Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Rene Fleming Song Recital- musical disgrace
384 views
Skip to first unread message
basnperson
Nov 12, 2012, 2:44:18 PM11/12/12
to
Recently I received a song recital from my friend in Sao Paulo, the
name of the soprano deliberately missing from his message.
It was very clear that this singer had a nice and even beautiful vocie
(at times). However the musicality was awful.... swooping, crooning,
hooting,'white tones', etc.. She utterly destroyed the gorgeouis aria
from Ruslka' Song To The Moon' . Unfortunately it turned out to be
Fleming. Hard to believe that a professional singer would sing like
that, (the audience of course was rapturous).
I heard Fleming in recital at Tully Hall 20 years ago. I thought the
singing was mediocre from a musical standpoint but there were none of
the ridiculous mannerisms that I heard in this recent recital.
What do others think of her singing?
AB
name of the soprano deliberately missing from his message.
It was very clear that this singer had a nice and even beautiful vocie
(at times). However the musicality was awful.... swooping, crooning,
hooting,'white tones', etc.. She utterly destroyed the gorgeouis aria
from Ruslka' Song To The Moon' . Unfortunately it turned out to be
Fleming. Hard to believe that a professional singer would sing like
that, (the audience of course was rapturous).
I heard Fleming in recital at Tully Hall 20 years ago. I thought the
singing was mediocre from a musical standpoint but there were none of
the ridiculous mannerisms that I heard in this recent recital.
What do others think of her singing?
AB
wagnerfan
Nov 12, 2012, 3:34:51 PM11/12/12
to
hear her. Her recent Desdemona at the MET starts out OK and goes
rapidly downhill till you get to he last act which is actually
grotesque - hooty crooning with a layer of tristesse over everything -
incredibly mannered and contrived - horrible.
Wagner fan
JohnGavin
Nov 12, 2012, 5:33:04 PM11/12/12
to
I haven't cared for the things I've heard from her, but I have to admit to being somewhat surprised at her singing of Messiaen's "Poems pour Mi" - this is difficult music to sing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYK_AeK6asI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYK_AeK6asI
basnperson
Nov 12, 2012, 6:06:39 PM11/12/12
to
On Nov 12, 3:35 pm, wagnerfan <ivanmax...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:44:18 -0800 (PST), basnperson
>
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:44:18 -0800 (PST), basnperson
>
AB
basnperson
Nov 12, 2012, 6:08:54 PM11/12/12
to
On Nov 12, 5:33 pm, JohnGavin <dagd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I haven't cared for the things I've heard from her, but I have to admit to being somewhat surprised at her singing of Messiaen's "Poems pour Mi" - this is difficult music to sing:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYK_AeK6asI
what is so strange is that she has an excellent ear,(pitch is always
> I haven't cared for the things I've heard from her, but I have to admit to being somewhat surprised at her singing of Messiaen's "Poems pour Mi" - this is difficult music to sing:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYK_AeK6asI
right on). How a person with such a good ear can sing so un-musically
is a mystery to me..
AB
Christopher Webber
Nov 12, 2012, 7:32:43 PM11/12/12
to
Personally I would forgive anything for the "Caro nome" counting routine
she did with the Muppets a couple of decades ago, which ended with her
being mobbed by pigs in trilby hats, accordion-playing sheep and
amazonian bananas. Total joy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dsg-MIFSbTc
There's no problem at all with her musicality. She's a very sensitive
artist as singers go, with a commendably curious mind and wide taste in
recital material stretching even to ultra-rare Rimsky arias. However -
not surprisingly given the length of her career - there are increasing
problems nowadays, both with the infamous trademark "La Scoopenda"
mannerisms and her general vocal health.
In a week which has seen so much pompous moralising about one failing
American Institution, I'm surprised to read the treachery visited upon
another, equally beloved one. It smells like snobbery, maybe because
(unlike The President) she's committed the cardinal sin of getting
popular and staying so.
she did with the Muppets a couple of decades ago, which ended with her
being mobbed by pigs in trilby hats, accordion-playing sheep and
amazonian bananas. Total joy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dsg-MIFSbTc
There's no problem at all with her musicality. She's a very sensitive
artist as singers go, with a commendably curious mind and wide taste in
recital material stretching even to ultra-rare Rimsky arias. However -
not surprisingly given the length of her career - there are increasing
problems nowadays, both with the infamous trademark "La Scoopenda"
mannerisms and her general vocal health.
In a week which has seen so much pompous moralising about one failing
American Institution, I'm surprised to read the treachery visited upon
another, equally beloved one. It smells like snobbery, maybe because
(unlike The President) she's committed the cardinal sin of getting
popular and staying so.
wagnerfan
Nov 12, 2012, 8:03:19 PM11/12/12
to
indicate a recent occurence but have been going on for over five
years. And it is never good musicality to sing in a blowsy, jazzy,
scoopy and hooty way regardless of the repertory. Why do you call it
treachery???? Do you think there is some kind of conspiracy against
this "beloved figure" From what I understand she is a very nice lady
in person but that has nothing to do with what she gives us on stage.
If I loathe the current way she sings, why attack me or assume I don't
like her because she's popular (where did you pull that from??)??? its
just a matter of where one's pain threshold lies.
Wagner Fan
Mort
Nov 12, 2012, 8:13:03 PM11/12/12
to
to be as pristine as it once was. In addition, she has developed a set
of mannerisms which many people, myself included, do not like. Regarding
intonation, several of her you-tube video clips demonstrate a painfully
uneven sense of intonation, as did a live recital which I attended a few
years ago. Then again, her swooning and swooping may make a point, but
not an elegant or artistic one.
As Louis B. Mayer said, "Include me out".
Regards,
Mort Linder
td
Nov 12, 2012, 9:03:04 PM11/12/12
to
On Nov 12, 7:32 pm, Christopher Webber <zarzu...@zarzuela.invalid.net>
wrote:
Correct.
There is nothing so bitchy in this world as an opera queen who decides
that a singer is "past it" for some obscure and mysterious reason.
Fleming has poor diction - even in English - but in this respect she
is like Sutherland in that she only really cares for the vocal sound
of what she is singing, not the words. I heard her sing Gershwin and
Ira's fabulous lyrics were indecipherable. But musically she was fine.
TD
wrote:
There is nothing so bitchy in this world as an opera queen who decides
that a singer is "past it" for some obscure and mysterious reason.
Fleming has poor diction - even in English - but in this respect she
is like Sutherland in that she only really cares for the vocal sound
of what she is singing, not the words. I heard her sing Gershwin and
Ira's fabulous lyrics were indecipherable. But musically she was fine.
TD
td
Nov 12, 2012, 9:04:36 PM11/12/12
to
do it with mercilous viciousness.
Soooo tedious.
Go listen to Callas and her screeching. And do a double swoon.
TD
O
Nov 12, 2012, 10:33:19 PM11/12/12
to
In article
<2fa9a05c-218d-4c5c...@c20g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>, td
It ain't necessarily schloe.
-Owen
<2fa9a05c-218d-4c5c...@c20g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>, td
-Owen
Christopher Webber
Nov 13, 2012, 3:53:22 AM11/13/12
to
On 13/11/2012 01:03, wagnerfan wrote:
> Snobbery??? no just good taste.
That's the way most of us defend our likes and dislikes: "you like her,
> Snobbery??? no just good taste.
fine - but I've got good taste and I don't". So the "taste" of the
people who like or love Fleming's work is deficient? Clearly not, for
them. It's a meaningless criterion. Using that line of assault simply
bolsters snobbery with yah-boo silliness.
As for personal "attack" that was absolutely not intended, and I'm sorry
you took it that way. I didn't think at all about the sender, just the
sentiment. I don't know who you are, after all. Though when a merely
personal opinion has such ad hominem colouration as your diatribe
against Ms Fleming, you can hardly act wounded if you get some flack in
return! That's the psychology of the bully in the playground.
As my own post made clear, I am not a big fan of the later Fleming
myself. Nor was I of the later Sutherland, for some of the same reasons
outlined in other, more reasonable posts. But we should not to be
blinded by our own little prejudices, or claim objectivity where none -
in the nature of things - can exist.
wagnerfan
Nov 13, 2012, 5:24:40 AM11/13/12
to
vocal mannerisms would result in any flack towards me here except from
the usual suspects (now that smacks of the playground doesn't it?) but
I guess thats the way it is. What gets me most angry about her singing
is that the voice itself may be the most intrinsically beautiful one
before the opera public today. A full beautiful lyric soprano. I think
"lush" may be a good adjective. That makes even more distressing the
way she is using it - if it was a lesser voice the damage wouldn't be
so bad. Sutherland went through a similar phase in her career in
the early sixties - when you compare her Prima Donna and Don Giovanni
recordongs from 1959-60 with the Messiah and Rigoletto just a few
months later you hear the difference - she however was younger than
Fleming and was able to correct many of the faults in the late 60s and
70s when she did the Turandot and the remakes. So you see my disgust
with the current singing is tempered with the sorrow at the waste IMHO
of a gorgeous voice. sad really. Wagner fan
Christopher Webber
Nov 13, 2012, 7:47:24 AM11/13/12
to
On 13/11/2012 10:24, wagnerfan wrote:
> So you see my disgust
> with the current singing is tempered with the sorrow at the waste IMHO
> of a gorgeous voice. sad really.
Fair enough: but wouldn't your gratitude for what she has done well in
> So you see my disgust
> with the current singing is tempered with the sorrow at the waste IMHO
> of a gorgeous voice. sad really.
the past have suggested a more fitting way to express that sorrow?
"Disgust" seems curiously over the top, for an iconic singer who is
(still) light years ahead of most of the opposition in vocal allure and
musicality - by which I mean a solid understanding of stylistic
differentials, underneath the latter-day scoops and swoonings.
I don't want to keep on lecturing, though, so won't say any more about
the matter!
basnperson
Nov 13, 2012, 8:49:54 AM11/13/12
to
mannerisms..........
AB
basnperson
Nov 13, 2012, 8:54:15 AM11/13/12
to
discriminating relating to voice as you are regarding pianism
(Hatto,Brendel for instance).
AB
basnperson
Nov 13, 2012, 8:56:58 AM11/13/12
to
appreciate the incredible musicality of Callas. Alcohol and music
don't mix,(at least for you)
AB
wagnerfan
Nov 13, 2012, 10:59:06 AM11/13/12
to
haven't seen his droppings for awhile and am so glad he's here to
entertain us all. I had heard he had expired while masturbating
autoerotically to an old photo of Marie Dressler - so glad that news
was wrong!!!!
Wagner fan
basnperson
Nov 13, 2012, 11:08:59 AM11/13/12
to
does not guarentee musicality. I would rather listen to Callas (at
least in her prime years) and even then her voice was not really
'beautiful' as we understand the meaning.
Fleming, even in her youth showed no real deep understanding fo
phrasing.
AB
wkasimer
Nov 13, 2012, 11:25:55 AM11/13/12
to
On Nov 13, 11:08 am, basnperson <abachr...@att.net> wrote:
> one cannot learn 'musicality'. it is intrinsic.
With all due respect, that's utter bullshit.
> one cannot learn 'musicality'. it is intrinsic.
Bill
William Sommerwerck
Nov 13, 2012, 12:02:33 PM11/13/12
to
> I had heard he had expired while masturbating
> autoerotically to an old photo of Marie Dressler --
> so glad that news was wrong!!!!
How can solo masturbation be anything /but/ autoerotic?
Having lusted after Gabby Hayes most of my life, I see no reason why a
hetero male shouldn't find Tugboat Annie attractive.
Norman Schwartz
Nov 13, 2012, 12:17:10 PM11/13/12
to
"basnperson" <abac...@att.net> wrote in message
news:4320b8b5-e845-4094...@d3g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...
she can possibly get away with in many of her pictures. With that said I
enjoyed her in PIT's (minimally staged) Eugene Onegin with Dmitri
Hvorostovsky and conducted by Valery Gergiev at ther Met in Feb. 2007, and
so much so that I bought the DVD shortly after the performance and then
again more recently on BD.
> AB
ivanm...@gmail.com
Nov 13, 2012, 12:20:20 PM11/13/12
to
On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:13:45 PM UTC-5, William Sommerwerck wrote:
> > I had heard he had expired while masturbating
>
> > autoerotically to an old photo of Marie Dressler --
>
> > so glad that news was wrong!!!!
>
>
>
> How can solo masturbation be anything /but/ autoerotic?
>
> Exactly - I'm sure she is exactly Leakin Deacon's type!!!!! Wagner fan
> > I had heard he had expired while masturbating
>
> > autoerotically to an old photo of Marie Dressler --
>
> > so glad that news was wrong!!!!
>
>
>
> How can solo masturbation be anything /but/ autoerotic?
>
William Sommerwerck
Nov 13, 2012, 12:11:34 PM11/13/12
to
> I had heard he had expired while masturbating
> autoerotically to an old photo of Marie Dressler --
> so glad that news was wrong!!!!
How can solo masturbation be anything /but/ autoerotic?
Norman Schwartz
Nov 13, 2012, 12:24:53 PM11/13/12
to
but would Dmiti Hvorostovsky and Valery Gergiev have let her get away with
poor Russian diction in their Met performance of Eugene Onegin?
> TD
basnperson
Nov 13, 2012, 12:57:40 PM11/13/12
to
AB
wkasimer
Nov 13, 2012, 3:30:08 PM11/13/12
to
On Nov 13, 12:57 pm, basnperson <abachr...@att.net> wrote:
> > > one cannot learn 'musicality'. it is intrinsic.
>
> > With all due respect, that's utter bullshit.
>
> > > one cannot learn 'musicality'. it is intrinsic.
>
> > With all due respect, that's utter bullshit.
>
> why do you say that?
Because no one comes out of the womb with "musicality".
Bill
Matthew B. Tepper
Nov 13, 2012, 10:43:27 PM11/13/12
to
wagnerfan <ivanm...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed in news:qdr4a85g8arg6h4e3...@4ax.com:
> You mean Leakin' Deacon is still here????? Thank goodness - I haven't
> seen his droppings for awhile and am so glad he's here to entertain us all.
> I had heard he had expired while masturbating autoerotically to an old
> photo of Marie Dressler - so glad that news was wrong!!!!
> Wagner fan
His presence or absence is of no interest to me. Just use a killfile.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers.
letters to be typed in news:qdr4a85g8arg6h4e3...@4ax.com:
> You mean Leakin' Deacon is still here????? Thank goodness - I haven't
> seen his droppings for awhile and am so glad he's here to entertain us all.
> I had heard he had expired while masturbating autoerotically to an old
> photo of Marie Dressler - so glad that news was wrong!!!!
> Wagner fan
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers.
wagnerfan
Nov 13, 2012, 11:56:29 PM11/13/12
to
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 21:43:27 -0600, "Matthew B. Tepper"
<oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>wagnerfan <ivanm...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:qdr4a85g8arg6h4e3...@4ax.com:
>
>> You mean Leakin' Deacon is still here????? Thank goodness - I haven't
>> seen his droppings for awhile and am so glad he's here to entertain us all.
>> I had heard he had expired while masturbating autoerotically to an old
>> photo of Marie Dressler - so glad that news was wrong!!!!
>> Wagner fan
>
>His presence or absence is of no interest to me. Just use a killfile.
Oh I have killfiled him for years - I only see his droppings when
<oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>wagnerfan <ivanm...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:qdr4a85g8arg6h4e3...@4ax.com:
>
>> You mean Leakin' Deacon is still here????? Thank goodness - I haven't
>> seen his droppings for awhile and am so glad he's here to entertain us all.
>> I had heard he had expired while masturbating autoerotically to an old
>> photo of Marie Dressler - so glad that news was wrong!!!!
>> Wagner fan
>
>His presence or absence is of no interest to me. Just use a killfile.
one of his betters here is trying to scrape them off their shoe!!!
Wagner Fan
td
Nov 14, 2012, 6:05:49 AM11/14/12
to
But she made a hell of a lot of crappy recordings. Her voice very
early on was fairly ruined as an instrument. All that was left was her
musicality, but that is not enough.
You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, Arri. You're a very
sad case, actually, as many here have pointed out to you. Your
blindness, deafness and utter stupidity have insulated you from these
comments, but those of us who can still see and hear and think are of
one opinion on the matter.
Get thee to a nunnery.
TD
td
Nov 14, 2012, 6:06:54 AM11/14/12
to
On Nov 13, 12:13 pm, "William Sommerwerck"
It is an idle pursuit to suggest such to our local opera queen.
TD
TD
td
Nov 14, 2012, 6:08:10 AM11/14/12
to
TD
td
Nov 14, 2012, 6:09:43 AM11/14/12
to
On Nov 13, 10:43 pm, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy @earthlink.net> wrote:
> wagnerfan <ivanmax...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed innews:qdr4a85g8arg6h4e3...@4ax.com:
here. No, nobody here is interested in your "interests".
Got that?
TD
> wagnerfan <ivanmax...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed innews:qdr4a85g8arg6h4e3...@4ax.com:
>
> > You mean Leakin' Deacon is still here????? Thank goodness - I haven't
> > seen his droppings for awhile and am so glad he's here to entertain us all.
> > I had heard he had expired while masturbating autoerotically to an old
> > photo of Marie Dressler - so glad that news was wrong!!!!
> > Wagner fan
>
> His presence or absence is of no interest to me. Just use a killfile.
What is of interest to you, Tepper, is of no interest to anyone else
> > You mean Leakin' Deacon is still here????? Thank goodness - I haven't
> > seen his droppings for awhile and am so glad he's here to entertain us all.
> > I had heard he had expired while masturbating autoerotically to an old
> > photo of Marie Dressler - so glad that news was wrong!!!!
> > Wagner fan
>
> His presence or absence is of no interest to me. Just use a killfile.
here. No, nobody here is interested in your "interests".
Got that?
TD
basnperson
Nov 14, 2012, 8:39:44 AM11/14/12
to
position of 'Chief of Nunnery'.
AB
basnperson
Nov 14, 2012, 8:41:30 AM11/14/12
to
you still show no signs of learning anything about musicality. Even
Ms. Hatto could not teach you damn thing:-)
AB
wkasimer
Nov 14, 2012, 8:48:36 AM11/14/12
to
If that's the case, perhaps you would be so kind as to refrain from
quoting him (or responding to such second-hand material) so that the
rest of us aren't subjected to it.
Bill
quoting him (or responding to such second-hand material) so that the
rest of us aren't subjected to it.
Bill
Matthew B. Tepper
Nov 14, 2012, 9:56:45 AM11/14/12
to
wkasimer <wkas...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the following letters
to be typed in news:cd0b972d-cd32-4c1c-9310-
06fea7...@x9g2000pbe.googlegroups.com:
Indeed. I humbly request the same of all polite company here.
to be typed in news:cd0b972d-cd32-4c1c-9310-
06fea7...@x9g2000pbe.googlegroups.com:
wagnerfan
Nov 14, 2012, 11:57:29 AM11/14/12
to
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:56:45 -0600, "Matthew B. Tepper"
<oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote:
>wkasimer <wkas...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the following letters
>to be typed in news:cd0b972d-cd32-4c1c-9310-
>06fea7...@x9g2000pbe.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Nov 13, 11:56 pm, wagnerfan <ivanmax...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh I have killfiled him for years -
>>
>> If that's the case, perhaps you would be so kind as to refrain from
>> quoting him (or responding to such second-hand material) so that the
>> rest of us aren't subjected to it.
>
>Indeed. I humbly request the same of all polite company here.
I will agree to your request - there is enough pollution in the
<oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote:
>wkasimer <wkas...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the following letters
>to be typed in news:cd0b972d-cd32-4c1c-9310-
>06fea7...@x9g2000pbe.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Nov 13, 11:56 pm, wagnerfan <ivanmax...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh I have killfiled him for years -
>>
>> If that's the case, perhaps you would be so kind as to refrain from
>> quoting him (or responding to such second-hand material) so that the
>> rest of us aren't subjected to it.
>
>Indeed. I humbly request the same of all polite company here.
world. Wagner fan
Matthew B. Tepper
Nov 14, 2012, 3:58:52 PM11/14/12
to
wagnerfan <ivanm...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed in news:gaj7a8tpajoopiump...@4ax.com:
Thank you.
letters to be typed in news:gaj7a8tpajoopiump...@4ax.com:
td
Nov 14, 2012, 6:25:26 PM11/14/12
to
for people like you.
TD
Mark S
Nov 14, 2012, 6:43:33 PM11/14/12
to
On Monday, November 12, 2012 11:44:19 AM UTC-8, basnperson wrote:
>
> What do others think of her singing?
I sang in the AGMA chorus when Fleming sang Rossini's Armida at Carnegie Hall with OONY. She was spectacular. Having sung on stage with Bergonzi, Cossotto and other old school singers, I can tell you that her singing at that point in her career was Old School in the very best sense of the word.
>
> What do others think of her singing?
I think her singing has become more mannered as she's moved into the pop rep. She can still pull it together in the straight classics when needed, but if you've started crooning etc to do the pop stuff, it's hard to keep it from seeping into your classical technique.
Can't say I follow her career these days. The last thing I caught was Act I of her Marschallin on the TV, and it was quite good.
Mark S
Nov 14, 2012, 6:51:13 PM11/14/12
to
It's actually comical to imagine that any kind of musicality is intrinsic. Were musicality intrinsic, a person born into the Western world and its musical forms would know what was considered to be musical in music being played in some remote Pacific island culture.
Musicality is learned. Some just learn it faster/better/easier than others.
basnperson
Nov 14, 2012, 7:02:42 PM11/14/12
to
most talented of musicians can demonstrate LIke Kreisler, Casals,
Hofmann , Calas, etc.
AB
basnperson
Nov 14, 2012, 7:03:49 PM11/14/12
to
AB
Mark S
Nov 14, 2012, 7:16:53 PM11/14/12
to
I doubt that there's a musician alive who started out with an advanced idea of what constitutes musicality and then worked at a technique until it was able to meet their standards. It's the other way around.
As Rostropovich noted, every musician has two sides - the emotional, and the technical, with the emotional side always governed by what the technical side can achieve.
wkasimer
Nov 14, 2012, 9:12:37 PM11/14/12
to
On Nov 14, 7:02 pm, basnperson <abachr...@att.net> wrote:
> what I mean is the unique phrasing, inflections,etc. that only the
> most talented of musicians can demonstrate LIke Kreisler, Casals,
> Hofmann , Calas, etc.
You're confusing musicality with imagination.
> what I mean is the unique phrasing, inflections,etc. that only the
> most talented of musicians can demonstrate LIke Kreisler, Casals,
> Hofmann , Calas, etc.
Bill
wkasimer
Nov 14, 2012, 9:17:13 PM11/14/12
to
On Nov 14, 6:43 pm, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I think her singing has become more mannered as she's moved into the pop rep. She can still pull it together in the straight >classics when needed, but if you've started crooning etc to do the pop stuff, it's hard to keep it from seeping into your >classical technique.
Mark, I may be wrong (about something other than politics, that is...)
>I think her singing has become more mannered as she's moved into the pop rep. She can still pull it together in the straight >classics when needed, but if you've started crooning etc to do the pop stuff, it's hard to keep it from seeping into your >classical technique.
but I believe that Fleming sang jazz very early in her career, even
before she'd finished graduate school.
Bill
JohnGavin
Nov 15, 2012, 9:37:31 AM11/15/12
to
A good example would be Schnabel's recording of the Hammerklavier. Schnabel did not allow his "emotional" side to be limited by his somewhat limited technique - and so one can sense the grandeur and power of his conception even if his instrumental technique could not realize it completely.
Some of the recordings of Alfred Cortot would also back up this theory.
Mark S
Nov 15, 2012, 9:56:33 AM11/15/12
to
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 6:37:31 AM UTC-8, JohnGavin wrote:
> > As Rostropovich noted, every musician has two sides - the emotional, and the technical, with the emotional side always governed by what the technical side can achieve.
>
>
>
> I would not want to contradict the great Rostropovich, but I would say that the listener's imagination is perhaps an element that is not taken into account in this equation.
>
> A good example would be Schnabel's recording of the Hammerklavier. Schnabel did not allow his "emotional" side to be limited by his somewhat limited technique - and so one can sense the grandeur and power of his conception even if his instrumental technique could not realize it completely.
You have a point.
> > As Rostropovich noted, every musician has two sides - the emotional, and the technical, with the emotional side always governed by what the technical side can achieve.
>
>
>
> I would not want to contradict the great Rostropovich, but I would say that the listener's imagination is perhaps an element that is not taken into account in this equation.
>
> A good example would be Schnabel's recording of the Hammerklavier. Schnabel did not allow his "emotional" side to be limited by his somewhat limited technique - and so one can sense the grandeur and power of his conception even if his instrumental technique could not realize it completely.
I'm one of those who can't get past Schnabel's piss-poor technique. To me, the "grandeur and power" of his conception is a glaring case of the emperor's new clothes.
Schnabel is a good example of the kind of musician who earns praise BECAUSE he has lousy technique. There's something of a cottage industry in listeners who claim to discern greatness shining through the mess. The idea is that those of us who can't hear the greatness are somehow not as sophisticated in our listening as those who can.
That's a lot of bull, IMHO. An example of a wild imagination, rather than a perceptive one.
Gerard
Nov 15, 2012, 10:18:39 AM11/15/12
to
Mark S <markst...@yahoo.com> typed:
The answer to the question if such things are "a lot of bull" always depends on
to which group (those who can, or those who can not) you belong.
to which group (those who can, or those who can not) you belong.
O
Nov 15, 2012, 10:38:00 AM11/15/12
to
In article <a15798e9-37fc-409c...@googlegroups.com>,
It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
intend.
-Owen
right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
intend.
-Owen
JohnGavin
Nov 15, 2012, 10:47:33 AM11/15/12
to
Or perhaps a faux perception that causes one to feel proud to like a performance which is technically deficient.
In the Schnabel/Beethoven example I think you're just plain wrong - and actually his technique was not that bad - the op. 106 happens the be the most treacherous technically, particularly the final fugue.
You know, Lang Lang could probably negotiate all the notes of the Hammerklavier, as could Yuja Wang or Stephen Hough, but I'm not sure any of these would be very compelling the way Schnabel most definitely is on recording.........IMHO of course.
Christopher Webber
Nov 15, 2012, 10:57:33 AM11/15/12
to
On 15/11/2012 15:38, O wrote:
> It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
> right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
> intend.
There are other possibilities.
> It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
> right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
> intend.
I'm with Stravinsky in wondering *why* music should be thought to be
about "communicating emotions" at all. It may evoke emotion in the
listener (and less usually or usefully the player, c.f. Rostropovich)
but that's a completely different question. I certainly don't make or
listen to music to achieve some sort of emotional richness denied me in
life. Rather, to be frank, the reverse. It's an escape from all that
detritus.
Maybe it's this too-evident attempt to signal emotions that (I think)
people don't much like about the current day Renée F. Though again - and
to be fair to her - all the portamento she uses brings her closer to an
absolutely authentic period style 19th and early 20th century composers
would have had in mind. Some might call it old-fashioned, in a manner
we'd expect from a Bori or de Hidalgo on ancient 78s ... but really it's
rather HIP.
At any rate, who's to say she's right and we're wrong? Or that we all
listen to music the same way?
Mark S
Nov 15, 2012, 11:07:23 AM11/15/12
to
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 7:47:33 AM UTC-8, JohnGavin wrote:
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:56:34 AM UTC-5, Mark S wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 6:37:31 AM UTC-8, JohnGavin wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > > As Rostropovich noted, every musician has two sides - the emotional, and the technical, with the emotional side always governed by what the technical side can achieve.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I would not want to contradict the great Rostropovich, but I would say that the listener's imagination is perhaps an element that is not taken into account in this equation.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > A good example would be Schnabel's recording of the Hammerklavier. Schnabel did not allow his "emotional" side to be limited by his somewhat limited technique - and so one can sense the grandeur and power of his conception even if his instrumental technique could not realize it completely.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > You have a point.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I'm one of those who can't get past Schnabel's piss-poor technique. To me, the "grandeur and power" of his conception is a glaring case of the emperor's new clothes.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Schnabel is a good example of the kind of musician who earns praise BECAUSE he has lousy technique. There's something of a cottage industry in listeners who claim to discern greatness shining through the mess. The idea is that those of us who can't hear the greatness are somehow not as sophisticated in our listening as those who can.
> > That's a lot of bull, IMHO. An example of a wild imagination, rather than a perceptive one.
> So you seem to be saying that it's artsy posturing to claim to hear greatness amidst wrong notes?
Yes.
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:56:34 AM UTC-5, Mark S wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 6:37:31 AM UTC-8, JohnGavin wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > > As Rostropovich noted, every musician has two sides - the emotional, and the technical, with the emotional side always governed by what the technical side can achieve.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I would not want to contradict the great Rostropovich, but I would say that the listener's imagination is perhaps an element that is not taken into account in this equation.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > A good example would be Schnabel's recording of the Hammerklavier. Schnabel did not allow his "emotional" side to be limited by his somewhat limited technique - and so one can sense the grandeur and power of his conception even if his instrumental technique could not realize it completely.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > You have a point.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I'm one of those who can't get past Schnabel's piss-poor technique. To me, the "grandeur and power" of his conception is a glaring case of the emperor's new clothes.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Schnabel is a good example of the kind of musician who earns praise BECAUSE he has lousy technique. There's something of a cottage industry in listeners who claim to discern greatness shining through the mess. The idea is that those of us who can't hear the greatness are somehow not as sophisticated in our listening as those who can.
> > That's a lot of bull, IMHO. An example of a wild imagination, rather than a perceptive one.
> So you seem to be saying that it's artsy posturing to claim to hear greatness amidst wrong notes?
> Or perhaps a faux perception that causes one to feel proud to like a performance which is technically deficient.
>
> In the Schnabel/Beethoven example I think you're just plain wrong - and actually his technique was not that bad - the op. 106 happens the be the most treacherous technically, particularly the final fugue.
And yet thousands of players get through the thing flawlessly.
> In the Schnabel/Beethoven example I think you're just plain wrong - and actually his technique was not that bad - the op. 106 happens the be the most treacherous technically, particularly the final fugue.
>
> You know, Lang Lang could probably negotiate all the notes of the Hammerklavier, as could Yuja Wang or Stephen Hough, but I'm not sure any of these would be very compelling the way Schnabel most definitely is on recording.........IMHO of course.
There are plenty of pianists who have recorded technically flawless recordings of the Hammerklavier and who also bring insight and emotion to the piece that trumps Schnabel in both respects. Set against them, Schnabel is weak beer.
Mark S
Nov 15, 2012, 11:13:41 AM11/15/12
to
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 7:38:02 AM UTC-8, O wrote:
> It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
>
> right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
>
> intend.
Let's say you have a better chance to communicate the musical emotions if you can hit all the right notes.
> It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
>
> right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
>
> intend.
BTW - the phrase "hitting all the notes" in this context has a pejorative feel to it, especially when contrasted against "the ability to communicate" musical emotions.
JohnGavin
Nov 15, 2012, 11:20:12 AM11/15/12
to
>
> There are plenty of pianists who have recorded technically flawless recordings of the Hammerklavier and who also bring insight and emotion to the piece that trumps Schnabel in both respects. Set against them, Schnabel is weak beer.
Many of those "plenty of technically flawless recordings": were made possible thanks to the friendly editor and splicer in the control room, a luxury that Schnabel wasn't able to enjoy (or perhaps cared not to).
> There are plenty of pianists who have recorded technically flawless recordings of the Hammerklavier and who also bring insight and emotion to the piece that trumps Schnabel in both respects. Set against them, Schnabel is weak beer.
But I see the dynamic of our different perceptions here........you like to make your points by going to extremes, and I tend to feel that the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
I'm not claiming that Schnabel's is the greatest or my personal favorite recording, but that it has real merit, and is worth listening to. That's all.
Mark S
Nov 15, 2012, 11:49:27 AM11/15/12
to
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 8:20:12 AM UTC-8, JohnGavin wrote:
>
>
> > There are plenty of pianists who have recorded technically flawless recordings of the Hammerklavier and who also bring insight and emotion to the piece that trumps Schnabel in both respects. Set against them, Schnabel is weak beer.
>
>
>
> Many of those "plenty of technically flawless recordings": were made possible thanks to the friendly editor and splicer in the control room, a luxury that Schnabel wasn't able to enjoy (or perhaps cared not to).
That's speculation that unintentionally denifrates the art and ability of those cleaner-than-Schnabel pianists. I'm sure there are plenty of pianists out there who provide multiple flawless takes in recording sessions. "Hitting all the notes" isn't something they need worry about.
>
>
> > There are plenty of pianists who have recorded technically flawless recordings of the Hammerklavier and who also bring insight and emotion to the piece that trumps Schnabel in both respects. Set against them, Schnabel is weak beer.
>
>
>
> Many of those "plenty of technically flawless recordings": were made possible thanks to the friendly editor and splicer in the control room, a luxury that Schnabel wasn't able to enjoy (or perhaps cared not to).
I won't speculate on why a artist like Schnabel would approve takes that contained as many errors as does his Hammerklavier. What was considered a long take in the 78 era? 7 minutes? I guess he didn't have the ability to go back and deliver a technically cleaner take. If the argument is that the grand musical gesture was so perfect that he'd just accept the wrong notes, then you have to question why an artist of his stature couldn't deliver the grand musical gesture on spec. I mean, that's what musicians do as a matter of course. It's not like they need to get themselves worked into some "zone" to deliver the deep gesture. Of course, at a recording session, there are many takes, and when set beside each other, some takes emerge as being right while others are less so.
For me, some of this comes down to having respect for the composer. After all, the composer wrote all of those notes down and - one assumes - expected all of the notes he wrote down to be played. That's sort of Step One to me. If one can't play the basic notes, then why feel the urge to essay the piece? No one says that every pianist HAS to master the Hammerklavier. Certainly, Beethoven realized that this technically demanding work wouldn't lie within the technique of the majority of keyboard players.
And there's always the option of editing/simplifying what the composer wrote. It may not be the best way to go, but it happens all the time in musical performances.
> But I see the dynamic of our different perceptions here........you like to make your points by going to extremes, and I tend to feel that the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
> I'm not claiming that Schnabel's is the greatest or my personal favorite recording, but that it has real merit, and is worth listening to. That's all.
Studio recordings are a different matter, at least to me.
O
Nov 15, 2012, 11:51:31 AM11/15/12
to
In article <agkhnd...@mid.individual.net>, Christopher Webber
cognitive, thoughtful, or merely nascent instinctual reactions serving
some primal functions that no longer applies in today's society?
Is music a communication? If so, what is being communicated?
-Owen
<zarz...@zarzuela.invalid.net> wrote:
> On 15/11/2012 15:38, O wrote:
> > It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
> > right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
> > intend.
>
> There are other possibilities.
>
> I'm with Stravinsky in wondering *why* music should be thought to be
> about "communicating emotions" at all. It may evoke emotion in the
> listener (and less usually or usefully the player, c.f. Rostropovich)
> but that's a completely different question. I certainly don't make or
> listen to music to achieve some sort of emotional richness denied me in
> life. Rather, to be frank, the reverse. It's an escape from all that
> detritus.
What is the effect of music on a human being? Is it emotional,
> On 15/11/2012 15:38, O wrote:
> > It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
> > right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
> > intend.
>
> There are other possibilities.
>
> I'm with Stravinsky in wondering *why* music should be thought to be
> about "communicating emotions" at all. It may evoke emotion in the
> listener (and less usually or usefully the player, c.f. Rostropovich)
> but that's a completely different question. I certainly don't make or
> listen to music to achieve some sort of emotional richness denied me in
> life. Rather, to be frank, the reverse. It's an escape from all that
> detritus.
cognitive, thoughtful, or merely nascent instinctual reactions serving
some primal functions that no longer applies in today's society?
Is music a communication? If so, what is being communicated?
-Owen
Mark S
Nov 15, 2012, 11:55:39 AM11/15/12
to
On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:17:13 PM UTC-8, wkasimer wrote:
> >I think her singing has become more mannered as she's moved into the pop rep. She can still pull it together in the straight >classics when needed, but if you've started crooning etc to do the pop stuff, it's hard to keep it from seeping into your >classical technique.
>
> Mark, I may be wrong but I believe that Fleming sang jazz very early in her career, even before she'd finished graduate school.<
> >I think her singing has become more mannered as she's moved into the pop rep. She can still pull it together in the straight >classics when needed, but if you've started crooning etc to do the pop stuff, it's hard to keep it from seeping into your >classical technique.
>
Possibly. But singing jazz or, frankly, any other kind of music early in one's career isn't going to be all that big of an influence on where a singer ends up in their 50s. After all, it's not like Fleming developed a full-blown, mature jazz style of singing before finishing grad school, just as she hadn't fully developed her classical technique by that time. More likely than not, her version of jazz singing early in her career was a young person's best impression/imitation of what they thought constituted jazz style, as opposed to having their own fully developed personality/style.
SPAM- @xs4all.nl HvT
Nov 15, 2012, 12:06:58 PM11/15/12
to
JohnGavin wrote:
>> That's a lot of bull, IMHO. An example of a wild imagination, rather
>> than a perceptive one.
>
> So you seem to be saying that it's artsy posturing to claim to hear
> greatness amidst wrong notes?
> Or perhaps a faux perception that causes one to feel proud to like a
> performance which is technically deficient.
>
> In the Schnabel/Beethoven example I think you're just plain wrong -
> and actually his technique was not that bad - the op. 106 happens the
> be the most treacherous technically, particularly the final fugue.
>
> You know, Lang Lang could probably negotiate all the notes of the
> Hammerklavier, as could Yuja Wang or Stephen Hough, but I'm not sure
> any of these would be very compelling the way Schnabel most
> definitely is on recording.........IMHO of course.
Hearing all the good things in a flawed performance is a quality of the
>> That's a lot of bull, IMHO. An example of a wild imagination, rather
>> than a perceptive one.
>
> So you seem to be saying that it's artsy posturing to claim to hear
> greatness amidst wrong notes?
> Or perhaps a faux perception that causes one to feel proud to like a
> performance which is technically deficient.
>
> In the Schnabel/Beethoven example I think you're just plain wrong -
> and actually his technique was not that bad - the op. 106 happens the
> be the most treacherous technically, particularly the final fugue.
>
> You know, Lang Lang could probably negotiate all the notes of the
> Hammerklavier, as could Yuja Wang or Stephen Hough, but I'm not sure
> any of these would be very compelling the way Schnabel most
> definitely is on recording.........IMHO of course.
listener not of the performer. I prefer to listen to performers who convince
me of the quality of their performances.
Henk
Mark S
Nov 15, 2012, 12:08:35 PM11/15/12
to
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 8:51:32 AM UTC-8, O wrote:
> Is music a communication? If so, what is being communicated?
I remember a music class at college where the professor addressed this question by playing the "Morning Mood" movement from Grieg's Peer Gynt Suite #1. Most of us had heard the piece before, of course, we knew who Grieg was (Norwegian composer), we didn't necessarily know anything about Ibsen's play, and we had no real idea of the way the piece worked as incidental music to the play.
> Is music a communication? If so, what is being communicated?
Our professor asked us what we felt the music was "communicating." Armed with the little we knew (and the much we didn't know), we came up with a vision of the sun rising over the fjords of Norway. Why, you could hear the music diving down into the depths of the fjords and rising back up towards the sun! It was simple logic: Morning +Grieg+Norwegian Composer+Ibsen = the obvious.
Our professor then laid the truth on us: that the piece actually depicts the rising of the sun during Act IV, Scene 4 of Ibsen's play, which finds Peer stranded in the Moroccan desert after his companions took his yacht and abandoned him while he slept. As Wikipedia says, "The scene begins with the following description: A grove of palms and acacias at dawn. PEER GYNT is up a tree, protecting himself with a broken-off branch from a swarm of apes."
Oops. We missed that particular communication entirely, especially the part about the apes!
O
Nov 15, 2012, 12:29:02 PM11/15/12
to
In article <6dc4dfff-abff-440c...@googlegroups.com>,
really a matter of degree, the amount of imperfection the listener is
willing to tolerate, until the imperfection becomes
noticeable/detrimental to the music.
"technique." In most discussions here, technique usually is
understood as being able to play the notes correctly at a fast speed,
or more generally, the ability of an artist to play something in any
way he chooses and achieves the artist's desired effects. The ability
to convey more than that (that the artist has the ability to choose the
correct effects) is a different function, and not necessarily related
to the first, although a healthy dollop of the first is required. It's
often said that many artists are good technicians, but not great
musicians. Seiji Ozawa is a great orchestral technician, and shines in
music with lots of color, but put him on the podium in front of a
Beethoven Symphony and he'll drain the blood out of it. He can *play*
the symphony with great technique, but what is he actually
communicating?
-Owen
Mark S <markst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 7:38:02 AM UTC-8, O wrote:
>
> > It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
> >
> > right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
> >
> > intend.
>
> Let's say you have a better chance to communicate the musical emotions if you
> can hit all the right notes.
Even the greatest miss a note or a phrase here and there, so it's
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 7:38:02 AM UTC-8, O wrote:
>
> > It depends on whether you consider "technique" to be hitting all the
> >
> > right notes or the ability to communicate the musical emotions you
> >
> > intend.
>
> Let's say you have a better chance to communicate the musical emotions if you
> can hit all the right notes.
really a matter of degree, the amount of imperfection the listener is
willing to tolerate, until the imperfection becomes
noticeable/detrimental to the music.
>
> BTW - the phrase "hitting all the notes" in this context has a pejorative
> feel to it, especially when contrasted against "the ability to communicate" musical emotions.
>
Not pejorative, but certainly limiting to the definition of the word
> BTW - the phrase "hitting all the notes" in this context has a pejorative
> feel to it, especially when contrasted against "the ability to communicate" musical emotions.
>
"technique." In most discussions here, technique usually is
understood as being able to play the notes correctly at a fast speed,
or more generally, the ability of an artist to play something in any
way he chooses and achieves the artist's desired effects. The ability
to convey more than that (that the artist has the ability to choose the
correct effects) is a different function, and not necessarily related
to the first, although a healthy dollop of the first is required. It's
often said that many artists are good technicians, but not great
musicians. Seiji Ozawa is a great orchestral technician, and shines in
music with lots of color, but put him on the podium in front of a
Beethoven Symphony and he'll drain the blood out of it. He can *play*
the symphony with great technique, but what is he actually
communicating?
-Owen
Gerard
Nov 15, 2012, 12:31:57 PM11/15/12
to
O
Nov 15, 2012, 12:38:55 PM11/15/12
to
In article <35d33c4e-4b85-49fb...@googlegroups.com>,
Good story. But it really says that music is not all that good about
communicating a program. John Philip Sousa thought his music would be
good for ballads.
Yet, music does have an effect on us, as strong an effect as words do.
It can make us cry, smile, laugh, frown, agitated, fearful, pleasured.
And we mostly listen for the pleasure.
-Owen
communicating a program. John Philip Sousa thought his music would be
good for ballads.
Yet, music does have an effect on us, as strong an effect as words do.
It can make us cry, smile, laugh, frown, agitated, fearful, pleasured.
And we mostly listen for the pleasure.
-Owen
Kip Williams
Nov 15, 2012, 12:50:05 PM11/15/12
to
O wrote, On 11/15/12 10:38 AM:
My dad always liked Schnabel, and Dad's a pianist.
Then again, he recently opined that I'd gotten better than him, and I
haven't. Even allowing for his present state of hearing, such an
evaluation clearly isn't based on the ratio of right notes to wrong
ones. (For that matter, I've noticed that musicians like my playing
better than non-musicians. The nons are more inclined to say "aha! I
detect an error!" while the musicians seem to feel that errors are a
part of music, and there's something beyond that that they enjoy.)
Kip W
Then again, he recently opined that I'd gotten better than him, and I
haven't. Even allowing for his present state of hearing, such an
evaluation clearly isn't based on the ratio of right notes to wrong
ones. (For that matter, I've noticed that musicians like my playing
better than non-musicians. The nons are more inclined to say "aha! I
detect an error!" while the musicians seem to feel that errors are a
part of music, and there's something beyond that that they enjoy.)
Kip W
Mark S
Nov 15, 2012, 12:52:04 PM11/15/12
to
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:38:56 AM UTC-8, O wrote:
>
> Yet, music does have an effect on us, as strong an effect as words do.
>
> It can make us cry, smile, laugh, frown, agitated, fearful, pleasured.
The only music that makes me cry with any consistency is the end of La boheme, and only at a live performance. And every time it happens, I curse Puccini for his ability to elicit the response by pulling such obvious musical strings. You think you're above such things, and then, powned!
>
> Yet, music does have an effect on us, as strong an effect as words do.
>
> It can make us cry, smile, laugh, frown, agitated, fearful, pleasured.
basnperson
Nov 15, 2012, 1:49:42 PM11/15/12
to
AB
basnperson
Nov 15, 2012, 1:51:32 PM11/15/12
to
AB
basnperson
Nov 15, 2012, 1:53:58 PM11/15/12
to
On Nov 15, 9:56 am, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 6:37:31 AM UTC-8, JohnGavin wrote:
> > > As Rostropovich noted, every musician has two sides - the emotional, and the technical, with the emotional side always governed by what the technical side can achieve.
>
> > I would not want to contradict the great Rostropovich, but I would say that the listener's imagination is perhaps an element that is not taken into account in this equation.
>
> > A good example would be Schnabel's recording of the Hammerklavier. Schnabel did not allow his "emotional" side to be limited by his somewhat limited technique - and so one can sense the grandeur and power of his conception even if his instrumental technique could not realize it completely.
>
> You have a point.
>
> I'm one of those who can't get past Schnabel's piss-poor technique. To me, the "grandeur and power" of his conception is a glaring case of the emperor's new clothes.
>
> Schnabel is a good example of the kind of musician who earns praise BECAUSE he has lousy technique.
the above statement is rather silly IMO......... who would praise a
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 6:37:31 AM UTC-8, JohnGavin wrote:
> > > As Rostropovich noted, every musician has two sides - the emotional, and the technical, with the emotional side always governed by what the technical side can achieve.
>
> > I would not want to contradict the great Rostropovich, but I would say that the listener's imagination is perhaps an element that is not taken into account in this equation.
>
> > A good example would be Schnabel's recording of the Hammerklavier. Schnabel did not allow his "emotional" side to be limited by his somewhat limited technique - and so one can sense the grandeur and power of his conception even if his instrumental technique could not realize it completely.
>
> You have a point.
>
> I'm one of those who can't get past Schnabel's piss-poor technique. To me, the "grandeur and power" of his conception is a glaring case of the emperor's new clothes.
>
> Schnabel is a good example of the kind of musician who earns praise BECAUSE he has lousy technique.
'lousy technique'..........
AB
Dufus
Nov 15, 2012, 4:10:44 PM11/15/12
to
>On Nov 15, 11:52 am, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The only music that makes me cry with any consistency is the end of
La boheme, and only at a live performance. And every time it happens,
I curse Puccini for his ability to elicit >the response by pulling
such obvious musical strings. You think you're above such things, and
then, powned!
Same here, to which I'd add the end of "Butterfly" as she sings to her
> The only music that makes me cry with any consistency is the end of
La boheme, and only at a live performance. And every time it happens,
I curse Puccini for his ability to elicit >the response by pulling
such obvious musical strings. You think you're above such things, and
then, powned!
son.
As to technique, always a matter of degree. Schnabel's "Hammerklavier"
is better than its reputation , but I still prefer a great pianist
like Gilels or Denk or Del Pueyo, etc, who can also play the notes ;
yet would not trade Schnabel in most other LvB Sonatas or Schuberts.
Schnabel's Brahms 2nd Concerto with Boult is not listenable for me,
but his Brahms 1st with Szell I enjoy greatly despite some slips.
Cortot's Ravel Left-hand is also unlistenable , but his Saint-Saens
4th with Munch is glorious.Bozhanov had some finger slips at the 2009
Cliburn, but was head and shoulders the best there, yet awarded 6th
place.
Horowitz said that you have to be a virtuoso before you can play not
like a virtuoso ; I get his point , but dont think he was completely
correct for all pianists.
wagnerfan
Nov 15, 2012, 6:05:44 PM11/15/12
to
leave the theatre a mess. Wagner fan
M forever
Nov 15, 2012, 6:47:23 PM11/15/12
to
communicate. It's not about what you thought the music communicated
but about your extra-musical associations based on, in this case,
false information or assumptions. You can really only explore that
field when you don't know what the music is supposed to be "about".
For instance, when I got to know Strauss' Don Quixote, I didn't know
the program. That was still more information than nothing since I knew
about the title character but I have never read the book. I think I
have seen a DQ movie a long time ago but if I did, I have forgotten
everything about it. I know about the windmills but hat's about it.
For some reason, I didn't read the program when I got to know the
piece, it somehow didn't interest me. In fact, even though I read it
at some point I have mostly forgotten what it is about in the
meantime. There are some obvious things in there like the sheep and
the chorale which IIRC signifies some wandering priests who DQ
attacks. But even that I don't remember that clearly. Yet when I
listen to the music, it communicates very strongly to me. I may not
know what the depicted adventures are but what is going on in the
musical adventures is completely clear to me.
Same about Till Eulenspiegel. I don't remember that program either
except that he is executed at the end. Then there are those pieces
which don't really have a program but which still convey vivid musical
images, like La Mer. what is the quiet middle section in the third
movement? Obviously, it is the becalmed sea. But is it at night or in
the middle of the day? I think it is at night, but I can't really
explain why. Nor do I know if that is what Debussy intended to
"communicate".
Mark S
Nov 15, 2012, 7:22:18 PM11/15/12
to
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 3:47:23 PM UTC-8, M forever wrote:
> On Nov 15, 12:08 pm, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 8:51:32 AM UTC-8, O wrote:
>
> > > Is music a communication? If so, what is being communicated?
>
> >
>
> > I remember a music class at college where the professor addressed this question by playing the "Morning Mood" movement from Grieg's Peer Gynt Suite #1. Most of us had heard the piece before, of course, we knew who Grieg was (Norwegian composer), we didn't necessarily know anything about Ibsen's play, and we had no real idea of the way the piece worked as incidental music to the play.
>
> >
>
> > Our professor asked us what we felt the music was "communicating." Armed with the little we knew (and the much we didn't know), we came up with a vision of the sun rising over the fjords of Norway. Why, you could hear the music diving down into the depths of the fjords and rising back up towards the sun! It was simple logic: Morning +Grieg+Norwegian Composer+Ibsen = the obvious.
>
> >
>
> > Our professor then laid the truth on us: that the piece actually depicts the rising of the sun during Act IV, Scene 4 of Ibsen's play, which finds Peer stranded in the Moroccan desert after his companions took his yacht and abandoned him while he slept. As Wikipedia says, "The scene begins with the following description: A grove of palms and acacias at dawn. PEER GYNT is up a tree, protecting himself with a broken-off branch from a swarm of apes."
>
> >
>
> > Oops. We missed that particular communication entirely, especially the part about the apes!
>
>
>
> The above has very little to do with what music can or can not
>
> communicate. It's not about what you thought the music communicated
>
> but about your extra-musical associations based on, in this case,
>
> false information or assumptions. You can really only explore that
>
> field when you don't know what the music is supposed to be "about".
Agreed. That was the point of the lesson.
> On Nov 15, 12:08 pm, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 8:51:32 AM UTC-8, O wrote:
>
> > > Is music a communication? If so, what is being communicated?
>
> >
>
> > I remember a music class at college where the professor addressed this question by playing the "Morning Mood" movement from Grieg's Peer Gynt Suite #1. Most of us had heard the piece before, of course, we knew who Grieg was (Norwegian composer), we didn't necessarily know anything about Ibsen's play, and we had no real idea of the way the piece worked as incidental music to the play.
>
> >
>
> > Our professor asked us what we felt the music was "communicating." Armed with the little we knew (and the much we didn't know), we came up with a vision of the sun rising over the fjords of Norway. Why, you could hear the music diving down into the depths of the fjords and rising back up towards the sun! It was simple logic: Morning +Grieg+Norwegian Composer+Ibsen = the obvious.
>
> >
>
> > Our professor then laid the truth on us: that the piece actually depicts the rising of the sun during Act IV, Scene 4 of Ibsen's play, which finds Peer stranded in the Moroccan desert after his companions took his yacht and abandoned him while he slept. As Wikipedia says, "The scene begins with the following description: A grove of palms and acacias at dawn. PEER GYNT is up a tree, protecting himself with a broken-off branch from a swarm of apes."
>
> >
>
> > Oops. We missed that particular communication entirely, especially the part about the apes!
>
>
>
> The above has very little to do with what music can or can not
>
> communicate. It's not about what you thought the music communicated
>
> but about your extra-musical associations based on, in this case,
>
> false information or assumptions. You can really only explore that
>
> field when you don't know what the music is supposed to be "about".
>
> For instance, when I got to know Strauss' Don Quixote, I didn't know
>
> the program. That was still more information than nothing since I knew
>
> about the title character but I have never read the book. I think I
>
> have seen a DQ movie a long time ago but if I did, I have forgotten
>
> everything about it. I know about the windmills but hat's about it.
>
> For some reason, I didn't read the program when I got to know the
>
> piece, it somehow didn't interest me. In fact, even though I read it
>
> at some point I have mostly forgotten what it is about in the
>
> meantime. There are some obvious things in there like the sheep and
>
> the chorale which IIRC signifies some wandering priests who DQ
>
> attacks. But even that I don't remember that clearly. Yet when I
>
> listen to the music, it communicates very strongly to me. I may not
>
> know what the depicted adventures are but what is going on in the
>
> musical adventures is completely clear to me.
>
> Same about Till Eulenspiegel. I don't remember that program either
>
> except that he is executed at the end. Then there are those pieces
>
> which don't really have a program but which still convey vivid musical
>
> images, like La Mer. what is the quiet middle section in the third
>
> movement? Obviously, it is the becalmed sea. But is it at night or in
>
> the middle of the day? I think it is at night, but I can't really
>
> explain why. Nor do I know if that is what Debussy intended to
>
> "communicate".
Christopher Webber
Nov 15, 2012, 8:56:38 PM11/15/12
to
On 16/11/2012 00:22, Mark S wrote:
> And I don't think that knowing the specifics would make me like the pieces more. it could have the opposite effect.
Indeed it could.
> And I don't think that knowing the specifics would make me like the pieces more. it could have the opposite effect.
Contrariwise, when I visited the Island of Staffa (and Fingal's Cave) I
discovered something which *did* astonish me.
Right below the cave mouth (which visitors have to enter from the sea)
there's a channel between rocks, through which the Atlantic rushes at
phenomenal pace, with phenomenal power, then as quickly receding. Almost
as impressive as the octagonal basalt-column floor of the cave and
island itself...
I was astonished because this effect is reproduced with graphic
precision by Mendelssohn, with a rushing pp-ff-pp chromatic swell in the
cellos and basses (bars 37-8, several times repeated) in precisely the
same time and natural rhythm as the reality.
It was rather marvellous to think that he'd stood exactly where I'd
stood, heard and seen the same thing, and then turned it so memorably
into music. And of course I can't help but think of that channel every
time I hear the overture...
Oscar
Nov 15, 2012, 9:30:34 PM11/15/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 11:52:05 AM, Mark S wrote:
>
> ...You think you're above such things, and then, powned!
No, hipster dad, the term is 'pwned'.
>
> ...You think you're above such things, and then, powned!
No, hipster dad, the term is 'pwned'.
Mort
Nov 15, 2012, 11:57:55 PM11/15/12
to
basnperson wrote:
> dont see how and why an ageing voice has to develop these
> mannerisms..........
No, no, the point is that the combination of 2 separate flaws makes her
singing unpleasant to me.
Mort Linder
> dont see how and why an ageing voice has to develop these
> mannerisms..........
No, no, the point is that the combination of 2 separate flaws makes her
singing unpleasant to me.
Mort Linder
Mort
Nov 16, 2012, 12:04:11 AM11/16/12
to
td wrote:
> Fleming has poor diction - even in English - but in this respect she
> is like Sutherland in that she only really cares for the vocal sound
> of what she is singing, not the words. I heard her sing Gershwin and
> Ira's fabulous lyrics were indecipherable. But musically she was fine.
>
> TD
I heard her sing Gershwin, unfortunately utilizing a microphone and
loudspeakers. She is a typical example of a classically trained singer
who does not get the rhythm and swing of a popular song. This despite
her early work singing popular songs.Audra McDonald is the only female
singer that I have heard who does very well in both camps.
Mort Linder
> Fleming has poor diction - even in English - but in this respect she
> is like Sutherland in that she only really cares for the vocal sound
> of what she is singing, not the words. I heard her sing Gershwin and
> Ira's fabulous lyrics were indecipherable. But musically she was fine.
>
> TD
I heard her sing Gershwin, unfortunately utilizing a microphone and
loudspeakers. She is a typical example of a classically trained singer
who does not get the rhythm and swing of a popular song. This despite
her early work singing popular songs.Audra McDonald is the only female
singer that I have heard who does very well in both camps.
Mort Linder
Dufus
Nov 16, 2012, 7:54:35 AM11/16/12
to
>On Nov 15, 5:05 pm, wagnerfan <ivanmax...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What does it for me is the end of Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet - I
> leave the theatre a mess. Wagner fan
Also agreed. And I'm one of those, perhaps the only one, who feels
> What does it for me is the end of Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet - I
> leave the theatre a mess. Wagner fan
this ballet score Prokofieff's best work. Although lately, I have been
enjoying the directness of his 2nd Symphony, which I'm ranking up
there with 1,5,7 ; 4 and 6 remaining unattractive to me.
Dufus
Dufus
Nov 16, 2012, 8:07:44 AM11/16/12
to
>On Nov 15, 5:47 pm, M forever <ms1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 15, 12:08 pm, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On the subject of " musicality" a good friend reminded me of Ravel's
> On Nov 15, 12:08 pm, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
comment to Honegger:
" I've written only one masterpiece - Bolero. Unfortunately , there's
no music in it."
Christopher Webber
Nov 16, 2012, 5:21:25 PM11/16/12
to
On 16/11/2012 12:54, Dufus wrote:
> And I'm one of those, perhaps the only one, who feels
> this ballet score Prokofieff's best work.
You are too modest. I can't think of anyone who *doesn't* think that,
> And I'm one of those, perhaps the only one, who feels
> this ballet score Prokofieff's best work.
to be honest!
Kip Williams
Nov 17, 2012, 12:23:06 AM11/17/12
to
Christopher Webber wrote, On 11/16/12 5:21 PM:
Who did you ask? For me, it's the concertos — piano 2 and 5, and violin 1.
Kip W
Kip W
Christopher Webber
Nov 17, 2012, 4:29:48 AM11/17/12
to
On 17/11/2012 05:23, Kip Williams wrote:
>
> Who did you ask? For me, it's the concertos — piano 2 and 5, and violin 1.
Indeed, but few would argue that the concertos had the breadth or depth
>
> Who did you ask? For me, it's the concertos — piano 2 and 5, and violin 1.
of the three, late ballet scores (if we can squeeze "The Stone Flower"
in here) or the two operas "War and Peace" and "The Fiery Angel".
I know this isn't what you're saying, but there's perhaps a distinction
to be made between "favourite" and "best". My own favourite Prokofiev
happens to be the exquisite suite "Summer Day", but I wouldn't claim it
was his best work.
Nobody in my hearing has matched the 1965 Supraphon LP of this piece by
the conductorless Prague Chamber Orchestra (real desert island stuff),
though the ASV version under Serebrier runs it pleasurably close.
wagnerfan
Nov 17, 2012, 7:44:34 AM11/17/12
to
Wagner fan
Gerard
Nov 17, 2012, 8:15:09 AM11/17/12
to
Christopher Webber <zarz...@zarzuela.invalid.net> typed:
OTOH I have a recording of Prokofiev's suite "Summer Night".
I suppose it's as different from suite "Summer Day" like night and day.
> On 17/11/2012 05:23, Kip Williams wrote:
> >
> > Who did you ask? For me, it's the concertos � piano 2 and 5, and
> >
> > violin 1.
>
> Indeed, but few would argue that the concertos had the breadth or
> depth of the three, late ballet scores (if we can squeeze "The Stone
> Flower" in here) or the two operas "War and Peace" and "The Fiery
> Angel".
>
> I know this isn't what you're saying, but there's perhaps a
> distinction to be made between "favourite" and "best". My own
> favourite Prokofiev happens to be the exquisite suite "Summer Day",
> but I wouldn't claim it was his best work.
>
> Nobody in my hearing has matched the 1965 Supraphon LP of this piece
> by the conductorless Prague Chamber Orchestra (real desert island
> stuff), though the ASV version under Serebrier runs it pleasurably
> close.
I don't know this piece.
>
> Indeed, but few would argue that the concertos had the breadth or
> depth of the three, late ballet scores (if we can squeeze "The Stone
> Flower" in here) or the two operas "War and Peace" and "The Fiery
> Angel".
>
> I know this isn't what you're saying, but there's perhaps a
> distinction to be made between "favourite" and "best". My own
> favourite Prokofiev happens to be the exquisite suite "Summer Day",
> but I wouldn't claim it was his best work.
>
> Nobody in my hearing has matched the 1965 Supraphon LP of this piece
> by the conductorless Prague Chamber Orchestra (real desert island
> stuff), though the ASV version under Serebrier runs it pleasurably
> close.
OTOH I have a recording of Prokofiev's suite "Summer Night".
I suppose it's as different from suite "Summer Day" like night and day.
Christopher Webber
Nov 17, 2012, 10:54:05 AM11/17/12
to
On 17/11/2012 13:15, Gerard wrote:
> I suppose it's as different from suite "Summer Day" like night and day.
Yes indeed. The brassy splendour of "Summer Night" (taken from his opera
> I suppose it's as different from suite "Summer Day" like night and day.
"The Duenna, for those who don't know it) has a very different mood from
"Summer Day", which is a chamber orchestration of seven of the piano
pieces from Music for Children, op.65.
The orchestral writing is dazzling, the tunes great, and the last of the
seven movements 'The Moon is over the Meadows" absolutely exquisite. He
re-used some of these pieces, notably a slinky waltz quite reminiscent
of Britten, in "The Stone Flower". I definitely recommend "Summer Day"
to anyone who's not heard it.
ivanm...@gmail.com
Nov 17, 2012, 5:10:52 PM11/17/12
to
wkasimer
Nov 17, 2012, 6:06:16 PM11/17/12
to
On Nov 17, 10:54 am, Christopher Webber
Bill
<zarzu...@zarzuela.invalid.net> wrote:
> The orchestral writing is dazzling, the tunes great, and the last of the
> seven movements 'The Moon is over the Meadows" absolutely exquisite. He
> re-used some of these pieces, notably a slinky waltz quite reminiscent
> of Britten, in "The Stone Flower". I definitely recommend "Summer Day"
> to anyone who's not heard it.
I agree - my orchestra played it last year. A delightful piece.
> The orchestral writing is dazzling, the tunes great, and the last of the
> seven movements 'The Moon is over the Meadows" absolutely exquisite. He
> re-used some of these pieces, notably a slinky waltz quite reminiscent
> of Britten, in "The Stone Flower". I definitely recommend "Summer Day"
> to anyone who's not heard it.
Bill
0 new messages