|
Tony Watson
Guest
|
 |
« on: 13:34:26, 16-07-2007 » |
|
 Coooooooollll! All the beautiful people like Procoffyef. Apologies to my lord Byron and my member Grew but, seriously, this promises to be a very enjoyable and interesting week. I don't understand why the Scythian suite is not performed more often (the excerpt today was excellent). It was a shame there wasn't room for his Sinfonietta: much as I love the Classical symphony, the Sinfonietta is unfairly overshadowed by it, I think. The Abaddo version of the Classical played today is not my favourite - too fast and insistent - although the details of the music come out well. As an antidote to it for speed, try Malcolm Sargent.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 13:36:26, 16-07-2007 by Tony Watson »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel
|
|
« Reply #1 on: 15:19:11, 16-07-2007 » |
|
It is quite shocking really how tunes just seem to spill out of Prokofiev sometimes, almost a bit like Bizet in that way, things like Lieutenant Kije, Peter and the Wolf, spring to mind immediately, and combined with the fraughtness and often stark lines in his music, I find that a really compelling combination. I just love the unbridled and sometimes manic energy he can impart to music, e.g. the Piano Sonata no.7 (even if it maybe gets overplayed), and how about the fantasy and monstrosity of the 2nd piano concerto! There's a lot of Prokofiev I don't know, so I will try to hear as many of this week's programmes as I can. my member Grew ... seriously, this promises to be a very enjoyable and interesting week.
I'm jealous ... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tony Watson
Guest
|
|
« Reply #2 on: 14:23:00, 18-07-2007 » |
|
Prokofiev's first violin concerto, probably my favourite of that genre. I like Sibelius's too and the beginnings of both have similarities but the Prokofiev takes me to another world. Apart from the rather showy middle movement, it's a work full of mystery.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
pim_derks
|
|
« Reply #3 on: 14:37:59, 18-07-2007 » |
|
Prokofiev's first violin concerto, probably my favourite of that genre. I like Sibelius's too and the beginnings of both have similarities but the Prokofiev takes me to another world. Apart from the rather showy middle movement, it's a work full of mystery.
I think I'm the only person on this planet who thinks that Prokofiev's Second Violin Concerto is better that the First Violin Concerto. A wonderful composer. Think of his Chout ballet. It's very difficult to find something original in Shostakovich's symphonies after you've heard this piece. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"People hate anything well made. It gives them a guilty conscience." John Betjeman
|
|
|
|
Ron Dough
|
|
« Reply #4 on: 14:50:05, 18-07-2007 » |
|
Prokofiev's first violin concerto, probably my favourite of that genre. I like Sibelius's too and the beginnings of both have similarities but the Prokofiev takes me to another world. Apart from the rather showy middle movement, it's a work full of mystery.
I think I'm the only person on this planet who thinks that Prokofiev's Second Violin Concerto is better that the First Violin Concerto. No, Pim: there are at least two of us. A wonderful composer. Think of his Chout ballet. It's very difficult to find something original in Shostakovich's symphonies after you've heard this piece.
Ah, now there you've definitely lost me. I'm a great fan of Chout, but that hasn't in anyway affected my admiration for what Shostakovich achieves. The fact that they are contemporaries from the same nation often leads people into lumping them together for comparison's sake, but they really are very different composers with quite separate agendas (except when dictated to by tyrants, maybe). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel
|
|
« Reply #5 on: 15:12:46, 18-07-2007 » |
|
The fact that they are contemporaries from the same nation often leads people into lumping them together for comparison's sake, but they really are very different composers with quite separate agendas (except when dictated to by tyrants, maybe).
Yes, I'd definitely agree with that, even from what I suspect is a rather poor level of knowledge of the music compared to the other posters on this thread. In a general way, Shostakovich's own music seems to have him by the throat sometimes, I sense a great physical stress in the music. Whereas Prokofiev, despite producing fraught and anxiety-ridden atmospheres, seems to be more detached somehow from their effects. I know a lot of the piano music, and I suppose most of the 'well-known' stuff, but I am looking forward to getting some pointers from this programme, as to where to explore further. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
pim_derks
|
|
« Reply #6 on: 15:35:38, 18-07-2007 » |
|
No, Pim: there are at least two of us. Many thanks, Ron. Now I will never feel lonely again!  Ah, now there you've definitely lost me. I'm a great fan of Chout, but that hasn't in anyway affected my admiration for what Shostakovich achieves. The fact that they are contemporaries from the same nation often leads people into lumping them together for comparison's sake, but they really are very different composers with quite separate agendas (except when dictated to by tyrants, maybe).
I also admire Shostakovich (for certain pieces). It's only difficult for me to find him original. I'm not really interested in originality, but I think Prokofiev was more original than Shostakovich. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"People hate anything well made. It gives them a guilty conscience." John Betjeman
|
|
|
|
Ron Dough
|
|
« Reply #7 on: 15:51:40, 18-07-2007 » |
|
At the risk of repeating myself, Pim, I find that the originality in Prokofiev lies on the surface: great tunes, wonderful orchestration, yes: but once he's found a great tune there's not a lot more that he can do with it. Shostakovich's mastery lies at a deeper level: it's the way he creates vast symphonic structures out of tiny cells contained within his (admittedly often less immediately beguiling) material that in the end always engages me more: and it's in the endlessly inventive way he pursues this quest that I find the mark of his originality.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tony Watson
Guest
|
|
« Reply #8 on: 16:31:12, 18-07-2007 » |
|
once he's found a great tune there's not a lot more that he can do with it. I think that’s rather a harsh judgement, Ron. The 4th symphony has been criticized as just a succession of nice tunes but the fact that Prokofiev later revised and expanded it, having seen more potential in the material in the mean time, perhaps contradicts what you said? And yet the original version survives in its own right, being sometimes preferrable to the revision. As for Shostakovich, I agree with what you said about how he constructs his symphonies but his music is always instantly recognisable, and I don’t just mean when the side drum or the piccolo starts to play. Much as there is to admire in Shostakovich’s compositional techniques, I sometimes find his music cold. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ron Dough
|
|
« Reply #9 on: 17:27:20, 18-07-2007 » |
|
Yes, it was a bit of a glib and flippant comment, Tony: but I chose it on purpose to show how misleading these basic observations can be. It happens particularly in the yoking together of supposedly similar composers from approximately the same time and place: not just P and S, but Debussy and Ravel or Britten and Tippett, to take but a couple of other examples. In each case it ends up doing both a diservice; there's a deal more to be learned in each case by contrasting their differences rather than being sidetracked by their obvious yet superficial similarities.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rauschwerk
|
|
« Reply #10 on: 20:35:41, 18-07-2007 » |
|
There is lots of Prokofiev on my shelves - CD's and piano scores (I wish I could play them better!) I was delighted to hear the first fiddle concerto today, but I'm equally fond of the second. The works in which (it seems to me) Prokofiev both bares his soul and achieves complete compositional mastery are the 6th symph and the first fiddle sonata (which I should think is played once to every 100 performances of the second! Depression, aggression, fury and the rest.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
oliver sudden
|
|
« Reply #11 on: 20:38:07, 18-07-2007 » |
|
once he's found a great tune there's not a lot more that he can do with it
Oo dearie me, gosh, er, don't know if I quite go there, I don't think that quite stands up in the face of the first movement of the second piano concerto or the actually development-oriented bits of the fifth symphony or, well, goodness me, er, actually huge great wodges of his stuff... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Il Grande Inquisitor
|
|
« Reply #12 on: 21:10:01, 18-07-2007 » |
|
I think I'm the only person on this planet who thinks that Prokofiev's Second Violin Concerto is better that the First Violin Concerto. No, Pim: there are at least two of us. Make that three. I'm really surprised that the slow movement hasn't achieved the 'hit status' of the Classical Symphony. I love the way Prokofiev produces flow after flow of beautiful melodies - another favourite is the opening 'May Night' scene of his opera 'War and Peace'. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 21:12:36, 18-07-2007 by Il Grande Inquisitor »
|
Logged
|
Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency
|
|
|
|
autoharp
|
|
« Reply #13 on: 23:02:27, 18-07-2007 » |
|
Seven they are seven is a real corker. Not too much melody in that, however.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ron Dough
|
|
« Reply #14 on: 23:06:13, 18-07-2007 » |
|
Yes, IGI. it's the slow movement of the second violin concerto which wins it for me too...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
