated us to
this extraordinary work".
This would have to have been from a rare copy of the 1874 piano vocal
score, as Rimsky's version was not available until 1896 (1908 in full
score). So I'd be interested to see when and where he voiced an opinion
about the Rimsky edition vis-a-vis the original he certainly knew.
Christopher Webber
Oct 11, 2012, 5:30:35 AM10/11/12
to
To return to the topic, I missed out on the first part of the thread;
but I'd like to express my undimmed enthusiasm for the virtuoso brass
version made by Elgar Howarth for the Philip Jones Brass Ensemble. It's
an extraordinary auditory experience (how do they even *make* some of
those sounds?!) and is available complete only in the excellent 2-CD
"Greatest Hits" collection on Decca. Desert Island stuff, I think...
It may well of course offend "purists" who perhaps feel that any
orchestration of Mussorgsky's piano suite is either morally or musically
unjustified.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Greatest-Philip-Jones-Brass-Ensemble/dp/B000056PRA/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1349947375&sr=1-1
but I'd like to express my undimmed enthusiasm for the virtuoso brass
version made by Elgar Howarth for the Philip Jones Brass Ensemble. It's
an extraordinary auditory experience (how do they even *make* some of
those sounds?!) and is available complete only in the excellent 2-CD
"Greatest Hits" collection on Decca. Desert Island stuff, I think...
It may well of course offend "purists" who perhaps feel that any
orchestration of Mussorgsky's piano suite is either morally or musically
unjustified.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Greatest-Philip-Jones-Brass-Ensemble/dp/B000056PRA/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1349947375&sr=1-1
Dufus
Oct 11, 2012, 11:30:24 AM10/11/12
to
>On Oct 11, 4:30 am, Christopher Webber <zarzu...@zarzuela.invalid.net> wrote:
> It may well of course offend "purists" who perhaps feel that any
> orchestration of Mussorgsky's piano suite is either morally or musically
> unjustified.
If God had intended "Pictures" orchestrated, he would have had Ravel
> It may well of course offend "purists" who perhaps feel that any
> orchestration of Mussorgsky's piano suite is either morally or musically
> unjustified.
or Rimsky compose it.
Christopher Webber
Oct 11, 2012, 12:20:22 PM10/11/12
to
On 11/10/2012 16:30, Dufus wrote:
> If God had intended "Pictures" orchestrated, he would have had Ravel
> or Rimsky compose it.
God made sure that Ravel made plenty of money out of his version, too!
> If God had intended "Pictures" orchestrated, he would have had Ravel
> or Rimsky compose it.
Just for the record, of course this was one Mussorgsky work which Rimsky
did *not* orchestrate. It was only MM's own, prior orchestrations which
bugged him (and everyone else in the Mighty Handful, plus Tchaikovsky.)
As Gerald Abraham puts it his admirable "Master Musicians" series book
on the composer:
"As a musical translator of words and all that can be expressed in
words, of psychological states, and even physical movement, he is
unsurpassed; as an absolute musician he was hopelessly limited, with
remarkably little ability to construct pure music or even a purely
musical texture."
That I'm afraid is a just estimate, despite the hagiography surrounding
"Original Mussorgsky" these days.
Tassilo
Oct 11, 2012, 10:21:02 PM10/11/12
to
On Thursday, October 11, 2012 12:20:26 PM UTC-4, Christopher Webber wrote:
> As Gerald Abraham puts it his admirable "Master Musicians" series book
> on the composer:
>
> "As a musical translator of words and all that can be expressed in
> words, of psychological states, and even physical movement, he is
> unsurpassed; as an absolute musician he was hopelessly limited, with
> remarkably little ability to construct pure music or even a purely
> musical texture.
Far better musicians than either Abraham or you would adamantly disagree, of course.
> As Gerald Abraham puts it his admirable "Master Musicians" series book
> on the composer:
>
> "As a musical translator of words and all that can be expressed in
> words, of psychological states, and even physical movement, he is
> unsurpassed; as an absolute musician he was hopelessly limited, with
> remarkably little ability to construct pure music or even a purely
> musical texture.
> That I'm afraid is a just estimate, despite the hagiography surrounding
> "Original Mussorgsky" these days.
-david gable
Christopher Webber
Oct 12, 2012, 5:00:57 AM10/12/12
to
On 12/10/2012 03:21, Tassilo wrote:
> Far better musicians than either Abraham or you would adamantly disagree, of course.
Insulting me or (more to the point) Gerald Abraham 'ad hominem' adds
> Far better musicians than either Abraham or you would adamantly disagree, of course.
nothing to your case, David. As a matter of fact the anathematised
Abraham was amongst the first to put forward the claims of the
Mussorgsky original version. You didn't know that the man you're
attacking is *on your side* as far as "Boris" is concerned!
"...in the perspective of a hundred years we can see that Musorgsky's
score did not really need 'correction' and reorchestration, that in fact
the untouched Boris is finer than the revised Boris." (Abraham, Master
Musicians)
So I'm sorry you misunderstand me. The question is over Mussorgsky's
technical competence, not his talent, and what needs to be done to make
his scores playable.
I note, by the way, that you have adduced no evidence for Debussy having
said anything nasty about Rimsky's scoring *vis-a-vis the original*,
which he did not know and could never have heard. He did know (very well
indeed) the 1874 piano vocal score, which contains several significant
cuts. He (presumably) saw the 1908 Paris production, which actually
contained *more* music - perhaps he thought the "new music" was by
Rimsky? It wasn't of course. That 1908 production misplaced many scenes
in Diaghilev's very peculiar order, not Rimsky's. As for Mussorgsky
himself, he could never make his mind up about the question!
So I repeat: where's your evidence in dragging another famous composer
in to support the orthodox line? Are you perhaps referring to some
review he wrote of that 1908 Paris Ballet Russes show? I'd like to know,
and be interested to read such a review from Debussy, one of the most
perceptive of musical critics.
Sadly, we're unlikely to hear the admirable Rimsky version much more in
the theatre. A pity, when the work is so diminished in theatrical impact
by MM's original scoring, and rendered so much more difficult (indeed
impossible) to balance and project. Although inevitably in my experience
of theatrical practise, conductors make ... ahem ... discreet changes.
That's the effect of the academic mafia. Practitioners have to keep
quiet where they deviate from the party line.
Perhaps we can look at another informed opinion, instead of hurling
abuse around? Here's Shostakovich, a composer rather higher up the
academic pecking order than poor old Rimsky:
"Mussorgsky has marvellously orchestrated moments, but I see no sin in
my work. I didn't touch the successful parts, but there are many
unsuccessful parts because he lacked mastery of the craft, which comes
only through time spent on your backside, no other way." (quoted by
Francis Maes)
I invite you to compare and contrast the two versions (or three, if you
want to bring in Shostakovich) of the Coronation Scene, and then let us
know exactly how the "original" is better crafted. It is certainly very
different. By the way, in this case the fundamental tenet "It's what the
composer wanted" does not wash, because - as is generally agreed - he
was not technically competent enough to orchestrate "how he wanted"
(even if are arrogant enough to pretend to know his mind better than he
did himself). Has anyone ever argued that he *was* technically
competent, by the way, as to harmony or orchestration?
So when I talk about "hagiography" of Mussorgsky, I speak as someone who
has known and loved his music (and Rimsky's) for many years. I
appreciate there's a practical need for pedagogues to perpetrate these
crude pecking orders. MM is sold to students by the academic industry as
1st rate, he Great Russian Original. Rimsky is a 2nd rate colourist and
plodding academic (part of the competition!) Therefore what the latter
perpetrated on the former's "authentic" art works must be condemned: and
of course it's not hard to find contemporaries with anti-Rimsky axes to
grind (e.g. Cui, Stravinsky and Balakirev) to "support" this "argument".
Yet we should look at both sides of the case in historical and personal
perspective, not just take what any composer (even Shostakovich) had to
say at face value.
It's a mean-spirited little attack which lacks either sympathy or good
sense, whether historical or musical. It is to judge a previous age by
our own narrow sense of moral standards in musicology. It is to ignore
what audiences (and many members of the musical profession) know,
whether they admit it publicly or not. Above all - as far as Rimsky is
concerned, the person I'm out to defend here - it is to insult his
heroic contribution (at the expense for many years of much of the
limited time he could have dedicated to his own compositions) to make
sure that his friend's work was not lost in oblivion, through the
neglect into which it had fallen during the alcoholic haze of
Mussorgsky's last decade.
Last, a new thought as to Mussorgsky's alleged "intention". Many
contemporaries (including Turgenev) testify to the *brilliance* of the
score when Mussorgsky played and sang passages to them on the piano.
It's brilliance, note, not its sobriety. We should be grateful that
Rimsky (and later, Shostakovich) used an orchestral palette that
Mussorgsky was - simply - not technically competent enough to use for
himself.
0 new messages