What is the last piece of classical music you listened to?

[Naïve Old Fart 10,864]

... or maybe, some of the "horror" music from Harry Potter reminds you of that 

[Loert 2,805]

1 hour ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

... or maybe, some of the "horror" music from Harry Potter reminds you of that 

 

I knew there would be one.

[Holko 10,835]

OK yeah Abbado's Alexander Nevsky is just fantastic. Great sound, great performance and lovely music! The Battle on the Ice is a climactic headbanging setpiece as rousing and headbanging as any of our favourite film composers could hope to write (and some did - I think I heard a bit of Riders of Doom in there, as well as some Horner and JW elements ), and the rest frames it very nicely with some beautiful and fun variations. Feels massive despite the length - now this is how you do an OST!

 

Scythian Suite is less memorable in comparison right after, but still contains some wonderful imagery.

 

Lieutenant Kijé is a nice lighter wrapup, pleasantly fun and comedic for a plot that sounds like it could be a grand farce. Reminded me a bit of Death of Stalin, so it fits!

[Naïve Old Fart 10,864]

Just a wee "heads-up", y'all:

At 14:00hrs. GMT, on BBC Radio 3, there is a show called Record Review. Part of this show is known as Building A library, where lots of different recordings of the same piece of music are compared and contrasted. 

This week, it's THE PLANETS.

[bollemanneke 3,748]

Berlioz, symphonie fantastique, Dudamel. First two movements are unremarkable and certainly the ball is no match for Karajan's version. Brass section is, of course, magnificent. Also, whoever put the pre-concert talk at the end of the album: you're an IDIOT.

[Chen G. 4,798]

Spohr's Jessonda again. Still a little too docile: although theoretically through-composed there are some surprisingly emphatic cadences here at the end of numbers, moreso than its contemporary Euryanthe. But there are some passages of sensuous chromaticism: "O schewster" (Recitative, but closer to arioso a-la Wagnerian declamation) comes to mind, although we're still far off from Tristan. It's amazing how recognisable the voice of Kurt Moll is: the instant he opened his mouth I knew who it was - an instrument of unique beauty.

 

 

 

[bollemanneke 3,748]

Started the Brahms symphonies by Dausgaard. When? WHEN are conductors going to realise that exposition repeats are dull, boring and a waste of everyone's time? Why am I and Karajan the only one who get this?

[Marian Schedenig 9,462]

18 minutes ago, bollemanneke said:

Started the Brahms symphonies by Dausgaard. When? WHEN are conductors going to realise that exposition repeats are dull, boring and a waste of everyone's time? Why am I and Karajan the only one who get this?

 

No, it's just you, not you and Karajan. As far as I know, Karajan only skipped written repeats when it was necessary to make a symphony fit on a single disc. His later recordings that I'm aware of include the repeats.

[bollemanneke 3,748]

I don't think that's always the case, though, definitely not his Brahms symphonies.

[Glóin the Dark 1,375]

Why is listening to an intended exposition repeat boring and a waste of time when (presumably) listening to an entire symphony that you've heard before isn't?

[Tom Guernsey 2,877]

I always find repeats in symphonies (and complexly developed works) such a strange concept somehow. These genius, composers who know how to write beautiful melodies, expertly develop them, interweave it with other material but then plonk in a repeat that almost sounds like someone just hitting repeat on a cd player but for a single section of the movement. I’m sure that’s an unnecessarily controversial take…

[Marian Schedenig 9,462]

I understand that it's a concept that has become "unnecessary" in a time when it's much easier to listen to a piece of music again any time you like. But it's hardly a big annoyance (as mentioned above, we do listen to these works repeatedly anyway), and it is what the composer has written. And part of that is that the end of the repeated phrase has two different transitions, one into the repetition and one into what comes next. Skipping the repeats loses at least that.

[karelm 3,142]

57 minutes ago, Tom Guernsey said:

I always find repeats in symphonies (and complexly developed works) such a strange concept somehow. These genius, composers who know how to write beautiful melodies, expertly develop them, interweave it with other material but then plonk in a repeat that almost sounds like someone just hitting repeat on a cd player but for a single section of the movement. I’m sure that’s an unnecessarily controversial take…

 

It's not that strange.  It's based on song form which existed before sonata form.  You state your theme then repeat it because it helps drive it in to memory, then you present a contrasting theme in a complementary key or melody that bridges back to the opening theme.  Sonata is an elaboration of this.  If you take issue of it in bigger forms, you'll need to take issue of it in smaller forms so every pop song ever.  Additionally, the whole meaning of long form and structure evolved over time and strict sonata practically doesn't exist now so you are looking back to a period where sonata structure was the most expansive structure, and those composers were adhering to conventions of their time.

[Tom Guernsey 2,877]

52 minutes ago, karelm said:

 

It's not that strange.  It's based on song form which existed before sonata form.  You state your theme then repeat it because it helps drive it in to memory, then you present a contrasting theme in a complementary key or melody that bridges back to the opening theme.  Sonata is an elaboration of this.  If you take issue of it in bigger forms, you'll need to take issue of it in smaller forms so every pop song ever.  Additionally, the whole meaning of long form and structure evolved over time and strict sonata practically doesn't exist now so you are looking back to a period where sonata structure was the most expansive structure, and those composers were adhering to conventions of their time.

That all makes sense although I did specifically refer to longer form works thus excluding things like songs etc. where that sort of repetition is standard. As you say, it was the convention of the time and I can see how it would have developed as form got more complex until eventually that sort of repeating largely disappeared in symphonic music.

[bollemanneke 3,748]

There is just no point to a repetition in a long-form work. Can you all imagine watching a sitcom episode and going back to the beginning at the 10-minute mark? Or reading a book and then reading the first half again? Etc? Just tell your musical story and let me decide if I need things to be 'driven home' again. I'll go back on my own terms. This is just stupid.

 

Yes, I listen to these works repeatedly, but that's because I want to hear them unfold again, or to explore other interpretations, mostly. I don't need sections repeated for me, especially when you're then not going to do it in other movements. The finale, for instance, didn't need any repeats. Repeats just make it longer.

 

I remember having to sit through Beethoven's 7th live with all the repetitions intact, it was a nightmare. You just FEEL it's not natural, the music has to MOVE. That work is a masterpiece that needs forward momentum, the repeats only degrade its qualities.

[Glóin the Dark 1,375]

The sitcom and novel comparisons that you've made don't work, because the suggested repetition is not part of the actual work, but rather a modification made by the viewer/reader. An appropriate analogy would be, for example, a film in which the film-maker had included a repeated scene but the distributor cut it out without authorisation.

 

If the composer of a symphony included a repeat of the exposition, then the repeat is a part of the piece; it's not for me to decide whether it really is or not. If repeating the exposition was not expected, the composer may have structured the movement differently in the first place.

 

Performing a piece is not a matter of delivering a batch of information to the listener (in which case resending a given segment could be redundant) but of providing a particular experience, and we're in agreement that excising the repetition alters the experience. You may well prefer the altered experience to the intended one, but I think you're thoroughly mistaken in judging the repetitions in the intended version to be "stupid".

 

I certainly don't want conductors making that decision on my behalf, and I think that performances and recordings in which the repetition is cut should be clearly labelled as edited versions.

[Thor 8,832]

Indeed. Same as we were discussing in the PATRIOT thread before the discussion was moved elsewhere. Structure and repetition is part of the very fabric of the music, even if it's the exact same piece being repeated.

[GerateWohl 5,409]

That explanation would only make sense to me if the movement then Was actually performed twice. But if I put a copy the exact same recording at the beginning or the end that means something like "We didn't exactly know where to put it, at the beginning or the end. But we had enough space. So we put it in both places and called the copy Reprise."

[Thor 8,832]

I’d say more because it makes sense and gives it a fine arc.

[bollemanneke 3,748]

3 hours ago, Glóin the Dark said:

The sitcom and novel comparisons that you've made don't work, because the suggested repetition is not part of the actual work, but rather a modification made by the viewer/reader. An appropriate analogy would be, for example, a film in which the film-maker had included a repeated scene but the distributor cut it out without authorisation.

 

If the composer of a symphony included a repeat of the exposition, then the repeat is a part of the piece; it's not for me to decide whether it really is or not. If repeating the exposition was not expected, the composer may have structured the movement differently in the first place.

 

Performing a piece is not a matter of delivering a batch of information to the listener (in which case resending a given segment could be redundant) but of providing a particular experience, and we're in agreement that excising the repetition alters the experience. You may well prefer the altered experience to the intended one, but I think you're thoroughly mistaken in judging the repetitions in the intended version to be "stupid".

 

I certainly don't want conductors making that decision on my behalf, and I think that performances and recordings in which the repetition is cut should be clearly labelled as edited versions.

You certainly make a valid point, but I just disagree. Take the symphonie fantastique. Explain the reasoning behind the repeat in the first and fourth movement. Especially the fourth. You can't walk to your scaffold twice, unless the executioner called in sick the first time, but Berlioz didn't write that in the program notes, I think.

[Jurassic Shark 13,895]

19 minutes ago, bollemanneke said:

You certainly make a valid point, but I just disagree. Take the symphonie fantastique. Explain the reasoning behind the repeat in the first and fourth movement. Especially the fourth. You can't walk to your scaffold twice, unless the executioner called in sick the first time, but Berlioz didn't write that in the program notes, I think.

 

It's a dream, where logic seizes to exist.

[bollemanneke 3,748]

Do you often dream about dramatic events that then suddenly go back to the beginning of the scene only to end up at exactly the same point?

[Jurassic Shark 13,895]

If I were abusing opium, probably. 

[Meredith McKay 7,156]

41 minutes ago, bollemanneke said:

You certainly make a valid point, but I just disagree. Take the symphonie fantastique. Explain the reasoning behind the repeat in the first and fourth movement. Especially the fourth. You can't walk to your scaffold twice, unless the executioner called in sick the first time, but Berlioz didn't write that in the program notes, I think.

Maybe he went back in time, but he just repeated all his mistakes?

[Loert 2,805]

4 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

Take the symphonie fantastique. Explain the reasoning behind the repeat in the first and fourth movement. Especially the fourth. You can't walk to your scaffold twice, unless the executioner called in sick the first time, but Berlioz didn't write that in the program notes, I think.

 

Spoken like a true film music fan.  Music is more than just program; there's a certain aesthetic that comes from such regularity. You can think of it as symmetry, or a cycle.

[bollemanneke 3,748]

Brahms 2. It really grew on me this time! Especially the first movement's lyrical idea. Second movement remains dull. Third movement very nice. Fourth opens with stunning material, but then completely loses momentum for no reason at all in the middle.

[Glóin the Dark 1,375]

19 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

Take the symphonie fantastique.

 

I will, because it's not too long since I listened to a performance of that only to find the fourth movement butchered...

 

19 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

Explain the reasoning behind the repeat...

 

I'm probably not competent to do that, but I can at least explain why it's necessary for me: without it, the final rendition of the fanfare theme feels premature and hence anticlimactic, and the movement consequently somewhat insipid.

[Marian Schedenig 9,462]

23 minutes ago, Glóin the Dark said:

19 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

Take the symphonie fantastique.

 

I will, because it's not too long since I listened to a performance of that only to find the fourth movement butchered...

 

When I heard it, it was a dress rehearsal (with an audience, i.e. tickets) by the Wiener Philharmoniker, conducted by Rattle, some 30 years ago. They just skipped the fourth movement altogether.

[bollemanneke 3,748]

Now that is criminal.

[Glóin the Dark 1,375]

They could at least have compromised and played only the repeat.

[Jurassic Shark 13,895]

You can say that again.

[Holko 10,835]

Four Seasons, Perlman/LPO. Perfection.

 

Also this Naxos Dukas disc which I bought digitally for a good Sorcerer's Apprentice:

But the rest is wonderful stuff too.

[Meredith McKay 7,156]

2 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

You can say that again.

That

[Jurassic Shark 13,895]

Just now, Doo_liss said:

That

 

I knew you would say that.

[Marian Schedenig 9,462]

That isn't funny.

[Jurassic Shark 13,895]

That's a wrap, then!

[Meredith McKay 7,156]

11 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said:

That isn't funny.

I'm not so sure about that...

[Marian Schedenig 9,462]

Stop saying that.

[Holko 10,835]

What's that supposed to mean?

[Meredith McKay 7,156]

That's a very good question.

[Glóin the Dark 1,375]

Is this allowed?

[Jurassic Shark 13,895]

[Glóin the Dark 1,375]

That's too bad.

[Holko 10,835]

All right, that's it!

[Meredith McKay 7,156]

That's a shame.

[Glóin the Dark 1,375]

It's not over till the that lady sings.

[Jurassic Shark 13,895]

Darn that woman!

[bollemanneke 3,748]

A vinyl called Living Baroque containing too many trumpet concertos with Neville Marriner. Interest died. Thrift store, here it comes.

[Datameister 2,376]

Finally got my first Bartók album. Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta, and Concerto for Orchestra. Helsinki Philharmonic, 2021.

 

Delicious. Nightmarish. Rapturous. Giggle-worthy. I'm looking forward to getting to know these works better.

[Jurassic Shark 13,895]

16 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

A vinyl called Living Baroque containing too many trumpet concertos with Neville Marriner. Interest died. Thrift store, here it comes.

 

And he doesn't even play the trumpet.