Decca Phase 4
Rinaldo
pretty slim. Has anybody heard of plans by Universal Music Group or
ArkivMusic to reissue titles in this series?
makropulos
Australian Eloquence is bringing a few Phase4 recordings out - most
recently Rozsa and Herrmann film music albums. I hope they might be
doing some more.
Steve de Mena
Look through eBay or Amazon (marketplace), you should find a lot of
titles.
Steve
Mr. Mike
There were a couple of box sets of Stokowski conducting various stuff
as follows:
http://amzn.to/eMj3Vi
http://amzn.to/ebioqM
Don't know if this is available at the present time, though.
Kerrison
> On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 20:03:30 -0800 (PST), Rinaldo
>
> >I've been searching out what's available on CD and the pickings are
> >pretty slim. Has anybody heard of plans by Universal Music Group or
> >ArkivMusic to reissue titles in this series?
>
> There were a couple of box sets of Stokowski conducting various stuff
> as follows:
>
>
> Don't know if this is available at the present time, though.
London reissued a whole batch of Phase-4 Stereo CDs back in the
mid-1990s, including about a dozen Stokowski releases, as well as
recordings made for them by Munch, Dorati, Herrmann, Rozsa and many
others, including (allegedly) Arthur Fiedler. I say 'allegedly'
because dark rumours have circulated over the years that he wasn't
well enough to conduct, so the Boston Pops assistant conductor, Harry
Ellis Dickson, took the sessions over. They kept Fiedler's name on the
issued discs for contractual reasons and also because no-one had ever
heard of Dickson. By now, however, someone at the BSO ought to have
confirmed or denied as a matter of fact whether this rumour was true
or not.
Cala licensed a few Stokowski recordings that London didn't issue
themselves, including the Czech Philharmonic Elgar 'Enigma Variations'
and LSO Brahms 1st, and the Hilversum Radio Philharmonic Cesar Franck
Symphony and LSO Messiaen 'L'Ascension', plus a remastered edition of
Stokowski's first Phase-4 recording, Rimsky's 'Scheherezade', all
still available.
London's CDs often mixed conductors, so you got Herrmann and Stokowski
on one Charles Ives CD, in the 2nd Symphony (Herrmann) and Orchestral
Set No. 2 (Stokowski) respectively, both with the LSO. On an all-
Respighi London CD you had Munch in The Pines and Fountains of Rome
and Dorati in Rossiniana. Now there's a lovely work which is too
seldom played these days.
On the other hand, I don't recall if any of the Phase-4 recordings
made by Leinsdorf (The Rite of Spring, etc.) or Maazel (Pictures at an
Exhibition, etc.) or Sargent (a Gilbert and Sullivan selection) or
Ivan Davis (Rachmaninov's 2nd Piano Concerto, etc.) or Henry Lewis
(Beethoven's 'Pastoral,' etc.) and many others, were ever reissued on
CD by London. Whether there'd be any commercial demand for them these
days, apropos Universal or Arkiv, I couldn't say.
William Sommerwerck
film-score albums has been reissued on SACD. They are quite spectacular on
open-reel tape -- in fact, one of them was /the/ best-selling quad open-reel
tape.
Matthew B. Tepper
be issued again, over and over and over (including downloadable formats). If
it has never been issued on CD, save your LPs or kiss goodbye to it forever.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Dontait...@aol.com
[editing]
> London reissued a whole batch of Phase-4 Stereo CDs back in the
> mid-1990s, including about a dozen Stokowski releases, as well as
> recordings made for them by Munch, Dorati, Herrmann, Rozsa and many
> others, including (allegedly) Arthur Fiedler. I say 'allegedly'
> because dark rumours have circulated over the years that he wasn't
> well enough to conduct, so the Boston Pops assistant conductor, Harry
> Ellis Dickson, took the sessions over. They kept Fiedler's name on the
> issued discs for contractual reasons and also because no-one had ever
> heard of Dickson. By now, however, someone at the BSO ought to have
> confirmed or denied as a matter of fact whether this rumour was true
> or not.
If my memory is correct, Dickson confirmed this in a book he wrote
about Fiedler, and about his (Dickson's) years with the Pops as well,
after Fiedler's death. I'll try to check the book and report back.
Don Tait
Roger Kulp
Which titles would these be?
Roger
Dontait...@aol.com
> On Dec 29, 11:29 am, Dontaitchic...@aol.com
> > If my memory is correct, Dickson confirmed this in a book he wrote
> > about Fiedler, and about his (Dickson's) years with the Pops as well,
> > after Fiedler's death. I'll try to check the book and report back.
>
> > Don Tait
>
> Which titles would these be?
>
> Roger
I can't say now because as I wrote, I'll have to find the Dickson
book and check it.
Don Tait
Kerrison
One of the Phase-4 CDs can definitely be ascribed to Dickson: a
selection of Gershwin numbers on London 443 900-2. The booklet states
that this was recorded in June 1979, just a few weeks or even days
before Fiedler's death. Yet, as his Wikipedia bio states, he had been
in poor health for some time and had suffered a heart seizure on 5th
May. Consequently, there's no way that this Gershwin CD is being
conducted by a man in ill health and the victim of a heart attack.
Maybe the Dickson book will reveal the facts.
pgaron
> London reissued a whole batch of Phase-4 Stereo CDs back in the
> mid-1990s, including about a dozen Stokowski releases, as well as
> recordings made for them by Munch, Dorati, Herrmann, Rozsa and many
> others, including (allegedly) Arthur Fiedler. I say 'allegedly'
> because dark rumours have circulated over the years that he wasn't
> well enough to conduct, so the Boston Pops assistant conductor, Harry
> Ellis Dickson, took the sessions over. They kept Fiedler's name on the
> issued discs for contractual reasons and also because no-one had ever
> heard of Dickson.
Trivial pursuit: Kitty Dukakis, wife of the former Mass. Governor and
Presidential candidate, is Harry Ellis Dickson's daughter.
pgaron
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:a17e379f-4335-4970-882e-4404eeeec757
@w17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
I'm fairly sure that "Saturday Night Fiedler" was one of them. The cover
art is ghastly, showing a dying man attired in leather because the label's
Mousse-haired Marketing Morons insisted on it.
Kip Williams
> Roger Kulp<thoren...@yahoo.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:a17e379f-4335-4970-882e-4404eeeec757
> @w17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Dec 29, 11:29 am, Dontaitchic...@aol.com wrote:
>>> If my memory is correct, Dickson confirmed this in a book he wrote
>>> about Fiedler, and about his (Dickson's) years with the Pops as well,
>>> after Fiedler's death. I'll try to check the book and report back.
>>
>> Which titles would these be?
>
> I'm fairly sure that "Saturday Night Fiedler" was one of them. The cover
> art is ghastly, showing a dying man attired in leather because the label's
> Mousse-haired Marketing Morons insisted on it.
All wrapped in white linen and cold as the clay.
http://davewells.us/2009/11/saturday-night-fiedler.html
Picture and conductor confirmation, quoting Dickson's book.
Too bad about Dickson. I was hoping he'd get the job.
Kip W
Steve de Mena
> I'm fairly sure that "Saturday Night Fiedler" was one of them. The cover
> art is ghastly, showing a dying man attired in leather because the label's
> Mousse-haired Marketing Morons insisted on it.
Where did you get those facts?
http://davewells.us/gallery/d/24091-2/Saturday+Night+Fiedler+Cover.jpg
Steve
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:QDUSo.69537$wf4....@newsfe05.iad:
> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>> Roger Kulp <thoren...@yahoo.com> appears to have caused the
>> following letters to be typed in
>> news:a17e379f-4335-4970-882e-4404eeeec757
>> @w17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> On Dec 29, 11:29 am, Dontaitchic...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>>> If my memory is correct, Dickson confirmed this in a book he wrote
>>>> about Fiedler, and about his (Dickson's) years with the Pops as well,
>>>> after Fiedler's death. I'll try to check the book and report back.
>>>
>>> Which titles would these be?
>>
>> I'm fairly sure that "Saturday Night Fiedler" was one of them. The
>> cover art is ghastly, showing a dying man attired in leather because
>> the label's Mousse-haired Marketing Morons insisted on it.
>
> All wrapped in white linen and cold as the clay.
Must have been some other issue that had him in leather.
> http://davewells.us/2009/11/saturday-night-fiedler.html
> Picture and conductor confirmation, quoting Dickson's book.
>
> Too bad about Dickson. I was hoping he'd get the job.
So did I, but the geniuses in the back office suddenly had their pupils
replaced with dollar signs, as they thought of all the film soundtrack work
the orchestra would certainly get if they signed a well-known composer with
scant knowledge of repertoire outside his own music.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:WNSdnU6ZS4nmOYHQ...@giganews.com:
Linen suit, not leather. Perhaps I was subconsciously hoping that there was
a Boston Pops cover of "YMCA." Hey, if the MMMs thought it would sell....
operafan
I think they sound pretty horrendous--egregious multi-miking that
makes a solo clarinet sound louder than the whole orchestra, etc. The
only one I have on CD is the reissued Stokowski Scheherezade, which
not only has the multi-miking problem but also has massive overloading
distortion at climaxes. It ruins my favorite performance of this piece.
Kip Williams
> Steve de Mena<st...@stevedemena.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:WNSdnU6ZS4nmOYHQ...@giganews.com:
>
> a Boston Pops cover of "YMCA." Hey, if the MMMs thought it would sell....
Or you might have an image of Pat Boone embedded deep in your brain.
Ironically, I think it was the most sincere and genuine part of his
career except possibly for the Mexican stereotypes in "Speedy Gonzales."
Kip W
Dontait...@aol.com
I have found Harry Ellis Dickson's book with his exposition about at
least some of the last "Fiedler/Pops" recordings.
Harry Ellis Dickson: "Arthur Fiedler and the Boston Pops -- An
Irreverent Memoir"
Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1981
Excerpted and summarized from pp. 155-7, Chapter XII, "The Golden
Anniversary":
"In the early spring of 1979, Arthur was approaching another
milestone, this time his fiftieth season as conductor of the Boston
Pops....Arthur had vowed he would never retire, preferring to 'die
with my boots on,' as he was fond of saying. Considering his recent
serious illness, the question around Symphony Hall was, 'will he make
it?' "
Fiedler had had serious brain surgery (to remove fluid) in December
1978. Dickson writes of Fiedler "it was hard to accept the fact that
'the debutante's delight and mother's despair' was now nothing more
than a shell. However, he walked out of the hospital on his own less
than two weeks later, more physically fit than I had seen him in
recent years, though his heart had weakened to a point where his
doctors could only marvel at his tenacity.
"Arthur recovered, but was not quite the same man." But Dickson
writes "the thought of not working was abhorrent to him...Soon after
he left the hospital, a recording session was scheduled to take place.
Tom Morris alerted me to be ready to conduct a new album, *Saturday
Night Fiedler*. On ther day of the session, I came to Symphony Hall
early and received a call from Arthur.
" 'Harry, I'm all dressed, and I'm coming in.'
" 'Okay, Arthur,' I said.
"But a few minutes later I received a call from Tom Morris, who had
just arrived at Arthur's home.
" 'Harry,' he whispered to me, 'he's in no condition to leave the
house, much less conduct.'
"Morris told me later that it took a great deal of persuasion on his
and Helen's [Mrs. Fiedler's] part to get Arthur back into bed. The
recording session took place on schedule, and we finished side one of
the album that morning.
"Two days later, when the second session was scheduled -- this one
to be called "Bach-o-Mania" -- the same telephone drama was
repeated....It is ironic that the very last Fiedler album, with him
the picture of him on the cover strutting dance steps in a while suit,
should have been conducted by me. When the album was released, a
statement appeared on the jacket under Arthur's signature thanking me
and all concerned. It did not definitely state that I conducted.
Subsequently, our management informed Midsong Records that they were
to correct the misimpression. They did so by attaching a pressure-
sensitive label to the cellophane wrap on the jacket, indicating that
Harry Ellis Dickson conducted the album; however,m when I removed the
cellophane from my copy, 'Harry Ellis Dickson' disappeared."
That's what I have found in the book. I saw nothing about the
Gershwin LP. However, there's no index. But evidently Dickson
conducted "Saturday Night Fiedler" for sure.
Don Tait
Kerrison
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks. I've now played the Gershwin CD and there's no way that this
is being conducted by a sick 84-year-old who had only a few weeks to
live (Fiedler died on 10 July 1979 and the Gershwin sessions were held
in June) and who'd had a major heart attack in May. It's a wonderful
CD, full of life and pizz-azz, so it's a pity that Decca/London did
Dickson out of his well-deserved credit in much the same way as
Midsong Records evidently did.
david gideon
<106eecca-80a2-4023...@y23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
Kerrison <kerrison1...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On the other hand, I don't recall if any of the Phase-4 recordings
> made by Leinsdorf (The Rite of Spring, etc.) or Maazel (Pictures at an
> Exhibition, etc.) or Sargent (a Gilbert and Sullivan selection) or
> Ivan Davis (Rachmaninov's 2nd Piano Concerto, etc.) or Henry Lewis
> (Beethoven's 'Pastoral,' etc.) and many others, were ever reissued on
> CD by London. Whether there'd be any commercial demand for them these
> days, apropos Universal or Arkiv, I couldn't say.
Of those I know the Gilbert & Sullivan selections (Sargent) came out in
a 2-CD set with James Walker's Pinafore (London 455 160). I've done a
few of the Leinsdorf items (Petrouchka, Tannhauser Ovt & VM--from open
reel sources). I'm surprised that so many Phase-4s have been forgotten,
apparently because it was decided that the performers were not
sufficiently marketable.
dg
--
CD issues of long-unavailable classic performances exclusively from:
http://www.rediscovery.us
ReDiscovery radio internet stream: http://www.rediscovery.us/Listen.html
Dontait...@aol.com
> > On Dec 29, 12:29 pm, Dontaitchic...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 29, 5:05 am, Kerrison <kerrison126-spar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
[edit]
> Thanks. I've now played the Gershwin CD and there's no way that this
> is being conducted by a sick 84-year-old who had only a few weeks to
> live (Fiedler died on 10 July 1979 and the Gershwin sessions were held
> in June) and who'd had a major heart attack in May. It's a wonderful
> CD, full of life and pizz-azz, so it's a pity that Decca/London did
> Dickson out of his well-deserved credit in much the same way as
> Midsong Records evidently did.
And thank *you*. I remember the Gershwin LP, but never bought it and
have no opinion.
You might well have a good point about it being too good to be the
work of a sick, enfeebled man. Fiedler made it to his fiftieth
anniversary concert, and it was televised live. Frankly, I was
horrified by it all. I believe that he never conducted again, and, as
you wrote, died on July 10. It was sad -- but he'd had a long and
glorious career, and was truly an excellent conductor whose quality is
sometimes overlooked because of the "pop" stuff in which he was so
regularly recorded in his last two decades. Among many things, Fiedler
was proud that for years his Boston Pops had programmed more Mozart
piano concertos since 1930 than the Boston Symphony had since 1881.
Incidentally, Fiedler had an almost incredible medical history. His
heart trouble in early 1979, shortly before his death, was just a late
part. He had a massive heart attack as early as 1944. During the Pops
season. Typically, he refused to go to the hospital, told doctors
where they could go and to leave him alone, and was back conducting
nightly concerts in a day or two. Without further problems. Other
major health problems followed, and Fiedler's behavior was the same.
Just some whiskey or beer. And no further problems.
Dickson's book is a marvellous source of information about him, as
is his daughter Johana's memoir.
Happy New Year....
Don Tait
Dontait...@aol.com
Frankly, I agree with you about the Phase 4 series. As you might
recall, Decca/London touted them when they were introduced in the
1960s as an exploitation of something such as "the new possibilities
of stereophonic recording." (My paraphrase of what I recall.) Meaning,
essentially, what you wrote: "egregious multi-miking" and manipulation
of balances, for starters. All part of a passing fad about
stereophonic reproduction. It seems that those things could be in the
existing master tapes and that there are no undoctored ones to use for
more honest sound. If true, it's a pity. At least RCA Victor's
misguided "Dynagroove" sonic manipulation of the '60s was inflicted
after the masters were recorded and stored, and could be subsequently
reversed. Or so I've been given to understand.
Don Tait
graham
<Dontait...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:d42b6cb9-b961-4fe7...@l32g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
---------------------------------------------------------------
I recall reading that Stokowski was much enamoured of the P4 system.
Graham
Bob Lombard
> <Dontait...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:d42b6cb9-b961-4fe7...@l32g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Frankly, I agree with you about the Phase 4 series. As you might
> recall, Decca/London touted them when they were introduced in the
> 1960s as an exploitation of something such as "the new possibilities
> of stereophonic recording." (My paraphrase of what I recall.) Meaning,
> essentially, what you wrote: "egregious multi-miking" and manipulation
> of balances, for starters. All part of a passing fad about
> stereophonic reproduction. It seems that those things could be in the
> existing master tapes and that there are no undoctored ones to use for
> more honest sound. If true, it's a pity. At least RCA Victor's
> misguided "Dynagroove" sonic manipulation of the '60s was inflicted
> after the masters were recorded and stored, and could be subsequently
> reversed. Or so I've been given to understand.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I recall reading that Stokowski was much enamoured of the P4 system.
> Graham
>
>
The 'control of recorded results' that it offered probably appealed to
him, as later DG practices did to Karajan. Stokowski was reportedly much
interested in orchestral 'details' in public performance too. None of
that signifies that either conductor approved of 'bad balances'.
bl
graham
"Bob Lombard" <thorste...@vermontel.net> wrote in message
news:Xf7To.548342$iV7....@en-nntp-15.dc1.easynews.com...
Graham
Dontait...@aol.com
> <Dontaitchic...@aol.com> wrote in message
[edit]
> I recall reading that Stokowski was much enamoured of the P4 system.
> Graham
Yes, by all accounts Stokowski loved it. It was perfect for him. By
the 1960s he had for decades held the belief that recordings were,
ideally, a medium that should make it possible to do things with music
that could not be achieved in performance. Bringing out instruments
that would otherwise be buried, for instance, or making groups of
instruments more prominent than they'd been in the recording
session(s). The many multi-tracks on the original Fantasia sound track
was a reflection of that. He'd been manipulating his recordings since
his RCA Victor sessions in 1947 and after -- altering dynamics for the
records, and so on. The Phase 4 business, with its overt manipulation
of balances et cetera, was something he was certain to love and
embrace as a part of his old philosophy. Right or wrong. Stokowski in
his eighties, as iconoclastic as ever.
Don Tait
One can fault him, but he truly believed it.
Kimba W Lion
> Yes, by all accounts Stokowski loved it. It was perfect for him. By
>the 1960s he had for decades held the belief that recordings were,
>ideally, a medium that should make it possible to do things with music
>that could not be achieved in performance. Bringing out instruments
>that would otherwise be buried, for instance, or making groups of
>instruments more prominent than they'd been in the recording
>session(s). The many multi-tracks on the original Fantasia sound track
>was a reflection of that. He'd been manipulating his recordings since
>his RCA Victor sessions in 1947 and after -- altering dynamics for the
>records, and so on. The Phase 4 business, with its overt manipulation
>of balances et cetera, was something he was certain to love and
>embrace as a part of his old philosophy. Right or wrong. Stokowski in
>his eighties, as iconoclastic as ever.
With 217,000 (plus or minus) recordings of Scheherazade (for example)
available, why shouldn't one be different, be outrageous even, and maybe be
instructive by highlighting details that normally go unnoticed or nearly so?
The idea of "realistically" reproducing the sound of a symphony orchestra in
one's living room is laughable anyway, so why shouldn't the process be
manipulated by a master musician?
And Phase 4 recordings do have a number of fans, even if Decca doesn't realize
it.
Terry
Then obviously you never heard Stokowski's recording of Debussy's "Fêtes",
in which piece you'll recall there is a VERY long orchestral crescendo. Not
satisfied to let the conductor manage this long crescendo, the Phase 4
engineers not only augmented it with an electronic crescendo, but added a
left-to-right "pan" effect as well, giving an effect that Superman might
have experienced in a flight to, through and away from the orchestra. I
believe Decca came to their senses some years later, and re-released the
performance without this appalling effect.
--
Cheers, Terry
Dontait...@aol.com
<norepliesbyem...@norepliesbyemail.invalid> wrote:
Perfect! That's Stokowski's reasoning for sure, whether he thought
of himself as a master musician or not (which he was).
Don Tait
number_six
> I've been searching out what's available on CD and the pickings are
> pretty slim. Has anybody heard of plans by Universal Music Group or
> ArkivMusic to reissue titles in this series?
There were also many great Phase 4 LPs outside the classical
repertoire. On the gatefold covers, sometimes you get pictures inside
of other albums.
I recently acquired a Phase 4 LP by Los Machucambos, who were a superb
group.
Come to think of it, I believe they might have been from France, but
then a lot of great Spanish music has always come from France.
My Phase 4 CDs include stuff by Bob Sharples, Edmundo Ros, Bernard
Herrmann, Stanley Black, and that Ketelbey fellow who isn't so popular
in these parts.
Kip Williams
> My Phase 4 CDs include stuff by Bob Sharples, Edmundo Ros, Bernard
> Herrmann, Stanley Black, and that Ketelbey fellow who isn't so popular
> in these parts.
I'm rather fond of Ketelbey, though I haven't gone much beyond his silly
programmatic pieces. I keep looking at a couple volumes of his piano
music, but so far I've only taken things with the aforementioned sort of
silly programmatic titles.
That said, I prefer him on piano, so that's probably not what was on
those Phase 4s anyway.
Kip W
number_six
Correct, the Phase 4 is the silly programmatic music, I think with
calls of "Baksheesh!" during In A Persian Market.
He has his detractors, many in fact, but I find some of his music very
attractive.
Peter
spectacular (LONDON SP 44095) "Ringling Bros and Barnum & Bailey CIRCUS
SPECTACULAR" has ever been transferred to CD?
Thank you.
Frank Berger
I don't believe so, but you can get a CD-R here (not cheaply). I don't know
anything about the quality.
Kerrison
> Bob Lombard <thorsteinNOS...@vermontel.net> wrote:
> > graham wrote:
> >> <Dontaitchic...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Terry ... You are spouting the most absolute rubbish. Stokowski never
recorded Debussy's "Fetes" in Phase-4 in his entire life, so your
ludicrous description of a long electronic crescendo and Decca coming
to their senses and all the rest is sheer claptrap, and thoroughly
misleading claptrap at that.
I have in front of me John Hunt's 1996 Stokowski Discography and can
tell you that Stokowski's only recordings of "Fetes" were on Victor
78s with the Philadelphia Orchestra in 1927 and again in 1939; with
'his Symphony Orchestra' for a 1950 RCA LP; and finally with the
London Symphony for Capitol in 1957, this being his only stereo
recording of the work and not in Phase 4 and nor for Decca.
Now, please do some proper research and get your facts right and then
tell us who did record Debussy's 'Nocturnes' in Phase 4 Stereo. Also,
give us the catalogue number so we can hear this electronic effect for
ourselves, plus the catalogue number of the re-released version
without the "appalling effect" which you so clearly recall.
Dave Cook
> only one I have on CD is the reissued Stokowski Scheherezade, which
> not only has the multi-miking problem but also has massive overloading
Do you have the Cala CD? It's a much better remastering job than the
"Jubilee" CD I had previously.
Dave Cook
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:Um3To.20590$Zf2....@newsfe17.iad:
What's "stereotypical" about Speedy Gonzales, apart from the exaggerated
dialect? He's industrious, likable, and always victorious.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:1a5da671-e320-42d8-8b11-
97591c...@n32g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
I am one of the detractors. I possess a CD with Luigini's "Ballet
Egyptien" suite (Fistoulari/RPO) as a filler to various Ketelby works
(Lanchbery/Philharmonia), and in the "Type" field of my database I list the
latter music not as "orchestral" but as "kitsch."
Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:eb0c1f8f-f49b-4680-af01-
0bffa4...@o14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
> Incidentally, Fiedler had an almost incredible medical history. His
> heart trouble in early 1979, shortly before his death, was just a late
> part. He had a massive heart attack as early as 1944. During the Pops
> season. Typically, he refused to go to the hospital, told doctors
> where they could go and to leave him alone, and was back conducting
> nightly concerts in a day or two. Without further problems. Other
> major health problems followed, and Fiedler's behavior was the same.
> Just some whiskey or beer. And no further problems.
Didn't Artur Bodanzky supposedly have a heart attack during a performance of
"Parsifal" at the Metropolitan, whereupon Leinsdorf stepped in to conduct the
second act? And then, Bodanzky returned to conduct the third act?
ivanmaxim
> number_six <cyberi...@hotmail.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:1a5da671-e320-42d8-8b11-
>
> - Show quoted text -
That Fistoulari Luigini recording was the only one readily available
for a very long time till Bonynge recorded it in one of his ballet
albums - yes it is very pretty kitsch. Wagner fan
ivanmaxim
> typed in news:eb0c1f8f-f49b-4680-af01-
> 0bffa4bf0...@o14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
Yes the broadcast of 4/15/38. Wagner fan
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams<k...@rochester.rr.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:Um3To.20590$Zf2....@newsfe17.iad:
>
>> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>>> Steve de Mena<st...@stevedemena.com> appears to have caused the
>>> following letters to be typed in
>>> news:WNSdnU6ZS4nmOYHQ...@giganews.com:
>>>
>>> Linen suit, not leather. Perhaps I was subconsciously hoping that
>>> there was a Boston Pops cover of "YMCA." Hey, if the MMMs thought it
>>> would sell....
>>
>> Or you might have an image of Pat Boone embedded deep in your brain.
>> Ironically, I think it was the most sincere and genuine part of his
>> career except possibly for the Mexican stereotypes in "Speedy Gonzales."
>
> What's "stereotypical" about Speedy Gonzales, apart from the exaggerated
> dialect? He's industrious, likable, and always victorious.
I'm talking about the song Boone recorded, not the early run (before the
decadent 60s Warner cartoons that pitted Gonzales against an unfunny
Daffy Duck), which seems to have Mel Blanc's voice delivering lines
about tequila for breakfast and such.
My old roommate, Sam Salas, loves to quote lines from the classic
cartoons. The Boone song, not so much.
Kip W
Gerard
The Luigini recording by Fistoulari was on EMI, IIRC (I have it both on LP and
CD).
It is absolutely no kistch at all.
It is very well possible that Tepper labelled the whole thing as "kitsch"
because of the Ketelbey items.
Dontait...@aol.com
A minor but possibly interesting fact about Ketelbey: he made
records as a conductor. Including, cut down to two record sides
Regal (U.K.) G 1013 Tchaikovsky: 1812 Overture
The Silver Stars Band
conducted by Albert W. Ketelbey
matrices 74376, 74392
An acoustical recording, if I recall correctly. I haven't played it
in many years, and now temporarily cannot. Other collectors here might
also own a copy and be able to confirm whether it's acoustical or
electrical process.
Don Tait
Matthew B. Tepper
to be typed in news:ecf2822c-1da4-45a3-b675-
1c7157...@n10g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
> On Dec 31, 11:24 am, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy @earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> I am one of the detractors. I possess a CD with Luigini's "Ballet
>> Egyptien" suite (Fistoulari/RPO) as a filler to various Ketelby works
>> (Lanchbery/Philharmonia), and in the "Type" field of my database I list
>> the latter music not as "orchestral" but as "kitsch."
>
> That Fistoulari Luigini recording was the only one readily available
> for a very long time till Bonynge recorded it in one of his ballet
> albums - yes it is very pretty kitsch. Wagner fan
No no; the Luigini is described in my database as "ballet exc." It's the
Ketelby that's "kitsch"!
ivanmaxim
> ivanmaxim <ivanmax...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following letters
> to be typed in news:ecf2822c-1da4-45a3-b675-
>
> > On Dec 31, 11:24 am, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy @earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >> I am one of the detractors. I possess a CD with Luigini's "Ballet
> >> Egyptien" suite (Fistoulari/RPO) as a filler to various Ketelby works
> >> (Lanchbery/Philharmonia), and in the "Type" field of my database I list
> >> the latter music not as "orchestral" but as "kitsch."
>
> > That Fistoulari Luigini recording was the only one readily available
> > for a very long time till Bonynge recorded it in one of his ballet
> > albums - yes it is very pretty kitsch. Wagner fan
>
> No no; the Luigini is described in my database as "ballet exc." It's the
> Ketelby that's "kitsch"!
>
> --
> Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
> Read about "Proty" here:http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
> To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
> Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Ah OK. But for me. like a lot of the pseudo-Oriental stuff that came
out of France around that time - it is pretty "kitsch-y". But thats
for each to decide. BTW I love Adorno's defintion of kitsch - the
beautiful minus its ugly counterpart. best Wagner Fan
Dontait...@aol.com
[snip]
> That Fistoulari Luigini recording was the only one readily available
> for a very long time till Bonynge recorded it in one of his ballet
> albums - yes it is very pretty kitsch. Wagner fan
I confess to being old enough to have bought, around 1958, RCA
Victor LM(x)-1084. Luigini: Ballet egyptienne. Overside: Massenet: Le
Cid: Ballet Music. Arthur Fiedler/Boston Pops Orchestra.
A great record, with great spirit and magnificent playing from Serge
Koussevitzky's Boston Symphony. I now own about three copies of it
just in case something happens to one or one wears out.
Concerning the Luigini, I happened to find on the Internet not long
ago that the four-movement suite was neither taken from a longer work
nor from a ballet. It was a concert work with that title.
Does anyone else remember that the beginning of the first movement
was used as musical accompaniment for early sound cartoons in which
stylized drawings imitating ancient Egyptian ones were depicted as
moving their arms in profile, to the accompaniment of Luigini's
music?
Don Tait
ivanmaxim
No but I can definitely picture that. I guess the Fiedler has never
been transferred to CD??? If not I'll look for a copy the music is
fun. Wagner fan
Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:07d2fe73-c6db-4542-9ba4-835aba0242cd@
39g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
> On Dec 31, 10:28 am, ivanmaxim <ivanmax...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> That Fistoulari Luigini recording was the only one readily available
>> for a very long time till Bonynge recorded it in one of his ballet
>> albums - yes it is very pretty kitsch. Wagner fan
>
> I confess to being old enough to have bought, around 1958, RCA
> Victor LM(x)-1084. Luigini: Ballet egyptienne. Overside: Massenet: Le
> Cid: Ballet Music. Arthur Fiedler/Boston Pops Orchestra.
>
> A great record, with great spirit and magnificent playing from Serge
> Koussevitzky's Boston Symphony. I now own about three copies of it
> just in case something happens to one or one wears out.
>
> Concerning the Luigini, I happened to find on the Internet not long
> ago that the four-movement suite was neither taken from a longer work
> nor from a ballet. It was a concert work with that title.
I did not know that! I should make the appropriate adjustment to the
listing in my database.
> Does anyone else remember that the beginning of the first movement was
> used as musical accompaniment for early sound cartoons in which stylized
> drawings imitating ancient Egyptian ones were depicted as moving their
> arms in profile, to the accompaniment of Luigini's music?
No, but I remember when Steve Martin introduced his song "King Tut" on TV!
Gerard
> On Dec 31, 2:07 pm, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
> > ivanmaxim <ivanmax...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the
> > following letters to be typed in news:ecf2822c-1da4-45a3-b675-
> > 1c7157338...@n10g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
> >
> > > On Dec 31, 11:24 am, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy @earthlink.net>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > I am one of the detractors. I possess a CD with Luigini's
> > > > "Ballet Egyptien" suite (Fistoulari/RPO) as a filler to various
> > > > Ketelby works (Lanchbery/Philharmonia), and in the "Type" field
> > > > of my database I list the latter music not as "orchestral" but
> > > > as "kitsch."
> >
> > > That Fistoulari Luigini recording was the only one readily
> > > available for a very long time till Bonynge recorded it in one of
> > > his ballet albums - yes it is very pretty kitsch. Wagner fan
> >
> > No no; the Luigini is described in my database as "ballet exc."
> > It's the Ketelby that's "kitsch"!
> >
> > --
> > Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
> > Read about "Proty" here:http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
> > To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
> > Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
>
> Ah OK.
Like I said.
> But for me. like a lot of the pseudo-Oriental stuff that came
> out of France around that time - it is pretty "kitsch-y". But thats
> for each to decide. BTW I love Adorno's defintion of kitsch - the
> beautiful minus its ugly counterpart. best Wagner Fan
Well, for a wagner fan there must be a lot of kitsch-y stuff.
Or was it the opposite?
operafan
operafan
wrote:
\
> Terry ... You are spouting the most absolute rubbish. Stokowski never
> recorded Debussy's "Fetes" in Phase-4 in his entire life, so your
> ludicrous description of a long electronic crescendo and Decca coming
> to their senses and all the rest is sheer claptrap, and thoroughly
> misleading claptrap at that.
> Now, please do some proper research and get your facts right and then
> tell us who did record Debussy's 'Nocturnes' in Phase 4 Stereo. Also,
> give us the catalogue number so we can hear this electronic effect for
> ourselves, plus the catalogue number of the re-released version
> without the "appalling effect" which you so clearly recall.
This is the only Phase 4 version of this piece I found (the catalog
number is London not Decca:
SPC-21104...Jean Fournet/The Netherlands Radio Philharmonic: Debussy:
Afternoon of a Faun/Nocturnes: Nuages • Fetes • Sirenes/Iberia LP
(1975)
Steve de Mena
I think I had that, had a silver or gold reflective cover(?).
Steve
Kerrison
Thanks for the research! I've now found the equivalent Decca number
(PFS 4317) and a review in The Penguin Guide which states Fournet's
are "well made performances, helped by the brilliant Decca recording,
which is not too unnaturally balanced." As to the 'Nocturnes', the
review states that "it is as its best in 'Fetes', where the distancing
of the procession is managed with a technical wizardry which would not
be possible at a live performance yet does not sound contrived." So
much for it being "an appalling effect."
Incidentally, the Phase-4 producers used this Dutch orchestra for
several of their recordings, including Stokowski in the Cesar Frank
Symphony (where it was named the Hilversum Radio Philharmonic, since
that's the name of the town where the country's radio orchestra has
its studios), Dorati in Prokofiev's Lt Kije and Kodaly's Hary Janos
Suite, and Fistoulari in a complete Swan Lake.
Gerard
I think that those names (of the orchestras) are confusing.
"Hilversum Radio Philharmonic" is not a familiar name.
The broadcasting companies had 2 orchestras in Hilversum:
- Radio Filharmonisch orkest Holland, or
Netherlands Radio Philharmonic Orchestra
- Radio Symfonie Orkest
I have the Franck symphonie on a Cala CD and on a Decca CD. With the "Hilversum
Radio Philharmonic Orchestra", as you wrote.
That orchestra probably is the Radio Filharmonisch orkest, sometimes referred to
like:
"Radio Filharmonisch orkest te Hilversum" ("te" = at).
Googling "Hilversum Radio Philharmonic" I see this name is mostly used in
connection to .. Stokowski's recording.
The orchestra (Radio Filharmonisch orkest) has made recordings with Stokowski,
Fournet, Dorati, Van Zweden, De Waart, Wigglesworth and others.
http://www.radiofilharmonischorkest.nl/mco_page/orkestbiografie
http://en.radiofilharmonischorkest.nl/mco_page/theorchestra
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Filharmonisch_Orkest
number_six
wrote:
> number_six <cyberi...@hotmail.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:1a5da671-e320-42d8-8b11-
I have that CD also. Lanchbery deserves some regard not only as a
conductor, but as a composer -- his music for Tales of Beatrix Potter
was very good.
The term "kitsch" is sometimes used disdainfully, sometimes
affectionately. Ketelbey may not earn your affection, but I don't
think his music should be disdained.
Of all the tools and materials a composer has at hand, the melodist's
gift may be the most obvious and accessible to the general
listenership, but can also be the most elusive and uncontrollable
element of composition. I believe melody has a different relationship
to the perspiration /inspiration dynamic than anything else in
composition. This forms a potential trap into which composers and
sophisticated, knowledgeable listeners sometimes fall -- they should
extol and appreciate the other compositional virtues, yes, but not
disdain a great melody that catches the audience's fancy.
ivanmaxim
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oh I agree - I enjoy some musical kitsch - kind of the same way I love
those old Universal horror films - a guilty pleasure I guess but can
be alot of fun and really enjoyable!!! Wagner fan
William Sommerwerck
> melodist's gift may be the most obvious and accessible to
> the general listenership, but can also be the most elusive
> and uncontrollable element of composition. I believe melody
> has a different relationship to the perspiration/inspiration
> dynamic than anything else in composition. This forms a
> potential trap into which composers and sophisticated,
> knowledgeable listeners sometimes fall -- they should
> extol and appreciate the other compositional virtues, yes,
> but not disdain a great melody that catches the audience's
> fancy.
But what if that "great melody" is all the composer has to offer the
listener?
To give one example... Who remembers Henry Mancini's film scores?
Kip Williams
> But what if that "great melody" is all the composer has to offer the
> listener?
>
> To give one example... Who remembers Henry Mancini's film scores?
Not in their entirety, but I listen to Mancini for pleasure.
Kip W
Kimba W Lion
>But what if that "great melody" is all the composer has to offer the
>listener?
Then he's still above average.
>To give one example... Who remembers Henry Mancini's film scores?
Who can't hum along to "dead ant, dead ant..."?
William Sommerwerck
>> Mancini's film scores?
> Not in their entirety, but I listen to Mancini for pleasure.
Forgive me, but isn't there "better" music -- including of lots of
non-classical -- to listen to for pleasure?
number_six
wrote:
> >> To give one example... Who remembers Henry
> >> Mancini's film scores?
Kip wrote -
> > Not in their entirety, but I listen to Mancini for pleasure.
>
William wrote -
> Forgive me, but isn't there "better" music -- including of lots of
> non-classical -- to listen to for pleasure?
Whatever you're listening to, there's almost always something better.
If you're listening to your favorite performance of your favorite
work, then enjoy it to its fullest, and hope it does not pall from
overplay.
number_six
wrote:
#6 wrote -
> > Of all the tools and materials a composer has at hand, the
> > melodist's gift may be the most obvious and accessible to
> > the general listenership, but can also be the most elusive
> > and uncontrollable element of composition. I believe melody
> > has a different relationship to the perspiration/inspiration
> > dynamic than anything else in composition. This forms a
> > potential trap into which composers and sophisticated,
> > knowledgeable listeners sometimes fall -- they should
> > extol and appreciate the other compositional virtues, yes,
> > but not disdain a great melody that catches the audience's
> > fancy.
>
William wrote -
> But what if that "great melody" is all the composer has to offer the
> listener?
Well, at the very least he's provided excellent raw material with
which more technically adept composers can fashion some variations on
a theme!
number_six
> But what if that "great melody" is all the composer has to offer the
> listener?
>
> To give one example... Who remembers Henry Mancini's film scores?
I think The Great Race, The Pink Panther, Breakfast at Tiffany's, and
some others, will be remembered for a long time.
There will always be room on my shelves, and in my memory, for these.
Kip Williams
I should conduct an analysis and determine which music is "best" before
I listen to anything? Every experience must be objectively uplifting?
No. Mancini gives me pleasure.
Kip W
William Sommerwerck
>> has to offer the listener?
> Well, at the very least he's provided excellent raw material
> with which more technically adept composers can fashion
> some variations on a theme!
I'm reminded of Mozart saying to Salieri that he'd a written a set of
variations on an aria from one of the latter's operas. "An odd little theme,
but it yielded interesting results." Salieri was not pleased.
From my perspective, a "good tune" is not the be-all and end-all of music --
it's what you /do/ with it.
MiNe 109
<33c7614a-dc05-4196...@i32g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
number_six <cybe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
The Mancini greatest hits collection on RCA is a guilty pleasure for me.
Stephen
William Sommerwerck
>> has to offer the listener?
>> To give one example... Who remembers Henry
>> Mancini's film scores?
> I think The Great Race, The Pink Panther, Breakfast at
> Tiffany's, and some others, will be remembered for a long
> time. There will always be room on my shelves, and in my
> memory, for these.
Okay... think of one genuinely memorable, or cinematically terrific, bit of
music from these works. The title music -- which was almost always
commercially exploited -- doesn't count. I've seen all these films -- and
others -- and nothing comes to mind.
The truly great film composers -- Herrmann, Waxman, Goldsmith -- weren't
(much) interested in writing commercially exploitable film scores. But
(until near the end of his career) that's pretty much all Mancini did. This
is also true of Tiomkin -- though I'd say the quality of the songs he wrote
far exceeds that of Mancini's.
As Herrmann said... "When you go to a doctor, you expect him to make you
well. You don't expect him to make you rich, too."
Kip Williams
>>> But what if that "great melody" is all the composer
>>> has to offer the listener?
>>> To give one example... Who remembers Henry
>>> Mancini's film scores?
>
>> I think The Great Race, The Pink Panther, Breakfast at
>> Tiffany's, and some others, will be remembered for a long
>> time. There will always be room on my shelves, and in my
>> memory, for these.
>
> Okay... think of one genuinely memorable, or cinematically terrific, bit of
> music from these works. The title music -- which was almost always
> commercially exploited -- doesn't count. I've seen all these films -- and
> others -- and nothing comes to mind.
The title song from "Breakfast at Tiffany's" is called "Breakfast at
Tiffany's." "Moon River" is the breakaway hit.
There's a song somebody sings in the ski chalet in "The Pink Panther"
that I'm rather fond of.
"Touch of Evil" was a good score for the movie. I do find myself
thinking of bits of it from time to time.
Kip W
Kerrison
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 20:41:21 +1100, Kerrison wrote
> (in article
> <5f9ba133-0f79-45cc-9b9c-f9d99e8a3...@p8g2000vbs.googlegroups.com>):
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Then obviously you never heard Stokowski's recording of Debussy's "Fêtes",
> >> in which piece you'll recall there is a VERY long orchestral crescendo. Not
> >> satisfied to let the conductor manage this long crescendo, the Phase 4
> >> engineers not only augmented it with an electronic crescendo, but added a
> >> left-to-right "pan" effect as well, giving an effect that Superman might
> >> have experienced in a flight to, through and away from the orchestra. I
> >> believe Decca came to their senses some years later, and re-released the
> >> performance without this appalling effect.
> >> --
> >> Cheers, Terry- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > recorded Debussy's "Fetes" in Phase-4 in his entire life, so your
> > ludicrous description of a long electronic crescendo and Decca coming
> > to their senses and all the rest is sheer claptrap, and thoroughly
> > misleading claptrap at that.
>
> > tell you that Stokowski's only recordings of "Fetes" were on Victor
> > 78s with the Philadelphia Orchestra in 1927 and again in 1939; with
> > 'his Symphony Orchestra' for a 1950 RCA LP; and finally with the
> > London Symphony for Capitol in 1957, this being his only stereo
> > recording of the work and not in Phase 4 and nor for Decca.
>
> > Now, please do some proper research and get your facts right and then
> > tell us who did record Debussy's 'Nocturnes' in Phase 4 Stereo. Also,
> > give us the catalogue number so we can hear this electronic effect for
> > ourselves, plus the catalogue number of the re-released version
> > without the "appalling effect" which you so clearly recall.
>
> correction. Clearly the recording was on EMI, not Decca Phase 4, and involved
> the London Symphony Orchestra and the BBC chorus.
>
> --
> Cheers!
>
> Terry- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
You bet I get a head of stem up when someone posts a message which
doesn't contains a vestige of factual accuracy anywhere! You now
concede that Stokowski's wasn't a Phase 4 recording after all, but a
Capitol one, yet you haven't withdrawn your preposterous statement
that the engineers (in fact, those at Abbey Road where this recording
was made) "not only augmented it with a long crescendo but added a
left to right pan effect ..." etc. It's quite evident that you've
never heard this recording, since your description of it bears no
relation at all to what comes out of the speakers. Well, I did listen
to it (10 minutes ago as it happens) and what the EMI engineers did
for Stokowski is identical to that as described by the Penguin Guide
critic in respect of the Fournier recording: ie - both take note of
Debussy's printed direction in the published score that his "fantastic
procession" is to begin pianissimo and then, a few bars later, is to
sound "un peu rapproche" ("a little nearer"). Obviously the winds and
brass microphone levels were lower at the start of this section and
were simply raised by a db or two over the required number of bars to
conform to the indications in the score.
Your subsequent statement that "Decca came to their senses and re-
released it without this appalling effect" falls flat on its face
since Decca weren't involved. Neither could you supply the catalogue
number of any re-released Capitol version of the Stokowski recording
where the 'Fetes' movement is in any way different to the original,
for the simple reason that no such re-release has ever existed. Head
of steam indeed! The purpose of your posting is a mystery, unless it
was to try and denigrate Stokowski, in which case you have failed
abysmally.
Kimba W Lion
>The Mancini greatest hits collection on RCA is a guilty pleasure for me.
Here's something I don't understand. Music (well, most of it anyway) is made
to be enjoyed. So why should enjoying music be a "guilty" pleasure?
Kimba W Lion
>Forgive me, but isn't there "better" music -- including of lots of
>non-classical -- to listen to for pleasure?
Define "better music".
Terry
> On Jan 2, 1:07 pm, Terry <b...@clown.invalid> wrote:
>> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 20:41:21 +1100, Kerrison wrote
(snip)
Would you believe it if you heard it with your own ears?
--
Cheers, Terry
Kip Williams
It seems to be shorthand for "I enjoy it, but I don't think you do."
Kip W
David O.
<k...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>> Here's something I don't understand. Music (well, most of it anyway) is made
>> to be enjoyed. So why should enjoying music be a "guilty" pleasure?
>
>It seems to be shorthand for "I enjoy it, but I don't think you do."
I listen to the Partridge Family albums & I even have a collection of
Martin Denny CDs! No matter how we define guilty pleasures, these are
definitely guilty, Kip.
(P.S. My favorite Partridge Family album track is "Echo Valley
2-6809," followed by "Morning Rider on the Road," which reminds me of
our old family vacations, & "Rainmaker.")
MiNe 109
"Guilty pleasure" is more idiomatic than literal. For me, the Mancini is
like listening to ideal Muzak arrangements and thus at odds with my
classical musician/rock music fan biases.
Stephen
Kip Williams
> On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 18:49:21 -0500, Kip Williams
> <k...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>> Here's something I don't understand. Music (well, most of it anyway) is made
>>> to be enjoyed. So why should enjoying music be a "guilty" pleasure?
>>
>> It seems to be shorthand for "I enjoy it, but I don't think you do."
>
> Martin Denny CDs! No matter how we define guilty pleasures, these are
> definitely guilty, Kip.
Patridge Family? Martin Denny? Pfaugh. I see your puerile guilt and
raise you Skip Martin's Sheherajazz and Myron Floren's Disco Polka.
Kip W
number_six
> >> But what if that "great melody" is all the composer
> >> has to offer the listener?
Lee wrote:
> > Well, at the very least he's provided excellent raw material
> > with which more technically adept composers can fashion
> > some variations on a theme!
>
William continued:
> I'm reminded of Mozart saying to Salieri that he'd a written a set of
> variations on an aria from one of the latter's operas. "An odd little theme,
> but it yielded interesting results." Salieri was not pleased.
>
> From my perspective, a "good tune" is not the be-all and end-all of music --
> it's what you /do/ with it.
Lee escribe:
Why is "good tune" in quotes? Whom are you quoting?
I briefly had the Amadeus example in mind, but did not use it,
thinking it was inapt. Mozart admirably fills the role of the more
technically skilled composer (!!), but in that scene, Salieri had
provided him a trifle, not a *great* melody.
In any event, no one here is saying be-all /end-all. I certainly agree
it is not.
William Sommerwerck
Why am I obliged to SCREAM at people? THAT IS NOT WHAT I SAID! Why do people
DELIBERATELY misread what people write? WHY? Am I obliged to play Hayakawa
and put a numerical subscript on every stinking word to convey the exact
shade of meaning?
If it's not clear what I'm yelling about, it's that you deliberately and
perversely changed my usage of "better" to mean "best". WHY?
If all we listened to was the "best" music, or only watched the "best"
films, or read the "best" books, * life would be rather dull. (I just sat
through "Dick Tracy vs. Cueball".) But (to me) Mancini, for much of his
career, was the Ketelby of film music.
Clifford Curzon was Ketelby's nephew. Curzon described Ketelby's melodies as
"immortal" -- but so are the contents of a landfill.
I'll let this drop before it starts looking like a personal attack (which I
didn't intend it to be), and I apologize if it's been taken as such.
* Given how long it takes to read a book, one might argue, though, that one
should limit one's reading primarily to high-quality non-fiction, with
fiction restricted to genuinely edifying works.
William Sommerwerck
>> end-all of music -- it's what you /do/ with it.
> I briefly had the Amadeus example in mind, but did not use it,
> thinking it was inapt. Mozart admirably fills the role of the more
> technically skilled composer (!!), but in that scene, Salieri had
> provided him a trifle, not a *great* melody.
Which is exactly the point I'm making. Why do I need to explain or justify
it?
William Sommerwerck
>> guilty pleasure for me.
> Here's something I don't understand. Music (well, most
> of it anyway) is made to be enjoyed. So why should
> enjoying music be a "guilty" pleasure?
Because there are certain things we're not "supposed" to like.
Norman Rockwell is a good example. Many of his paintings are not merely
sentimental, but sentimental in an arch, self-aware, unsubtle manner that
shoves the sentiment right in the viewer's face and down their throat.
(Zeugma.) Unfortunately, the Art Critics are rehabilitating him, and have
decided he was A Great Artist after all. He wasn't. Most of his work is
kitschy crap.
William Sommerwerck
> I do find myself thinking of bits of it from time to time.
I'd completely forgotten about that. I'll have to pull it out this evening
and give it another listen. And I will not hold Mancini to a higher standard
than other composers.
William Sommerwerck
>> of lots of non-classical -- to listen to for pleasure?
> Define "better music".
Music that's intended to be more than /just/ immediately appealing. (I'm
waiting for /that/ remark to be deliberately misread.)
Kip Williams
>>>>> To give one example... Who remembers Henry
>>>>> Mancini's film scores?
>
>>>> Not in their entirety, but I listen to Mancini for pleasure.
>
>>> Forgive me, but isn't there "better" music -- including of lots
>>> of non-classical -- to listen to for pleasure?
>
>> I should conduct an analysis and determine which music is "best"
>> before I listen to anything? Every experience must be objectively
>> uplifting? No. Mancini gives me pleasure.
>
> Why am I obliged to SCREAM at people? THAT IS NOT WHAT I SAID! Why do people
> DELIBERATELY misread what people write? WHY? Am I obliged to play Hayakawa
> and put a numerical subscript on every stinking word to convey the exact
> shade of meaning?
>
> If it's not clear what I'm yelling about, it's that you deliberately and
> perversely changed my usage of "better" to mean "best". WHY?
Perhaps because the point makes as much sense either way.
Please, feel free to substitute "better" for "best" in my statement
above. Then you can scream some more.
Kip W
Kip Williams
> Please, feel free to substitute "better" for "best" in my statement
> above. Then you can scream some more.
If you are going to say "there's something better than this to listen
to," then it follows that there is also something "better than that" to
listen to, and this inevitably leads to a conclusion that one must
always be listening to the very best possible thing.
The pleasure you express distaste for is as much an option as the
self-improvement or whatever it is that comes from listening to the
"better" all the time.
Kip W
William Sommerwerck
>> above. Then you can scream some more.
> If you are going to say "there's something better than this to listen
> to," then it follows that there is also something "better than that" to
> listen to, and this inevitably leads to a conclusion that one must
> always be listening to the very best possible thing.
Isn't it amazing how any argument can be argued away.
I said there was music "better" than Mancini's. Your argument is a
non-sequitur, with respect to what I actually said.
If you insist in arguing this way, don't expect me to watch "Touch of Evil"
tonight. I have "better" things to do.
Frank Berger
I think Kip's reasoning is impeccable in this case. The implication of what
you said is exactly as he said. *However,* he could have cut you some slack
and not insist ed on a perfectly literal interpretation. We don't all
always mean what we say and say what we mean. What you *meant" is that
Mancini's music is "bad" enough that *you* would never get around to
listening to it. But you didn't say that, exactly.
ivanmaxim
wrote:
Ah Dick Tracy vs. Cueball - that is a guilty pleasure of mine. The old
actress who plays the bar owner is really good in that and Cueball
himself is pretty frightening!!!! TMC recently ran four Dr, Kildares
in a row - I had never seen them and didn't know how good they
are!!!! Wagner fan
Kip Williams
> Ah Dick Tracy vs. Cueball - that is a guilty pleasure of mine. The old
> actress who plays the bar owner is really good in that and Cueball
> himself is pretty frightening!!!! TMC recently ran four Dr, Kildares
> in a row - I had never seen them and didn't know how good they
> are!!!!
Again with the guilt. I watch the movie with no feeling that I should be
off edifying myself with Chaucer or Shakespeare in the original spelling
instead. There's a time for everything, even if there's not time enough
to fit it all in. I also like Dick Tracy vs Gruesome, though I
personally think Skelton Knaggs deserves the name more than Karloff did.
But at least Karloff plays the piano in it.
I tried a DVD of Dick Tracy serials recently, but it feels like 60% of
it is padding.
Kip W
Kip Williams
>>> Please, feel free to substitute "better" for "best" in my statement
>>> above. Then you can scream some more.
>
>> If you are going to say "there's something better than this to listen
>> to," then it follows that there is also something "better than that" to
>> listen to, and this inevitably leads to a conclusion that one must
>> always be listening to the very best possible thing.
>
> Isn't it amazing how any argument can be argued away.
Isn't it amazing how the logical consequences of what you said have
absolutely nothing to do with what you now say you meant? Maybe you
should think before you write.
> I said there was music "better" than Mancini's. Your argument is a
> non-sequitur, with respect to what I actually said.
My argument considers the notion that I should spend my time listening
to something someone else thinks is better. It addresses the fallacy
that if something better exists, I should listen to that instead of what
I want to listen to.
The fact is, if there's something better I should listen to, then
there's also something better than that. You should own your words and
not wriggle away from them.
> If you insist in arguing this way, don't expect me to watch "Touch of Evil"
> tonight. I have "better" things to do.
Oh, mercy. I'm being punished by you not listening to something. Ow, ow, ow.
Kip W
Kip Williams
[re Dick Tracy vs Cueball]
> I also like Dick Tracy vs Gruesome, though I
> personally think Skelton Knaggs deserves the name more than Karloff did.
> But at least Karloff plays the piano in it.
It also veers dangerously close to some sort of musical topic with the
character Dr. A. Tomic!
Kip W
ivanmaxim
OK Kip - I guess I shouldn't have used the old saying "guilty
pleasure" - I enjoy watching 1950s science fiction films (I recently
re-viewed The Cyclops - where half the monsters face looks like a
melted cheese sandwich) as much as I do other "more important" aspects
of art. What a dull life it would be without them!! Wagner fan
Kip Williams
> OK Kip - I guess I shouldn't have used the old saying "guilty
> pleasure"
Oh, don't mind me. You were just caught in the fallout. The expression
serves a useful enough purpose, I think. It makes it possible to express
appreciation of something in a deniable way. Without it, it's possible
that some of us wouldn't dare speak up.
Kip W
David O.
<grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
>But (to me) Mancini, for much of his
>career, was the Ketelby of film music.
I love Mancini's film songs! "The Days of Wine & Roses," "Moon River,"
et al. And that "Charade" score--what a delight! Great hooks in
Mancini.
Mancini's singer? Andy Williams, of course!
David O.
<grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
>If you insist in arguing this way, don't expect me to watch "Touch of Evil"
>tonight. I have "better" things to do.
Pauline Kael thought that Dietrich's line "He was some kind of man,"
&c., was a parody of "The Death of a Salesman."
William Sommerwerck
news:egmUo.4427$231....@newsfe14.iad...
> William Sommerwerck wrote:
>>>> Please, feel free to substitute "better" for "best" in my statement
>>>> above. Then you can scream some more.
>>> If you are going to say "there's something better than this to listen
>>> to," then it follows that there is also something "better than that" to
>>> listen to, and this inevitably leads to a conclusion that one must
>>> always be listening to the very best possible thing.
>> Isn't it amazing how any argument can be argued away.
> Isn't it amazing how the logical consequences of what you said have
> absolutely nothing to do with what you now say you meant? Maybe you
> should think before you write.
This, of course, is what I am always accusing other people of doing.
I don't see where saying that there's "better" music than some composer's
(it doesn't matter who it is) /necessarily/ implies a form of what might be
called "aesthetic induction", in which the "better" music /must/ needs be
replaced with yet another "better" composer's music, and so on, until one
reaches Bach or Mozart, for which there is presumably no better music to.
If this it isn't clear, I assume you know what "mathematical induction" is.
> The fact is, if there's something better I should listen to, then
> there's also something better than that. You should own your
> words and not wriggle away from them.
Correct -- as facts go. But see the preceding. I was talking of a single
example.
>> If you insist in arguing this way, don't expect me to watch
>> "Touch of Evil" tonight. I have "better" things to do.
> Oh, mercy. I'm being punished by you not listening to something.
> Ow, ow, ow.
I implicitly criticized essentially all of Mancini's early & middle-period
work. You pointed out a likely exception, and I said I would listen to it to
recalibrate my perspective. Then you deliberately misinterpret what I
posted -- I should do you a courtesy?
David O.
<ivanm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>OK Kip - I guess I shouldn't have used the old saying "guilty
>pleasure" - I enjoy watching 1950s science fiction films (I recently
>re-viewed The Cyclops - where half the monsters face looks like a
>melted cheese sandwich) as much as I do other "more important" aspects
>of art.
The best of the worst: The man in the ape suit in "Robot Monster."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8h2QJ44HnrM