Hammerklavier fugue
LaVirtuosa
very free-there's a keylessness, not as spiky as it is oten played but
more molten, Scriabinesque even. The resemblance to Bach's keyboard
writing, which is quite evident on the page and to the fingers, is not
emphasized--Gieseking had a different focus for this. There isn't
much discernable air allowed into the fugue, and notes give the vague
impression of being blurred for effect, something like in a charcoal
sketch or painting where the artist blurs certain areas on canvas.
I'm very impressed with Gieseking's mastery of Beethoven's concepts
beyond mere pianism, which, you will probably assert, could be honed a
bit in Gieseking's case. There's something to be said by
de-emphasizing the muscles in the hands and letting other, more
creative forces, motivate the fingers.
But there are so many possibilities in interpretation of this amazing
little work. What are your favorite Hammerklavier fugues?
*************Val
sam6...@earthlink.net
> What are your favorite Hammerklavier fugues?
>
> *************Val
Wilhelm Kempff.
Let the massacre begin!
regards,
SG
(I am glad you've got your stars back, Val, with some extras as it seems
-- what are you now, some super-trooper-generalissimo?)
Dan Koren
Dan Koren
news:nvXRb.682$uM2...@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> > What are your favorite Hammerklavier fugues?
> >
> > *************Val
>
>
> Wilhelm Kempff.
>
> Let the massacre begin!
>
Clean, but underpowered.
Personally, I don't think this is
worth playing. But if one decides
to do it, it must be played with
iron fists and wrists, and very
few pianists are capable of this.
This work suits Kissin to a T. It
could not have matched his style
any better even if it had been
commissioned by him.
Can't wait for the HammerKissinKlavier.
dk
Matt
> Regarding Gieseking playing the Hammerklavier fugue from 1949, it's
> very free-there's a keylessness, not as spiky as it is oten played but
> more molten, Scriabinesque even. The resemblance to Bach's keyboard
> writing, which is quite evident on the page and to the fingers, is not
> emphasized--Gieseking had a different focus for this. There isn't
> much discernable air allowed into the fugue, and notes give the vague
> impression of being blurred for effect, something like in a charcoal
> sketch or painting where the artist blurs certain areas on canvas.
> I'm very impressed with Gieseking's mastery of Beethoven's concepts
> beyond mere pianism, which, you will probably assert, could be honed a
> bit in Gieseking's case. There's something to be said by
> de-emphasizing the muscles in the hands and letting other, more
> creative forces, motivate the fingers.
>
I heard this same recording for the first time a week or so ago, and it
just sounded like a mess to me, almost as if he were sight reading. Maybe
I'm just not sophisticated enough a listener. I love your description
though; I wish that had been what I heard. Maybe I'll give it another
spin soon.
>
> But there are so many possibilities in interpretation of this amazing
> little work. What are your favorite Hammerklavier fugues?
>
Rosen, Richter, Yudina, Gulda, and Pollini although it would be a slightly
different list if you consider the sonata as a whole (especially the
Adagio).
Regards,
Matt
Marcus Maroney
> But there are so many possibilities in interpretation of this amazing
> little work. What are your favorite Hammerklavier fugues?
Nothing erases the memory of Pollini live in Carnegie Hall a few years
ago (with works by Schoenberg and Stockhausen). I remember coming
home to his recording and being disappointed with it.
My favorites would be:
Richter (Aldeburgh 1975 on BBC Legends), and Solomon (in the GP20C
issue).
Richter (Prague 1975) - a bit bangy in spots (noticeably at the Tempo
I. passage with parallel sixths in the LH, includes some unexplainable
missed notes in the simple RH). Also a bit pingy for me in the D
major cantabile section. All just basically very loud - especially
the big trill in the bass at the end with arpeggios above - just a
loud mess.
Richter (Aldeburgh 1975) - Not only much cleaner technically, but I
like the piano used in this recording much better than the Prague.
Also better recorded sound brings out a much wider dynamic range, and
the D major interlude brings a more noticeably dark tone.
Levy (1958) - amazingly fast, but too much pedal for my taste - a lot
of this music is marked staccato and Levy blurs right over it. When
the pedal's not down (which is pretty much every bar through the
entire first beat), much more distinction is made between the three
voices (at least more than either of the Richter performances above).
I hadn't listened to this recording in a while and didn't enjoy it at
all this time around (the first movement is a different matter...).
Solomon (1952) - The most technically perfect recording here. No
risks are taken however, and the tone is always "pretty" - I could
definitely use more "edge" on the attack - Beethoven wrote a lot of
sforzandi into this movement. The passage in parallel sixths is
grouped in twos, which bothers me to no end every time I hear it. I
love to come back to this recording for the breathtaking technique at
a rather quick tempo and the gorgeous sound Solomon gets in the
cantabile passages. The D major interlude is a great example of
separating 3 voices in a rhythmically homophonic passage. The
multiple simultaneous colors in the coda are amazing, too. In the
end, I do wish he would dig in a little more in places, but I'd say
this would be among "must hears" of this sonata.
Goode (1986) - I love his sparse use of the pedal (especially in the
Largo introduction), however he is extremely fussy with voicing each
accent in the music, which may put off some listeners (myself
included). He's the best at actually construing the various character
markings in the music ('scherzando grazioso', 'non ligato' [this one
nobody else got...]. This is a good, clean performance - what ruins
its overall conception for me is Goode's lack of a wide range of
colors, and his inability to layer the subtle hues he does possess.
Cheers,
Marcus Maroney
marcus....@yale.edu
LaVirtuosa
> >
> > *************Val
>
>
> Wilhelm Kempff.
>
> Let the massacre begin!
I think "Hammerklavier" is a most unfortunate misnomer. There's
nothing hammery in here. It's written in the style of the best jazz
players.
>
> regards,
> SG
> (I am glad you've got your stars back, Val, with some extras as it seems
It depends on how much blood is in my fingers at the moment.
> -- what are you now, some super-trooper-generalissimo?)
No, just a limp, sweaty woman practicing Scriabin's fifth sonata.
************Val
I think "Hammerklavier" is an unfortunate misnomer. I see nothing
hammery about this piece. It's written in the style of the best jazz
players.
David7Gable
Marcus Maroney's very specific remarks about several performances of the
Hammerklavier fugue are extremely interesting.
-david gable
LaVirtuosa
(skip)
>
> Personally, I don't think this is
> worth playing.
Many would agree with you. It's worth listening to, though.
But if one decides
> to do it, it must be played with
> iron fists and wrists, and very
> few pianists are capable of this.
Why? It's not physical, it's mental.
>
> This work suits Kissin to a T. It
> could not have matched his style
> any better even if it had been
> commissioned by him.
>
> Can't wait for the HammerKissinKlavier.
Kissin has unusual technical expertise in certain pieces. He could do
it, yes. But not because of his recent tendency towards brutality.
However, I don't envision him in this repertoire, which leans toward
the big romantics. But I've never been to a Kissin recital.
***********Val
>
>
>
> dk
sam6...@earthlink.net
Dan Koren wrote:
> Personally, I don't think this is
> worth playing. But if one decides
> to do it, it must be played with
> iron fists and wrists
Why?
regards,
SG
PS One hopes you're not taking this "HAMMER" stuff too, what's the word,
I forget, I had it on the crown of my tooth, I mean on the tip of my nose,
anyway, yes, too literally!
Dan Koren
> "Dan Koren" <dank...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<4018...@news.meer.net>...
>
> (skip)
> >
> > Personally, I don't think this is
> > worth playing.
>
> Many would agree with you. It's
> worth listening to, though.
If you find someone who can, and
wants to, play it. When I was in
music school and conservatory,
pretty much everyone in piano
hated it.
> > But if one decides
> > to do it, it must be played with
> > iron fists and wrists, and very
> > few pianists are capable of this.
>
> Why? It's not physical, it's mental.
Some people's physical can be others'
mental.... or viceversa ;-)
> > This work suits Kissin to a T. It
> > could not have matched his style
> > any better even if it had been
> > commissioned by him.
> >
> > Can't wait for the HammerKissinKlavier.
>
> Kissin has unusual technical expertise
> in certain pieces. He could do it, yes.
> But not because of his recent tendency
> towards brutality.
Precisely because of it.
> However, I don't envision him in this
> repertoire, which leans toward the big
> romantics.
He has recorded Beethoven Concerti as you
know.
> But I've never been to a Kissin recital.
I have -- following which my partner did
not want to kiss me anymore.
dk
sam6...@earthlink.net
Dan Koren wrote:
>>>Personally, I don't think this is
>>>worth playing.
>>
>>Many would agree with you. It's
>>worth listening to, though.
>
> If you find someone who can, and
> wants to, play it. When I was in
> music school and conservatory,
> pretty much everyone in piano
> hated it.
What were the feelings of those in the music department?
regards,
SG
Dan Koren
news:x54Sb.1201$uM2...@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
I'm not sure I understand your question.
What do you mean by "music department"?
Musicology? Music history? Composition?
Please clarify.
dk
PS. I probably don't need to remind you
that in any music school the students
who do not like to play Beethoven
outnumber those who do 2:1 or more.
Dan Koren
"LaVirtuosa" <LaVir...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:fb0dfc23.0401...@posting.google.com...
>
> Regarding Gieseking playing the Hammerklavier
> fugue from 1949, it's very free-there's a
> keylessness,
He played without touching the keys?
Is it MIDI? Or is it Ondes Martenot?
dk
sam6...@earthlink.net
Dan Koren wrote:
>>Regarding Gieseking playing the Hammerklavier
>>fugue from 1949, it's very free-there's a
>>keylessness,
>
> He played without touching the keys?
>
> Is it MIDI? Or is it Ondes Martenot?
Saint Walter marchant sur les clefs.
regards,
SG
Henk van Tuijl
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical.recordings
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 12:19 AM
Subject: Hammerklavier fugue
> What are your favorite Hammerklavier fugues?
At the moment probably Gulda and Solomon.
Henk
Dan Koren
news:HD4Sb.1245$uM2...@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Surely you meant *glissant*.
dk
Simon Roberts
>
>I think "Hammerklavier" is a most unfortunate misnomer. There's
>nothing hammery in here. It's written in the style of the best jazz
>players.
? You know what its name means, don't you?
Simon
Dan Koren
> sam6...@earthlink.net wrote in message
news:<nvXRb.682$uM2...@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> > > What are your favorite Hammerklavier fugues?
> > >
> > > *************Val
> >
> >
> > Wilhelm Kempff.
> >
> > Let the massacre begin!
>
> I think "Hammerklavier" is a most unfortunate misnomer. There's
> nothing hammery in here. It's written in the style of the best jazz
> players.
>
You clearly don't know shit about jazz.
This is an insult to every jazz lover.
dk
Dontaitchicago
>From: "Henk van Tuijl" hvt...@xs4all.nl
>Date: 1/29/2004 4:11 AM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <4018dd38$0$327$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl>
I agree about both, especially Solomon. But may I add something I hope you'll
all accept as I mean it, which is how extraordinary this music is?
More than forty years ago my friend Howard and I went to a Rudolf Serkin
recital at Orchestra Hall in Chicago. It was typically serious, and Serkin
ended with the Hammerklavier. Howard never liked music that was very advanced,
and as we were walking down the long flights of stairs from Orchestra Hall's
gallery he shouted into my ear "I don't know about that last movement [the
fugue]! It sounds like modern music to me!"
Beethoven conceived it in the 1820s and it can still baffle - still sound
"modern." Well, at least forty years ago. Perhaps others feel the same.
Don Tait
Dan Koren
"Dontaitchicago" <dontait...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040129200313...@mb-m07.aol.com...
>
> I agree about both, especially Solomon. But may I add something I hope
you'll
> all accept as I mean it, which is how extraordinary this music is?
>
> More than forty years ago my friend Howard and I went to a Rudolf Serkin
> recital at Orchestra Hall in Chicago. It was typically serious, and Serkin
> ended with the Hammerklavier. Howard never liked music that was very
advanced,
> and as we were walking down the long flights of stairs from Orchestra
Hall's
> gallery he shouted into my ear "I don't know about that last movement [the
> fugue]! It sounds like modern music to me!"
>
> Beethoven conceived it in the 1820s and it can still baffle - still
sound
> "modern." Well, at least forty years ago. Perhaps others feel the same.
>
And that, my dear Watson, is precisely
the problem.
Had Stockhause composed it, it would not
have sounded any differently. That fugue
is not music -- it is anti-music. It is
in the *FORM* of music, with none of the
*CONTENT* that makes music a performing
art.
dk
notrump15-17
Grosse Fuge. BTW, my favorite op. 106 is Gulda.
Miguel Montfort
> And that, my dear Watson, is precisely
> the problem.
>
> Had Stockhause composed it, it would not
> have sounded any differently. That fugue
> is not music -- it is anti-music. It is
> in the *FORM* of music, with none of the
> *CONTENT* that makes music a performing
> art.
»Holmes was certainly not a difficult man
to live with. [...]His ignorance was as
remarkable as his knowledge.«
ACD
Miguel
Dan Koren
Did you mean The Grossest Fugue?
dk
"notrump15-17" <notrum...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:4019cef6$0$18417$61fe...@news.rcn.com...
Paul Ilechko
> More than forty years ago my friend Howard and I went to a Rudolf Serkin
> recital at Orchestra Hall in Chicago. It was typically serious, and Serkin
> ended with the Hammerklavier. Howard never liked music that was very advanced,
> and as we were walking down the long flights of stairs from Orchestra Hall's
> gallery he shouted into my ear "I don't know about that last movement [the
> fugue]! It sounds like modern music to me!"
>
> Beethoven conceived it in the 1820s and it can still baffle - still sound
> "modern." Well, at least forty years ago. Perhaps others feel the same.
And the late quartets are even more "modern" sounding. This is why
Beethoven is so great, no-one ever gets to the bottom of him. Ditto for
Bach, of course.
notrump15-17
Marcus Maroney
> BTW, my favorite op. 106 is Gulda.
This has been mentioned several times on here and I'd like to hear it
- what label is it available on?
Thanks,
Marcus Maroney
marcus dot maroney at yale dot edu
Simon Roberts
says...
>
>"notrump15-17" <notrum...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>> BTW, my favorite op. 106 is Gulda.
>
>This has been mentioned several times on here and I'd like to hear it
>- what label is it available on?
It's available only as part of a complete set on Amadeo. I think these have
also been identified by previous posters as the sonata recordings which were
confusingly issued a year or two ago in a European Decca box along with his
Decca recordings of the concertos cond. Horst Stein. (Don't confuse the Amadeo
recordings with his earlier Decca recordings of the sonatas, which aren't nearly
as good.)
Simon
Lena
>>> If you find someone who can, and wants to, play it. When I was in
>>> music school and conservatory, pretty much everyone in piano hated
>>> it.
>>
>> What were the feelings of those in the music department?
>
> I'm not sure I understand your question. [...]
So do excessive anti-Beethoven feelings have a long-term detrimental
effect on one's joke comprehension?
> PS. I probably don't need to remind you that in any music school the
> students who do not like to play Beethoven outnumber those who do
> 2:1 or more.
(laugh) 10,000 out of 10,000 sheep don't much care for Beethoven
either because the music is not sufficiently conducive to enraptured
grass-blade licking. (I got this from the same place you got your
statistics from; the latest episode of the Lord of the Rings.)
Anyway, weren't you the self-proclaimed super-individualist at one
time? Wow, to go from a conceptual combination of Nietszche and a
furiously typing megalomaniacal parrot all the way to a follower of
the majority opinion of piano students...
Now if you could only develop some of the quiet manly grace of any of
the above mentioned instruments of god... at least in posting. Things
would be a lot more pleasant.
Lena
Raymond Hall
Dan will (may) appreciate this anecdote. Perhaps many will be aware of it.
On a Parkinson chat show, where well known guests are invited, I saw a
repeat of the one with Anthony Hopkins as the main guest. He discussed his
upbringing in Wales, with a father who was brusque, and solid, and didn't
care much about the finer intricacies of courtesy. The story relating to Sir
Larry Olivier is quite amusing, but only makes this post longer. Anthony
Hopkins was obviously taught the piano as a very young lad, and played a
fair bit of Beethoven and Chopin on the piano upstairs in the bakery shop
run by his father.
One day, as Hopkins was tickling the ivories upstairs, he father roared up
the stairs, and flung open the door, all covered up to the arms in flour and
fury, and yelled, "Boy - where are those scones I asked you to bring - and
here I find you playing the piano?".
To which young Hopkins had no answer of course, except to mutter the obvious
fact he was playing the piano. But as an aside, his father added, "... and
by the way, what was that music you were playing?".
"Beethoven" said the young Hopkins.
"No wonder Beethoven went deaf then" replied his father.
PS: Hopkins greatly admired Tommy Cooper, and for those who greatly admired
this genius of a comedian, Anthony Hopkin's impersonations of the funny man
were hilarious. Barry manilow, sitting alongside Hopkins, hadn't even heard
of Tommy Cooper. So sad.
Regards,
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/index.html
See You Tamara (Ozzy Osbourne)
Ray, Taree, NSW
LaVirtuosa
> that in any music school the students
> who do not like to play Beethoven
> outnumber those who do 2:1 or more.
No enough technical challenges.
**********Val
LaVirtuosa
> > But I've never been to a Kissin recital.
Dan wrote
> I have -- following which my partner did
> not want to kiss me anymore.
Did she want to kissimmm?
LaVirtuosa
>
> > I think "Hammerklavier" is a most unfortunate misnomer. There's
> > nothing hammery in here. It's written in the style of the best jazz
> > players.
DanWrote
> You clearly don't know shit about jazz.
>
> This is an insult to every jazz lover.
>
And what's more, Bach was the first jazz player; the Partitas are Bach
at the Blue Note. And Beethoven got it from Bach.
************Val
LaVirtuosa
> I heard this same recording
> for the first time a week or so ago,
> and it just sounded like a mess to me,
That's my point.
That's why I like it.
It's like 1940's
Abstract Impressionism.
**********Val
LaVirtuosa
> LaVir...@aol.com (LaVirtuosa) wrote:
>
> > But there are so many possibilities in interpretation of this amazing
> > little work. What are your favorite Hammerklavier fugues?
>
> Nothing erases the memory of Pollini live in Carnegie Hall a few years
> ago (with works by Schoenberg and Stockhausen).
That's an intriguing way to program it. I'd imagine he'd be indestructable in it.
> I remember coming
> home to his recording and being disappointed with it.
I'd be surprised at any inconsistency from Pollini.
> My favorites would be:
>
> Richter (Aldeburgh 1975 on BBC Legends), and Solomon (in the GP20C
> issue).
>
> Richter (Prague 1975) - a bit bangy in spots (noticeably at the Tempo
> I. passage with parallel sixths in the LH, includes some unexplainable
> missed notes in the simple RH). Also a bit pingy for me in the D
> major cantabile section. All just basically very loud - especially
> the big trill in the bass at the end with arpeggios above - just a
> loud mess.
>
> Richter (Aldeburgh 1975) - Not only much cleaner technically, but I
> like the piano used in this recording much better than the Prague.
> Also better recorded sound brings out a much wider dynamic range, and
> the D major interlude brings a more noticeably dark tone.
>
> Levy (1958) - amazingly fast, but too much pedal for my taste - a lot
> of this music is marked staccato and Levy blurs right over it. When
> the pedal's not down (which is pretty much every bar through the
> entire first beat), much more distinction is made between the three
> voices (at least more than either of the Richter performances above).
> I hadn't listened to this recording in a while and didn't enjoy it at
> all this time around (the first movement is a different matter...).
>
> Solomon (1952) - The most technically perfect recording here. No
> risks are taken however, and the tone is always "pretty" - I could
> definitely use more "edge" on the attack - Beethoven wrote a lot of
> sforzandi into this movement. The passage in parallel sixths is
> grouped in twos, which bothers me to no end every time I hear it. I
> love to come back to this recording for the breathtaking technique at
> a rather quick tempo and the gorgeous sound Solomon gets in the
> cantabile passages. The D major interlude is a great example of
> separating 3 voices in a rhythmically homophonic passage. The
> multiple simultaneous colors in the coda are amazing, too. In the
> end, I do wish he would dig in a little more in places, but I'd say
> this would be among "must hears" of this sonata.
>
> Goode (1986) - I love his sparse use of the pedal (especially in the
> Largo introduction), however he is extremely fussy with voicing each
> accent in the music, which may put off some listeners (myself
> included). He's the best at actually construing the various character
> markings in the music ('scherzando grazioso', 'non ligato' [this one
> nobody else got...]. This is a good, clean performance - what ruins
> its overall conception for me is Goode's lack of a wide range of
> colors, and his inability to layer the subtle hues he does possess.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Marcus Maroney
> marcus....@yale.edu
Thanks for an interesting post.
***********Val
LaVirtuosa
> More than forty years ago my friend Howard and I went to a Rudolf Serkin
> recital at Orchestra Hall in Chicago. It was typically serious, and Serkin
> ended with the Hammerklavier. Howard never liked music that was very advanced,
> and as we were walking down the long flights of stairs from Orchestra Hall's
> gallery he shouted into my ear "I don't know about that last movement [the
> fugue]! It sounds like modern music to me!"
>
> Beethoven conceived it in the 1820s and it can still baffle - still sound
> "modern." Well, at least forty years ago. Perhaps others feel the same.
>
> Don Tait
Maybe time doesn't matter--1820's to not--It's not that many years.
The garments of the era being different enough so as to give the
impression that an artistic concept like the Hammerklavier couldn't
possibly surface from someone dressed like that.
*********Val
LaVirtuosa
(skip)
> > Beethoven conceived it in the 1820s and it can still baffle - still
> sound
> > "modern." Well, at least forty years ago. Perhaps others feel the same.
> >
>
>
> And that, my dear Watson, is precisely
> the problem.
>
> Had Stockhause composed it, it would not
> have sounded any differently. That fugue
> is not music -- it is anti-music. It is
> in the *FORM* of music, with none of the
> *CONTENT* that makes music a performing
> art.
>
It's danceable though--and if music originated
as service to primitive dance, then the
Hammerklavier has reason to exist based on the
pulses and rhythms within its textures.
***********Val
Dan Koren
Nope.
She was sick and tired of Kissin.
dk
Dan Koren
> I wrote
>
> >
> > > I think "Hammerklavier" is a most unfortunate misnomer. There's
> > > nothing hammery in here. It's written in the style of the best jazz
> > > players.
>
> DanWrote
>
> > You clearly don't know shit about jazz.
> >
> > This is an insult to every jazz lover.
> >
>
> And what's more, Bach was the first jazz
> player; the Partitas are Bach at the Blue
> Note.
I don't disagree that Bach is very jazzy.
In fact, if you search the usenet archives
many years back, you may find some articles
I posted on this topic.
> And Beethoven got it from Bach.
Beethoven did not learn enough from Bach,
and the only somewhat jazzy piece he wrote
is the rag variation in 111.
dk
PS. The Hammerklavier appears to have
been inspired by Cecil Taylor -- who
is definitely not one of my favorites.
Why couldn't he followe Erroll Garner?
Dan Koren
"LaVirtuosa" <LaVir...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:fb0dfc23.0401...@posting.google.com...
If, and only if, your notion of
what is dance is taken from the
natives of Papua New Guinea.
I'll pass.
dk
Paul Ilechko
>
> PS. The Hammerklavier appears to have
> been inspired by Cecil Taylor -- who
> is definitely not one of my favorites.
I was thinking more McCoy Tyner.
Have you heard Taylor's solo album Garden 2 ? It's very good, and I'm
also not a fan generally.
Raymond Hall
news:401B30B...@patmedia.net...
| Dan Koren wrote:
|
| >
| > PS. The Hammerklavier appears to have
| > been inspired by Cecil Taylor -- who
| > is definitely not one of my favorites.
|
|
| I was thinking more McCoy Tyner.
No way. McCoy Tyner was part and parcel of the sound of Coltrane, and his
harmonic textures totally unique unto himself. A million miles away from the
HammerThing.
Paul Ilechko
> "Paul Ilechko" <pile...@patmedia.net> wrote in message
> news:401B30B...@patmedia.net...
> | Dan Koren wrote:
> |
> | >
> | > PS. The Hammerklavier appears to have
> | > been inspired by Cecil Taylor -- who
> | > is definitely not one of my favorites.
> |
> |
> | I was thinking more McCoy Tyner.
>
> No way. McCoy Tyner was part and parcel of the sound of Coltrane, and his
> harmonic textures totally unique unto himself. A million miles away from the
> HammerThing.
I was thinking of his work as a band leader, away from Coltrane. Not the
sound particularly, but something massive about the music.
Ian Pace
medium, which occurs across time; form is a term simply for trying to
articulate the musical processes that occur during a piece. Form and
content are impossible without one another. Beethoven could create the most
exhilirating compositions not just despite but precisely because of what is
sometimes relatively ordinary thematic material. Same is true of some works
of Bach, Brahms, Schoenberg and others. The lesser focus upon the static
moments of a piece serve to foreground the musical drama as it unfolds.
With more 'autonomous' thematic material, the fuge from the Hammerklavier,
or the Grosse Fuge, would most likely suffer from information overload and
would thus seem bloated. That Beethoven was able to achieve a balance in
this respect is the sign of his genius.
In one sense or another, the same is true of some pieces of Stockhausen, or
Lachenmann. In both cases, their brands of radicalism is also very much in
a 'tradition'.
Ian
Ian Pace
" Ian Pace" <i...@ianpace.com> wrote in message
news:bvgop0$rp9dn$1...@ID-209093.news.uni-berlin.de...
*slap on wrist for not checking before hitting the 'send' button*
Ian Pace
>
> PS. The Hammerklavier appears to have
> been inspired by Cecil Taylor -- who
> is definitely not one of my favorites.
>
> Why couldn't he followe Erroll Garner?
>
Ian
Ian Pace
> very free-there's a keylessness, not as spiky as it is oten played but
> more molten, Scriabinesque even. The resemblance to Bach's keyboard
> writing, which is quite evident on the page and to the fingers, is not
> emphasized--Gieseking had a different focus for this. There isn't
> much discernable air allowed into the fugue, and notes give the vague
> impression of being blurred for effect, something like in a charcoal
> sketch or painting where the artist blurs certain areas on canvas.
> I'm very impressed with Gieseking's mastery of Beethoven's concepts
> beyond mere pianism, which, you will probably assert, could be honed a
> bit in Gieseking's case. There's something to be said by
> de-emphasizing the muscles in the hands and letting other, more
> creative forces, motivate the fingers.
>
Gieseking's Beethoven (and Mozart) eschew so many things I believe to be
intrinsic to this music, that somehow they are still captivating. You put
it very well; I think that maybe these qualities produce not only a blurring
and keylessness, (those attributes alone might make a woefully dull and
smoothed-over performance), but also a particular type of relentlessness of
purpose, which sustains the momentum and drama so vividly. Rarely has the
statement 'less is more' been more apt than in the case of Gieseking. Same
sort of thing goes for his Scarbo.
Best,
Ian
Paul Ilechko
>>A great complement to Stockhausen (the first sentence).
<snip>
>> In both cases, their brands of radicalism is also very much
>> in a 'tradition'.
>>
>>Ian
>>
>
> Substitute 'are' for 'is' in the last sentence.
>
> *slap on wrist for not checking before hitting the 'send' button*
>
>
You might also want to give yourself a slap for substituting
"complement" for "compliment" ;-)
Ian Pace
Ian Pace
" Ian Pace" <i...@ianpace.com> wrote in message
news:bvgop0$rp9dn$1...@ID-209093.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> A great compliment to Stockhausen (the first sentence). Music is a
temporal
> medium, which occurs across time; form is a term simply for trying to
> articulate the musical processes that occur during a piece. Form and
> content are impossible without one another. Beethoven could create the
most
> exhilirating compositions not just despite but precisely because of what
is
> sometimes relatively ordinary thematic material. Same is true of some
works
> of Bach, Brahms, Schoenberg and others. The lesser focus upon the static
> moments of a piece serve to foreground the musical drama as it unfolds.
> With more 'autonomous' thematic material, the fuge from the Hammerklavier,
> or the Grosse Fuge, would most likely suffer from information overload and
> would thus seem bloated. That Beethoven was able to achieve a balance in
> this respect is the sign of his genius.
>
> In one sense or another, the same is true of some pieces of Stockhausen,
or
> Lachenmann. In both cases, their brands of radicalism are also very much
in
> a 'tradition'.
>
> Ian
>
But who might be a true 'complement' to Stockhausen? Boulez? Barraque?
Xenakis? Nono? Cage?
Ian
Lena
[...]
> Beethoven could create the most
> exhilirating compositions not just despite but precisely because of what is
> sometimes relatively ordinary thematic material. Same is true of some works
> of Bach, Brahms, Schoenberg and others. The lesser focus upon the static
> moments of a piece serve to foreground the musical drama as it unfolds.
> With more 'autonomous' thematic material, the fuge from the Hammerklavier,
> or the Grosse Fuge, would most likely suffer from information overload and
> would thus seem bloated.
I agree with this. (And the continuation which I snipped.)
(Although Larry (Rinkel) did once significantly amend the opening of the Eroica
by replacing the theme with a hilariously florid one. :) )
Lena
LaVirtuosa
> In article <fb0dfc23.04012...@posting.google.com>, LaVirtuosa says...
>
> >
> >I think "Hammerklavier" is a most unfortunate misnomer. There's
> >nothing hammery in here. It's written in the style of the best jazz
> >players.
>
>
> Simon
Ham at keyboard?
Larry Rinkel
news:4b8442bf.04013...@posting.google.com...
Thanks for the complement (I mean "compliment"), but I don't recall ever
having done any such thing.
-- Larry (Rinkel)
Lena
of contrition:
> > (Although Larry (Rinkel) did once significantly amend the opening of the Eroica
>> by replacing the theme with a hilariously florid one. :) )
> Thanks for the complement (I mean "compliment"), but I don't recall ever
> having done any such thing.
You're wellcome (or welcom) but you have a long history of improving
the Eroica. By your own admission (which you now seem to have
"forgotten"):
> Last week I already suggested playing the opening
> theme on the bassoons,
Audience reaction to bassoons was lukewarm, but your creativity flows
on, unfazed:
> Or how about this: I decide to make my Eroica
> "different" or "my own" by playing the first two chords as grand and
> sustained, not as sharp and staccato. And I introduce some embellishment to
> the main theme (they did that back then, especially on repeats, right?):
> "my" theme is not:
> Eb half - G quarter | Eb half - Bb quarter | Eb qu G qu Bb qu | Eb half D
> qu | C#
(Thank goodness your theme is not that, that theme really sucks...)
> but instead
>
>Eb dotted quarter - F Eb D - 16th triplet - Eb eighth G eight | Eb
half Bb
>qu | Eb F G Ab A Bb all eighths | F- Eb [rest] Eb-D-D all eighths |
C#
>
> And it's played on the solo cello too. Pretty good, huh?
Yes, I like it. :) It could be a bit more exotic, though. (Add sheep
in B?)
Lena
:):)
Larry Rinkel
> Yes, I like it. :) It could be a bit more exotic, though. (Add sheep
> in B?)
>
> Lena
> :):)
Oh. I must have blotted all that out of my mind. Yes, sheep may safely
graze, in whatever key they wish.