Greatest composition after 1950?
Opus47
I'm in trouble now. Asking about contemporary music on this mainstream NG.
For the few who wish to participate I really want to know what you think.
Recorded or unrecorded what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
as our century winds down? If I was asking most popular I would already know
that answer: Paul McCartney, Standing Stone (argggggh!!!).
It might help if I started to get the ball rolling. Wouldn't know it would be
Shostakovich? I think his 14th symphony composed in 1969 is one of the most
profound things ever done. You've might have noticed as I've posted it often
for depressing or tragic music: eleven poems all set to music with the theme of
death.
Selfishly I am posting because I want to compare and contrast with the
Shostakovich 14th. Maybe the work is too conservative, I don't know. I don't
know much about other composers after 1950. Many of the library books probably
haven't been printed yet on the subject. Many library books I've seen are old
and don't contain recent information, at least where I live. I take it you
learn about the music of the near past almost by word of mouth or in this case
via newsgroup.
So in all fairness educate me as I have no other resource at hand.
Fred
XyZortC
> what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
>So in all fairness educate me as I have no other resource at hand.
You've got quite a dilemma - "greatest" and "after 1950" create a pretty
serious oxymoron. Good luck.
Ceil
remove xy to reply
Donald Patterson
Opus47 wrote:
>
> I'm in trouble now. Asking about contemporary music on this mainstream NG.
>
> For the few who wish to participate I really want to know what you think.
>
> Recorded or unrecorded what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
> as our century winds down?
Paul Hindemith's Symphony in Bb for Concert Band
I'm serious about this.
--
Don Patterson <don...@erols.com>
Arranger
Professional Music Copyist
Asst. Principal Trombone
"The President's Own"
United States Marine Band
Visit the U.S. Marine Band website
http://www.marineband.hqmc.usmc.mil
The views expressed are my own and in no way
reflect those of the U.S. Marine Band or the U.S.
Marine Corp.
evan johnson
Some nominations:
Krzysztof Penderecki: Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima
Earle Brown: Available Forms I
Elliott Carter: String Quartet #2, Piano Concerto
George Crumb: Ancient Voices of Children, Makrokosmos cycle
Gyorgy Ligeti: can't think of a particular piece, but he definitely deserves
to be on the list
evan
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
evan johnson - joh...@digex.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ejoh...@sidwell.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
G. Brown
Opus47 wrote:
> It might help if I started to get the ball rolling. Wouldn't know it would be
> Shostakovich? I think his 14th symphony composed in 1969 is one of the most
> profound things ever done. You've might have noticed as I've posted it often
> for depressing or tragic music: eleven poems all set to music with the theme of
> death.
Call me shallow,Fred(I've been called a lot worse on this ng)but I
prefer the DSCH 15th to it's predecessor.I seem to recall that in
"Testimony"Shosty/Volkov claims that the 14th was his one major work to
which the main criticism came from friends and family,rather than the
Stalinist stooges.For morbidity the standard remains Mahler(I'll pass
there,too.)...howse about the Gorecki 3rd for best since 1950?(I confess
that is pretty depressing,too.) cheers,gb
Mike Painter
In article <19980223133...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
xyz...@aol.com (XyZortC) wrote:
> > what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
> (snip)
> >So in all fairness educate me as I have no other resource at hand.
>
> You've got quite a dilemma - "greatest" and "after 1950" create a pretty
> serious oxymoron. Good luck.
>
>
> Ceil
There's no oxymoron here, as long as 3 or more works have been composed.
If only 2 works had been composed, then Fred would have had to asked about
the "greater" one.
Mike Painter
Mark Wilson
XyZortC wrote:
>
> > what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
> (snip)
Rautavaara Violin Concerto, some of Malcolm Arnold's later symphonies
and the 6th symphony of Bohuslav Martinu (I think it was composed in the
'50's - apologies if not).
Really, there has been some music of quality written since 1950!
Mark
SAP23556
>.hows about the Gorecki 3rd for best since 1950?(I confess
>that is pretty depressing,too.)
I'll second that. Especially the London Sinfonietta with David Zinman
conducting and Dawn Upshaw as soloist. Upshaw is magnificent! Her voice
really captures the mood of the piece and her tone makes the strings glisten.
Stacey
DTohir
>> what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
>(snip)
>
>You've got quite a dilemma - "greatest" and "after 1950" create a pretty
>serious oxymoron. Good luck.
>
>
great deal of ignorance. It is true though that you have a dilemma. That being
that there was so much great music written since 1950.
A few off the top of my head (hopefully these all are after 1950, if not
they're close):
Britten-"War Requiem"
Messiaen-"La Transfiguration de Notre....", "Eclairs sur l'Au-Dela..."
Kernis-"Second Symphony"
Riley-"In C"
Penderecki-"St. Luke's Passion", "Threnody.."
Cage-"Atlas Eclipticalis", "Concert for Piano & Orchestra"
Bryars-"Sinking of the Titanic"
Toch-later symphonies
Gubaidulina-"Offertorium"
Crumb-"Black Angels"
Carter-"Variations for Orchestra"
this list (literally) goes on and on.
Mr. Mike
For me, one is ...
Roberto Gerhard's Concerto for Orchestra
G. Brown
Naxos recording,which is fine,but Dawn makes the difference!BTW,Her
recent Rodgers & Hart album on Nonesuch is the best R&H that I've heard
since Ellas's songbook. Cheers,gb
Jon Bell
Define "great." :-)
If it's "historically significant" you're after, how about Philip Glass's
"Einstein on the Beach"? Love it or hate it, you've got to admit it was
a major event in that it was the first "minimalist" piect to gain wide
public attention.
Some "recent" works (say since about 1970) that I've personally been
impressed by:
Joonas Kokkonen's "The Last Temptations" (opera)
Aulis Sallinen's "The Red Line" (opera)
Ingvar Lidholm's "A Dream Play" (opera)
John Adams's "Nixon in China" (opera)
[hmmm, I seem to have opera on my mind today, and I'm not even an opera
buff particularly]
--
Jon Bell <jtb...@presby.edu>
Flavius Titus
While I do not want to assert that any of these are the greatest composed
after 1950, I do wish to refute the assertion that nothing of value has been
created during this period with a few works off the top of my head that do get
regular playings; even for the most conservative among us.
Barber: Piano Concerto
Shostakovich Symphonies 10-14
Vaughn Williams Symphonies 7-9
Walton: Symphony #2, Cello Concerto (+ various short works eg. Orb and
Scepter)
John - N8086N
Organizer and Executive Vice President of the
"Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy"
The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy is now on-line at
http://home.att.net/~miano/conspiracy.htm
------------------------------------------------
EMail Address:
|m.i.a.n.o @ |
|c.o.l.o.s.s.e.u.m.b.u.i.l.d.e.r.s.|
|c.o.m.|
Full Name:
-------------------
-J.o.h.n?M.i.a.n.o-
-------------------
Samuel Vriezen
> > what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
> (snip)
> >So in all fairness educate me as I have no other resource at hand.
>
> You've got quite a dilemma - "greatest" and "after 1950" create a pretty
> serious oxymoron. Good luck.
>
>
> Ceil
Of course! It is a generally well-known fact that only Beethoven wrote
great music, and in particular, greatest music. In fact, we cannot
speak of great music from before 1770 or after 1827. Everyone knows
that. It is indicative of severe lack of good taste to believe that
other composers could have written interesting stuff as well.
You know, I have been called unflexible for expounding such views. But
people who really admire Ockeghem, Mahler, Martland and Xenakis, or
who voluntarily listen to the screeching of the Japanese or the
contrapuntal imbecility of Arabic music are in fact just fooling
themselves, following what is dictated by the academic establishment
etc y'know like rilly. So who's unflexible here, huh?
[innocent look on face throughout]
Samuel
Joe
To keep this short I will omit Shostakovich
Messiaen 'Catalogue d'Oiseaux' , Eclairs...,
Shchedrin - Carmen Suite
Lutoslawski's Piano Concerto
Holmboe's Symphonies 7- 13 & especially 'In Memorium'
Honegger Symphony #5 - finished fall of 1950
Rautavaara's Cantus Articus,
Kokkonen's Sinfonia da Camera
Durufle's Requiem,
Pettersson's Symphonies, up to 11 now ?
Adam's Shaker Loops.
Steve reich's Different Trains
Henze' Symphonies 4 - 7. Baracorolla
Ginastera's two piano concerti
Robert Simpson Symphony #5
No Schnittke as I am still wondering about him
JOE
Opus47 wrote:
> I'm in trouble now. Asking about contemporary music on this mainstream NG.
>
> For the few who wish to participate I really want to know what you think.
>
> Recorded or unrecorded what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
> as our century winds down? If I was asking most popular I would already know
> that answer: Paul McCartney, Standing Stone (argggggh!!!).
>
> It might help if I started to get the ball rolling. Wouldn't know it would be
> Shostakovich? I think his 14th symphony composed in 1969 is one of the most
> profound things ever done. You've might have noticed as I've posted it often
> for depressing or tragic music: eleven poems all set to music with the theme of
> death.
>
> Selfishly I am posting because I want to compare and contrast with the
> Shostakovich 14th. Maybe the work is too conservative, I don't know. I don't
> know much about other composers after 1950. Many of the library books probably
> haven't been printed yet on the subject. Many library books I've seen are old
> and don't contain recent information, at least where I live. I take it you
> learn about the music of the near past almost by word of mouth or in this case
> via newsgroup.
>
> So in all fairness educate me as I have no other resource at hand.
>
> Fred
Jim Clow
XyZortC wrote:
>
> > what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
> >So in all fairness educate me as I have no other resource at hand.
>
> serious oxymoron. Good luck.
>
> Ceil
I presume you are trolling.
Almost anything by Michael Tippett since (or before, for that matter) 1950.
CAP
Well if you are going on the basis of popularity, the Gorecki Symphony of
Sorrowful Songs would be a contender. But as has always been the case, we
will probably have to wait about a century to know for sure.
Paul Kintzele
Opus47 (opu...@aol.com) wrote:
: Recorded or unrecorded what do you think is the greatest composition
: after 1950 as our century winds down?
I don't know enough post-1950 music to really speak confidently, but I'll
nominate a couple that haven't been mentioned yet:
John Adams - Harmonielehre
Alfred Schnittke - Concerto Grosso No. 1
Both of these works, in my view, wear better than Gorecki's 3rd, which is
good, but not among the "greatest."
Paul K.
lanza
Offhand (and it's ALWAYS offhand), I'd say Poulenc's STABAT MATER is
certainly my favorite (and an important) post-50s composition (outside
of TUTTI FRUTTI, by Richard Penniman). I'd say Britten wrote some
pretty decent stuff in that period, as well as Shostakovitch, among more
conservative composers.
--
************************************************
"I mean, uh, couldn't we stop off at a corner
drugstore for a moment, so that I could explain
I'm being, uh, kidnapped?"
- Roger O. Thornhill
************************************************
David McClanahan
Many works,
but Pettersson's 7th Symphony is at or near the top of the list for me.
Paul Kintzele
Joe (jos...@avint.net) wrote:
: Durufle's Requiem,
It's a close call, but this work falls just outside the period
specified--it was completed and premiered in 1947.
A wonderful piece, though.
Paul K.
Catherine Motuz
And don't forget Leaonard Bernstein's contributions.
Symphonic Dances on West Side Story is an exceelent work to
say the least. I haven't heard his whole mass, but the part I
heard, I liked. I think this listing might benifit from
classifications into tonal and atonal music though. Most of
what I am reading is relatively tonal.
--
Richard Lupien
There is a new release on Sony of Berstein's work at a very cheap price. I
was really surprised by the quality of the sound. This record was the
record of the month is the Repetoire magazine( french) BTW this is the best
magazine in french or in english.
I do suggest to listen to Varese and Ligeti.Looking for specific
recommandation please E-Mail me
Brian Newhouse
In article <19980223102...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, opu...@aol.com
(Opus47) wrote:
"I'm in trouble now. Asking about contemporary music on this mainstream NG.
"
"For the few who wish to participate I really want to know what you think.
"
"Recorded or unrecorded what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
"as our century winds down? If I was asking most popular I would already know
"that answer: Paul McCartney, Standing Stone (argggggh!!!).
"
"It might help if I started to get the ball rolling. Wouldn't know it would be
"Shostakovich? I think his 14th symphony composed in 1969 is one of the most
"profound things ever done. You've might have noticed as I've posted it often
"for depressing or tragic music: eleven poems all set to music with the theme of
"death.
"
[snip with apologies to save screen space]
Only _one_ greatest work for the past forty-eight years? Could you really
in all good conscience declare that one and only one work is the greatest
for the period of, say, 1870-1914?
Still, I'll suggest some off-the-cuff major contenders in the strictly
classical bailiwick:
Opera: The rake's progress (Stravinsky), The turn of the screw (Britten)
Oratorio (sort of): The cave (Reich)
Ballet: Agon (Stravinsky)
Symphony (other than Shostakovich): Symphony no. 2 (Tippett), Sinfonia
(Berio), Symphony of three orchestras (Carter), Symphony no. 3
(Lutoslawski)
Concerto or other solo with orchestra: Cello symphony (Britten), Double
concerto (Carter), Violin concerto (Ligeti)
Large chamber ensemble: Chamber concerto (Ligeti)
String quartets (other than Shostakovich): Carter 1 & 2
Other chamber music: Oboe and clarinet sonatas (Poulenc), Compositions
1-3 (Ustolvskaia), Trio for violin, horn and piano (LIgeti), Octet/Eight
lines (Reich), Sextet (Reich)
(Player) Piano music: Nancarrow studies
Choral music: War requiem (Britten), Requiem canticles (Stravinsky), When
lilacs last in the dooryard bloom'd (Sessions), Rothko Chapel (Feldman)
Solo vocal music: Three voices (Feldman)
--
Brian Newhouse
newh...@newton.crisp.net
Eric Schissel
perhaps Sessions' string quintet
or Brian sym. 16
unless for a greatest work you require something with textual reference or
implications!
-Eric Schissel
--
schi...@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/schissel ICQ#7279016
standard disclaimer
Eric Schissel
or, perhaps even better choices, Pettersson sym. 3 (I .think. it's
post-1950)- or to be sure, sym. 8- any takers?
Eric Schissel
And as josephk's post reminds me, I .really. should have included
Holmboe's sym. 9 and quartet 9 (both from around 1969-odd), and Simpson-
in my case his amazing late quartets more than sym. 5, though the 3-5
group is my favorite among the symphonies.
Opus47
Eric,
What do you think of Petterson's 7th symphony. Someone mentioned this as the
greatest piece in the last half of the century.
And that was all they mentioned!!!
Fred
Ryan Hare
Ryan Hare's short of list of masterpieces, or at least really good pieces,
written since 1950:
(All IMHO and YMMV, etc. Not intended to be all-inclusive)
Milton Babbitt: Philomel (1964)
Piano Concerto (1985)
Luciano Berio: Coro (1975-76)
Sinfonia (1968)
Points on the Curve to Find (1974)
Corale (1981)
Un re in ascolta (1985?)
Continuo (1990)
Leonard Bernstein: Candide (1956)
West Side Story (1957)
Harrison Birtwistle: The Triumph of Time (1972)
The Mask of Orpheus (1971-73, 1981-84)
Secret Theatre (1984)
Earth Dances (1986)
Antiphonies (1993)
Gawain (1991)
Pierre Boulez: Le Marteau sans maitre (1953-55)
Le Visage nuptial (1946, 1951, 1988-89)
Figures, Doubles, Prismes (1957-58, 1963-68)
Pli selon pli (1957-62)
Rituel in Memoriam Maderna (1974)
Notations I-IV for orchestra (1978)
Repoons (1984 -- ?)
...explosante-fixe... (1971, 1991-93)
Benjamin Britten War Requiem (1962)
Symphony for Cello and Orchestra (1963)
Earle Brown Available Forms I (1961)
John Cage Sixteen Dances (1950-51)
Atlas Eclipticalis (1961-62)
Elliott Carter Variations for Orchestra (1954-55)
String Quartet No. 2 (1959)
Concerto for Piano and Orchestra (1964)
Concerto for Orchestra (1969)
A Mirror on Which to Dwell (1975)
A Symphony of Three Orchestras (1977)
Syringa (1978)
String Quartet No. 4 (1986)
Violin Concerto (1990)
String Quartet No. 5 (1996)
Aaron Copland (most of his masterpieces are pre-1950)
Connotations (1962)
Ruth Crawford Suite for Woodwind Quintet (1952)
George Crumb Ancient Voices of Children (1970)
Luigi Dallapiccola Piccola musica notturna (1954)
Ulisse (1970)
Franco Donatoni Spiri (1977)
L'Ultima Seria (1980)
Refrain (1986)
Jacob Druckman String Quartet No. 2 (1955)
Windows (1970)
Delizie contente che l'alme beate (1973)
Prism (1980)
Brangle (1988?)
Nor Spell Nor Charm (1990)
Brian Ferneyhough Carceri d'invenzione (1986)
Morte subite (1990)
Terrain (1992)
String Trio (1995)
Roberto Gerhard Symphony No. 3 "Collages" (1960)
Epithalamion (1965-66)
Jonathan Harvey Mortuos plango vivos voco (1980?)
Bhakti (1985?)
Pierre Henry Veil of Orpheus (?)
Variations on a Door and a Sigh (?)
Karel Husa Mosaiques (1961)
Music for Prague (1968)
Concerto for Orchestra (1980?)
Oliver Knussen Where the Wild Things Are (1979-83)
Higglety Pigglety Pop! (1988?)
Horn Concerto (1994-95)
Gyorgy Ligeti Aventures/Nouvelles Aventures (1962-65)
Lontano (1967)
String Quartet No. 2 (1967-68)
Chamber Concerto (1969-70)
Le Grande Macabre (1974-77)
Horn Trio (1982)
Piano Etudes (1985 - present)
Piano Concerto (1985-88)
Violin Concerto (1990-92)
Sonata for Solo Viola (1991-94)
Magnus Lindberg Kraft (1983-85)
Corrente (1991-92)
Joy (1989-90)
Witold Lutoslawski Concerto for Orchestra (1954)
String Quartet (1964)
Symphony No. 2 (1966-68)
Livre pour orchestre (1968)
Cello Concerto (1968-70)
Les espaces du sommeil (1975)
Symphony No. 3 (1983)
Symphony No. 4 (1992)
Bruno Maderna Quadrivium (1969)
Biogramma (1972)
Colin Matthews Suns Dance (1984-85)
Hidden Variables (1989-92)
Olivier Messiaen Chronochromie (1959-60)
Ex exspecto resurrectionem mortuorum (1964)
Un Vitrail et des oiseaux (1986)
Luigi Nono Variazioni canoniche (1950)
Il Canto sospeso (1955-56)
.....sofferte onde serene... (1976)
Fragmente - Stille, An Diotima (1979-80)
No hay caminos, hay que caminar... (1987)
Harry Partch Castor and Pollux (1952)
Shulamit Ran Concerto da Camera II (1987)
Symphony No. 1 (1990)
Wolfgang Rihm Tutuguri (1982)
Schwebende Begegnung (1988)
Die Eroberung von Mexico (1990?)
Poul Ruders Symphony No. 3 (1989)
Gong (1992)
Arnold Schoenberg De Profundis, op. 50b (1950)
Modern Psalm, op. 50c (1950)
Roger Sessions Symphony No. 8 (1968)
Concerto for Orchetsra (1979-81)
Dmitri Shostakovich Symphony No. 10 (1953)
String Quartet No. 8 (1960)
Symphony No. 13 (1962)
String Quartet No. 10 (1964)
Symphony No. 14 (1969)
Karlheinz Stockhausen Gesang der Juengling (1955-56)
Zeitmasze (1955-56)
Gruppen (1955-57)
Kontakte (1959-60)
Mixtur (1964)
Telemusik (1966)
Igor Stravinsky The Rake's Progress (1948-51)
Agon (1953-57)
In Memoriam Dylan Thomas (1954)
Canticum Sacrum (1955)
Movements (1958-59)
The Flood (1961-62)
Variations for Orchestra (1963-64)
Fanfare for a New Theatre (1964)
Requiem Canticles (1965-66)
Toru Takemitsu Requiem for Strings (1957)
November Steps (1967)
Mark-Anthony Turnage Three Screaming Popes (1988-89)
Edgard Varese Deserts (1954)
Heitor Villa-Lobos Erosao (1950)
Dawn in a Tropical Forest (1953)
Genesis (1954)
Stefan Wolpe Quartet No.q (1950)
Symphony No. 1 (1956)
Sonata in Two Parts for Flute, Cello and Piano
(1963-64)
Piece for Trumpet and Seven Instruments (1971)
Charles Wuorinen Archangel (1977)
New York Notes (1981-82)
Double Solo for Horn Trio (1985)
String Quartet No. 3 (1987)
Iannis Xenakis Metastasis (1954-54)
Kraanerg (1968)
Palimpsest (1979)
Dikhthas (1979)
Thallein (1984)
Keqrops (1986)
Whew! Franly, there's a lot more good stuff out there which I could have
included, but forgot about or just didn't feel like it. Omissions should
not be contrued to mean anything. Who knows which of these many, many
pieces will "stand the test of time" . . . for now, there's a lot of
worthy *contemporary* stuff to listen to.
Verdict: it's been a GREAT half century.
Ryan Hare
rh...@u.washington.edu
Eric Schissel
Well, it's good, and intense.
I still prefer 3, 4, 8, 9, 13 and perhaps 15.
(This says nothing negative about 7- they're all stunning works that cause
your throat and chest area to constrict remarkably when listening, until
the final chord, whether loud D-flat major as in 13 or quiet b minor as in
7, sounds...)
-Eric Schissel
Opus47 (opu...@aol.com) wrote:
>Eric,
>Fred
Roberto Maria Avanzi
it should be "greatest compositionS after 1950", the list is also
too pesonal and listener-dependent.
evan johnson wrote:
>
> Some nominations:
>
> Krzysztof Penderecki: Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima
and also Anaklasis, Dies Irae (I never heard the Dies Irae but I "read"
and "listen" the score. it is impressive.)
> Earle Brown: Available Forms I
> Elliott Carter: String Quartet #2, Piano Concerto
> George Crumb: Ancient Voices of Children, Makrokosmos cycle
> Gyorgy Ligeti: can't think of a particular piece, but he definitely deserves
> to be on the list
While I find Ligeti's output a little uneven, I still find he's one of
the giants of this century.
The Requiem, Atmospheres and Lontano are three great pieces, Lontano
being the best of the three (IMO), challenged by the breathtaking Lacrimosa
of the Requiem. These pieces have been the key that contemporary music used
to find a place in my heart and in my mind.
I would add to the list the second string quartet.
Lutoslawsky: syms #3 and #4. the beginning of #4 drives me mad.
Messiaen: Eclairs sur l'au-de-la (surely the spelling is wrong, I have
NEVER been able to learn even a word of french, despite the similarities
with my mother tongue). "Catalogue d'oiseaux" (written after 1950 I think).
Shostakovich quartets #8,11,12,13,14,15, with 8,12,15 my favourites.
and syms 10,13,14,15 (hey, it's a personal list and I want to pick only
SOME)
Xenakis, well, Metastaseis, Dikhtas, Tetras, Herma, Palimpsest, and other
whose exact names fail me because I have a brain well-known to mispell
things :/
Walton: Cello concerto, sym #2 a tad behind.
I was impressed by Pettersson's #7,11,12... not for the faint of heart :)
Nono: "Fragmente-Stille, an Diotima" for SQ and "Hay que caminar, sonando"
for two violins, as well as "A Carlo Scarpa, architetto", deserve to be
in the list.
Schnittke: String trio, and the Piano quartet.
Harvey's "Bhakti" is also a contender, as the two (are there more ?) String
quartets.
and I could go on for a while...
... I forgot to mention Professor Bor's "Double Concerto for Swing Trio":
who is behind this name ? (I know it is music meant to be funny and is
surely not "great" (then, why ?), but I simply _adore_ these almost 4
minutes of Swing-y Bach). hehehehe.
Cheers
Roberto
_/_/ Roberto Maria Avanzi
/_/ Institut fuer Experimentelle Mathematik / Universitaet GHS Essen
_/ Ellernstrasse 29 / 45326 Essen / Germany
/ Phone: +49-201-32064-37, Fax: +49-201-32064-68
piper
Since George Crumb was mentioned, my favorite Crumb piece is "Idyll of
the Misbegotten" for miked flute and 3 percussionists. But I don't
know all his work. By the way, I'm not nominating that piece in this
thread. If I absolutely HAD to nominate something, it might be a piece
by Ralph Shapey, such as "Discourse", or Ezra Laderman's Symphony for
Brass and Orchestra (I think that was Symphony #5). But how many of us
really know enough works since 1950 to make a nomination with
confidence?
Michael
piper
On 24 Feb 1998 08:45:20 GMT, rh...@saul5.u.washington.edu (Ryan Hare)
wrote:
>Ryan Hare's short of list of masterpieces, or at least really good pieces,
>written since 1950:
[snip]
Well, Ryan, you really DO know enough post-1950 works to offer a very
well-educated opinion - although I disagree with many of your choices.
What this thread has shown me, for the most part, is how much I
disagree with the taste of many other contributors to this newsgroup.
It's interesting.
Regards,
Michael
Stephen Mounsey
Harrison Birtwistle's "The Mask of Orpheus".
-Stephen
--
+ CUED, Trumpington Street Telephone : (44) 1223 332658 +
+ Cambridge CB2 1PZ E-mail : s...@eng.cam.ac.uk +
+ +
+ "And now, with a single step, your journey starts." +
Diane Wilson
Many interesting suggestions, but some names are curiously missing...
I've recently discovered Arvo Part. Try "Tabula Rasa."
Where is Eduard Tubin? He's one of the great symphonists of the
century, and his work based on Estonian folk music is wonderful.
Lou Harrison is quite interesting. For chamber music, try his Grand Duo
for violin and piano. Also try the suite for violin, piano, and small
orchestra.
Valentin Silvestrov. Try Gidon Kremer's recording of "Dedication" and
"Post Scriptum." These are very powerful and dark pieces.
Torke's color music is interesting, too.
Does anyone listen to William Grant Still? I doubt that he's the only
black classical composer, but he does seem to getting some attention
finally. I have one disk, "Sunday Symphony," which also has some
spirituals, and I'd like to pursue his spiritual works some more.
--
Diane Wilson |
dewi...@pobox.com | Pain avoidance and pain deferral
http://www.lava.net/~dewilson/ | both become pain amplification.
http://www.acm.org/chapters/trichi/ | --me
Dan Schmidt
opu...@aol.com (Opus47) writes:
| Recorded or unrecorded what do you think is the greatest composition
| after 1950 as our century winds down?
Lucky for you, I already have the beginnings of a list of "great
compositions since 1950." Here's what I came up with:
Louis Andriessen, De Stijl
Luciano Berio, Sinfonia
Morton Feldman, Piano and String Quartet
Hans Werner Henze, Stimmen
Daniel Lentz, Missa Umbrarum
Gyorgy Ligeti, Etudes for Piano
Witold Lutoslawski, Symphony #3
Olivier Messiaen, Saint Francois d'Assise
Per Norgard, Symphony #3
Allan Pettersson, Symphony #7
Steve Reich, Four Organs
Frederic Rzewski, The People United Will Never Be Defeated!
--
Dan Schmidt -> df...@harmonixmusic.com, df...@alum.mit.edu
Honest Bob & the http://www2.thecia.net/users/dfan/
Factory-to-Dealer Incentives -> http://www2.thecia.net/users/dfan/hbob/
Gamelan Galak Tika -> http://web.mit.edu/galak-tika/www/
Ryan Hare
piper (pi...@interport.net) wrote:
: Well, Ryan, you really DO know enough post-1950 works to offer a very
: well-educated opinion - although I disagree with many of your choices.
: What this thread has shown me, for the most part, is how much I
: disagree with the taste of many other contributors to this newsgroup.
: It's interesting.
And that's absolutely o.k. My list was arbitrary, off the top of my head
more or less, and is likely to change singificantly week by week. After I
wrote it I thought of several more pieces that deserve to be on the
list. And I've enjoyed seeing what other people have been mentioning.
In any case, the bottom line from my list of suggestions and from
everybody else's is this: whatever one's tastes in contemporary music,
there is *a lot* of quality stuff out othere. So much good music, in fact,
that it really reveals how lame our musical culture is, since 95% of the
music people have been mentioning is severely neglected. There's a lot of
music out there, more than most people have a clue about, and a
surprisingly large portion of it is worth hearing. There is simply no
dearth of good contemporary art music--anyone who thinks so is simply out
in left field, and horribly nearsighted, or something.
Ryan Hare
rh...@u.washington.edu
Lionel Tacchini
In article <MPG.f5c8d295...@news.mindspring.com>,
dewi...@pobox.com (Diane Wilson) wrote:
> Many interesting suggestions, but some names are curiously missing...
Yes, I'm very surprised not to read more about Dutilleux, Boulez, Xenakis,
Ligeti, Lutoslawski, Berio, Rihm ... I'm probably missing a few more.
To me, it looks like the same thread 100 years ago would have yielded
the whole Strauss family and left Wagner, Bruckner, Brahms or Mahler
aside ...
Which reminds me of that statement by Edwin Fischer, who once remarked
that "Schumann was still considered a difficult composer" in his youth
(must have been about 100 years ago too, maybe even later).
And by the way, what about changing the subject line to "great compositions
after 1950" ?
I'll start :
Ligeti : Requiem, Chamber Concerto, Violin Concerto, Piano Etudes
Lutoslawski : 2nd Symphony (haven't heard the others yet), Partita,
Piano Concerto
Dutilleux : "Timbres, Espaces, Mouvement", Metaboles,
Violin Concerto ("L'arbre des songes")
Cello Concerto ("Tout un monde lointain")
Xenakis : Jonchaies (sorry, I haven't heard too much by him yet - it feels
like that list should grow a lot)
Boulez : Eclat/Multiples, Rituel
Rihm : Music for 3 strings
Lionel Tacchini
PS : Fred, I agree about Pettersson as well. As to Shostakovich, well,
I'll compare his situation in the 2nd half of the century with Bach's
when he wrote the Art of Fugue and the Musical Offering : out of time
greatness.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
S. Alan Schweitzer
Perhaps not the greatest but an unqualigfied masterpiece is Eliot
Carter's Variations For Orchestra. The work was commisioned for
the Louisville Orchestra, and Robert Whitney does a superb job
on it. Unfortunately the Louisville label is a mono
recording. Some listeners will opine that some of Carter's later works are
"better'; howevwer, I'll always stand by this sifnificant work.
Brian Newhouse
In article <6cvclr$dqu$1...@pale-rider.INS.CWRU.Edu>,
Those looking for a recording at least equally good but in stereo could do
worse than to check out the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra under Michael
Gielen (New World Records NW 347-2; paired with Ursula Oppens in the piano
concerto)
--
Brian Newhouse
newh...@newton.crisp.net
SAP23556
> whatever one's tastes in contemporary music,
>there is *a lot* of quality stuff out othere. So much good music, in fact,
>that it really reveals how lame our musical culture is, since 95% of the
>music people have been mentioning is severely neglected. There's a lot of
>music out there, more than most people have a clue about, and a
>surprisingly large portion of it is worth hearing. There is simply no
>dearth of good contemporary art music--anyone who thinks so is simply out
>in left field, and horribly nearsighted, or something.
>
>Ryan Hare
was for 100 years or so. This is absolutely true. History shows that
contemporary music of almost every time period has been largely ignored in its
own time, but regarded as genius 50-100 years later. If people aren't
listening to this stuff it probably is because our ears still aren't used to it
yet.
Stacey
lanza
> >in left field, and horribly nearsighted, or something.
"art" music (by the way, is that Art Garfunkel or Art Toscanini?), since
much of it is a lot better than it sounds (presumably, if you read the
music it makes more sense than if you hear it).
> >Ryan Hare
> Someone else also mentioned that we won't really know what the greatest piece
> was for 100 years or so. This is absolutely true. History shows that
> contemporary music of almost every time period has been largely ignored in its
> own time, but regarded as genius 50-100 years later. If people aren't
> listening to this stuff it probably is because our ears still aren't used to it
> yet.
Well, as the old joke goes, they'll probably be listening to Schoenberg
long after they stop listening to Beethoven; unfortunately, not until
then.
We've gone over these issues so many times it's becoming a little like
deja vu, although, to quote Larry Hart, I don't remember "where or
when." But, in all seriousness, so-called contemp music has had more
than enough time to "take"; but it hasn't taken. Usually, as Leonard
Meyer points out in one of his books, it took no more than a generation,
typically opposing young to old, as we still find in today's pop music
scene, where older people prefer Crosby, Sinatra, Frankie Laine, Eddie
Fisher, Presley, The Beatles, Sir Elton, The Clash, U2, etc. while the
younger set prefer the later of the artists mentioned. But to argue,
convincingly, that it takes more than approx. one generation for an
artist to "take" seems unreasonable. Unless, of course, you argue, with
Mr. Clemens, that some music is a lot better than it sounds; but then
you're no longer arguing aesthetically but hermeneutically or
interpretatively.
This topic crosses several disciplines, inc. psychology, sociology,
aesthetics, and critical theory. I myself am not interested in arguing
that much of contemp music is not art, merely that it has not been
experienced as art (that, to me, seems sufficient). These
composers/artists are certainly not imposters; nor are they crazy; nor
are the people who enjoy them imposters, pretenders (to elite aesthetic
tastes), or whatever. But, to me at least, you cannot call something
art (in the critical, rather than aesthetic, sense) that does not "take"
with a sufficient number of listeners, calculated both numerically as
well as demographically ("Three Blind Mice" has had more appreciative
auditors than Beethoven's Ninth; unfortunately, they're all under 5
years old or less; but, fortunately, few of those have written theories
of aesthetics).
None less than Count Tolstoy dismissed much of art since it was
illegible to the masses (he inc. Shakespeare as well as Beethoven).
Tolstoy used the culinary metaphor, since art that was indigestible to
people was as nonsensical as food that was indigestible. Whether one
would even wish to call this art or not is another issue.
In any case, it's the people who decide on immortality, not the critics
or the academics or the other artists (we all know how WRONG other
artists can be about aesthetic judgments, Toscanini dismissing Mahler as
"crazy," for example).
At issue, I believe, is not the aesthetics of this art (since people
will or will not be appreciating works by contemp composers regardless),
but the sociology of marketing and dissemination. The fact that
something "takes" with a small coterie does not justify its
dissemination to a larger group (it does not justify its suppression
either).
>
> Stacey
Scott Smith
Greatest composition after 1950? I'm pretty sure it was Stairway to Heaven.
;-)
Chris Hillman
On 24 Feb 1998, Catherine Motuz wrote:
> And don't forget Leaonard Bernstein's contributions.
> Symphonic Dances on West Side Story is an exceelent work to
> say the least.
Yes, that is a brilliant piece... several other of his works which fall
into the period under review are among my favorites.
> I haven't heard his whole mass, but the part I
> heard, I liked.
Anyone else out there who loves "A Simple Song?" I love the two
interludes too...
Chris Hillman
Opus47
Thanks for all of the answers.
I have printed out some pages. Where some cross references where made are
especially noted.
I have bought two recordings and have two on order as a result of this thread:
Elgar/Walton Cello Concertos: Ma/Previn CBS.
Penderecki: Threnody plus many other compositions with the composer
conducting!!! EMI Matrix
Lutoslawski: Symphony No.3 - Wit - Naxos
Petterson: Symphony No.7 - Commisiona - some Swedish label?
I guessed all of the performances. I did want to get Elgar also and Ma is just
about the only recording with a Walton coupling. I think Penderecki conducting
Penderecki will be good too. I have Wit doing orchestra support for
Shostakovich's Cello Concerti and I think he is brilliant. I don't think
getting Naxos is a bad choice at all in this case. For Petterson they had
Segerstam on BIS, but I still have a bad taste in my mouth from Segerstam's
Mahler 3rd on Chandos. Dorati does the 7th and he was a familiar name, but I
thought go a little nutso and get Commisiona the former conductor of the
Baltimore SO. Oh, well it would have been nice to have performance
recommendations too, but I was impulsive and wanted to get or order these works
right away. Hopefully they will be serviceable if not outstanding.
I will be trying more out also. So don't be disappointed if your composition
is not listed.
Happy Listening and thanx again,
Fred
Lionel Tacchini
DTohir
> But, in all seriousness, so-called contemp music has had more
>than enough time to "take"; but it hasn't taken.
This simply isn't true. You can't judge everyone's tastes on those of your
associates. Depending on where you are, I suppose, contemporary compositions
are being performed with more & more regularity, and often are favored by
audiences over much of the older works.
Brian Newhouse
In article <34F3AB...@mail.ncku.edu.tw>, la...@mail.ncku.edu.tw wrote:
"[snip to save screen space]
It took me a bit of time to figure out "what's wrong with this picture?"
until that last sentence. Here is someone seriously asking whether there
might be something in the world of postwar classical music that might
interest him. And you tell him, no you shouldn't be the least little bit
interested in that sort of thing, because it's only the business of a
"small coterie" and thus not really art. Have you ever thought that some
people might be genuinely curious about the business of a "small
coterie"--that they might even want to get in on that coterie? And is
telling someone honestly curious about the particulars of that business
really the sort of "dissemination" that cannot be justified? Is one
"unjustified" in talking or writing about one's enthusiasms in public if
such enthusiasms are not shared by a sufficient proportion of the larger
audience?
(As a gay man, this whole business begins to sound like the whole
discourse of "I don't mind it if they stay discreet and not so much as
talk about it, but I'd rather they stayed in the closet and not flaunt it
in public--that might be recruiting the young and/or impressionable...")
--
Brian Newhouse
newh...@newton.crisp.net
Joe
All surviving symphonies are after 1950 - #1 in deystroyed so no date
(story of my life!) #7 is the most structurally close to other big
symphonies.
JOE
Eric Schissel wrote:
> or, perhaps even better choices, Pettersson sym. 3 (I .think. it's
> post-1950)- or to be sure, sym. 8- any takers?
> -Eric Schissel
>
Joe
But he worked on it until 1961 so, maybe, if I'm quiet and stay in the
back, and promise to not ask any questions, someone might include it??
JOE
Paul Kintzele wrote:
> Joe (jos...@avint.net) wrote:
>
> : Durufle's Requiem,
>
> It's a close call, but this work falls just outside the period
> specified--it was completed and premiered in 1947.
>
> A wonderful piece, though.
>
> Paul K.
Joe
In the odd chance that there was a newbie wondering about Simpson I would
suggest #5 first - so I included it. The quartets? the three Beethoven
parrallel ones - 4, 5 & 6 for obvious reasons and number 9! Great cover too.
JOE
Eric Schissel wrote:
> And as josephk's post reminds me, I .really. should have included
> Holmboe's sym. 9 and quartet 9 (both from around 1969-odd), and Simpson-
> in my case his amazing late quartets more than sym. 5, though the 3-5
> group is my favorite among the symphonies.
Joe
Well,
there's a lady who knows
Joe
SAP23556 wrote:
> >
> >Ryan Hare
> Someone else also mentioned that we won't really know what the greatest piece
> was for 100 years or so. This is absolutely true. History shows that
> contemporary music of almost every time period has been largely ignored in its
> own time, but regarded as genius 50-100 years later. If people aren't
> listening to this stuff it probably is because our ears still aren't used to it
> yet.
>
> Stacey
I disagree - for instance Beethovens 5th piano concerto was a huge success from the
premier. Haydn's The Creation caused a small riot outside the palace it was
'officially' premiered in. Brahms symphony #4 was aclaimed as his masterpiece at
its premier.
Not that your point has a great weight behind it, but there are those who were
front runners from their very onset.
JOE
evan johnson
In article <19980225090...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
Opus47 <opu...@aol.com> wrote:
:
:Thanks for all of the answers.
:
:I have printed out some pages. Where some cross references where made are
:especially noted.
:
:I have bought two recordings and have two on order as a result of this thread:
:
:Elgar/Walton Cello Concertos: Ma/Previn CBS.
My father has this CD, but I've only heard it a couple times. Not my favorite
idiom, but good performances.
:Penderecki: Threnody plus many other compositions with the composer
:conducting!!! EMI Matrix
This is one of my favorite CDs. Covers the whole range of Penderecki - from the
experimental Threnody and De Natura Sonoris pieces to the later, more conservative
idiom of the Canticum Canticorum Salominis. All excellent - every piece on this
disc would qualify for the thread.
:Lutoslawski: Symphony No.3 - Wit - Naxos
Great. Get all the Naxos Lutoslawski series.
:Petterson: Symphony No.7 - Commisiona - some Swedish label?
no comment - no clue :)
evan
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
evan johnson - joh...@digex.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ejoh...@sidwell.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ryan Hare
Joe (jos...@avint.net) wrote:
: I disagree - for instance Beethovens 5th piano concerto was a huge success from the
: premier. Haydn's The Creation caused a small riot outside the palace it was
: 'officially' premiered in. Brahms symphony #4 was aclaimed as his masterpiece at
: its premier.
: Not that your point has a great weight behind it, but there are those who were
: front runners from their very onset.
And it happens today, too. It's just that it's *a lot* harder, since any
composer today is up against an unwieldy, entrenched tradition of 2
centuries' worth of music, something that wasn't true in turn-of-the-19th
century central Europe.
Ryan Hare
rh...@u.washington.edu
John Elway Rosenthal
>> >Ryan Hare
>> Someone else also mentioned that we won't really know what the greatest piece
>> was for 100 years or so. This is absolutely true. History shows that
>> contemporary music of almost every time period has been largely ignored in its
>> own time, but regarded as genius 50-100 years later. If people aren't
>> listening to this stuff it probably is because our ears still aren't used to it
>> yet.
>I disagree - for instance Beethovens 5th piano concerto was a huge success from the
>premier. Haydn's The Creation caused a small riot outside the palace it was
>'officially' premiered in. Brahms symphony #4 was aclaimed as his masterpiece at
>its premier.
Didn't Britwistle's "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" start a small riot
as well? Ok, perhaps "demo" would be a better word, but I suspect the
history books will call it a riot.
--
Colin Rosenthal
High Altitude Observatory
Boulder, Colorado
rose...@hao.ucar.edu
SAP23556
> But, in all seriousness, so-called contemp music has had more
>>than enough time to "take"; but it hasn't taken.
>
>This simply isn't true. You can't judge everyone's tastes on those of your
>associates.
public. We understand and appreciate contemporary music much more readily that
the average non-musician does. For us to accept this kind of music and be able
to judge what the masterpieces are in one generation makes sense. For the rest
of the world, it should and does take much longer.
Stacey
>
>
p-peters
Joe schreef:
> To keep this short I will omit Shostakovich
>
> Messiaen 'Catalogue d'Oiseaux' , Eclairs...,
> Shchedrin - Carmen Suite
> Lutoslawski's Piano Concerto
> Holmboe's Symphonies 7- 13 & especially 'In Memorium'
> Honegger Symphony #5 - finished fall of 1950
> Rautavaara's Cantus Articus,
> Kokkonen's Sinfonia da Camera
> Durufle's Requiem,
> Pettersson's Symphonies, up to 11 now ?
> Adam's Shaker Loops.
> Steve reich's Different Trains
> Henze' Symphonies 4 - 7. Baracorolla
> Ginastera's two piano concerti
> Robert Simpson Symphony #5
>
> No Schnittke as I am still wondering about him
> JOE
>
Anything by Kagel, anything by Henze (so we have covered two exrtremes of the
spectrum)
Philip Peters
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Terrymelin
Samuel Barber's "Vanessa."
Terry Ellsworth
Paul Dormer
> Poul Ruders Symphony No. 3 (1989)
> Gong (1992)
I'm curious about this. Ruders had a symphony premiered at the Proms in
1989, but it was his first, I thought. Gong is the first part of the
Solar trilogy, which is also described as a symphony, but doesn't seem to
be numbered. So, is there a Symphony No. 3?
Paul Dormer
> >I disagree - for instance Beethovens 5th piano
> concerto was a huge success from the
> >premier. Haydn's The Creation caused a small riot
> outside the palace it was
> >'officially' premiered in. Brahms symphony #4 was
> aclaimed as his masterpiece at
> >its premier.
>
> Didn't Britwistle's "Sir Gawain and the Green
> Knight" start a small riot
> as well? Ok, perhaps "demo" would be a better word,
> but I suspect the
> history books will call it a riot.
>
I was at the premiere of Birtwistle's Gawain. It was well received.
When the production was revived a couple of years later, there was an
attempt to disrupt the first night by a group calling themselves "The
Hecklers". I was there. They were drowned out by the cheers. Alfred
Brendel and Lord Gowrie (at the time the head of the Arts Council) were
leading the cheering. Birtwistle gave the hecklers a 'V' sign (which,
for non-UK readers, is considered slightly obscene).
Paul Dormer
> > I haven't heard his whole mass, but the part I
> > heard, I liked.
>
> Anyone else out there who loves "A Simple Song?" I
> love the two
> interludes too...
Fell in love with the whole of Mass back in 1972, when the BBC first
broadcast it. Bought the record, and played it until it just about wore
out. I've now got the CD transfer. Don't play it anywhere near as often
these days.
Don Drewecki
I might be wrong, but I think Copland's The Tender Land would fall into
the post-1950 category. Maybe even his Clarinet Concerto, but since it
was premiered in 1950, it's possible that it was written before then.
Those are certainly two great works.
--
Don Drewecki
<dre...@rpi.edu>
Joe
> Didn't Britwistle's "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" start a small riot
> as well? Ok, perhaps "demo" would be a better word, but I suspect the
> history books will call it a riot.
>
Thas what I heard aswell - but someone else should collaborate on this. Obviusly will be
compared to Rite etc. in this respect.JOE
Sara Freeman
In <34F451C2...@p-peters.demon.nl> p-peters
<phi...@p-peters.demon.nl> writes:
>
>
>
>Joe schreef:
>
>> To keep this short I will omit Shostakovich
>>
>> Messiaen 'Catalogue d'Oiseaux' , Eclairs...,
>> Shchedrin - Carmen Suite
>> Lutoslawski's Piano Concerto
>> Holmboe's Symphonies 7- 13 & especially 'In Memorium'
>> Honegger Symphony #5 - finished fall of 1950
>> Rautavaara's Cantus Articus,
>> Kokkonen's Sinfonia da Camera
>> Durufle's Requiem,
>> Pettersson's Symphonies, up to 11 now ?
>> Adam's Shaker Loops.
>> Steve reich's Different Trains
>> Henze' Symphonies 4 - 7. Baracorolla
>> Ginastera's two piano concerti
>> Robert Simpson Symphony #5
>>
>> No Schnittke as I am still wondering about him
>> JOE
>>
>
>Anything by Kagel, anything by Henze
Bassarids
(so we have covered two exrtremes of the
>spectrum)
>
>Philip Peters
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
"If the Truth is Out There, what's In Here?" - Nick Humphries
Opus47
Stairway to Heaven?
Dazed and Confused?
C'mon guys what about the very rhythmically exciting "Four Sticks."
Now back to you regular scheduled thread.
Fred
Kurt Hansen
The danish label Dacapo has issued e good deal of Poul Ruders. Their
Solar Trilogy-recording was nominated to the Danish Grammy Award 1998.
Check their website at http://www.dacapo-records.dk for further
details.
See also http://www.mic.dk, which is the Danish Music Information
centre.
If your ISP can get it, we have a danish newsgroup on classical music
(dk.kultur.musik.klassisk). You are welcome with enquiries in english.
Best regards
Kurt Hansen
Donald Patterson
SAP23556 wrote:
>
> > whatever one's tastes in contemporary music,
> >there is *a lot* of quality stuff out othere. So much good music, in fact,
> >that it really reveals how lame our musical culture is, since 95% of the
> >music people have been mentioning is severely neglected. There's a lot of
> >music out there, more than most people have a clue about, and a
> >surprisingly large portion of it is worth hearing. There is simply no
> >dearth of good contemporary art music--anyone who thinks so is simply out
> >in left field, and horribly nearsighted, or something.
> >
> >Ryan Hare
> Someone else also mentioned that we won't really know what the greatest piece
> was for 100 years or so. This is absolutely true. History shows that
> contemporary music of almost every time period has been largely ignored in its
> own time,
I don't think this necessarily rings true. It is true of our century,
but not
those prior. In Bach's time, composer's were hired on as court
musicians
or church musicians and were required to produce new music at a regular
interval. Their music was performed and then *usually* put away and
neglected...NOT in favor of the oldies, but in favor of more new music.
Do you think Haydn's work for the Esterhazy palace was ignored
in favor of Bach's? Wagner pretty much had the German opera scene to
himself in the 19th century (generally speaking, that is). He wasn't
ignored for the sake of Mozart or Haydn. Perhaps this changed about the
the turn of the 19th century when composers were becoming more
of the free-lancer types than before, but even then, the latest
symphony of LvB was considered an event.
No, the phenomenon of neglecting new music is fairly new. But then,
so little of this avant garde stuff really qualifies as music
in my book. But, that's a whole nuther thread (spoken in a thick
Texan drawl).
--
Don Patterson <don...@erols.com>
Arranger
Professional Music Copyist
Asst. Principal Trombone
"The President's Own"
United States Marine Band
Visit the U.S. Marine Band website
http://www.marineband.hqmc.usmc.mil
The views expressed are my own and in no way
reflect those of the U.S. Marine Band or the U.S.
Marine Corp.
Bradford Kellogg
In article C...@mail.ncku.edu.tw, lanza <la...@mail.ncku.edu.tw> () writes:
>
>Well, as the old joke goes, they'll probably be listening to Schoenberg
>long after they stop listening to Beethoven; unfortunately, not until
>then.
> We've gone over these issues so many times it's becoming a little like
>deja vu, although, to quote Larry Hart, I don't remember "where or
>when." But, in all seriousness, so-called contemp music has had more
>than enough time to "take"; but it hasn't taken.
What do you mean by taken? Music by Schoenberg written before the turn of
the 20th century (not exactly contemporary, 100 years ago) is still played
today. More contemporary music by Part, Gorecki, and Adams seems to have
taken quite well, at least for now. Will it be played 100 years from now?
We don't know. But it has all "taken".
> This topic crosses several disciplines, inc. psychology, sociology,
>aesthetics, and critical theory. I myself am not interested in arguing
>that much of contemp music is not art, merely that it has not been
>experienced as art (that, to me, seems sufficient). These
>composers/artists are certainly not imposters; nor are they crazy; nor
>are the people who enjoy them imposters, pretenders (to elite aesthetic
>tastes), or whatever. But, to me at least, you cannot call something
>art (in the critical, rather than aesthetic, sense) that does not "take"
>with a sufficient number of listeners, calculated both numerically as
>well as demographically
But how you separate the critical from the aestheic? In determining
whether or not something is a work based on an aesthetic, aren't you
being critical? And what is that sufficient number?
> None less than Count Tolstoy dismissed much of art since it was
>illegible to the masses (he inc. Shakespeare as well as Beethoven).
>Tolstoy used the culinary metaphor, since art that was indigestible to
>people was as nonsensical as food that was indigestible. Whether one
>would even wish to call this art or not is another issue.
If Tolstoy dismissed Shakespeare as indigestible, then Tolstoy must have
gotten a little too much sun that day. Perhaps attempting to translate
the lyricism of Shakespearean English proved impossible, but the English
is not what distinguishes Shakespeare. Shakespeare is universal and timeless,
and it is amazing that Tolstoy couldn't see that. Why is War and Peace so
much more digestible than Macbeth or King Lear? Using Tolstoy to support
this point seems not the best example.
> In any case, it's the people who decide on immortality, not the critics
>or the academics or the other artists
Well, the critics and the academics and other artists are some of the people
themselves, and they often command some respect as authorities. If a movie
gets praised by a critic, you can be sure the marketing will include those
praises in delivering the message to the people.
(we all know how WRONG other
>artists can be about aesthetic judgments, Toscanini dismissing Mahler as
>"crazy," for example).
But being an aesthetic judgement, can it be wrong?
> At issue, I believe, is not the aesthetics of this art (since people
>will or will not be appreciating works by contemp composers regardless),
>but the sociology of marketing and dissemination. The fact that
>something "takes" with a small coterie does not justify its
>dissemination to a larger group (it does not justify its suppression
>either).
You seem to be playing both sides of the coin. Are you talking about
the accountant's perspective? Fortunately, chart busting is not the bottom
line for all recorded music. If it were, we would not have Allegri Motets
on CD. Also fortunately, companies like Sony can afford to make little or
no money in classical music, since they make so much in consumer electronics.
Which is also good because I can have a Sony CD devoted to Alban Berg. I
think when something "takes with a small coterie" it does indeed justify
wider dissemination if the disseminators want to.
---
Have an ice day... BK
John S Mamoun
Barber's Piano Concerto.
Opus47 (opu...@aol.com) wrote:
: I'm in trouble now. Asking about contemporary music on this mainstream NG.
: For the few who wish to participate I really want to know what you think.
: Recorded or unrecorded what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
: as our century winds down? If I was asking most popular I would already know
: that answer: Paul McCartney, Standing Stone (argggggh!!!).
: It might help if I started to get the ball rolling. Wouldn't know it would be
: Shostakovich? I think his 14th symphony composed in 1969 is one of the most
: profound things ever done. You've might have noticed as I've posted it often
: for depressing or tragic music: eleven poems all set to music with the theme of
: death.
: Selfishly I am posting because I want to compare and contrast with the
: Shostakovich 14th. Maybe the work is too conservative, I don't know. I don't
: know much about other composers after 1950. Many of the library books probably
: haven't been printed yet on the subject. Many library books I've seen are old
: and don't contain recent information, at least where I live. I take it you
: learn about the music of the near past almost by word of mouth or in this case
: via newsgroup.
: So in all fairness educate me as I have no other resource at hand.
: Fred
Ryan Hare
Paul Dormer (pauld...@cix.compulink.co.uk) wrote:
: > Poul Ruders Symphony No. 3 (1989)
: > Gong (1992)
: I'm curious about this. Ruders had a symphony premiered at the Proms in
: 1989, but it was his first, I thought. Gong is the first part of the
: Solar trilogy, which is also described as a symphony, but doesn't seem to
: be numbered. So, is there a Symphony No. 3?
You're right, the piece is just called "Symphony," and is Ruders' first.
I don't know where the "no. 3" in my list came from. Sorry.
Ryan Hare
rh...@u.washington.edu
lanza
> What do you mean by taken? Music by Schoenberg written before the turn of
> the 20th century (not exactly contemporary, 100 years ago) is still played
> today. More contemporary music by Part, Gorecki, and Adams seems to have
> taken quite well, at least for now. Will it be played 100 years from now?
> We don't know. But it has all "taken".
anything in music, only one can illustrate anything one has a mind to).
Remember, I'm playing, for the most part, the devil's advocate. My
final (ultimate) dictum of aesthetics would be, simply you can't argue
taste (that means "cannnot"). Whether a music takes or not is the only
criterion, as far as I'm concerned (short of critical paternalism,
hermeneutics, utilitarianism, etc.). Whether a music takes is relative,
of course; Rach's 2d is more popular than his 1st or 4th & even 3d.
Tchai's First is a lot more popular than his other pno concerti. I was
in Poland a while back and the few people I talked to about Gorecki had
never listened to his music, although one knew about him ("we know he's
a great man, but I never heard his music"). Still, G's 3d S. has
obviously taken with a lot of listeners.
> But how you separate the critical from the aestheic? In determining
> whether or not something is a work based on an aesthetic, aren't you
> being critical? And what is that sufficient number?
there is none! Taste is the only criterion; in the words of Johnson,
what pleases many for long (what other rational criterion is there?).
So aesthetics (feeling) has nothing to do with criticism (meaning).
Let's face it, one could write reams about Woody Allen's Interiors,
because it's such a calculated film, but (to my mind) it has minimal
aesthetic value. It would be very difficult to write anything about
Little Richard's Tutti Frutti or Good Golly, Miss Molly, but, again to
my mind, it's a great work of art. True, as aesthetic experiences
become institutionalized a vocabulary emerges to discuss them, dissect
them, theorize them, etc. (as in the case with cinema, for example, a
critical industry which has now become more esoteric than that focussed
on literary texts). But critical theory in no way grasps the aesthetic
dimensions of these works, merely depends on their aesthetic worth as a
"given," or, in some case, irrelevant (as with obvious Marxist critiques
or doctrinal hermeneutics of different stripes).
> If Tolstoy dismissed Shakespeare as indigestible, then Tolstoy must have
> gotten a little too much sun that day. . . . Using Tolstoy to support
> this point seems not the best example.
Absolutely. I merely used him in a polemical sense (I certainly don't
agree with him). But I do use him to illustrate (again, merely
illustrate, not prove) a point that aesthetics is strictly relative.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder; although, we can validate, in the
only certain way, that a great number of viewers who find something
beautiful at least suggests that beauty inheres in the object and is not
merely a pedagogic construct or a figment of one viewer's imagination.
(The reverse is also true, as we found in the 50s when much sanitized
Rock was considered artistically superior to the more gritty models on
which they were based.)
>
> Well, the critics and the academics and other artists are some of the people
> themselves, and they often command some respect as authorities. If a movie
> gets praised by a critic, you can be sure the marketing will include those
> praises in delivering the message to the people.
Well, now you're talking about sociology. Critics dismissed Hitch for
much of his career; Roger Ebert dismissed Jim Carrey in his review of
his first feature movieand in his second. The thing about criticism is
that it's so deciduous; otherwise we'd blush at the sheer number of
wrong opinions. I happened upon a contemporary review of Psycho & the
reviewer dismissed Herrmann's now celebrated score as "typical radio
fare"! So yes; sociologically the critics obviously matter (esp. on
opening nights along Broadway); but critics certainly carry less weight
with movies (stars, for example, and word of mouth carry greater
weight). Andrew Sarris revised his opinion (the following week) re:
2001 after his initial negative review of the film; and many critics
revised their initial opinions of Bonny and Clyde; but the list is
obviously endless. What I meant was that ultimate aesthetic value is
not measured by critical evaluation but by popular acclamation and
acceptance: it takes or it does not.
>
> (we all know how WRONG other
> >artists can be about aesthetic judgments, Toscanini dismissing Mahler as
> >"crazy," for example).
>
> But being an aesthetic judgement, can it be wrong?
True, but don't hold me to a strict use of terminology on the internet,
please. I clearly intended aesthetic judgments as critical judgments.
For Toscanini, his aesthetic experience was unsatisfactory. However
(see above) if aesthetic judgments can be validated (consensually) by a
community, then it appears that T's initial (and presumably final)
judgment was WRONG, since Mahler has become the most popular, or one of
the most popular composers, of our century. (Anymore validation than
this is unnecessary; at a certain point, numerical advantage is not
normative: the fact that many more people enjoy "Memory" than Mahler's
Das Lied von der Erde does not privilege Webber's song over Mahler's
song cycle; for clearly M's song cycle has enough of an audience (inc.
numerical and demographic factors).
>
> You seem to be playing both sides of the coin. Are you talking about
> the accountant's perspective? Fortunately, chart busting is not the bottom
> line for all recorded music. If it were, we would not have Allegri Motets
> on CD. Also fortunately, companies like Sony can afford to make little or
> no money in classical music, since they make so much in consumer electronics.
> Which is also good because I can have a Sony CD devoted to Alban Berg. I
> think when something "takes with a small coterie" it does indeed justify
> wider dissemination if the disseminators want to.
Well, I'll not argue the above, since I have no feelings for or against
your statement. If people wish to buy Moses und Aaron, that's fine; if
they enjoy it, that's better yet. I say, what the market will bear. Of
course I'm arguing it both ways, since that's the way I feel. I can't
understand either extreme: the music is great and the "masses" should
learn to discard their sentimental or attenated preferences; or, the
music is crap & nobody should record the music. Why decry people who
listen to this music? And why decry orchestras that don't play this
music? If it takes, orchestras will play it (like the Gorecki 3d). It
seems fairly simple to me. To say that these composers are
misunderstood or neglected geniuses misses the mark in my opinion (by
definition a genius, in the accepted idiomatic sense, is a person whose
art is universally appreciated (again, in the idiomatic sense, since not
all people will enjoy listening to Memory either, and fewer will enjoy
listening to Beethoven's Pastoral). Clearly, however, with some
pedagogic institutionalization of these works, they are loved by wide
audiences; and I know personally of people who never listened to
"classical" music in their lives who finally couldn't stop playing the
Pastoral symphony, for one. It took, finally; but it did take.
Remember, that a highly sensitive musician can find beauty in the
overtones of a single note; but his or her job is to translate that
personal experience into audible patterns (chords, counterpoint,
timbres, etc.) into public forms; therefore, by definition, the only
validation of aesthetics is public, provided the definition of the term
public has reasonable demographic consensual persuasion (Jane Smith's
family will agree that she is the finest singer of La Boheme in the
world, but will John Anderson's family feel the same? Douglas
Twelvetone's following will agree that his music is the finest of this
century, but will Andrew Notone's following agree with this
assessment?).
************************************************
"I mean, uh, couldn't we stop off at a corner
drugstore for a moment, so that I could explain
I'm being, uh, kidnapped?"
- Roger O. Thornhill
************************************************
Eric Schissel
Joe (jos...@avint.net) wrote:
>In the odd chance that there was a newbie wondering about Simpson I would
>suggest #5 first - so I included it. The quartets? the three Beethoven
>parrallel ones - 4, 5 & 6 for obvious reasons and number 9! Great cover too.
Those are great, but to clarify my earlier post, my own preferences as
quartets go are for 14&15.
Eric Schissel
Joe (jos...@avint.net) wrote:
>All surviving symphonies are after 1950 - #1 in deystroyed so no date
>(story of my life!) #7 is the most structurally close to other big
>symphonies.
>JOE
#1 isn't destroyed actually, just, apparently, incomplete.
#7 more structurally close to other big symphonies than #3 in 4 movements
with a real (however truncated) .scherzando. third?
Actually this links up to a discussion of Naxos recordings of some time
ago, because #7 is on its way.
Eric Schissel
also, most of Holmboe's quartets :)-Eric Schissel, who is .very.
impressed by these.
evan johnson
In article <6d20ka$m...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
Sara Freeman <fre...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
:In <34F451C2...@p-peters.demon.nl> p-peters
:<phi...@p-peters.demon.nl> writes:
:>
:>
:>
[list snipped]
:>
:>Anything by Kagel, anything by Henze
um, no. The point of this thread is to name "great" works after 1950. It's gotten out of
control enough already, but can you honestly claim that everything Henze and Kagel (who?)
have ever written is great?
Roberto Maria Avanzi
[posted and mailed]
Eric Schissel wrote:
>
> Joe (jos...@avint.net) wrote:
> >All surviving symphonies are after 1950 - #1 in deystroyed so no date
> >(story of my life!) #7 is the most structurally close to other big
> >symphonies.
> >JOE
>
> #1 isn't destroyed actually, just, apparently, incomplete.
> #7 more structurally close to other big symphonies than #3 in 4 movements
> with a real (however truncated) .scherzando. third?
> Actually this links up to a discussion of Naxos recordings of some time
> ago, because #7 is on its way.
Pettersson #7 on Naxos ?
That sounds very good (will win more followers to this good composer),
if I understood it correctly.
How did you get the news ?
Anybody has more ?
Regards
Roberto
_/_/ Roberto Maria Avanzi
/_/ Institut fuer Experimentelle Mathematik / Universitaet GHS Essen
_/ Ellernstrasse 29 / 45326 Essen / Germany
/ Phone: +49-201-32064-37, Fax: +49-201-32064-68
Roberto Maria Avanzi
evan johnson wrote:
>
> In article <19980225090...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
> Opus47 <opu...@aol.com> wrote:
> :Lutoslawski: Symphony No.3 - Wit - Naxos
>
> Great. Get all the Naxos Lutoslawski series.
I agree. I have three CDs, the ones with Syms 2,3,4 and other music.
I saw in the HNH web site that a CD with the Cello Concerto should have
been released, than disappeared from the pages.
In the meanwhile, it has not appeared in any of the shops i regularly
visit...
info ? other CDs ?
Thanks
Roberto Maria Avanzi
Joe wrote:
>
> SAP23556 wrote:
>
> > >
> > >Ryan Hare
> > Someone else also mentioned that we won't really know what the greatest piece
> > was for 100 years or so. This is absolutely true. History shows that
> > contemporary music of almost every time period has been largely ignored in its
> > listening to this stuff it probably is because our ears still aren't used to it
> > yet.
> >
>
> I disagree - for instance Beethovens 5th piano concerto was a huge success from the
> premier. Haydn's The Creation caused a small riot outside the palace it was
> 'officially' premiered in. Brahms symphony #4 was aclaimed as his masterpiece at
> its premier.
>
> front runners from their very onset.
For example, Ligeti's Atmosphere.
(when I heard recently a professor dismissing Ligeti's music from the 60s
as good only as teaching tools, but not as deep and good music, I understood
why he did not become a famous composer. no heart. ah, and he is also
a Ferneyhough basher: "complication with no meaning". no understanding.)
but it is true that we should look a little to history.
People cry and shout even when the spice girls launch a new song.
I personally believe that 39 years for Apparitions and
37 years for Atmosphere as well as 31 for Lontano (am I right ?
1959, 1961 and 1967) or 30 for Requiem are enough to "let things
calm down a little" and recognize them as masterpieces not of this
century, but of the whole history of music.
But, again, I am strongly biased in favour of Ligeti.
Roberto ,that will forever plan a revenge against an enemy world.
Dan Schmidt
joh...@access4.digex.net (evan johnson) writes:
| In article <6d20ka$m...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
| Sara Freeman <fre...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
|
| > Anything by Kagel, anything by Henze
|
| um, no. The point of this thread is to name "great" works after
| 1950. It's gotten out of control enough already, but can you
| honestly claim that everything Henze and Kagel (who?) have ever
| written is great?
Kagel is Mauricio Kagel, a great jokester and I'm glad he's around,
but I don't know that I would put him into the "greatest since 1950"
category.
I find Henze very uneven (probably because he plays with different
styles a lot), but I think Stimmen (Voices) is one of the great works
of the late 20th century.
--
Dan Schmidt -> df...@harmonixmusic.com, df...@alum.mit.edu
Honest Bob & the http://www2.thecia.net/users/dfan/
Factory-to-Dealer Incentives -> http://www2.thecia.net/users/dfan/hbob/
Gamelan Galak Tika -> http://web.mit.edu/galak-tika/www/
Mario Taboada
Dan Schmidt:
<<I find Henze very uneven (probably because he plays with different
styles a lot), but I think Stimmen (Voices) is one of the great works
of the late 20th century.>>
So is his great ballet "Ondine". And I hear that his trumpet concerto is
a masterpiece (I haven't heard it yet).
Regards,
Mario Taboada
Frank Eggleston
Terrymelin wrote:
> Samuel Barber's "Vanessa."
>
> Terry Ellsworth
Certainly, the last act Quintet, one of the glorious pieces of music
written after Richard Strauss.
Frank Eggleston
Frank Eggleston
S. Alan Schweitzer wrote:
> Perhaps not the greatest but an unqualigfied masterpiece is Eliot
> Carter's Variations For Orchestra. The work was commisioned for
> the Louisville Orchestra, and Robert Whitney does a superb job
> on it. Unfortunately the Louisville label is a mono
> recording. Some listeners will opine that some of Carter's later works are
> "better'; howevwer, I'll always stand by this sifnificant work.
Hear, hear! As much as I like much of the later Carter, the Variations have
always been my favorite piece (maybe also the 8 Etudes and a Fantasy, for
Woodwind Quartet).
Frank Eggleston
Ryan Hare
Roberto Maria Avanzi (moce...@exp-math.uni-essen.de) wrote:
: I personally believe that 39 years for Apparitions and
: 37 years for Atmosphere as well as 31 for Lontano (am I right ?
: 1959, 1961 and 1967) or 30 for Requiem are enough to "let things
: calm down a little" and recognize them as masterpieces not of this
: century, but of the whole history of music.
: But, again, I am strongly biased in favour of Ligeti.
I'm with you on this one. I think Ligeti is a really great composer, one
of the greatest since Stravinsky. It'll be good to actually get a
recording of _Apparitions_ in the continuing Sony series, though, since to
my knowledge there has never been a commercial recording of it.
Be sure to check out some of his recent music, especially the Solo Viola
Sonata, the Horn Trio, the Piano Etudes, and the Violin and Piano
Concertos. Great stuff!
Ryan Hare
rh...@u.washington.edu
Tauser
In response to playing 'modern' music they way they used to:
in the Classical Period up to the death of Schubert, most everyone expected to
hear 'new' music rather than older classics. However, 2 changes came about: 1)
the world of "classical music" left the courts and aritocratic priveged class
and entered into the middle class market place. 2) the very small rift
between public taste and the individual creative desire of the composer became
wider and wider (Beethoven we can thank and/or blame for initiating this) ...
now this chasm seems unbridgable, save for desparate attempts at "cross-over".
Simplistic to be sure, but I think could well be discussed at this forum.
Cordially, Tauser
Samuel Vriezen
joh...@access4.digex.net (evan johnson):
>um, no. The point of this thread is to name "great" works after 1950. It's gotten out of
>control enough already, but can you honestly claim that everything Henze and Kagel (who?)
>have ever written is great?
Kagel: Mauricio Kagel, composer of many great pieces of music, one of
the most innovative composers of this period of time. Check him out.
Preferably live, theatrics may play a large role in his music.
Some hints: listen to the Stuecke der Windrose, or Liturgien.
Samuel
Adam C. Komisaruk
Not to be a wet blanket, but could we get a definition of "great" here? Are
we simply listing our favorites? the most significant stylistic innovations?
the most important social statements? the highest refinements/greatest
mileage out of existing conventions?
A couple of observations on works already listed: Durufle's Requiem is
extremely pleasing to the taste, but its conceit is not new (surrounding
Gregorian chants with contemporary harmonies); Bernstein's Mass is a vast
compendium of musical styles that utilizes each one very successfully, but at
times lacks cohesion. Reich's Drumming and, perhaps to a greater extent,
Different Trains seems to be doing something quite original. The same could
be said of Messiaen, John Zorn and LaMonte Young.
Diane Wilson
In article <komisaru.2...@ucla.edu*>, komi...@ucla.edu* says...
> Not to be a wet blanket, but could we get a definition of "great" here? Are
> we simply listing our favorites? the most significant stylistic innovations?
> the most important social statements? the highest refinements/greatest
> mileage out of existing conventions?
It's already been pointed out that we got a bit beyond the original scope,
and that it's a bit of a short time period to say that we (as a community)
have any answers on lasting greatness.
The refreshing point is the breadth and quality of work that is still being
produced, when there are many who view Debussy or Stravinsky or (fill in the
blank with some revolutionary) as the end of classical music.
Unlike the Norwegian blue parrot, classical music isn't dead, and it
certainly doesn't have its feet nailed to the perch.
--
Diane Wilson |
dewi...@pobox.com | Pain avoidance and pain deferral
http://www.lava.net/~dewilson/ | both become pain amplification.
http://www.acm.org/chapters/trichi/ | --me
Opus47
Personally Adam I'll take anything. I just wanted people to "blurt" out
something.
As many people already know I am a great devotee of Shostakovich. Before this
thread I would have said:
"The greatest music of the 20th century was from 1925-1975"
Then what happened?
"Classical music died."
But now I am opening my mind as I ocassionally do. Just to hear other
thoughts....literally.
Maybe the next thread should be "Greatest composition after 1975!!!"
I sure this will be more meat for some of you out there.
Fred
Fred
Joe
after 1975?
Well, that would be:
Holmboe's symphonies 11, 12, & 13. - Why - not that many symphonists around, or
that I know of.
A bunch of Holmboes quartets whose numbers elude myself ( yo EricS!)
Robert Simpson's String Quartets 6 & up
Vainberg symphonies 12 & up - see Holmboe
Philip Galss - the two Bowie Symphonues - Low & Heroes - well, even though the
music themes are from the Pop/Rock world, their treatment is very high in calibre.
Unlike those London Symphony Orchestra Plays The Police/PinkFLoyd elevator music
pap.
It seems I am repeating myself a little. Safe to say that the record companies are
failing a lot of recent / contemporary composers. More Brhms that Ligeti, which is
a shame for Ligeti and not a bad commentary on Brahms.
JOE
PS gotta keep the thread going - this is its first mutation? I'm gonna post this
at rec.music.classical.contemporary where it belongs.
Opus47
I see from my handy dandy Schwann Catalog that it says Holmboe died in 1996.
But which of the........ohhh.
All three symphonies: the 11th (1980), the 12th (1988), and the 13th (1994) are
available on one CD on BIS with the Aarhus SO conducted by Owain Arwel Hughes.
BIS CD 728.
Scandanavians rule in the last half.....er quarter of the century?!?!
Fred
Mitchel L. Galishoff
Loved thePenderecki Threony
Have you heard Van de Vate's "Chernobyl"?
joh...@access4.digex.net (evan johnson) wrote:
>Some nominations:
>
>Krzysztof Penderecki: Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima
>Earle Brown: Available Forms I
>Elliott Carter: String Quartet #2, Piano Concerto
>George Crumb: Ancient Voices of Children, Makrokosmos cycle
>Gyorgy Ligeti: can't think of a particular piece, but he definitely deserves
> to be on the list
Mitchel L. Galishoff
Wow you got a bunch of responses --
I have enjoyed the music of Peteris Vasks, his works: Message and
Musica Dolorosa are excellent.
How can you pick a greatist? There is so much and personal tastes
develop with each new listening experience
Eric Schissel
evan johnson (joh...@access4.digex.net) wrote:
>um, no. The point of this thread is to name "great" works after 1950. It's gotten out of
>control enough already, but can you honestly claim that everything Henze and Kagel (who?)
>have ever written is great?
Kagel. Mauricio Kagel. He's quite famous.
-Eric Schissel
Eric Schissel
and never received...
>Eric Schissel wrote:
>> Actually this links up to a discussion of Naxos recordings of some time
>> ago, because #7 is on its way.
>Pettersson #7 on Naxos ?
>That sounds very good (will win more followers to this good composer),
>if I understood it correctly.
>How did you get the news ?
>Anybody has more ?
Yeah, Sundqvist conducting, coupled with the Mesto from the 3rd concerto
for strings; news available on the Pettersson page (I have the URL
somewhere.)
Eric Schissel
surely Pettersson 15 as well.
As to Holmboe- not just because not so many symphonists but because his
music is some of the best of this half-century- I'll look it up tomorrow
to find best works after '75...-Eric Schissel
Gustav Yeung
DTohir wrote:
> Crumb-"Black Angels"
My thumbs up for "Black Angels". A wonderful and shocking quartet music.
Gustav
--
-------------------------
Gustav Yeung Kwong Fung
Senior System Engineer, Vanda Computer & Equip. Co Ltd.
Certified AIX Support Professional
Certified RS/6000 SP Specialist
(Please remove NOSPAM when replying)
gustav...@vandagroup.com gus...@netvigator.com
Tel: (852) 2197 2194
Fax: (852) 2197 2323
Gustav Yeung
Mario Taboada
Jeff Wilson:
<<I'd also add Martinu's "Frescos of Piero della Francesca" and
his fourth piano concerto to the list of candidates. His oboe
concerto is absolutely irresistible, though not on as grand a scale.>>
Late Martinu is almost all great music. Someone called this Bohuslav's
"incandescent" period - a very appossite term.
More recently, John Harbison has been producing great work which I think
will endure. His viola concerto is a fabulous piece.
The late Robert Simpson will, I think, be ranked ahead of Benjamin
Britten as the greatest English composer of the century - as I say this,
I by no means cancel my membership in the Britten fan club: he wrote
wonderful music, lots of it. But Simpson is special.
The late Toru Takemitsu had the gift of originality - there is no-one
who sounds even remotely like him. I never tire of listening to his
music.
The late Andrej Panufnik was also an original - extraordinary technical
refinement and an unusual sense of rhythm. I have never heard a work of
his that I didn't enjoy and find memorable.
The late Roger Sessions produced a smallish but tightly wound and very
personal body of music which I think has permanence. His symphonies rank
with the best of any era.
The late Witold Lutoslawski produced enough masterpieces that he died
already being a classic (deservedly).
There are many more. The second half of this century has been very rich
and varied in classical music.
Regards,
Mario Taboada
Jeff Wilson
On Mon, 23 Feb 1998 12:53:24 -0600, Mark Wilson
<mark....@ericsson.com> wrote:
>XyZortC wrote:
>>
>> > what do you think is the greatest composition after 1950
>> (snip)
>I shall vote for the Walton Cello Concerto. My second tier includes the
>Rautavaara Violin Concerto, some of Malcolm Arnold's later symphonies
>and the 6th symphony of Bohuslav Martinu (I think it was composed in the
>'50's - apologies if not).
>
>Really, there has been some music of quality written since 1950!
>
>Mark
I'd also add Martinu's "Frescos of Piero della Francesca" and
his fourth piano concerto to the list of candidates. His oboe
concerto is absolutely irresistible, though not on as grand a scale.
I'd also second the nominations for Carter's piano concerto and
his variations for orchestra, which others have mentioned. They're
available together on one disk. I'll also second the nomination for
his concerto for orchestra.
Shostakovitch's 10th symphony also has to be considered. I
was surprised when I saw it mentioned here, since although it
was written in 1953, it hadn't entered my mind. It seems to me
to belong in spirit more to the first half of the century.
Stravinsky's "movements for piano and orchestra" is my
favorite work by him.
Henze's double concerto for oboe and harp & orchestra is
unfortunately not out on CD yet, though I've had my DGG
record of it for many years. It's another festive, glittering
piece, like Martinu's oboe concerto.
--
Please remove the two capital X's from my e-mail address before replying via e-mail.
(They are an attempt to thwart unsolicited commercial mail.)