Ok...Now for the WOIST!
Chuckie
NEGATIVE time..and so let us take your FIVE worst recordings....if
there are that many...Now please..be CRUEL!!!
1. Moffo as Thais..a total disaster...but when you marry Sarnoff...what
the hell....
2. Nabucco under Muti..Not only does he not allow high notes,but he
rushes to a FIRE.....
3. I cannot take Caniglia in a lot of the RCA recordings..i think the
Aida is a total nothing, despite Gigli and Stignani....who really do
not show their very best.
4. Those disasters of phillips:Cavalleria,Salome, Carmen with Jessye
Norman..MISCAST!
5. You know what I am going to say:ANY Italian opera (except Falstaff)
with Fischer-Dieskau..devoid of proper style, voice, you name it.
So let us see if you can be meaner than I am. CH
alanwa...@aol.com
Cannot say about any of that but, choosing any section you wish, I
would say that all orchestras around the world regard Verdi as third
rate crap to play.
He is often just Grade V stuff and even in Otello, Requiem and parts of
Boccanegra only vaguely approaches Grade VIII. Falstaff about Grade
VII.
As to which the worst to play (not to sing) is, I would think, a score
draw between Aida and Traviata.
My choice would be Traviata. I think it fourth rate crap so it's my
winner.
Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
clem
not a tribute, but a destruction. I don't really like Kiri's Gershwin
set either, but it is much better than this!
Paul
Chuckie
alanwa...@aol.com wrote:
> Chuckie wrote:
> > Many thanks for your I am. CH
>
> Cannot say about any of that but, choosing any section you wish, I
> would say that all orchestras around the world regard Verdi as third
> rate crap to play.
>
> He is often just Grade V stuff and even in Otello, Requiem and parts of
> Boccanegra only vaguely approaches Grade VIII. Falstaff about Grade
> VII.
>
> As to which the worst to play (not to sing) is, I would think, a score
> draw between Aida and Traviata.
>
> My choice would be Traviata. I think it fourth rate crap so it's my
> winner.
>
> Kind regards,
Dearest Kind Arrogant Reagrds..i asked for the worst specfic recordings
of operas.
Not for you to put down the greatest Italian composer ever..and huis
sensational operas..like Traviata......I guess you only like esoteric
Czech operas.....Your czech should be in the mail..the one that is a
one-way ticket to snobville.....and take kasimer with you...CH
> Alan M. Watkins
Chuckie
clem wrote:
> Barbara Hendricks recorded a "Tribute to George Gershwin." For me it is
> not a tribute, but a destruction. I don't really like Kiri's Gershwin
> set either, but it is much better than this!
>
> > >
Chuckie
>
> As to which the worst to play (not to sing) is, I would think, a score
> draw between Aida and Traviata.
>
> My choice would be Traviata. I think it fourth rate crap so it's my
> winner.
>
Mark
Fuck you Chuckie. Alan Watkins is 100 times more readable, interesting
and knowledgable than you are. Unlike you, he is actually a
professional musician.
In Kind Regards,
Mark
Lookingglass
"Chuckie" <vissida...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157164833.7...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I must say I am with Mr Watkins in this regard... I am not a big fan of the
general standard repertoire that most companies find they have to produce in
order to bring in the typical patron. Most of the
Verdi-Puccini-Donizetti-Rossini-Mozart standards do not interest me (though
I love Rigoletto). They contain some wonderful music and some singable arias
and choruses. And judging by the typical post here at RMO, I think that most
Opera 'fans' here would be better served by attending recitals and
'oratorio/concert' performances of these operas (except THE RING). For me
OPERA is much more than the singing/singer. It is the WHOLE production...
Singing, Music, Staging, Lighting, Acting...etc. I also find the librettos
of most of the 'standards' rather mundane and uninteresting...but that's
just my opinion. Give me a story I can't experience in my everyday life...
you can keep your Toscas and Bohemes and Traviatas...give me Witches and
Dwarves and Dragons and Moonshine...Invisible Cities and Golden Cockerels
and Snowmaidens too...!!!
...just my two cents!
alanwa...@aol.com
I am just writing from the perspective of playing. A great deal of
Verdi is terribly dull stuff to do with little challenge for the
players although that doesn't stop the vocal writing being superb and
the show being a hit.
With Aida, for example, you have this planned stage spectacular but
from time to time the music degenerates into what I would politely
describe as Oom-pah-pah of which there is rather a lot in Verdi. At
the time Aida was written you had works around like The Ring, Libuse,
Tchaikovsky's Overture Romeo and Juliet while Delibes was rewriting the
course of ballet music with Coppelia and all of them with superb
orchestration.
Ken Meltzer
alanwa...@aol.com wrote:
> Cannot say about any of that but, choosing any section you wish, I
> would say that all orchestras around the world regard Verdi as third
> rate crap to play.
At one time, the Pittsburgh Symphony also played the Pittsburgh Opera
performances. By the time I came to work for them, they had stopped
the Pittsburgh Opera gig. The musicians I talked to (most) wished that
they still had the opportunity to play opera, Verdi included. They
very much enjoyed the occasional concert opera or Verdi Requiem that
came their way.
Best,
Ken
Lookingglass
<alanwa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1157197010.7...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I realize this was your intent. I just extended it a bit.
But I would like to amend my original post.
I was just watching the CLASSIC ARTS SHOWCASE... a program of short video
clips of concert, opera, film etc here in the US. It just showed the most
delightful clip of the Act 3 Party scene from LA TRAVIATA... not a filmed
opera, but an animated 'vision' from the video collection titled OPERA
IMAGINAIRE. It depicted a large banquet table laid out with all kinds of
sweet 'goodies'...tarts and puddings cakes and candies, with a large, white
frosted wedding styled tiered cake in the center of the table... the
'goodies' come alive in a very humorous dance and proceed to the tiered cake
and arrange themselves on the cake in 'decoration'... very very clever. Now
THAT I like.
Chuckie
> > > VII.
> > >>
> and knowledgable than you are. Unlike you, he is actually a
> professional musician.
>
SUCHJ ANGER!!!!!!!!
Well,that is your usual pattern!!!! You BELONG in the snob
club,remember.......I always excpect that from "the clan of cretini."
I am about to rehearse Norma....If you want..we need a good
Clotilde....
I saw Watkins on "American Idol." He was hitting himself on the head
with spoons....he was rejected.CH
Like who cares who is a professional musician to give such a stupid
opinion of VERDI..Maybe he knows more than
Muti,Toscanini,Callas,etc.......
Ken Meltzer
Chuckie wrote:
> Like who cares who is a professional musician to give such a stupid
> opinion of VERDI..Maybe he knows more than
> Muti,Toscanini,Callas,etc.......
Interesting that you would cite Muti to support your argument, after
all the scorn you've heaped on him in this group.
Best,
Ken
Chuckie
>
> At one time, the Pittsburgh Symphony also played the Pittsburgh Opera
> performances. By the time I came to work for them, they had stopped
> the Pittsburgh Opera gig. The musicians I talked to (most) wished that
> they still had the opportunity to play opera, Verdi included. They
> very much enjoyed the occasional concert opera or Verdi Requiem that
> came their way.
> Best,
> Ken
that "fourth rate composer!!!" i guess the entire UNIVERSE is
wrong..but Mr/.Kind regards is correct......
Yeah...RIGHT!!!!
He probably thinks that "How much is that doggie in the window" is
better than "Sempre Libera."
Ken Meltzer
Chuckie wrote:
> Gee...That is STRANGE!!!!!~ Professionals actually wanting to play
> that "fourth rate composer!!!"
I certainly don't disagree with Alan's personal opinion of Verdi. He's
entitled to that. I do have a problem with Alan suggesting that all
musicians in all orchestras share that opinion.
Just my opinion!
Best,
Ken
Lookingglass
>
> He probably thinks that "How much is that doggie in the window" is
> better than "Sempre Libera."
Wouldn't that depend upon who is singing...? Though Florence Foster Jenkins
singing either would be a 'howler'...!
Mark
> > Gee...That is STRANGE!!!!!~ Professionals actually wanting to play
> > that "fourth rate composer!!!"
>
> I certainly don't disagree with Alan's personal opinion of Verdi. He's
> entitled to that. I do have a problem with Alan suggesting that all
> musicians in all orchestras share that opinion.
> Just my opinion!
> Best,
> Ken
Ken,
Didn't G.B.Shaw refer to the orchestral accompaniments written by Verdi
and Donizetti as "the big guitar"?
Kind regards,
Mark
Ken Meltzer
Mark wrote:
> Ken,
> Didn't G.B.Shaw refer to the orchestral accompaniments written by Verdi
> and Donizetti as "the big guitar"?
>
> Kind regards,
> Mark
Hi Mark-
I know that someone did!
I don't dispute the fact that as time went on, Verdi became a much more
adept and interesting composer of the instrumental portion of his
operas. But even the very earliest operas almost always have something
unusual and interesting to offer.
Best,
Ken
shir...@hotmail.com
I happen to love Traviata, but I'm not an orchestral musician. The
singers get the INTERESTING music, and the audience principally goes to
hear them. The orchestra is always there certainly, and the opera
would sound very silly without it. But for the players, it's two or
three hours of glorified accompaniment. Most of the time , I'd guess
that most of the audience is only paying attention to the orchestra on
a secondary level. Unless they're playing really, really well, or
really, really badly.
Melissa
alanwa...@aol.com
Yes, I understand that but I think that is a slightly different thing.
It makes a nice break from the concert platform to do opera just as the
opera musicians usually enjoy the choice to do concert work or Mahler
or something similar.
But if you are doing opera full time (as I was for a while) some of
these scores wear rapidly. Some musicians may want an easy ride in
which case that is what they will get and I suppose they will be happy
with it.
But many, myself included, would much rather encounter a score with
real interest and in particular technical challenges (such as Janacek,
for example, where most of the instruments are being pushed all the
time). A lot of Verdi is a very easy ride for the orchestra and there
are very few excerpts which turn up in orchestral auditions. Very few
indeed.
Ken Meltzer
alanwa...@aol.com wrote:
> Yes, I understand that but I think that is a slightly different thing.
> It makes a nice break from the concert platform to do opera just as the
> opera musicians usually enjoy the choice to do concert work or Mahler
> or something similar.
>
> But if you are doing opera full time (as I was for a while) some of
> these scores wear rapidly. Some musicians may want an easy ride in
> which case that is what they will get and I suppose they will be happy
> with it.
>
> But many, myself included, would much rather encounter a score with
> real interest and in particular technical challenges (such as Janacek,
> for example, where most of the instruments are being pushed all the
> time). A lot of Verdi is a very easy ride for the orchestra and there
> are very few excerpts which turn up in orchestral auditions. Very few
> indeed.
I'm not sure it was so much the desire to have an "easy ride" as much
as chance to do something different, as you mention at the top here.
I have no doubt that for an orchestral musician, playing the score of
Traviata is not nearly as fulfilling as Fidelio, one of the Janacek
operas, or many others we might care to mention. There are other Verdi
operas I might point to that offer better challenges, particularly for
solo instruments.
But in any event, as a fan of opera and not a performing musician, I
have the luxury of enjoying these works in their totality. We just
come to this from different perspectives, that's all.
Best,
Ken
Chuckie
I have a problem with Mr."Kind regards"(a euphemism for "Drop
Dead,Everyone!") saying just about anything.....
He should be sent to the Tower..and i do not mean the store
either..ch
Chuckie
alanwa...@aol.com wrote:
> Ken Meltzer wrote:
> > alanwatkinsuk@>
> But many, myself included, would much rather encounter a score with
> real interest and in particular technical challenges (such as Janacek,
> for example, where most of the instruments are being pushed all the
> time). A lot of Verdi is a very easy ride for the orchestra and there
> are very few excerpts which turn up in orchestral auditions. Very few
> indeed.
>
> Kind regards,
> Alan M. Watkins
Maybe sitting there and banging on a drum is boring...You need to join
a ROCK GROUP..if you have any hair....
Ken Meltzer
Chuckie wrote:
> Maybe sitting there and banging on a drum is boring...You need to join
> a ROCK GROUP..if you have any hair....
Charlie:
At some point, I think you're going to realize that Alan is ignoring
you here.
As well he should.
Why not stick to the subject?
Best,
Ken
david...@aol.com
Chuckie,
Watkins is just a crank indignant because not one of Verdi's operas is
a percussion concerto. It is also true that, technically speaking, the
writing for percussion in 19th-century Italy is problematic at best.
Be that as it may, Berlioz, a great master of precisely the kinds of
orchestral effects Watkins finds lacking in Verdi, revered the man
Verdi and his music, frequently including movements from Trovatore on
his own concerts; Brahms defended Verdi from the Watkins-like attacks
of Eduard Hanslick; Mahler, a thorough professional in dealing with
the large orchestra of the late 19th-century as both composer and
conductor, loved Verdi's operas; Schoenberg was a great fan of
Trovatore; and Stravinsky held Verdi up against Wagner as the
classical model of what opera should be.
As for "the big guitar" and oom-pah-pah accompaniments, those are among
the fundamental conditions of the style just as a certain kind of loose
brushwork and a particularly bright palette are among the fundamental
conditions of impressionist painting. There is nothing inherently
wrong with oom-pah-pah accompaniments or loose brushwork, although
critics of Italian opera and impressionist painting have railed against
them.
I don't know whether Shaw was responsible for the remark about the big
guitar, but "the wicked remark" was a fundamental technique of
Shaw's criticism. His most wicked remark was that Otello didn't
prove that Verdi could be Shakespearean: it only proved that
Shakespeare was operatic. There's no denying the wickedness here,
but the wickedness is the vehicle for expressing an insight. It
doesn't mean that Shaw was dismissing Verdi. It does mean that he
wasn't buying some of the critical nonsense that had been written
about the late Verdi. Shaw didn't believe that Otello represented a
radical departure in a new direction in Verdi's dramaturgy. He
didn't believe that Otello was either newly Shakespearean or newly
Wagnerian in technique. He believed it was one of the last and most
powerful products of a deepening mastery. Nor was Shaw's admiration
reserved for Otello and Falstaff. He had a very healthy respect for
the composer of Ernani and Il Trovatore. (His relationship to
Shakespeare, whom he pretended to detest, was more complex.)
-david gable
Chuckie
david...@aol.com
I hope you don't think that was the most interesting part of my post.
-david gable
alanwa...@aol.com
I thought it was considering your views on 19th-century percussion in
Italy.
david...@aol.com
> I thought it was considering your views on 19th-century percussion in
> Italy.
>
> Kind regards,
> Alan M. Watkins
I wasn't aware that I had any views on percussion writing in
19th-century Italy. But it's not surprising that my post has made you
defensive, what with Berlioz, Brahms, Mahler, Schoenberg, Stravinsky,
and Shaw all lining up against you on the other side of the debate.
-david gable
Andrew T. Kay
> Cannot say about any of that but, choosing any section you wish, I
> would say that all orchestras around the world
Wow. Even the Scala? I thought they were kind of fond of him.
> regard Verdi as third
> rate crap to play.
Do many of them go around asserting it over and over again in unseemly
attempts to be provocative, regardless of the topic of conversation, or
is that just you?
Todd K
alanwa...@aol.com
I thought you said it was "problematic at best".
I may be mistaken but if not would you care to expound on the problems
of 19th-century percussion and, if you wish, in Italy in particular?
Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkibns
alanwa...@aol.com
I thought you said it was "problematic at best".
david...@aol.com
> I thought you said [Verdi's writing for percussion instruments] was "problematic at best".
That's right. I was conceding in advance the existence of the peg on
which you hang your blanket condemnation.
> I may be mistaken but if not would you care to expound on the problems
> of 19th-century percussion and, if you wish, in Italy in particular?
I was first made aware of these problems by you. Indeed, I read and
saved a long and informative post written by you that explained these
problems in some detail. The problem is clearly specific to the
musical culture of Italy in the late 18th and 19th centuries and not to
Verdi in particular. My awareness of these peculiar problems does not
change my opinion of Verdi's stature as a composer, of his professional
competence, or of his mastery of instrumentation. It certainly doesn't
make me love his music any less.
Berlioz and Mahler were both consummate professionals who - as both
composers and conductors - confronted the problems of instrumentation
from both sides, and they had an enormous respect for Verdi. Unlike
Mahler, whose musical language was colored in part by the experience of
Otello, Berlioz based his opinion of Verdi on operas of the middle
period, on Luisa Miller and Les vêpres siciliennes - he published rave
reviews of both operas - and on Il Trovatore, of which he was
inordinately fond, constantly programming excerpts from it on his own
concerts. In short, professional opinion on the subject of Verdi is
not as undivided as Mr. Watkins would have us believe.
-david gable
Chuckie
> I may be mistaken but if not would you care to expound on the problems
> of 19th-century percussion and, if you wish, in Italy in particular?
>
> Kind regards,
> Alan M. Watkibns
1. The earth is flat
2.Corelli was a castrato
3. The wheel was invented by madonna
4. Queen Elizabeth is a better queen than Elton John
5. Verdi who????????????????????
Mark
You forgot #6: Handelman is an obsessive-compulsive jerk.
Chuckie
Chuckie wrote:
> > I may be mistaken but if not would you care to expound on the problems
> > of 19th-century percussion and, if you wish, in Italy in particular?
> >
> >
REG
really sound so 'om pah pah' (a phrase I detest) to 19th century ears?
Stendahl would not have tbought so, I believe, from what I"ve read of his
view of orchestral accompaniments in La Vie de Rossini.
And the comparison to 'loose brushwork" is exactly apt. Thanks.
<david...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1157221801....@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
alanwa...@aol.com
REG wrote:
> Doesn't it also matter with what ears we are listening, David? Did Verdi
> really sound so 'om pah pah' (a phrase I detest) to 19th century ears?
> Stendahl would not have tbought so, I believe, from what I"ve read of his
> view of orchestral accompaniments in La Vie de Rossini.
>
> And the comparison to 'loose brushwork" is exactly apt. Thanks.
>
Compared with Rossini it is "om pah pah". If you are PLAYING it, not
listening to it.
Would you like to discuss brush work with me whether loose or
otherwise?
I would love to. It is one of my specialities.
You go first REG.
REG
is mostly written for an audience. Most people on this group love Mozart
more than I do, and yet everything I understand from friends who are or have
been choristers is that the mezzo and tenor music in the operas (I am
talking about chorus, and not just in the operas) is generally terribly
boring to sing. That may be of interest, but it doesn't really reflect on
the ulitmate result or intent of the music in the composer's mind,
particularly for symphonically based music. Haydn's cello parts in the
quartets before Op 20 are pure shit, and even if you can find some
musicalogical interest after Opus 20, they go from pure shit to adulterated
shit.....I could probably still play most anything except the "Lark" and a
couple of other moments, but does that have any relevance in the long run to
how the music is heard? Maybe, but not just from a standpoint that it's
'boring' or badly written.
Your point about Verdi's percussion writing is interesting and I take it for
true for most percussionists, but you make it as incessantly as any post
here of one of our most prolific posters.
You also deliberately misconstrue what I say about brushwork. Why would you
do that?
<alanwa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1157422159.7...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
and...@comcast.net
> otherwise?
>
> Alan M. Watkins
>
It's tough down there in the pit.
St. André ~ Juif
Chuckie
I would guess a Musical Joke
is Alan M. Watkins.
Truer words were ne'r spoken.
Sad how Verdi was a 12th rate composer..poor guy..nobody likes
him...boo hoo.CH
david...@aol.com
> > Doesn't it also matter with what ears we are listening, David? Did Verdi
> > really sound so 'om pah pah' (a phrase I detest) to 19th century ears?
> > view of orchestral accompaniments in La Vie de Rossini.
I don't see how Stendhal or anybody else can have failed to hear the
bolero rhythms driving movements like "Di quella pira." Has anybody
ever failed to notice that Traviata is full of waltz rhythms? Miss
these fundamental aspects of the movements in question, and you can't
really be said to have heard the movements at all. Some wags, being
far less clever than they imagine, have dismissed Italian style by
characterizing these accompaniments as oom pah pah accompaniments, a
term that probably arose because organ grinders in 19th century Italy
were wont to play the hit tunes from Italian opera on the hurdy-gurdy.
I embrace the term quasi-defiantly, since these accompaniments are a
fundamental key to the lyric style of 19th century Italian opera and to
what distinguishes that style from the German system used by Haydn and
Mozart.
The musical language of 19th century Italy is distinct from late 18th
century "common practice" (e.g. Haydn & Mozart) in crucial respects.
One difference is the hypnotic driving rhythms found in Italian opera,
rhythms cut loose from the control of the harmony. In Mozart,
immediate changes of rhythm are intimately linked to changes of
harmony: harmonic motion, the constant unfolding of tension-release
patterns characteristic of the language, seems to drive the rhythmic
structure.
In Italian opera there are stock accompanimental patterns, waltz,
polonaise, and bolero rhythms and the like, that carry the music from
bar line to bar line, from downbeat to downbeat, while the harmony
itself remains unchanged inside the bar. This is true even in
movements with long measures in a slow tempo (e.g., the final
peroration from the concertato at the end of Act II of Verdi's
Macbeth).
The effect of this on the style and therefore on the listener is
extremely difficult to explain in a short note written on the internet,
but the first thing that happens is that the harmonic rhythm is slowed
down: in other words, the chords change less often. Space opens up
within the duration of each sustained harmony for the leisurely
unfolding of ornamental (and harmonically motionless) melody. The
characters in Italian opera find themselves lost in the moment as often
as Romantic poets, and this is a technique of lyric expression
fundamental for the creation of effects of loss in the moment. And, of
course, the hypnotically driving rhythms contribute to the effect of
loss in the moment. The rhythms are driven "hypnotically" because
the motion is not real motion but only motion across the expanse of a
motionless chord.
Rather than being discharged on an ongoing "conversational" basis
within the bar, as in an aria from Figaro, the tension gradually
accumulates across a section of a movement only to be discharged at a
climactic point near the end. The whole process of tension
accumulation and final release unfolds a single self-contained moment
within a single continuous process. This lyric technique underlies the
Liebestod, Wagner having learned it from Bellini, although Wagner
deploys it on a much vaster scale than any primo ottocento composer.
If I had the score of Norma or Macbeth handy I'd walk you through an
example.
> Would you like to discuss brush work with me whether loose or otherwise?
If you're serious, you really ought to look at a remarkable exhibition
catalogue I just found in a used bookstore, Impression: Painting
Quickly in France 1860-1890 (by Richard Brettell, pub'd Yale
University Press, 2000). There's a terrific discussion of the rapid
visible brush stroke of the impressionists in the book, but even better
than the text are the paintings reproduced. The author (who organized
the exhibition of which this book is the catalogue) managed to track
down some of the very most loosely painted pictures of the
impressionists, most of which I've never seen reproduced elsewhere,
and, trust me, I know my impressionist painting.
-david gable
David Melnick
brushwork on drums and cymbals.
Your little essay is fascinating. I'm not sure it's all true or
even whether you're using words the way I would use them ("real"
motion meaning only changes in harmony looks counterintuitive
to me, though I know what you're trying to get at), but it fits
with your description of Bellinian cantilena a couple of years ago
(can it really be years?), and it forces recognition.
I think melody is at least as important as rhythm and harmony
in the description of different schools of music in the 19th
century, from Caro nome to the Simpleton's lament, to pick two
cliché examples with melodies made of shorter phrases than your
Casta diva example (but Bellini sometimes used short phrases
too).
I'm reminded of something I read in a biography of someone or
other that Rossini would have been considered the greatest 19th
century composer if it hadn't been for a cabal of German and
Austrian critics who took over the writing-about-music biz at
mid-century and boosted Beethoven's standing.
It's probably not true, but to me the simple, elegant melody of
Bel raggio lusinghier is as perfect as, say, that perfect melody
of the slow movement of the Emperor concerto. I'd like to know
what makes one typically Italian and the other Teutonic.
Any thoughts?
dav
david...@aol.com
David Melnick wrote:
> Your little essay is fascinating. I'm not sure it's all true or
> even whether you're using words the way I would use them ("real"
> motion meaning only changes in harmony looks counterintuitive
> to me, though I know what you're trying to get at), but it fits
> with your description of Bellinian cantilena a couple of years ago
> (can it really be years?), and it forces recognition.
I should have put "real" in quotation marks as you have, but the
creation of "motionless motion" is used for various effects in 19th
century music. Just think of the prelude to Rheingold "which is
motionless and moving at the same time," as Boulez once said. After
all, we're at the bottom of the eternal Rhine.
Motion in tonal music is harmonic motion. It is quite literally the
case that lots of fast notes will not make the tempo sound fast. Our
sense of tempo is determined by prevailing rates of chord change. In
the slow movement of Beethoven's Appassionata, the figuration on the
surface of each variation is twice as fast as the figuration in the
previous variation, which is hardly uncommon in a varation set, but the
chord progression underlying the figuration - and therefore the rate of
chord change - remains unchanged. As a result, we don't experience any
increase in tempo even though the figuration increases in speed.
> I think melody is at least as important as rhythm and harmony
These three categories are not so easily divorced as it may seem.
Melodies already imply the harmonizations that are suitable for them as
well as the meter. You wouldn't get wildly different harmonic patterns
from several different late 18th-century composers if you gave them the
same melody to harmonize. On rare occasions, Schubert or Berlioz,
unlike any 18th-century composer or even Beethoven, will deliberately
ignore the harmonization implied by the melody, although there is
obviously a limit to how far they can stray. Moreover, these
exceptions to the rule only prove my point. The effect depends on the
odd harmonization, which implies the existence of the normal one.
Melody is extremely difficult to explain and nobody really has
explained it. Melody is so difficult because it has all the problems
already characterisitic of a piece: Bach can project an entire
contrapuntal piece with a single line for a solo fiddle even without
recourse to double or triple stops.
> I'm reminded of something I read in a biography of someone or
> other that Rossini would have been considered the greatest 19th
> century composer if it hadn't been for a cabal of German and
> Austrian critics who took over the writing-about-music biz at
> mid-century and boosted Beethoven's standing.
German writers were nationalistic, but so were the Italians, who wrote
analogous nonsense about the Germans, "who don''t even know how to
write a melody." Beethoven's entirely justified prestige derived from
professional opinion, not from propaganda. The most sophisticated
musicians wanted to play his music, and composers were in awe of it.
Rossini most certainly admired Beethoven, whom he made a point of
visiting. "Ah, Rossini, give us more Barber's," gushed Beethoven in
all sincerity, no doubt as grateful for Rossini's interest as
Schoenberg was for Puccini's. Verdi kept scores of the Haydn, Mozart,
and Beethoven quartets at his bedside in Sant'Agata. It took audiences
a little longer, and the late sonatas were rarely played before World
War II.
> It's probably not true, but to me the simple, elegant melody of
> Bel raggio lusinghier is as perfect as, say, that perfect melody
> of the slow movement of the Emperor concerto. I'd like to know
> what makes one typically Italian and the other Teutonic.
>
> Any thoughts?
That's exactly the kind of distinction everybody wants to draw,
including me, and it's the hardest one of all. The goal is to explain
what is unique about a given piece. You virtually never can. For one
thing, the uniqueness will be the result of a constellation of factors
that you have to handle both separately and in their interaction.
You're lucky if you can explain one little piece of the puzzle
adequately.
Some things you know, because there's usually what everybody already
knows about a given style. Then you notice some anomaly and begin
trying to figure out how it works. Eventually you may figure it out
and explain it, but it rarely turns out to be unique to a single piece.
You're lucky if it's unique to a period style. You may only have
discovered something that applies to all 18th and 19th century music,
which music theorists love - broad general laws, and all that - but I
want to know what makes the individual organism tick. I generally
settle for explaining some aspect of a period style.
-david gable
REG
catty, came from Watkins, and not from me. Thanks
"David Melnick" <dmel...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:yI8Lg.68060$TD2....@fe08.news.easynews.com...
Lookingglass
<david...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1157433974.8...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Now this is the reason I come here...to learn.
Thank you.
david...@aol.com
REG wrote:
> Please note that the comment about discussing brush work, which was indeed
> catty, came from Watkins, and not from me. Thanks
REG,
Duly noted.
-david gable
David Melnick
the better to bore people twice with:
david...@aol.com wrote:
> Motion in tonal music is harmonic motion. It is quite literally the
> case that lots of fast notes will not make the tempo sound fast. Our
> sense of tempo is determined by prevailing rates of chord change. In
> the slow movement of Beethoven's Appassionata, the figuration on the
> surface of each variation is twice as fast as the figuration in the
> previous variation, which is hardly uncommon in a varation set, but the
> chord progression underlying the figuration - and therefore the rate of
> chord change - remains unchanged. As a result, we don't experience any
> increase in tempo even though the figuration increases in speed.
>
>
>>I think melody is at least as important as rhythm and harmony
>
>
> These three categories are not so easily divorced as it may seem.
Roger to all the above, though your first statement sounds a
litttle extreme. What about Night Ride and Sunrise?
(And I'm not completely convinced of your invocation of
Romanticism in your earlier post. Aren't there some Handel arias
that have the same suspension of time? Your main thesis sounds
right but there seem to be stray threads to it. Oh I know you've
already taken care of objections by talking about how general one
can and can't get.)
Like you, I'm interested in comparing accompanying figures, but
not quite in the same way as you. For example (an example I've
cited before), the opening of Op. 59 No. 1 as compared to the
opening of the Archduke trio. They have the same harmonic
structure and almost the same tempo, but the quartet has a
supplicating urgency and yearning that the assertive, patrician
opening of the trio doesn't have. I think the melody has a lot to
do with that, but also the accompanying figure. (This example
came to me when a friend was saying how alike he thought the two
themes were and I instinctively objected!)
Then there are similar melodies with similar harmonies but
different feelings conveyed according to tempo and how they are
phrased and repeated. One obvious example is in comparing Caro
nome's first two phrases to the famous slow descending scale in
The Nutcracker.
And in re: melodies themselves (another example I've cited
before): The principal subjects of the slow movements of Mozart's
clarinet quintet and his clarinet concerto differ subtly but
definingly. Because the concerto motive initially stops at the
mediant, not rising to the dominant, it has a repose that makes it
IMO even more sublime than the quintet motive.
Lots o' goodies going on in all those heads. :-)
dav
capa0...@aol.com
david...@aol.com wrote:
> David Melnick wrote:
>
> > I'm reminded of something I read in a biography of someone or
> > other that Rossini would have been considered the greatest 19th
> > century composer if it hadn't been for a cabal of German and
> > Austrian critics who took over the writing-about-music biz at
> > mid-century and boosted Beethoven's standing.
>
> German writers were nationalistic, but so were the Italians, who wrote
> analogous nonsense about the Germans, "who don''t even know how to
> write a melody." Beethoven's entirely justified prestige derived from
> professional opinion, not from propaganda. The most sophisticated
> musicians wanted to play his music, and composers were in awe of it.>
> -david gable
===============
I think it should be added as well that even in the 18th and 19th
centuries the distances from Rome to Berlin and Vienna to Paris were
not that great ** and quite a few composers got around quite a bit.
Just off the top of my head, Handel, Mozart, Salieri, JC Bach, Haydn,
Gluck, Mendelssohn, Meyerbeer, Offenbach all wrote important pieces --
in a number of cases most of their masterpieces -- while far from home
and under the influence of a musical culture unlike their own. This
interaction of styles, I think, is one of the reasons the music of the
period is so attractive. French composers, I think, perhaps enthralled
by the attractions of 'la ville des lumieres' seemed to stay closer to
home than those of other countries.
"Die Zauberflote" is a very different opera from "Le Nozze di Figaro."
But I'm not sure that the overtures of either are "German" or
"Italian" in any real sense. But I'm far from an expert.
Pat
** In addition, the borders of the major powers (not to mention the
hundreds of smaller political entities in the HRE and the Italian
peninsula) changed any number of times between 1648 (the date of the
Peace of Westphalia which ended the continental upheaval we call the
Thirty Years War) and the age of Metternich. Northern Italy, in
particular, was tossed (kicked?) around like a political football
during much of this time.
david...@aol.com
David Melnick wrote [lots of provocative stuff snipped]:
> I'm not completely convinced of your invocation of
> Romanticism in your earlier post. Aren't there some Handel arias
> that have the same suspension of time?
It is good Baroque doctrine that any movement should express a single
"affect," and there are countless meditative or reflective arias by
Handel and Bach. But in the 19th century certain techniques were
developed to check the directed dynamism characteristic of 18th century
tonality. You certainly won't find a single aria by Bach or Handel
that uses the kind of texture from Italian opera I described and to
which I am unable to do full justice on this forum. Nor will you find
the "end weighting" of form characteristic of the type of structure I
described in anything Bach or Handel ever wrote. Modeled in part on
the kind of form I described, the Liebestod is one of the supreme
examples of an endweighted form. The entire Liebestod does nothing but
work toward the final shattering climax through a series of crescendos,
and crescendos themselves are intrinsically end weighted, of course.
Nineteenth century composers routinely exploited "the rhetoric of the
culminating point" [Boulez] in ways that never occured to any
18th-century composer.
Finally, there is the cultural context of 19th century music. Poets
like Wordsworth and Hoelderlin etc. etc. etc. pioneered an ambitious
new kind of lyric poetry that usurped ambitions once reserved for epic.
Composers from Schubert to Berlioz to Verdi to Wagner to Schumann to
... naturally gravitated to the forms of expression embodied in the new
lyric poetry: the "Romantic" is all but synonymous with the lyric. In
attempting to express the new moods characteristic of lyric poetry,
Romantic composers developed new musical technques.
-david gable
REG
extremely as you state it that there is no aria in Bach or Handel that uses
such 'end weighting'. Do you not think this is true for the final chorale of
the Matthew Passion? It is not a shattering conclusion, but many
end-weighted arias must have other ways of ending, in terms of the dying
fall, for example. I also find it somewhat hard to think that there's
nothing in all of Handel - do you not think that the final melismatic Amen
is in its own way end weighted - if you heard Scherchen conduct it (at a
tempo easily twice as slow as anyone else) you might well think so.
<david...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1157496865....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
David Melnick
The final chorus of the St. Matthew Passion does indeed have one
affect IMO, set up by the sad-beyond-words preface, "Mein Jesu,
gute Nacht."
dav
Mark D Lew
<capa0...@aol.com> wrote:
> ** In addition, the borders of the major powers (not to mention the
> hundreds of smaller political entities in the HRE and the Italian
> peninsula) changed any number of times between 1648 (the date of the
> Peace of Westphalia which ended the continental upheaval we call the
> Thirty Years War) and the age of Metternich. Northern Italy, in
> particular, was tossed (kicked?) around like a political football
> during much of this time.
Of course, but is that even relevant? I agree with you that
nationality is often difficult to define, but to whatever extent it can
be defined surely the most relevant factors are the local culture, and
not which royal house happens to own the land.
Verdi was born under French rule, but no one would think it even
debatable whether Parma might be French (as one might for, say, Savoy
or Nice).
mdl
david...@aol.com
REG wrote:
> This is all wonderful, but I find myself asking if you really mean it as
> extremely as you state it that there is no aria in Bach or Handel that uses
> such 'end weighting'.
The key word here is "such," and, no, I don't think there is such end
weighting in Bach or Handel. Virtually every movement ever written is
"end weighted" in some sense: how else are you going to articulate the
close? But there's no movement by Bach or Handel that uses the kind of
crescendo form you find in Wagner, a form that depends on more or less
continuous processes of growth aimed from early in the form toward a
culminating point near the end. That doesn't mean that composers
didn't handle the endings of movements carefully and with full
knowledge that they were endings. Obviously, they also knew which
movement was the "finale" in a multi-movement work.
In a central finale from an opera by Mozart, there will be a well
plotted overall formal and harmonic design, and the size of the
ensemble may increase as the plot gets more complicated. The last
section will be a fast tutti. Nevertheless, the finale as a whole is
not a single curve that starts at the beginning and builds to a
culminating point of release. Rather, there are separately articulated
sections marked by complete shifts of texture. The biggest point of
arrival is the point where the final section begins, the arrival of
which restores the original key. At that point, the large-scale
harmonic design of the finale is brought to a close, yet you still have
the whole final section to get through. There is no Wagnerian orgasm
reserved for the end.
The final section of the Liebestod is the last in a series of
crescendos, a crescendo that climaxes near the end of the form. It's
not the arrival of the section but the climax at its end that is the
harmonic goal of the movement. Moreover, following the climax, the
movement . . . subsides. It isn't closed with a series of purely
formal cadences. The music . . . dies. That kind of subsiding - a
dying fall on that scale - is simply unheard of in 18th century music.
The arrival of the final section is not marked by an articulating full
caesura, and the final section doesn't depart radically in character
from the previous section. The tempo remains essentially the same as
in the previous section. Consisting of the gradual rise and fall of a
single undivided curve, the form of the final section is essentially
continuous. It consists of a single crescendo, its climax and
subsiding.
This kind of thinking starts with Beethoven and is what distinguishes
his sonata forms from Haydn's and Mozart's, but I've got to get some
sleep.
> I also find it somewhat hard to think that there's
> nothing in all of Handel - do you not think that the final melismatic Amen
> is in its own way end weighted - if you heard Scherchen conduct it (at a
> tempo easily twice as slow as anyone else) you might well think so.
I assume you mean Messiah. I'll have to listen to it again. I'd be
surprised to discover the kind of form I've been trying to describe,
but you might convince me that the form is end weighted: which means
palpably planned to culminate from the beginning of the movement rather
than simply featuring an impressive section at the end whipped up for
the close. (I don't mean to make the 18th century composer's form
sound less well planned: it isn't.)
By the way, Verdi found a quotation in Lucretius that delighted him no
end: "Crescit eundo": It grows as it goes.
-david gable
Donald Grove
wrote:
>Nationality is often difficult to define, but to whatever extent it can
>be defined surely the most relevant factors are the local culture, and
>not which royal house happens to own the land.
Signed Gavrilo Princip
Mark
> REG wrote:
> > This is all wonderful, but I find myself asking if you really mean it as
> > extremely as you state it that there is no aria in Bach or Handel that uses
> > such 'end weighting'.
>
> The key word here is "such," and, no, I don't think there is such end
> weighting in Bach or Handel. Virtually every movement ever written is
> "end weighted" in some sense: how else are you going to articulate the
> close? But there's no movement by Bach or Handel that uses the kind of
> crescendo form you find in Wagner, a form that depends on more or less
> continuous processes of growth aimed from early in the form toward a
> culminating point near the end. That doesn't mean that composers
> didn't handle the endings of movements carefully and with full
> knowledge that they were endings. Obviously, they also knew which
> movement was the "finale" in a multi-movement work.
>
David,
I think if you listened to a well-informed performance of Bach's
Passacaglia and Fugue in c minor, you might at least say this is the
exception to your statement. The Passacaglia builds to a magnificent
crescendo and leaps right into the Fugue. The culmination of the Fugue
and final false cadence on the then astonishing Picardy Third brings
the Fugue back to the home key with brilliance.
capa0...@aol.com
Yes, Parma was Italian, culturally, even when Austria and France and
neighboring Italian 'states' held sway. But even so there are
crosscurrents and intermarriages and so on. Cavour, one of the
liberators of Italy, was sponsored at baptism by a sister of Napoleon
(who had married an Italian nobleman.) Napoleon himself, the
personification of France, was from a town called Ajaccio in Corsica.
Cities and towns don't write music, people do.
Was Lulli's music Italian or French? Handel's German, Italian or
English? Was Gluck's Viennese or French? Cherubini's Italian or
French? Chopin's Polish or French? Offenbach's German or French? I
think most of those composers seasoned the music of their homeland with
the music of the countries to which they traveled.
The original discussion, as I recall, was about 'German music' and
'Italian' music. Certainly a lot of composers -- Bach, Schubert,
Schumann on the German side, maybe Rossini (in his composing days),
Bellini and Verdi on the Italian side -- were somewhat insular. But
there was a great deal of intermeshing of styles, too, as a result of
the more eclectic styles of some of the well-traveled composers I
named.
Pat
david...@aol.com
Mark wrote:
> I think if you listened to a well-informed performance of Bach's
> Passacaglia and Fugue in c minor, you might at least say this is the
> exception to your statement. The Passacaglia builds to a magnificent
> crescendo and leaps right into the Fugue. The culmination of the Fugue
> and final false cadence on the then astonishing Picardy Third brings
> the Fugue back to the home key with brilliance.
Mark,
A passacaglia is a kind of variation form. Numerous passacaglias and
variation sets start out simply and grow more complex with each
variation. That's already a kind of "crescendo." Nevertheless, a
passacaglia is not an example of the kinds of formal processes that I'm
talking about. I'll have to take a peak at the fugue, though, and see
what you're getting at, but every Bach fugue starts in a given key that
is restored at the end. Indeed, recursions to the original key in the
body of the fugue are the norm.
-david gable
Mark D Lew
<capa0...@aol.com> wrote:
> The original discussion, as I recall, was about 'German music' and
> 'Italian' music. Certainly a lot of composers -- Bach, Schubert,
> Schumann on the German side, maybe Rossini (in his composing days),
> Bellini and Verdi on the Italian side -- were somewhat insular. But
> there was a great deal of intermeshing of styles, too, as a result of
> the more eclectic styles of some of the well-traveled composers I
> named.
Ermanno Wolf-Ferrari, they say, was so distressed when his two nations
went to war in 1917 that he stopped composing for yyears.
mdl
Mark
Well, yes, David. But this is the big Bach passacaglia. It's not like
any other passacaglia ever written before, or since, I think. I have
books and books of them; from Italians, Germans, French. The Bach
wipes them out. The fugue at the end will make you think again about
your "end weighting" formula. Leave it to Bach!
>
> -david gable