SOMEWHERE between Satie and Debussy
Duane Frybarger
Composer Duane Frybarger has just released an album of piano and
orchestral works entitled "A Road Less Traveled". You can here it right
now in Real Audio by clicking on this link...
http://www.virtualcolony.com/realaudio/road.ram
For more info, visit his Web site at
http://www.virtualcolony.com/duane/
Mike Holme
Please don't compare Satie with Debussy. Somewhere between Satie and
Debussy is like saying somewhere between east coast America and West
coast America.
Satie I will bow to for his "3 pieces in the form of a pear' and perhaps
that melody of his, you know the one, I'm not even going to name it.
Debussy I will bow to for every single one of his published works (with
perhaps some back pain preventing me from completely managing a decent
angle of bow on some works). What a peculiar way I found of expressing
myself. Still, there you have it, Debussy was a giant compared to Satie,
who was little more than an amateur.
Mike
Charles Eggen
On Mon, 01 Jun 1998 11:56:36 +0100, Mike Holme <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>
wrote:
Do I smell a thread starting? Are you trying to pull someones chain?
However, I would depart slightly and say that Debussy was a musical
giant whether compared to Satie or most anyone else.
Chuck
PS - I do not dislike Satie
piper
>Please don't compare Satie with Debussy. Somewhere between Satie and
>Debussy is like saying somewhere between east coast America and West
>coast America.
>
>Satie I will bow to for his "3 pieces in the form of a pear' and perhaps
>that melody of his, you know the one, I'm not even going to name it.
>Debussy I will bow to for every single one of his published works (with
>perhaps some back pain preventing me from completely managing a decent
>angle of bow on some works). What a peculiar way I found of expressing
>myself. Still, there you have it, Debussy was a giant compared to Satie,
>who was little more than an amateur.
>
>Mike
The composer of Parades an amateur? Have you ever tried to compose
anything? If not, try it and maybe you'll attain a greater
appreciation for "simple" music.
Michael
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <3573ab27...@news.interport.net>,
As it happens I have tried to compose music, yes. I've even succeeded, though
don't hold your breath whilst waiting for a premiere.
As I see it, the main difference in "The Velvet Gentleman" and Debussy is one
of attitude towards their work. Satie didn't take music seriously, Debussy
did. Satie didn't give a damn, and on that basis alone is not in my opinion
worthy of mention along side Debussy.
I used to Enjoy Satie also, but it was more his eccentricities that appealled
to me. There's always somebody who'll love an odd ball.
Mike
What's that thing Satie wrote in on a score ?
"Stealing your friends piece of bread will give you a sore head"
Something like that. Very serious, obviously written by somebody who wanted to
be held up in high regard by the musical intelligencia (sp?) of the day.
Mike
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
piper
No, his whole purpose was to make fun of the stuffy bourgeois
intellectuals of his day, to "shock the bourgeoisie". Satie's lack of
seriousness was his philosophy of life. Just because neither he nor
his music was grave doesn't take away any quality from it. I have to
wonder whether you would find that Charlie Chaplin movie about the
drunk who comes home unfunny and think that only tragedies or
"message" comedies are great movies.
Now what is it you don't consider great about Parades again?
Michael
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <3574e96a...@news.interport.net>,
Typical approach of somebody how couldn't get noticed via talent alone.
> seriousness was his philosophy of life. Just because neither he nor
> his music was grave doesn't take away any quality from it. I have to
Debussy's music isn't all grave. Who mentioned grave ?
> wonder whether you would find that Charlie Chaplin movie about the
> drunk who comes home unfunny and think that only tragedies or
Yes I find Charlie Chaplin unfunny.
> "message" comedies are great movies.
>
> Now what is it you don't consider great about Parades again?
I've never heard Parades, but I've heard all of Satie's piano music ever
played it or listen to recordings. I've also heard all his songs.
If you think that one piece is all that is nessasary for a composer to be
ranked with the real greats then you you're quite frankly, illogical.
>
> Michael
>
Mike
What was that other line in the Satie score, something to do with a Parrot
(chuckle, chuckle).
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <357288...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>,
Mike Holme <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Please don't compare Satie with Debussy. Somewhere between Satie and
> Debussy is like saying somewhere between east coast America and West
> coast America.
>
> Satie I will bow to for his "3 pieces in the form of a pear' and perhaps
> that melody of his, you know the one, I'm not even going to name it.
Isn't it interesting that nobody has asked, what melody ? Of course no one
has because no one would show such ignorance. Apply the phrase to Beethoven,
Mozart, Ravel, Schumann, DEBUSSY, anyone .... ridiculous isn't it, it just
doesn't work with anyone but Eric Satie. What conclusion can we draw from
this exercise ??????
I rest my case.
Mike Holme
Clare...@aol.com
In article <6lg892$ato$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
>
> In article <357288...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>,
> Mike Holme <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Please don't compare Satie with Debussy. Somewhere between Satie and
> > Debussy is like saying somewhere between east coast America and West
> > coast America.
> >
> > Satie I will bow to for his "3 pieces in the form of a pear' and perhaps
> > that melody of his, you know the one, I'm not even going to name it.
> (snip)
>
> Isn't it interesting that nobody has asked, what melody ? Of course no one
> has because no one would show such ignorance. Apply the phrase to Beethoven,
> Mozart, Ravel, Schumann, DEBUSSY, anyone .... ridiculous isn't it, it just
> doesn't work with anyone but Eric Satie. What conclusion can we draw from
> this exercise ??????
>
> I rest my case.
>
> Mike Holme
Good Point and may I add a few more in the '5 minutes of wonder' category
e.g.
What did Sinding write apart from Rustle of Spring ?
Barber and that Adagio of his.
Bruck and the Violin thing ?
Certainly can't say the same thing of a decent composer like Debussy.
Clare D'avro
Steve Forrest
In article <6lg892$ato$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
>In article <357288...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>,
> Mike Holme <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Please don't compare Satie with Debussy. Somewhere between Satie and
>> Debussy is like saying somewhere between east coast America and West
>> coast America.
>>
>> Satie I will bow to for his "3 pieces in the form of a pear' and perhaps
>> that melody of his, you know the one, I'm not even going to name it.
>(snip)
>
>Isn't it interesting that nobody has asked, what melody ? Of course no one
>has because no one would show such ignorance. Apply the phrase to Beethoven,
>Mozart, Ravel, Schumann, DEBUSSY, anyone .... ridiculous isn't it, it just
>doesn't work with anyone but Eric Satie.
Sure it does. Ravel's melody: Bolero. Debussy's: Prelude to the Afternoon
of a Faun. If you were talking about Beethoven, I would guess that you were
refering to the opening of the 5th Symphony.
>What conclusion can we draw from
>this exercise ??????
That certain pieces by various composers have become very well-known,
even among persons who don't listen to classical music regularly.
>I rest my case.
>Mike Holme
I don't disagree that Satie was a minor figure, but that doesn't follow
from the fact that we knew what melody you were refering to.
-Steve
Frank Eggleston
Clare...@aol.com wrote:
> In article <6lg892$ato$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
> >
> > In article <357288...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>,
> > Mike Holme <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > Please don't compare Satie with Debussy. Somewhere between Satie and
> > > Debussy is like saying somewhere between east coast America and West
> > > coast America.
> > >
> > > Satie I will bow to for his "3 pieces in the form of a pear' and perhaps
> > > that melody of his, you know the one, I'm not even going to name it.
> > (snip)
> >
> > Isn't it interesting that nobody has asked, what melody ? Of course no one
> > has because no one would show such ignorance. Apply the phrase to Beethoven,
> > Mozart, Ravel, Schumann, DEBUSSY, anyone .... ridiculous isn't it, it just
> > doesn't work with anyone but Eric Satie. What conclusion can we draw from
> > this exercise ??????
> >
> > I rest my case.
> >
> > Mike Holme
>
> Good Point and may I add a few more in the '5 minutes of wonder' category
> e.g.
> What did Sinding write apart from Rustle of Spring ?
> Barber and that Adagio of his.
> Bruck and the Violin thing ?
>
> Certainly can't say the same thing of a decent composer like Debussy.
>
Aren't we confusing our ignorance with the composers lack of talent? I know quite
a bit of "else" with Samuel Barber, for instance.
Frank E
--
"... for it goes without saying."
--- description of Milo's cart in
"The Phantom Tollbooth"
piper
On Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:07:19 GMT, Clare...@aol.com wrote:
>In article <6lg892$ato$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
>>
>> In article <357288...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>,
>> Mike Holme <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> > Please don't compare Satie with Debussy. Somewhere between Satie and
>> > Debussy is like saying somewhere between east coast America and West
>> > coast America.
>> >
>> > Satie I will bow to for his "3 pieces in the form of a pear' and perhaps
>> > that melody of his, you know the one, I'm not even going to name it.
>> (snip)
>>
>> Isn't it interesting that nobody has asked, what melody ? Of course no one
>> has because no one would show such ignorance. Apply the phrase to Beethoven,
>> Mozart, Ravel, Schumann, DEBUSSY, anyone .... ridiculous isn't it, it just
>> doesn't work with anyone but Eric Satie. What conclusion can we draw from
>> this exercise ??????
>>
>> I rest my case.
>>
>> Mike Holme
>
>Good Point and may I add a few more in the '5 minutes of wonder' category
>e.g.
>What did Sinding write apart from Rustle of Spring ?
>Barber and that Adagio of his.
>Bruck and the Violin thing ?
>
>Certainly can't say the same thing of a decent composer like Debussy.
>
>Clare D'avro
Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
following composers:
Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
Your ignorance of a composer's output does not prove that s/he is not
a great composer.
_I_ rest my case.
Michael
Mike Holme
> Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
> following composers:
>
> Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
> Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
> Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
> Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
> Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
> Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
> you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
> any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
> that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
>
No the word for these Guys is unfashionable and yes I can name works by
them, the word Sonata probably covers the lot.
Next.
(snip)
Clare...@aol.com
In article <357c8068...@news.interport.net>,
> following composers:
>
> Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
> Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
> Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
> Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
> Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
> Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
> you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
> any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
> that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
>
> a great composer.
>
> _I_ rest my case.
This is totally irrelavant. You are naming composers that are no longer
listen to (in general) because they were totally dwarfed by the genius that
was J.S.Bach. Satie does not fit into that catagory, name me some modern
greats that no one has heard of. Of course the sons of Bach don't count, in
fact CPE Bach was instrumental in developing modern Sonata form and is a much
greater composer than Satie. He actually contributed. Tell me, what
pioneering things did Satie do, why is Satie great. If you didn't know, the
Debussy work "Afternoon after the Faun" affected virtually all music after
it. What similar monument has Satie wrote ?
Clare D'avro
BTW If you had actually read Mr Holme's post then you would have noticed that
he stated he had played or heard every piano piece or song that Satie had
ever wrote, so careful with your use of the word ignorance.
> Michael
David Cleary
Mike Holme (M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk) wrote:
> someone else wrote:
: > Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
: > following composers:
: >
: > Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
: > Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
: > Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
: > Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
: > Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
: > Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
: > you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
: > any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
: > that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
: >
: No the word for these Guys is unfashionable and yes I can name works by
: them, the word Sonata probably covers the lot.
: Next.
Not so fast. I would like very much (for starters) to have you describe
more fully any work entitled "Sonata" by any of the first nine composers
listed above. Do you know of any such pieces?
Dave
Jose Oscar Marques
On Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:07:19 GMT Clare...@aol.com wrote in article
<6lhqr7$bp7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
>Good Point and may I add a few more in the '5 minutes of wonder' category
>e.g.
>What did Sinding write apart from Rustle of Spring ?
A marvelous First Symphony, a blockbuster Piano Concerto, much chamber
music of very high quality.
You see, you should get to know him better ;)
--
Jose Oscar Marques
(to reply by e-mail remove the "X" from my address)
Jose Oscar Marques
On Tue, 09 Jun 1998 09:45:37 +0100 Mike Holme <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>
wrote in article <357CF6...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>:
>> Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
>> following composers:
>>
>> Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
>> Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
>> Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
>> Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
>> Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
>> Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
>> you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
>> any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
>> that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
>>
>
>No the word for these Guys is unfashionable and yes I can name works by
>them, the word Sonata probably covers the lot.
Hmm, ignorance as a yardstick of fashion... well, who needs
"fashionable" anyway - Spice Girls are so fashionable, so what?
And I am eager to know which sonatas were ever written by Landini,
Machaut (!), Dufay, Ockeghem, des Pres, Gesualdo, Marenzio, di Lasso,
Victoria, Dowland ...
Jose Oscar Marques
On Tue, 09 Jun 1998 16:27:45 GMT Clare...@aol.com wrote in article
<6ljnq1$vuj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
>In article <357c8068...@news.interport.net>,
> pi...@interport.net (piper) wrote:
>> Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
>> following composers:
>>
>> Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
>> Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
>> Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
>> Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
>> Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
>> Christian Bach...
>
>This is totally irrelavant. You are naming composers that are no longer
>listen to (in general)
No longer listened to??!! Which planet do you live in?!! Have you seen
the immense amount of early music releases by Naxos, Harmonia Mundi and
many other companies? These composers never had as many listeners as
they have nowadays.
> because they were totally dwarfed by the genius that
>was J.S.Bach.
You are completely confused in this. Please open some books. Machaut,
Dufay, Ockeghem, Des Pres, are first rate geniuses that were NEVER
surpassed by ANYBODY, and, anyway, JS Bach's music is a completely
different thing altogether.
I am not an expert in early music but can say that your ignorance in
this field is amazing!
piper
On Tue, 09 Jun 1998 09:45:37 +0100, Mike Holme <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>
wrote:
>> Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
>> following composers:
>>
>> Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
>> Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
>> Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
>> Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
>> Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
>> Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
>> you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
>> any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
>> that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
>>
>
>No the word for these Guys is unfashionable and yes I can name works by
>them, the word Sonata probably covers the lot.
[snip]
Wrong. The first 10 of them probably never wrote any Sonatas in their
life.
But thanks for using the word "unfashionable".
Michael
piper
On Tue, 09 Jun 1998 16:27:45 GMT, Clare...@aol.com wrote:
>In article <357c8068...@news.interport.net>,
> pi...@interport.net (piper) wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:07:19 GMT, Clare...@aol.com wrote:
>> >Good Point and may I add a few more in the '5 minutes of wonder' category
>> >e.g.
>> >What did Sinding write apart from Rustle of Spring ?
>> >Barber and that Adagio of his.
>> >Bruck and the Violin thing ?
>> >
>> >Certainly can't say the same thing of a decent composer like Debussy.
>> >
>> >Clare D'avro
>>
>> Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
>> following composers:
>>
>> Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
>> Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
>> Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
>> Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
>> Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
>> Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
>> you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
>> any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
>> that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
>>
>> Your ignorance of a composer's output does not prove that s/he is not
>> a great composer.
>>
>> _I_ rest my case.
>
>This is totally irrelavant. You are naming composers that are no longer
>listen to (in general) because they were totally dwarfed by the genius that
>was J.S.Bach.
I consider it nonsensical to say that 14th-century composers like
Landini and Machaut were "dwarfed" by an 18th-century composer.
> Satie does not fit into that catagory, name me some modern
>greats that no one has heard of.
I don't know you, so I don't know what you know. Surely, many people
have heard of Satie's "Parades". If those posting the messages
haven't, that isn't my problem.
> Of course the sons of Bach don't count,
Don't count how?
> in
>fact CPE Bach was instrumental in developing modern Sonata form and is a much
>greater composer than Satie.
I love C.P.E. Bach and consider him highly underrated, but I also
appreciate Satie.
> He actually contributed. Tell me, what
>pioneering things did Satie do, why is Satie great.
Think of Satie as the antithesis of Wagner. It was his light,
"trifling", anti-Romantic pieces which were the beginning of the
radical avant garde in many senses.
>If you didn't know, the
>Debussy work "Afternoon after the Faun" affected virtually all music after
>it.
I'm a Doctor and Professor of music, and also a flutist. I _think_ I
know the significance of this work.
Also, Debussy is one of my favorite composers, so don't misinterpret
any of my remarks as deprecating Debussy in any way.
> What similar monument has Satie wrote ?
Satie was an anti-monumental composer. As I said, the antithesis of
Wagner. He was more radical than Debussy, whose "impressionism" was
more of an outgrowth of Romanticism than Satie's was. If you like only
great edifices, you will never appreciate a beautifully-built,
deceptively simple home.
>
>Clare D'avro
>
>BTW If you had actually read Mr Holme's post then you would have noticed that
>he stated he had played or heard every piano piece or song that Satie had
>ever wrote, so careful with your use of the word ignorance.
Fine. I'll apply it only to you.
Michael
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <6ljsm6$cci$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
>
> Mike Holme (M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk) wrote:
> > someone else wrote:
>
> : > following composers:
> : >
> : > Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
> : > Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
> : > Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
> : > Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
> : > Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
> : > Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
> : > you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
> : > any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
> : > that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
>
> : No the word for these Guys is unfashionable and yes I can name works by
> : them, the word Sonata probably covers the lot.
>
>
> Not so fast. I would like very much (for starters) to have you describe
> more fully any work entitled "Sonata" by any of the first nine composers
> listed above. Do you know of any such pieces?
Just excuse me for a moment while I step into my Tardis .....
Right, here we are. Firstly I think my educated guess did very well. By your
calculations I hit 9 out of 18 composers with just one word (50% !!!!). Next
your question obviously implies that the word Sonata and hence the form in
any manifestation didn't exist when these 9 ancient pioneers lived. I know
very little about pre J.S.Bach Composers and don't care to know to be honest.
If I may add another word to my one I've already offered (in the light of the
implication of your question) then that word would be 'Mass' (Perhaps I've
now hit 100% !!!!!). I could be a nerd and actually go and look these
composers up but I prefer to go off what I know when answering posts, rather
than reading to people.
Now may I suggest that I've you want to start a thread on early music, either
a) do it in the early music group or b) do it in a different thread to this.
I am talking about Eric Satie and Debussy.
Back to the Tardis.
Right, here we are again. Now back to Satie. The previous two posters have
been caught in some sort of time warp. They believe that music written
perhaps 600 years ago which though excellent in its day is relevant to our
discussion. The reason that the music by the composers listed above is no
longer very popular today is because it was superseeded, with dramatic effect
by such people as J.S.Bach The horse and cart was excellent in it's day, but
it doesn't get much press today.
Modern music i.e. the era which this group deals with is roughly speaking
everything after J.S.Bach. After all it is Bach's style that practically
dictates the contents of the textbooks that would be composers *today*
study.
Having stated why we don't hear the music of the above composers very often,
may we get back to this century please. Can you answer this simple question.
Why is it when ever I hear Eric Satie on the radio or see his name on a CD,
the piece quoted is virtually without exception 'that melody of his'. If Eric
had wrote many masterpieces, why do the musical powers conspire to prevent us
hearing his many masterpieces. They seem to play everything and anything by
Debussy. Which gets us back to the original reason this thread started.
Thank you "Having suffered a partial derailment, normal service will
hopefully now resume, anyone dissatisfied with the service can pick up the
standby at the side of the track. A horse and cart."
> Dave
>
>
Mike Holme
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <357e0869...@news.interport.net>,
pi...@interport.net (piper) wrote:
>
> On Tue, 09 Jun 1998 16:27:45 GMT, Clare...@aol.com wrote:
>
> >In article <357c8068...@news.interport.net>,
> > pi...@interport.net (piper) wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:07:19 GMT, Clare...@aol.com wrote:
>
> >> >Good Point and may I add a few more in the '5 minutes of wonder' category
> >> >e.g.
> >> >What did Sinding write apart from Rustle of Spring ?
> >> >Barber and that Adagio of his.
> >> >Bruck and the Violin thing ?
> >> >
> >> >Certainly can't say the same thing of a decent composer like Debussy.
> >> >
> >> >Clare D'avro
> >>
> >> following composers:
> >>
> >> Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
> >> Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
> >> Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
> >> Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
> >> Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
> >> Christian Bach. I could name more, but that's enough. I'll bet most of
> >> you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
> >> any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
> >> that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
> >>
> >> a great composer.
> >>
> >> _I_ rest my case.
> >
> >This is totally irrelavant. You are naming composers that are no longer
> >listen to (in general) because they were totally dwarfed by the genius that
> >was J.S.Bach.
>
> I consider it nonsensical to say that 14th-century composers like
> Landini and Machaut were "dwarfed" by an 18th-century composer.
I consider it 'nonsensical to bring 14th century composers in to a discussion
about Eric Satie and Debussy.
>
> > Satie does not fit into that catagory, name me some modern
> >greats that no one has heard of.
>
(The above Question has been ignored)
> I don't know you, so I don't know what you know. Surely, many people
> have heard of Satie's "Parades". If those posting the messages
> haven't, that isn't my problem.
>
> > Of course the sons of Bach don't count,
>
> Don't count how?
I don't want to sound flip, but I meant that Bach would have a hard time
dwarfing people that hadn't actually had fair chance to start writting music.
Give them chance to be born, mature and learn to write (sons of Bach ?).
>
> > in
> >fact CPE Bach was instrumental in developing modern Sonata form and is a much
> >greater composer than Satie.
>
> I love C.P.E. Bach and consider him highly underrated, but I also
> appreciate Satie.
>
I too find C.P.E.Bach but again he is in a different league all together than
Satie, if for only the one reason given above.
> > He actually contributed. Tell me, what
> >pioneering things did Satie do, why is Satie great.
>
> Think of Satie as the antithesis of Wagner. It was his light,
> "trifling", anti-Romantic pieces which were the beginning of the
> radical avant garde in many senses.
Fine, then again, I ask this same question (I fear ad nauseum). If Satie was
so good, why do we only get to hear 'that melody of his'.
>
> >If you didn't know, the
> >Debussy work "Afternoon after the Faun" affected virtually all music after
> >it.
>
> I'm a Doctor and Professor of music, and also a flutist. I _think_ I
> know the significance of this work.
Great, then you will appreciated my original post that said please don't
compare Satie with Debussy. I think I'm getting somewhere now.
>
> Also, Debussy is one of my favorite composers, so don't misinterpret
> any of my remarks as deprecating Debussy in any way.
>
> > What similar monument has Satie wrote ?
>
> Satie was an anti-monumental composer. As I said, the antithesis of
> Wagner. He was more radical than Debussy, whose "impressionism" was
> more of an outgrowth of Romanticism than Satie's was. If you like only
> great edifices, you will never appreciate a beautifully-built,
> deceptively simple home.
Read previous question again.
> >
> >Clare D'avro
> >
> >BTW If you had actually read Mr Holme's post then you would have noticed that
> >he stated he had played or heard every piano piece or song that Satie had
> >ever wrote, so careful with your use of the word ignorance.
>
> Fine. I'll apply it only to you.
>
> Michael
>
Mike Holme
BTW thank you Ms D'avro.
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <3583c414...@enews.newsguy.com>,
mar...@Xnewsguy.com (Jose Oscar Marques) wrote:
>
> On Tue, 09 Jun 1998 16:27:45 GMT Clare...@aol.com wrote in article
> <6ljnq1$vuj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
>
> > pi...@interport.net (piper) wrote:
> >> Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
> >> following composers:
> >>
> >> Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
> >> Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
> >> Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
> >> Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
> >> Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
> >
> >This is totally irrelavant. You are naming composers that are no longer
> >listen to (in general)
>
> the immense amount of early music releases by Naxos, Harmonia Mundi and
> many other companies? These composers never had as many listeners as
> they have nowadays.
Before exploding and rushing head first at the keyboard and posting, try
reading. The previous poster said quote '(in general)', that is not what you
quote her as saying. Early music _is_ a speciality, in fact I may be correct
in thinking that Harmonia Mundi are _specialist_ in the field though I may be
wrong there (am I ?). Therefore, _by definition_ early music is not
_generally_ listened to.
Mike
>
> > because they were totally dwarfed by the genius that
> >was J.S.Bach.
>
> You are completely confused in this. Please open some books. Machaut,
> Dufay, Ockeghem, Des Pres, are first rate geniuses that were NEVER
> surpassed by ANYBODY, and, anyway, JS Bach's music is a completely
> different thing altogether.
>
> I am not an expert in early music but can say that your ignorance in
> this field is amazing!
I'm not an expert in the field of insults but you certainly seem to be in
training.
>
> --
> Jose Oscar Marques
> (to reply by e-mail remove the "X" from my address)
>
Mike Holme
David Cleary
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
: In article <6ljsm6$cci$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
: >
: > : > Before you all rest your cases, name several works by each of the
: > : > following composers:
: > : >
: > : > Francesco Landini, Guillaume de Machaut, Guillaume Dufay, Johannes
: > : > Ockeghem, Josquin des Pres, Carlo Gesualdo, Luca Marenzio, Orlando di
: > : > Lasso, Tomas Luis de Victoria, John Dowland, Salamone Rossi, Girolamo
: > : > Frescobaldi, Monteclair, Johann Kaspar Ferdinard Fischer, Dietrich
: > : > Buxtehude, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann
: > : > you who know only one or two works by Satie can't name many works, if
: > : > any, by any of these other composers I mentioned. So I guess you think
: > : > that, ipso facto, none of these composers could be "decent".
: >
: > : No the word for these Guys is unfashionable and yes I can name works by
: > : them, the word Sonata probably covers the lot.
: >
: > : Next.
: >
: > Not so fast. I would like very much (for starters) to have you describe
: > more fully any work entitled "Sonata" by any of the first nine composers
: > listed above. Do you know of any such pieces?
: Just excuse me for a moment while I step into my Tardis .....
: Right, here we are. Firstly I think my educated guess did very well. By your
: calculations I hit 9 out of 18 composers with just one word (50% !!!!).
I purposely stopped before Dowland. So you're saying Dowland wrote Sonatas
as well? For that matter, do you know the difference between Baroque-era
"Sonatas" and those of the 19th century?
And this all strikes me as being no more useful than saying that you know
all the titles of James Joyce's books. What matters is whether or not you
have read them.
: Next
: your question obviously implies that the word Sonata and hence the form in
: any manifestation didn't exist when these 9 ancient pioneers lived.
No--I'm asking you if you know of any. I don't, but that doesn't
necessarily mean none exist. Do you know?
: I know
: very little about pre J.S.Bach Composers and don't care to know to be honest.
As you wish. IMHO you're missing some excellent music, but that's up to
you.
: If I may add another word to my one I've already offered (in the light of the
: implication of your question) then that word would be 'Mass' (Perhaps I've
: now hit 100% !!!!!). I could be a nerd and actually go and look these
: composers up but I prefer to go off what I know when answering posts, rather
: than reading to people.
You might consider doing a little reading. Or better yet, a little
listening. Or better still, maybe a lot of each. If that's being a "nerd,"
there should be more of them IMHO.
: Now may I suggest that I've you want to start a thread on early music, either
: a) do it in the early music group or b) do it in a different thread to this.
: I am talking about Eric Satie and Debussy.
a) I didn't put up the list of composers in the first place. Please take
your gripe to the person who did.
b) This being a classical music newsgroup, it is all on topic. And it's my
choice to post what I wish, not yours. If you don't like it, you don't
have to reply.
c) Did you not understand the analogy the lister was trying to make? Given
your next paragraph, I wonder.
: Back to the Tardis.
: Right, here we are again. Now back to Satie. The previous two posters have
: been caught in some sort of time warp. They believe that music written
: perhaps 600 years ago which though excellent in its day is relevant to our
: discussion. The reason that the music by the composers listed above is no
: longer very popular today is because it was superseeded, with dramatic effect
: by such people as J.S.Bach The horse and cart was excellent in it's day, but
: it doesn't get much press today.
So much for "back to Satie." In what way was Josquin superseded by J.S.
Bach?
: Modern music i.e. the era which this group deals with is roughly speaking
: everything after J.S.Bach. After all it is Bach's style that practically
: dictates the contents of the textbooks that would be composers *today*
: study.
Using that analogy, you can just as easily say "Modern music started with
Palestrina." 16th century counterpoint is a staple of college music theory
curricula, and species counterpoint derived from that style even shows up
in some freshman/sophomore theory classes. And besides, J.S. Bach's music
didn't just happen out of thin air--his music was influenced by earlier
composers such as Buxtehude. Why are you drawing the line at Bach? If you
know so little about pre-Bach composers, what basis are you using for
making the division here?
And would-be composers today study lots more music than that ranging from
Bach to Rachmaninoff. Ever taken any college-level music history classes?
: Having stated why we don't hear the music of the above composers very often,
: may we get back to this century please. Can you answer this simple question.
: Why is it when ever I hear Eric Satie on the radio or see his name on a CD,
: the piece quoted is virtually without exception 'that melody of his'. If Eric
: had wrote many masterpieces, why do the musical powers conspire to prevent us
: hearing his many masterpieces. They seem to play everything and anything by
: Debussy. Which gets us back to the original reason this thread started.
Who says the "musical powers" have any kind of "conspiracy" against
Satie's output? Who are these "musical powers?" What role, if any, does
marketing or chance play in all this?
Dave
Steve Forrest
>Can you answer this simple question.
>Why is it when ever I hear Eric Satie on the radio or see his name on a CD,
>the piece quoted is virtually without exception 'that melody of his'.
Well, I don't know what radio station you listen to. Maybe it's one of those
mediocre 'pops' stations that only plays short well-known pieces.
When Satie is played on the radio I listen to, about 95% of the time it
is something other than 'that melody'.
-Steve
Jose Oscar Marques
On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:51:34 GMT M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote in article
<6llkv5$tq8$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
>In article <3583c414...@enews.newsguy.com>,
> mar...@Xnewsguy.com (Jose Oscar Marques) wrote:
>> You are completely confused in this. Please open some books. Machaut,
>> Dufay, Ockeghem, Des Pres, are first rate geniuses that were NEVER
>> surpassed by ANYBODY, and, anyway, JS Bach's music is a completely
>> different thing altogether.
>> I am not an expert in early music but can say that your ignorance in
>> this field is amazing!
>I'm not an expert in the field of insults but you certainly seem to be in
>training.
Oh, I didn't mean to insult you, only to state a plain matter of fact.
It takes A LOT of ignorance to coin such a piece of nonsense as this
one:
>The reason that the music by the composers listed above is no
>longer very popular today is because it was superseeded, with dramatic effect
>by such people as J.S.Bach The horse and cart was excellent in it's day, but
>it doesn't get much press today.
I don't need to say anything else. This speaks for itself.
John Gavin
Christian Sinding wrote of lovely and memorable Suite For Violin and
Orchestra -
I believe there are many, many composers who wrote great - yes, great
music which is not known or appreciated because, perhaps, they take more
time to reveal their subtleties.
e.g. - Clementi, Medtner, Godowsky, Sorabji (ever hear of Soler's
Fandango?).
Jose Oscar Marques
On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:02:39 GMT M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote in article
<6lli3f$ped$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
>Right, here we are. Firstly I think my educated guess did very well. By your
>calculations I hit 9 out of 18 composers with just one word (50% !!!!).
If a monkey were asked to point among a number of composers those who
wrote sonatas, it would get it right 50% of the cases too. So much for
your "educated guess"...
matthew...@my-dejanews.com
In article <6lm3qv$mmb$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
>
> M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
> : In article <6ljsm6$cci$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
> : dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
> : >
> : > Mike Holme (M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk) wrote:
> : > > someone else wrote:
> : >
[BIG snip]
>
> : Right, here we are again. Now back to Satie. The previous two posters have
> : been caught in some sort of time warp. They believe that music written
> : perhaps 600 years ago which though excellent in its day is relevant to our
> : discussion. The reason that the music by the composers listed above is no
> : longer very popular today is because it was superseeded, with dramatic effect
> : by such people as J.S.Bach The horse and cart was excellent in it's day, but
> : it doesn't get much press today.
>
> So much for "back to Satie." In what way was Josquin superseded by J.S.
> Bach?
>
> : Modern music i.e. the era which this group deals with is roughly speaking
> : everything after J.S.Bach. After all it is Bach's style that practically
> : dictates the contents of the textbooks that would be composers *today*
> : study.
>
> Using that analogy, you can just as easily say "Modern music started with
> Palestrina." 16th century counterpoint is a staple of college music theory
> curricula, and species counterpoint derived from that style even shows up
> in some freshman/sophomore theory classes. And besides, J.S. Bach's music
> didn't just happen out of thin air--his music was influenced by earlier
> composers such as Buxtehude. Why are you drawing the line at Bach? If you
> know so little about pre-Bach composers, what basis are you using for
> making the division here?
>
> : Having stated why we don't hear the music of the above composers very often...
I'm with Dave on this (as are, I suspect, the majority of the readers of
these posts).
As for music by earlier composers no longer being popular:
FWIW, and for just one example, the last few times I checked the classical
charts, Anonymous 4's albums of medieval music were consistently outselling
just about any given recent Bach or Satie or Debussy release one might
mention...
Matthew Westphal
piper
On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:02:39 GMT, M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
[snip]
>Now may I suggest that I've you want to start a thread on early music, either
>a) do it in the early music group or b) do it in a different thread to this.
[snip]
Sorry, but tough luck. The suggestion that if a person doesn't know
more than one work by a composer proves he wasn't great is dumb. And
the "early music" you don't like is part of the larger set of
"classical music".
Michael
piper
On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:51:34 GMT, M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
[snip]
>Early music _is_ a speciality, in fact I may be correct
>in thinking that Harmonia Mundi are _specialist_ in the field though I may be
>wrong there (am I ?). Therefore, _by definition_ early music is not
>_generally_ listened to.
>
>Mike
[snip]
I hate to break it to you, Mike, but classical music is a specialty,
and Beethoven is NOT generally listened to. _Rap_ is "generally
listened to".
Michael
piper
On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:23:39 GMT, M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
>In article <357e0869...@news.interport.net>,
> pi...@interport.net (piper) wrote:
[snip]
>> >> Your ignorance of a composer's output does not prove that s/he is not
>> >> a great composer.
>> >>
>> >> _I_ rest my case.
>> >
>> >This is totally irrelavant. You are naming composers that are no longer
>> >listen to (in general) because they were totally dwarfed by the genius that
>> >was J.S.Bach.
>>
>> I consider it nonsensical to say that 14th-century composers like
>> Landini and Machaut were "dwarfed" by an 18th-century composer.
>
>I consider it 'nonsensical to bring 14th century composers in to a discussion
>about Eric Satie and Debussy.
And I consider it nonsensical to say that your, or someone else's,
ignorance of a composer's output proves that s/he is not a great
composer. Circular argument, but it brings us back to the point.
>
>>
>> > Satie does not fit into that catagory, name me some modern
>> >greats that no one has heard of.
>>
>
>(The above Question has been ignored)
As I think I said to Clare, I don't know what or who you've heard of.
But how can one answer a question about someone who "_no one_ has ever
heard of"?
Do you want a list of some underrated 20th-century composers? Have you
heard anything by Andre Jolivet? What about Ralph Shapey?
[snip]
>> > Of course the sons of Bach don't count,
>>
>> Don't count how?
>
>I don't want to sound flip, but I meant that Bach would have a hard time
>dwarfing people that hadn't actually had fair chance to start writting music.
>Give them chance to be born, mature and learn to write (sons of Bach ?).
You're wrong. Bach's sons have been devalued by invidious comparison
with their father ever since J.S. Bach was deified in the 19th
century, and this is still true, though somewhat less than before.
J.S. Bach's ANCESTORS, e.g. Johann Michael Bach, also don't get enough
credit, and for much the same reason.
>
>>
>> > in
>> >fact CPE Bach was instrumental in developing modern Sonata form and is a much
>> >greater composer than Satie.
>>
>> I love C.P.E. Bach and consider him highly underrated, but I also
>> appreciate Satie.
>>
>
>I too find C.P.E.Bach but again he is in a different league all together than
>Satie, if for only the one reason given above.
And I think you devalue Satie's contribution to the avant garde.
>
>> > He actually contributed. Tell me, what
>> >pioneering things did Satie do, why is Satie great.
>>
>> Think of Satie as the antithesis of Wagner. It was his light,
>> "trifling", anti-Romantic pieces which were the beginning of the
>> radical avant garde in many senses.
>
>Fine, then again, I ask this same question (I fear ad nauseum). If Satie was
>so good, why do we only get to hear 'that melody of his'.
So your supposition, again, is that the choices of classical radio
stations are the sole proof of quality? Parades is in the repertoire,
by the way. I guess you think that since the "Canon" is all you hear
by Pachelbel, this PROVES nothing else he wrote was any good. And
"Bolero" must be Ravel's greatest work because it's his most popular?
(Ugh!)
>
>
>>
>> >If you didn't know, the
>> >Debussy work "Afternoon after the Faun" affected virtually all music after
>> >it.
>>
>> I'm a Doctor and Professor of music, and also a flutist. I _think_ I
>> know the significance of this work.
>
>Great, then you will appreciated my original post that said please don't
>compare Satie with Debussy.
No, I didn't, silly.
>I think I'm getting somewhere now.
Into quicksand.
>
>>
>> Also, Debussy is one of my favorite composers, so don't misinterpret
>> any of my remarks as deprecating Debussy in any way.
>>
>> > What similar monument has Satie wrote ?
>>
>> Satie was an anti-monumental composer. As I said, the antithesis of
>> Wagner. He was more radical than Debussy, whose "impressionism" was
>> more of an outgrowth of Romanticism than Satie's was. If you like only
>> great edifices, you will never appreciate a beautifully-built,
>> deceptively simple home.
>
>Read previous question again.
[snip]
I answered it. Not all questions have a "yes" or "no" answer.
Parades is a great work. All right, I guess that may be his
"monument". But you didn't pay attention to what I said about
"monuments". I think you could say the same thing about painter Le
Douanier Rousseau. No, he didn't paint "monuments", but did that make
his Primitivist style any less meritorious? I think your rigid
adherence to the categories you make amounts to blinders.
Michael
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <6lnh3f$rcb$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
matthew...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> I'm with Dave on this (as are, I suspect, the majority of the readers of
> these posts).
Enter K9, the Time Lords trusty sidekick.
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <6lm3qv$mmb$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
>
> M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
> : In article <6ljsm6$cci$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
> : dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
> : >
> : > Mike Holme (M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk) wrote:
> : > > someone else wrote:
> : >
(irrelevant ancient history snipped)
>
> : I know
> : very little about pre J.S.Bach Composers and don't care to know to be
honest.
>
> As you wish. IMHO you're missing some excellent music, but that's up to
> you.
My Background
-------------
As I said above. I know very little about pre J.S.Bach Composers. I'm a
pianist, play every day and love music. 95% of the music I listen to is piano
music, I'm acquanted with the entire piano repertoire of both Satie and
Debussy (I'm not saying I've played it all). Both composers were above all
other things, composers for the piano.
(more history snipped)
>
> You might consider doing a little reading. Or better yet, a little
> listening. Or better still, maybe a lot of each. If that's being a "nerd,"
> there should be more of them IMHO.
I didn't say that. I was implying that to move over to the ground of early
music I'd have to get a book out. That I would consider rather lame or
"nerdish" on my part. Excuse me amount whilst I find that copy of Groves ?
(snip)
>
> So much for "back to Satie." In what way was Josquin superseded by J.S.
> Bach?
I'm sorry, I should have said "After my recap, back to Satie". Look, please
understand, I'm not playing your game of leading this thread to _your_
territory. We are talking about modern composers, not dinosaurs. Oh and BTW
it doesn't wash with me to _tell me_ that you're intellegent, e.g. Someone
said "I'm a Doctor and Professor", prove it (something that poster seemed to
fail to do at a very early herdle with his misunderstanding about the
implications of birth in relation to time).
Perhaps I can suggest a modern composer _for you_. Messian is not (generally)
played much. His organ music is perhaps played more than his piano music.
Nevertheless, we don't hear alot of Messian (again, generally). Does this
mean that Messian is an incompetent composer, of course not. Look what
Messian tried to do for modern music. He created a whole new way of composing
using his "modes of limited transposition", it's all in that book of his. Now
lets compare this to what Satie did. Satie acted like a clown, did nothing
clever, took the easy way out, yet you support him. I'm sorry but I don't
understand the logic of that. Satie to me is like the modern "artist" who
puts a pile of bricks in an art gallery and claims it's art. Or the painter
who paints a number of baked bean cans and calls that art. Perhaps they've
got away with it due to the eccentric nature of it, as I said earlier (or was
that via email) we all love an odd ball.
(more irrelevant history snipped)
>
> Who says the "musical powers" have any kind of "conspiracy" against
> Satie's output? Who are these "musical powers?" What role, if any, does
> marketing or chance play in all this?
>
> Dave
>
The musical powers are popular opinion, which is weighted very heavily towards
the inescapable conclusion that, Satie only wrote one piece of music that
people want to listen to, "That Melody of his".
Others may disagree but they tend to be similiar eccentrics such as John Cage
how once took literally Satie's comment to play a repeat 800+ times. What did
Cage offer the world ? 4'33''. Similiar mentality can be found in Stockhausen
who writes music in 143/4 time or similar number and what does that bar
contain ? The same chord 143 times, brilliant, all hail, what pioneers. Have
often do we hear that piece ? answer - never. All of them eccentric (which
some people can't resist) but talentless.
Myself I favour Satie's mentors opinion of him. His piano teacher suggested
he concentrate on composition and his composition teacher suggested he
concentrate on piano.
Mike
Mike Holme
I used the words speciality and generally _within_ the field of
classical music, which is the nature of this newsgroup. I assume that
most of the people reading this group are _primarily_ classical music
listeners.
The Professor has yet again showed us his lack of basic common sense,
this he managed with spectacular form in regard to Bach and his Son's,
now he has done it yet again in the post above well done Prof.
I await his next blunder.
Mike
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <357f89ea...@news.interport.net>,
pi...@interport.net (piper) wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:23:39 GMT, M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
>
> >In article <357e0869...@news.interport.net>,
> > pi...@interport.net (piper) wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >> >> Your ignorance of a composer's output does not prove that s/he is not
> >> >> a great composer.
> >> >>
> >> >> _I_ rest my case.
> >> >
> >> >This is totally irrelavant. You are naming composers that are no longer
> >> >listen to (in general) because they were totally dwarfed by the genius
that
> >> >was J.S.Bach.
> >>
> >> I consider it nonsensical to say that 14th-century composers like
> >> Landini and Machaut were "dwarfed" by an 18th-century composer.
> >
> >I consider it 'nonsensical to bring 14th century composers in to a discussion
> >about Eric Satie and Debussy.
>
> And I consider it nonsensical to say that your, or someone else's,
> ignorance of a composer's output proves that s/he is not a great
> composer. Circular argument, but it brings us back to the point.
I'm familiar with almost all of Satie's music.
> >
> >>
> >> > Satie does not fit into that catagory, name me some modern
> >> >greats that no one has heard of.
> >>
> >
> >(The above Question has been ignored)
>
> As I think I said to Clare, I don't know what or who you've heard of.
> But how can one answer a question about someone who "_no one_ has ever
> heard of"?
>
> Do you want a list of some underrated 20th-century composers? Have you
> heard anything by Andre Jolivet? What about Ralph Shapey?
>
Of course not, I did ask for underrated composers, I asked for great
composers, i.e. those that can be compared with Debussy, Satie not being
one.
> [snip]
> >> > Of course the sons of Bach don't count,
> >>
> >> Don't count how?
> >
> >I don't want to sound flip, but I meant that Bach would have a hard time
> >dwarfing people that hadn't actually had fair chance to start writting music.
> >Give them chance to be born, mature and learn to write (sons of Bach ?).
>
> You're wrong. Bach's sons have been devalued by invidious comparison
> with their father ever since J.S. Bach was deified in the 19th
> century, and this is still true, though somewhat less than before.
> J.S. Bach's ANCESTORS, e.g. Johann Michael Bach, also don't get enough
> credit, and for much the same reason.
> >
Myself I consider J.S.Bach to be the greatest composer ever to have lived, so
we could extend that somewhat. You missed the point of what I said. The point
I was making about J.S.Bach is that Bach perfected the, essentially vocal
style, that was the Baroque and much that came earlier. Those coming after
Bach, e.g. his C.P.E.Bach in particular could not follow such genius and
worked towards forming the Sonata form, perfected by the other Giant of
music, Beethoven.
> >>
> >> > in
> >> >fact CPE Bach was instrumental in developing modern Sonata form and is a
much
> >> >greater composer than Satie.
> >>
> >> I love C.P.E. Bach and consider him highly underrated, but I also
> >> appreciate Satie.
> >>
> >
> >I too find C.P.E.Bach but again he is in a different league all together than
> >Satie, if for only the one reason given above.
>
> And I think you devalue Satie's contribution to the avant garde.
See my other post made today for my opinions related to this.
> >
> >> > He actually contributed. Tell me, what
> >> >pioneering things did Satie do, why is Satie great.
> >>
> >> Think of Satie as the antithesis of Wagner. It was his light,
> >> "trifling", anti-Romantic pieces which were the beginning of the
> >> radical avant garde in many senses.
> >
> >Fine, then again, I ask this same question (I fear ad nauseum). If Satie was
> >so good, why do we only get to hear 'that melody of his'.
>
> So your supposition, again, is that the choices of classical radio
> stations are the sole proof of quality? Parades is in the repertoire,
> by the way. I guess you think that since the "Canon" is all you hear
> by Pachelbel, this PROVES nothing else he wrote was any good. And
> "Bolero" must be Ravel's greatest work because it's his most popular?
As you indicated earlier, you are a flutist. Try telling pianists the above
statement. Ravel himself was of course a pianist and like Satie and
Debussy much of his output, was for piano, of which I know every single work.
> (Ugh!)
> >
> >
No, my years of listening to the radio, talking to other musicians, browsing
CD shops and my own modest ability to judge good from bad in music, based on
an acquantance of many other composers works.
> >>
> >> >If you didn't know, the
>> >Debussy work "Afternoon after the Faun" affected virtually all music
after
> >> >it.
> >>
> >> I'm a Doctor and Professor of music, and also a flutist. I _think_ I
> >> know the significance of this work.
> >
> >Great, then you will appreciated my original post that said please don't
> >compare Satie with Debussy.
>
> No, I didn't, silly.
Then I still have work to do, see my other post dated today.
>
> >I think I'm getting somewhere now.
>
> Into quicksand.
>
> >>
> >> Also, Debussy is one of my favorite composers, so don't misinterpret
> >> any of my remarks as deprecating Debussy in any way.
> >>
> >> > What similar monument has Satie wrote ?
> >>
> >> Satie was an anti-monumental composer. As I said, the antithesis of
> >> Wagner. He was more radical than Debussy, whose "impressionism" was
> >> more of an outgrowth of Romanticism than Satie's was. If you like only
> >> great edifices, you will never appreciate a beautifully-built,
> >> deceptively simple home.
> >
> >Read previous question again.
> [snip]
>
> I answered it. Not all questions have a "yes" or "no" answer.
>
> Parades is a great work. All right, I guess that may be his
> "monument". But you didn't pay attention to what I said about
> "monuments". I think you could say the same thing about painter Le
> Douanier Rousseau. No, he didn't paint "monuments", but did that make
> his Primitivist style any less meritorious? I think your rigid
> adherence to the categories you make amounts to blinders.
>
> Michael
>
>
I don't know this painter so can't comment.
Jose Oscar Marques
On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:51:20 GMT M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote in article
<6lojs8$a3u$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
> The point
>I was making about J.S.Bach is that Bach perfected the, essentially vocal
>style, that was the Baroque and much that came earlier.
Totally wrong. Read something about the history of music before posting.
Otherwise you pass for a fool.
David Cleary
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
: In article <6lm3qv$mmb$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
: dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
: >
: > M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
: > : In article <6ljsm6$cci$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
: > : dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
: > : >
: > : > Mike Holme (M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk) wrote:
: > : > > someone else wrote:
[snip]
: > You might consider doing a little reading. Or better yet, a little
: > listening. Or better still, maybe a lot of each. If that's being a "nerd,"
: > there should be more of them IMHO.
: I didn't say that. I was implying that to move over to the ground of early
: music I'd have to get a book out. That I would consider rather lame or
: "nerdish" on my part.
To do a little reading is "nerdish?" That's what I was talking about
above.
: Excuse me amount whilst I find that copy of Groves ?
Beats trying to improvise on a subject you don't know about, don't you
think?
: > So much for "back to Satie." In what way was Josquin superseded by J.S.
: > Bach?
: I'm sorry, I should have said "After my recap, back to Satie". Look, please
: understand, I'm not playing your game of leading this thread to _your_
: territory. We are talking about modern composers, not dinosaurs.
1. how do you know what "my territory" is? Or are you just assuming?
2. you're calling Satie and Debussy and J.S. Bach "modern composers?" On
what grounds? And yes, I read your previous post.
3. who says anything pre-Bach is "dinosaur" country? Besides you?
: Perhaps I can suggest a modern composer _for you_. Messian is not (generally)
: played much. His organ music is perhaps played more than his piano music.
: Nevertheless, we don't hear alot of Messian (again, generally). Does this
: mean that Messian is an incompetent composer, of course not. Look what
: Messian tried to do for modern music. He created a whole new way of composing
: using his "modes of limited transposition", it's all in that book of his.
Hmmm. You want to talk Messiaen? Fine composer IMHO. Want to, for example,
talk about his use of rhythm and pitch patterns in the first movement of
"Quartet for the End of Time?" And how this relates to color and talea
usage in isorhythmic motets ("dinosaur music" by your reckoning)? And are
you aware that the use of modes of limited transposition did not originate
with Messiaen? For example, Debussy used whole-tone scales and Bartok used
octatonic scales, both of which are examples of what Messiaen called
"modes of limited transposition." Are you aware that Messiaen was a strong
influence on the work of Boulez and Stockhausen (the last a composer
you've admited below you think is "talentless")?
I find your assumption about me and what I may or may not know to be very
patronizing. Would you like to take a wager on how much music of Messiaen
I've heard and can discuss?
: Now
: lets compare this to what Satie did. Satie acted like a clown, did nothing
: clever, took the easy way out, yet you support him. I'm sorry but I don't
: understand the logic of that.
1. How do you know Satie "took the easy way out?" Could you be more
specific? From what I've read of his life, it was not an easy one.
2. How do you know Satie "did nothing clever?" What do you mean by this?
3. How did Satie "act like a clown?" Are you talking musically? In his
personal life? Could you elaborate?
: Satie to me is like the modern "artist" who
: puts a pile of bricks in an art gallery and claims it's art. Or the painter
: who paints a number of baked bean cans and calls that art. Perhaps they've
: got away with it due to the eccentric nature of it, as I said earlier (or was
: that via email) we all love an odd ball.
This all suggests that you know what "art" is and is not. Would you please
provide a definition so there's a basis of further discussion?
: > Who says the "musical powers" have any kind of "conspiracy" against
: > Satie's output? Who are these "musical powers?" What role, if any, does
: > marketing or chance play in all this?
: The musical powers are popular opinion,
How do you know this is the case? Don't performers count? Impresarios and
booking agents? Record company executives?
: which is weighted very heavily towards
: the inescapable conclusion that, Satie only wrote one piece of music that
: people want to listen to, "That Melody of his".
According to whom--other than you and perhaps the radio station you listen
to?
: Others may disagree but they tend to be similiar eccentrics such as John Cage
: how once took literally Satie's comment to play a repeat 800+ times. What did
: Cage offer the world ? 4'33''.
Are you aware that Cage wrote a lot of music of different types, including
works for prepared piano and percussion ensemble? His output is in fact
quite large.
And how do you know what those who disagree with you believe? Do you
think, for example, that you can characterize me and what I believe in
detail from one or two posts?
: Similiar mentality can be found in Stockhausen
: who writes music in 143/4 time or similar number and what does that bar
: contain ?
What is the similarity to Cage's 4'33" here? Would you care to elaborate?
: The same chord 143 times, brilliant, all hail, what pioneers. Have
: often do we hear that piece ? answer - never. All of them eccentric (which
: some people can't resist) but talentless.
How do you know Stockhausen is "talentless?" Have you heard any of his
muic besides his piano works?
: Myself I favour Satie's mentors opinion of him. His piano teacher suggested
: he concentrate on composition and his composition teacher suggested he
: concentrate on piano.
Rimsky-Korsakov told Stravinsky not to quit his law studies. What does
this prove, except perhaps that forecasting a person's future is an
inexact science?
Dave
Jose Oscar Marques
On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:47:30 GMT mar...@Xnewsguy.com (Jose Oscar
Marques) wrote in article <35800992...@enews.newsguy.com>:
>M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
>The reason that the music by the composers listed above is no
>longer very popular today is because it was superseeded, with dramatic effect
>by such people as J.S.Bach The horse and cart was excellent in it's day, but
>it doesn't get much press today.
>> The point
>>I was making about J.S.Bach is that Bach perfected the, essentially vocal
>>style, that was the Baroque and much that came earlier.
>Totally wrong. Read something about the history of music before posting.
>Otherwise you pass for a fool.
OK, I re-read my postings on this and wasn't happy. I have been
aggressive. I am sorry. I will try to explain things in more detail
here. Since my interlocutor thinks it is "nerdish" to consult books, I
will play at the same level and write everything from the top of my
head, so forgive me any imprecision.
1) To think that everything that came before Bach ("the, essentially
vocal style, that was the Baroque and much that came earlier") was in
any sense surpassed by him shows, to put it mildly, a poor understanding
of the history of music and a shallow evaluative perspective of musical
matters as such. From the manuscripts at St Martial, Paris and Reims to
the birth of Bach we have 500 years of Western musical creation. That's
to say, twice the time we have from the death of Bach to our time. Only
a naive parochialism could suppose that all musical masterworks belong
to the last period, and none to the former. On the contrary, if geniuses
are evenly distributed along the centuries, we should expect twice as
much great composers in the time before Bach than thereafter. (Of
course, those who judge music according to the "horse and cart against
airplane" paradigm will probably think otherwise...)
2) The great polyphonic style of early Renaissance was completely dead
by the time Bach was born. So, he couldn't possibly have "superseded"
it. He, in fact, wouldn't know how to write in that difficult and
elaborate style; his music was of a completely different sort, he was a
late Baroque composer of the basso continuo age, not a polyphonist in
the strict Renaissance sense.
Those who superseded the polyphonic writing of the XVI Century were the
founders of opera, composers like Peri, Monteverdi, and others, around
1600, who begin to compose in a much simpler style of accompanied
melody. This happened, 100 years before Bach began to compose anything
of importance. The reason why one style replaced other was because the
old one went out of fashion. And it didn't go out of fashion because the
new music was in any sense "better" - fashion and quality rarely
coincide. I know I am simplifying things - details may be found in any
good book on the history of music
3) Bach's music itself quickly went out of fashion when a new style
appeared around 1760, with composers like Sammartini, the Mannheim
school and many others. This was a much simpler and "popular" style, and
old J.S. became completely forgotten: everybody then would associate the
name "Bach" to the "Bach of Hamburg" (C.P.E) or the "Bach of Milan
(later London)" (J.C.). Now, would anybody say, on account of that, that
J.S. Bach's music was "superseded" by Mozart and Haydn, who perfected
the classical style? Hardly. However, the situation is exactly
comparable to the position of Bach towards the old polyphonic masters.
To sum up - composers like Machaut, Dufay, Des Pres, Ockeghem and many
others are towering peaks in the history of music, as high as
Monteverdi, Bach, Beethoven, Schoenberg or whomever one may choose as a
paradigm of greatness. Their music was never surpassed by anybody, they
reached perfection in their style, and when this style simply ceased to
be practiced, this happened for social or historical reasons that have
nothing to do with the issue of musical quality. There is no "progress"
in music, and any comparison with the history of the transportation or
any other technology misses the point miserably.
Pelleas
Between Satie and Debussy you have some misknowed french composers of the
first middle of this century
J.CRAS, for instance
The french composer Robert CABY (who as knowed SATIE)
as written music as SATIE (He as written Gnossiennes 4 , 5 , and 6 for
instance
and also others pieces of "SATIE" !!! )
Many pieces of SATIE was orchestred by him
(I have the manuscrit of sonneries de la Rose + Croix)
--
With best regards from PARIS .
Claude MICHEL
those happy, few lovers of rare music who are interested in out of print
French classical music of the golden age"
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <6lp8q3$6g3$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
>
> M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
> : In article <6lm3qv$mmb$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
> : dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
> : >
> : > M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
> : > : In article <6ljsm6$cci$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
> : > : dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
> : > : >
> : > : > Mike Holme (M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk) wrote:
> : > : > > someone else wrote:
> : > : >
>
> [snip]
>
> think?
I can apply logic and reason to most things.
But this leads me to my main point, see end.
> : I'm sorry, I should have said "After my recap, back to Satie". Look, please
> : understand, I'm not playing your game of leading this thread to _your_
> : territory. We are talking about modern composers, not dinosaurs.
>
> 1. how do you know what "my territory" is? Or are you just assuming?
No I'm not assuming, you studied music a college haven't you. Was it you that
asked me the same question ?
See end.
>
> 2. you're calling Satie and Debussy and J.S. Bach "modern composers?" On
> what grounds? And yes, I read your previous post.
My definition of the word modern, i.e. Music based on e.g. Bach onwards with
emphasis on 3rds and fifths, as opposed to earlier music some of which was
based on the perfect intervals if we program the Tardis in such a way.
>
> 3. who says anything pre-Bach is "dinosaur" country? Besides you?
>
I agree, I do have a unique way with words, thank you for pointing that out.
> : Perhaps I can suggest a modern composer _for you_. Messian is not
(generally)
> : played much. His organ music is perhaps played more than his piano music.
> : Nevertheless, we don't hear alot of Messian (again, generally). Does this
> : mean that Messian is an incompetent composer, of course not. Look what
> : Messian tried to do for modern music. He created a whole new way of
composing
> : using his "modes of limited transposition", it's all in that book of his.
>
> Hmmm. You want to talk Messiaen? Fine composer IMHO. Want to, for example,
No, of course I don't, but I knew that you, or Michael would., that's exactly
why I asked. Again see below.
> talk about his use of rhythm and pitch patterns in the first movement of
> "Quartet for the End of Time?" And how this relates to color and talea
> usage in isorhythmic motets ("dinosaur music" by your reckoning)? And are
> you aware that the use of modes of limited transposition did not originate
> with Messiaen? For example, Debussy used whole-tone scales and Bartok used
Of course I was aware of whole tone scales in Debussy e.g. Prelude Book 1
"Voiles" a classic example.
> octatonic scales, both of which are examples of what Messiaen called
> "modes of limited transposition." Are you aware that Messiaen was a strong
> influence on the work of Boulez and Stockhausen (the last a composer
> you've admited below you think is "talentless")?
That was poor choice of word. Stockhausen is another eccentric who wrote music
for others in a failed attempt to forge ahead. Stockhausen like, Cage and
other eccentrics, are not in touch with reality and humanity. See end.
>
> I find your assumption about me and what I may or may not know to be very
> patronizing. Would you like to take a wager on how much music of Messiaen
> I've heard and can discuss?
Probably lots, see end.
>
> : Now
> : lets compare this to what Satie did. Satie acted like a clown, did nothing
> : clever, took the easy way out, yet you support him. I'm sorry but I don't
> : understand the logic of that.
>
> 1. How do you know Satie "took the easy way out?" Could you be more
> specific? From what I've read of his life, it was not an easy one.
Let me put it like this. He's like the comedian who trys to get cheap laughs.
He takes the easy route by being e.g. coarse. He's never witty though.
>
> 2. How do you know Satie "did nothing clever?" What do you mean by this?
As I've said, I'm acquanted with his entire piano output. I've heard
people improvise on the spot better music.
>
> 3. How did Satie "act like a clown?" Are you talking musically? In his
> personal life? Could you elaborate?
>
Both, he dressed like a clown, behaved like a clown, wrote such pieces as
"Flabby Preludes", gave performers directions such as "With a Nightingale with
Touthache", many, many other similiar examples which I don't care to quote.
> : Satie to me is like the modern "artist" who
> : puts a pile of bricks in an art gallery and claims it's art. Or the painter
> : who paints a number of baked bean cans and calls that art. Perhaps they've
> : got away with it due to the eccentric nature of it, as I said earlier (or
was
> : that via email) we all love an odd ball.
>
> This all suggests that you know what "art" is and is not. Would you please
> provide a definition so there's a basis of further discussion?
No I'm not starting a discussion about art. I'm not a painter or whatever, but
you will never convince me that a pile of bricks is art, _never_.
>
> : > Who says the "musical powers" have any kind of "conspiracy" against
> : > Satie's output? Who are these "musical powers?" What role, if any, does
> : > marketing or chance play in all this?
>
> : The musical powers are popular opinion,
>
> How do you know this is the case? Don't performers count? Impresarios and
> booking agents? Record company executives?
Other course, they all fall into that bracket. How often have you been to a
piano recital and the Music of Erik Satie has been played. Apart from a hand
full of notable exceptions e.g. Joanna Magregor, people don't play it. Imagine
it.
Vladimir Ashkenazy
Wigmore Hall, London
Rachmaninov Etude Tableau
Beethoven Op 31/2
Chopin Fantasy
Erik Satie Flabby Preludes
Rachmaninov Etude Tableau
>
> : which is weighted very heavily towards
> : the inescapable conclusion that, Satie only wrote one piece of music that
> : people want to listen to, "That Melody of his".
>
> According to whom--other than you and perhaps the radio station you listen
> to?
I repeat, popular opinion. You are showing the same lack of reasoning and
logical facility as you friend the Professor. Think David, why may I use the
phrase "That Melody of his", what are the implications of this.
>
> : Others may disagree but they tend to be similiar eccentrics such as John
Cage
> : how once took literally Satie's comment to play a repeat 800+ times. What
did
> : Cage offer the world ? 4'33''.
>
> Are you aware that Cage wrote a lot of music of different types, including
> works for prepared piano and percussion ensemble? His output is in fact
> quite large.
More eccentric nonsence music.
>
> And how do you know what those who disagree with you believe? Do you
> think, for example, that you can characterize me and what I believe in
> detail from one or two posts?
See below
>
> : Similiar mentality can be found in Stockhausen
> : who writes music in 143/4 time or similar number and what does that bar
> : contain ?
>
> What is the similarity to Cage's 4'33" here? Would you care to elaborate?
Eccentricity.
>
> : The same chord 143 times, brilliant, all hail, what pioneers. Have
> : often do we hear that piece ? answer - never. All of them eccentric (which
> : some people can't resist) but talentless.
>
> How do you know Stockhausen is "talentless?" Have you heard any of his
> muic besides his piano works?
>
I've _never listen_ to Stockhausen. I took one look at his piano scores and
have never even bothered to listen.
> : Myself I favour Satie's mentors opinion of him. His piano teacher suggested
> : he concentrate on composition and his composition teacher suggested he
> : concentrate on piano.
>
> Rimsky-Korsakov told Stravinsky not to quit his law studies. What does
> this prove, except perhaps that forecasting a person's future is an
> inexact science?
>
> Dave
>
Both David and Professor Michael have one important thing in common. Both are
or have been musical academics. There has been a long, long time for the
study of the real masters (e.g. Bach and Beethoven) to have taken place.
Music from the Baroque to the Romantic and early 20th century has been
studied, restudied, etc, etc, for decades. Academics like David and Michael
have a vested interest in early music, which they jumped straight for, and
very modern music, which I can see they are clearly eager to discuss (a
theory I tested and proved correct). These type of people love modern music
because they can write papers on it and talk till they are blue in the face
about how good it is. Musical academia is full of people who study the
extremes, i.e. Time Lords who jump back and forward and skip the best music
which the _majority_ of people want to listen to. They think you have to have
a degree to understand their specialities. It only exist for them though, the
average (reasonable) person isn't interested. Erik Satie is supported by
these people because as someone in this very thread said, he paved the way to
the Avant Garde and that's exactly what these biased people arguing with me,
thrive on, they need it to justify their own existance in their Ivory Towers.
Mike Holme, representing sensible, reasoning, music loving people, wasting
his time talking to biased people how have a vested interest in no marks of
music like Erik Satie and the other eccentrics he paved the way for.
Mike Holme
Thank you very much Claude, and you're French to.
"those happy, _few_ lovers of _rare_ music who are interested in _out of
print_ French classical music". Such as that inspired by Eric Satie ?
I think so.
ROFL
Mike Holme
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk
In article <35800992...@enews.newsguy.com>,
mar...@Xnewsguy.com (Jose Oscar Marques) wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:51:20 GMT M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote in article
> <6lojs8$a3u$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
>
> >I was making about J.S.Bach is that Bach perfected the, essentially vocal
> >style, that was the Baroque and much that came earlier.
>
> Otherwise you pass for a fool.
I've read your reply to your own post (at least the start of it. You'll excuse
me for not reading it all as you clearly hadn't read all I have had to say
either before making the post I am now replying to).
Anyway, back to Bach. When I used the term 'essentially vocal' perhaps I
should have said polyphonic, to be clearer. Early music was more often than
not sung and is hence vocally derived. Bach's music though more elaborate, is
_in many cases_ (obvious exception such as the Bb Prelude from Book 1 of the
WTC, etc, etc), and in particular, when non essential decoration is removed,
no different.
Mike
>
> --
> Jose Oscar Marques
> (to reply by e-mail remove the "X" from my address)
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
Pablo
* FWIW, and for just one example, the last few times I checked the classical
* charts, Anonymous 4's albums of medieval music were consistently outselling
* just about any given recent Bach or Satie or Debussy release one might
* mention...
Not to divert this thread completely, but isn't Anonymous 4 competing with
the Erotic--er, the Eroica Trio for to be the Spice Girls of classical
music? ;-)
p
--
pee aye you elle eff @ pee aye en eye ecks . sea oh em
or
peter able uncle love fox @ peter able nan item xray . charlie oboe mike
Pelleas
I repeat a great deal of Satie piece are not written by Satie (Gnossiennes
4,5,6), Uspud, ......
But by Robert Caby ( a french composer) 1900-1992 ?
who as well knowed Satie .
He has orchestred a lot of Satie music .
I have well know him - he as give to me orchestration of "Sonneries de la
Rose + Croix"
Jose Oscar Marques
On Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:27:40 GMT M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote in article
<6lracc$6n9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>:
>I've read your reply to your own post (at least the start of it. You'll excuse
>me for not reading it all as you clearly hadn't read all I have had to say
>either before making the post I am now replying to).
I understand. You chose to take the easy way out.
>Anyway, back to Bach. When I used the term 'essentially vocal' perhaps I
>should have said polyphonic, to be clearer. Early music was more often than
>not sung and is hence vocally derived. Bach's music though more elaborate, is
>_in many cases_ (obvious exception such as the Bb Prelude from Book 1 of the
>WTC, etc, etc), and in particular, when non essential decoration is removed,
>no different.
OK. You are hopeless. I won't come back to this topic anymore. You don't
have the least idea of what you are talking about. Bach's music "more
elaborate" than the music of the ancient Flemish masters, indeed...
Bach's music is magnificent in its way, but in terms of sheer
complexity, even the Bm Mass or the Art of Fugue pale when compared to
the polyphonic pyrotechnics of people like Ockeghem and Obrecht.
David Cleary
M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
: In article <6lp8q3$6g3$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
: dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
: >
: > M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
: > : In article <6lm3qv$mmb$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
: > : dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
: > : >
: > : > M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
: > : > : In article <6ljsm6$cci$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
: > : > : dcl...@fas.harvard.edu (David Cleary) wrote:
: > : > : >
: > : > : > Mike Holme (M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk) wrote:
: > : > : > > someone else wrote:
: > : > : >
: >
: > [snip]
: >
: > Beats trying to improvise on a subject you don't know about, don't you
: > think?
: I can apply logic and reason to most things.
You had me fooled.
> : > 1. how do you know what "my territory" is? Or are you just assuming?
: No I'm not assuming, you studied music a college haven't you.
Yes. So what?
: Was it you that
: asked me the same question ?
No.
: > 2. you're calling Satie and Debussy and J.S. Bach "modern composers?" On
: > what grounds? And yes, I read your previous post.
: My definition of the word modern, i.e. Music based on e.g. Bach onwards with
: emphasis on 3rds and fifths, as opposed to earlier music some of which was
: based on the perfect intervals if we program the Tardis in such a way.
What are you talking about? All the Renaissance and Baroque music I've
heard has an extremely strong emphasis on 3rds and 5ths. And in case
you're not aware of it, 5ths are perfect intervals.
: > : Perhaps I can suggest a modern composer _for you_. Messian is not
: (generally)
: > : played much. His organ music is perhaps played more than his piano music.
: > : Nevertheless, we don't hear alot of Messian (again, generally). Does this
: > : mean that Messian is an incompetent composer, of course not. Look what
: > : Messian tried to do for modern music. He created a whole new way of
: composing
: > : using his "modes of limited transposition", it's all in that book of his.
: >
: > Hmmm. You want to talk Messiaen? Fine composer IMHO. Want to, for example,
: No, of course I don't, but I knew that you, or Michael would., that's exactly
: why I asked. Again see below.
I like to talk Messaien. I also like to talk Bach, Schumann, Schubert,
Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Mahler, Schoenberg, Bartok, Josquin,
Monteverdi, Machaut, Handel, and Schuetz--and The Beatles, Buddy Holly,
Elvis Costello, and early R.E.M. And lots more besides. In short, I like
to talk music. What's wrong with that? If you want to ghetto-ize styles
and approaches, that's not of interest to me.
: > talk about his use of rhythm and pitch patterns in the first movement of
: > "Quartet for the End of Time?" And how this relates to color and talea
: > usage in isorhythmic motets ("dinosaur music" by your reckoning)? And are
: > you aware that the use of modes of limited transposition did not originate
: > with Messiaen? For example, Debussy used whole-tone scales and Bartok used
: Of course I was aware of whole tone scales in Debussy e.g. Prelude Book 1
: "Voiles" a classic example.
That's fine. But the whole-tone scale is one of Messiaen's "modes of
limited transposition," though Debussy didn't call it that.
: > octatonic scales, both of which are examples of what Messiaen called
: > "modes of limited transposition." Are you aware that Messiaen was a strong
: > influence on the work of Boulez and Stockhausen (the last a composer
: > you've admited below you think is "talentless")?
: That was poor choice of word. Stockhausen is another eccentric who wrote music
: for others in a failed attempt to forge ahead. Stockhausen like, Cage and
: other eccentrics, are not in touch with reality and humanity. See end.
I can see that you don't like these composers. Fine for you--no one's
forcing you to like them. Are you so arrogant that you believe you speak
for a general "everyone?"
: > : Now
: > : lets compare this to what Satie did. Satie acted like a clown, did nothing
: > : clever, took the easy way out, yet you support him. I'm sorry but I don't
: > : understand the logic of that.
: >
: > 1. How do you know Satie "took the easy way out?" Could you be more
: > specific? From what I've read of his life, it was not an easy one.
: Let me put it like this. He's like the comedian who trys to get cheap laughs.
: He takes the easy route by being e.g. coarse. He's never witty though.
You're speaking musically then? Have you heard any Satie other than his
piano music? If not, try "Socrate" or "Parade." IMHO the former is his
best piece, very moving in its stark way--at least to this listener.
Perhaps you won't agree.
: > 2. How do you know Satie "did nothing clever?" What do you mean by this?
: As I've said, I'm acquanted with his entire piano output. I've heard
: people improvise on the spot better music.
Long after the time Satie wrote it, unless you're old enough to have been
alive in Satie's time. Some folks can do wonderful style studies.
And to be fair to any composer, you need to know enough of the *entire*
output before judging. If you judge Bartok only by his earliest works,
you'll think he's a Liszt clone.
: > 3. How did Satie "act like a clown?" Are you talking musically? In his
: > personal life? Could you elaborate?
: Both, he dressed like a clown, behaved like a clown,
He did? I must have missed this one:
[bright flashing lights and carnival music are heard]
Voice-over announcer: Hhhhhhheyyyyyyy kiiiiiiiiiiids! It's the Satie the
Clown Show!
[Satie enters dressed in white greasepaint with a bright red nose, a
bright red fright-wig on his head, big frilly clothes, and size 50 EEEEE
shoes.]
Satie: Hiya kiddies! You look like you could use a bath! <He takes a large
seltzer bottle from his pocket and sprays the front row with water>
:)
: wrote such pieces as
: "Flabby Preludes", gave performers directions such as "With a Nightingale with
: Touthache", many, many other similiar examples which I don't care to quote.
Must be sad to go through life with no sense of humor, Mike.... :)
: > : Satie to me is like the modern "artist" who
: > : puts a pile of bricks in an art gallery and claims it's art. Or the painter
: > : who paints a number of baked bean cans and calls that art. Perhaps they've
: > : got away with it due to the eccentric nature of it, as I said earlier (or
: was
: > : that via email) we all love an odd ball.
: >
: > This all suggests that you know what "art" is and is not. Would you please
: > provide a definition so there's a basis of further discussion?
: No I'm not starting a discussion about art.
Could have fooled me.
: I'm not a painter or whatever, but
: you will never convince me that a pile of bricks is art, _never_.
Ah. Nothing better than someone not in the field to know best, eh?
: > : > Who says the "musical powers" have any kind of "conspiracy" against
: > : > Satie's output? Who are these "musical powers?" What role, if any, does
: > : > marketing or chance play in all this?
: >
: > : The musical powers are popular opinion,
: >
: > How do you know this is the case? Don't performers count? Impresarios and
: > booking agents? Record company executives?
: Other course, they all fall into that bracket.
What does this mean?
: How often have you been to a
: piano recital and the Music of Erik Satie has been played.
So the most performances equals the best music?
: > : which is weighted very heavily towards
: > : the inescapable conclusion that, Satie only wrote one piece of music that
: > : people want to listen to, "That Melody of his".
: >
: > According to whom--other than you and perhaps the radio station you listen
: > to?
: I repeat, popular opinion.
You can repeat it all you like. I'd like to see more than your word for
it.
: You are showing the same lack of reasoning and
: logical facility as you friend the Professor.
Please show how this is the case. In detail, please.
: Think David, why may I use the
: phrase "That Melody of his", what are the implications of this.
That you don't know what you're talking about? :)
: > : Others may disagree but they tend to be similiar eccentrics such as John
: Cage
: > : how once took literally Satie's comment to play a repeat 800+ times. What
: did
: > : Cage offer the world ? 4'33''.
: >
: > Are you aware that Cage wrote a lot of music of different types, including
: > works for prepared piano and percussion ensemble? His output is in fact
: > quite large.
: More eccentric nonsence music.
Gauged from a voluminous knowledge of his output, if it mirrors your
knowledge of Stockhausen's work, no doubt.... :P
: > : Similiar mentality can be found in Stockhausen
: > : who writes music in 143/4 time or similar number and what does that bar
: > : contain ?
: >
: > What is the similarity to Cage's 4'33" here? Would you care to elaborate?
: Eccentricity.
In what way? Please elaborate.
: >
: > : The same chord 143 times, brilliant, all hail, what pioneers. Have
: > : often do we hear that piece ? answer - never. All of them eccentric (which
: > : some people can't resist) but talentless.
: >
: > How do you know Stockhausen is "talentless?" Have you heard any of his
: > muic besides his piano works?
: >
: I've _never listen_ to Stockhausen. I took one look at his piano scores and
: have never even bothered to listen.
This would be priceless if it weren't pathetic.
: Both David and Professor Michael have one important thing in common. Both are
: or have been musical academics. There has been a long, long time for the
: study of the real masters (e.g. Bach and Beethoven) to have taken place.
: Music from the Baroque to the Romantic and early 20th century has been
: studied, restudied, etc, etc, for decades. Academics like David and Michael
: have a vested interest in early music, which they jumped straight for, and
: very modern music, which I can see they are clearly eager to discuss (a
: theory I tested and proved correct). These type of people love modern music
: because they can write papers on it and talk till they are blue in the face
: about how good it is. Musical academia is full of people who study the
: extremes, i.e. Time Lords who jump back and forward and skip the best music
: which the _majority_ of people want to listen to. They think you have to have
: a degree to understand their specialities. It only exist for them though, the
: average (reasonable) person isn't interested. Erik Satie is supported by
: these people because as someone in this very thread said, he paved the way to
: the Avant Garde and that's exactly what these biased people arguing with me,
: thrive on, they need it to justify their own existance in their Ivory Towers.
This is so foolish it doesn't even merit a detailed response. Your
characterization does not fit me very well, for starters.
: Mike Holme, representing sensible, reasoning, music loving people, wasting
: his time talking to biased people how have a vested interest in no marks of
: music like Erik Satie and the other eccentrics he paved the way for.
Please don't bother wasting your time for my sake.
Dave
piper
On Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:30:46 GMT, mar...@Xnewsguy.com (Jose Oscar
Marques) wrote:
>OK. You are hopeless. I won't come back to this topic anymore. You don't
>have the least idea of what you are talking about. Bach's music "more
>elaborate" than the music of the ancient Flemish masters, indeed...
>
>Bach's music is magnificent in its way, but in terms of sheer
>complexity, even the Bm Mass or the Art of Fugue pale when compared to
>the polyphonic pyrotechnics of people like Ockeghem and Obrecht.
>
>
>--
>Jose Oscar Marques
Right, Jose. And Machaut's isometric motets are even MORE complex.
Michael
Matt
Er, look, it doesn't really pay to argue with somebody who imagines
he's a character from a science-fiction spoof series.
--
Matt Fields, DMA http://listen.to/mattaj TwelveToneToyBox http://start.at/tttb
http://e-scrub.com/cgi-bin/wpoison/wpoison.cgi (poison for web-scrubbers)
Satire: http://www.goddard.edu/wgdr/kalvos/fieless1.html
RecentSpams: postm...@ballehs.dk in...@whoodoo.com pmy...@WORLDNET.ATT.NET DeanM...@JAVABASE.COM
piper
>M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
[snip]
>: Both David and Professor Michael have one important thing in common. Both are
>: or have been musical academics. There has been a long, long time for the
>: study of the real masters (e.g. Bach and Beethoven) to have taken place.
>: Music from the Baroque to the Romantic and early 20th century has been
>: studied, restudied, etc, etc, for decades. Academics like David and Michael
>: have a vested interest in early music, which they jumped straight for, and
>: very modern music, which I can see they are clearly eager to discuss (a
>: theory I tested and proved correct). These type of people love modern music
>: because they can write papers on it and talk till they are blue in the face
>: about how good it is. Musical academia is full of people who study the
>: extremes, i.e. Time Lords who jump back and forward and skip the best music
>: which the _majority_ of people want to listen to. They think you have to have
>: a degree to understand their specialities. It only exist for them though, the
>: average (reasonable) person isn't interested. Erik Satie is supported by
>: these people because as someone in this very thread said, he paved the way to
>: the Avant Garde and that's exactly what these biased people arguing with me,
>: thrive on, they need it to justify their own existance in their Ivory Towers.
[snip]
Well, Mr. Holme, this confirms my decision to ignore your postings
lately, but for what it's worth, I am first and foremost a performer.
It might or might not interest you to know that my favorite composers
to perform are J.S. Bach and Claude Debussy.
And, of course, Claude Debussy, though you seem not to know this, was
one of the most important early avant garde composers.
Now go back to your rant, you silly goose. :-)
Michael
nje...@my-dejanews.com
In article <01bd961f$b461c1e0$8169...@week.club-internet.fr>,
"Pelleas" <we...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
> I repeat a great deal of Satie piece are not written by Satie (Gnossiennes
> 4,5,6), Uspud, ......
> But by Robert Caby ( a french composer) 1900-1992 ?
> who as well knowed Satie .
> He has orchestred a lot of Satie music .
> I have well know him - he as give to me orchestration of "Sonneries de la
> Rose + Croix"
Caby did not compose Gnossiennes Nos 4-6 nor Uspud. I have this confirmed
by the prominent musicologists Steven Whiting and Robert Orledge.
He did however make important contributions to the research on Satie
by arranging and publishing many of Satie's previously unknown works.
More info on Caby:
http://www.af.lu.se/~fogwall/caby.html
More info on Satie:
http://www.af.lu.se/~fogwall/satie.html
Kind regards,
Niclas
David R L Porter
The message <6lqqto$fti$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
from M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk contains these words:
> Mike Holme, representing sensible, reasoning, music loving people, wasting
> his time talking to biased people how have a vested interest in no marks of
> music like Erik Satie and the other eccentrics he paved the way for.
Uh -- sorry to but in, but as a sensible, reasoning, music-loving
person I just wanted to say that Mike Holme doesn't represent me ...
David.
david....@zetnet.co.uk
Willy Wonka
(pointless argument snipped)
> : > 3. How did Satie "act like a clown?" Are you talking musically? In his
> : > personal life? Could you elaborate?
>
> : Both, he dressed like a clown, behaved like a clown,
>
> He did? I must have missed this one:
>
> [bright flashing lights and carnival music are heard]
>
> Voice-over announcer: Hhhhhhheyyyyyyy kiiiiiiiiiiids! It's the Satie the
> Clown Show!
>
> [Satie enters dressed in white greasepaint with a bright red nose, a
> bright red fright-wig on his head, big frilly clothes, and size 50 EEEEE
> shoes.]
>
> Satie: Hiya kiddies! You look like you could use a bath! <He takes a large
> seltzer bottle from his pocket and sprays the front row with water>
>
> :)
>
> : wrote such pieces as
> : "Flabby Preludes", gave performers directions such as "With a Nightingale with
> : Touthache", many, many other similiar examples which I don't care to quote.
>
> Must be sad to go through life with no sense of humor, Mike.... :)
>
Congratulations, see my post "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was -
SOMEWHERE BETWEEN SATIE AND DEBUSSY. I know you for one will like it.
(remainder of argument snipped)
>
> Dave
Mike Holme alais Clare D'avro
------------------------------------------------------
| Michael John Holme, Senior Technician |
| Dept Computing, Manchester Metropolitan University |
| Chester Street, Manchester, M1 5GD, United Kingdom |
| email : M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk |
| WWW : http://www.doc.mmu.ac.uk/STAFF/M.Holme |
------------------------------------------------------
Willy Wonka
Right, you two _definately_ do _not_ get the chocolate factory.
Jose Oscar Marques
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:07:33 +0100 Willy Wonka <M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>
wrote in article <3584D6...@doc.mmu.ac.uk>:
>piper wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:30:46 GMT, mar...@Xnewsguy.com (Jose Oscar
>> Marques) wrote:
>>
>> >OK. You are hopeless. I won't come back to this topic anymore. You don't
>> >have the least idea of what you are talking about. Bach's music "more
>> >elaborate" than the music of the ancient Flemish masters, indeed...
>> >
>> >Bach's music is magnificent in its way, but in terms of sheer
>> >complexity, even the Bm Mass or the Art of Fugue pale when compared to
>> >the polyphonic pyrotechnics of people like Ockeghem and Obrecht.
>> Right, Jose. And Machaut's isometric motets are even MORE complex.
>Right, you two _definately_ do _not_ get the chocolate factory.
>
>Mike Holme alais Clare D'avro
I'll "definately" avoid it, if your atrocious spelling is any sign of
the quality of the chocolate. BTW it's definitely "alias", not
"alais"...
Derek Haslam
In article <6lli3f$ped$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, M.H...@doc.mmu.ac.uk wrote:
> The reason that the music by the composers listed above is no
> longer very popular today is because it was superseeded, with dramatic
> effect
> by such people as J.S.Bach The horse and cart was excellent in it's day,
> but
> it doesn't get much press today.
In the same way that Haydn was "superseded" by Mozart, who was in turn
"superseded" by Beethoven? I thought this Darwinian view of music had died
decades ago.
Derek Haslam
--
___________________________
Derek Haslam /
Joyce Haslam / dljh...@argonet.co.uk
___________________________/
Derek Haslam
> Uh -- sorry to but in, but as a sensible, reasoning, music-loving
> person I just wanted to say that Mike Holme doesn't represent me ...
>
> David.
Nor me. Do you think he's finally been seen off?