|
richard barrett
|
 |
« Reply #60 on: 15:29:23, 20-03-2008 » |
|
Weren't we talking about the Zehetmair Quartet at some far-off time on this thread?
What did people think of the Schubert and Schumann?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
perfect wagnerite
|
|
« Reply #61 on: 15:42:12, 20-03-2008 » |
|
I LA'd this morning - prompted by the debate here, I'd have missed it otherwise - and greatly enjoyed the Schubert, a gorgeous piece that I don't recall hearing before - the slow movement seemed very much to point the way to his late works, but, when one considers the songs that Schubert was writing at this stage of his career, one shouldn't be surporsied.
As for the Holliger, I was greatly impressed and fascinated: I agree with what has been said here about the obvious largeness of intent and the extraordinary sonorities - not like the usual SQ format at all. I'm really glad to have heard it - I certainly didn't hear the cacophony that some posters at TOP described.
Haven't heard the Schumann yet - I'll try and catch it before it disappears.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 16:12:03, 20-03-2008 by perfect wagnerite »
|
Logged
|
At every one of these [classical] concerts in England you will find rows of weary people who are there, not because they really like classical music, but because they think they ought to like it. (Shaw, Don Juan in Hell)
|
|
|
|
ahinton
|
|
« Reply #62 on: 17:30:34, 20-03-2008 » |
|
Weren't we talking about the Zehetmair Quartet at some far-off time on this thread?
Yes, Richard - and I did try to steer at least some of them back to that subject! (I've not heard the piece myself, incidentally)... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
time_is_now
|
|
« Reply #63 on: 17:33:59, 20-03-2008 » |
|
I've not heard the piece myself, incidentally
Have you ever heard/read anything that we talk about, though? It's on Listen Again till next Tuesday if you feel like bucking the trend.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The city is a process which always veers away from the form envisaged and desired, ... whose revenge upon its architects and planners undoes every dream of mastery. It is [also] one of the sites where Dasein is assigned the impossible task of putting right what can never be put right. - Rob Lapsley
|
|
|
|
ahinton
|
|
« Reply #64 on: 17:41:19, 20-03-2008 » |
|
I've not heard the piece myself, incidentally
Have you ever heard/read anything that we talk about, though? Yes - but do I detect an implied assumption to the contrary in what you write here? - or am I just imagining it? (I wonder if it's coat-getting time)... It's on Listen Again till next Tuesday if you feel like bucking the trend. I'll try if I can; not so sure about the trendy bit, though... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
...trj...
|
|
« Reply #65 on: 17:50:07, 20-03-2008 » |
|
I've just had the Holliger running (partly) in the background while I do some keying and even then the seriousness of the piece comes through unavoidably. I shall have to give it a proper listen to establish how successful I think find it in other respects, but it definitely has an uncommon air of importance about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John W
|
|
« Reply #66 on: 22:23:05, 20-03-2008 » |
|
I'm unaware of any who use a brand name when referring to pens of the rollerball or fountain variety Alistair, Maybe 'Fountain' pen IS an American brand name. Wiki shows a Klein/Wynne pen from 1867, clearly marketed as a 'Fountain Pen'. A pen of that type does not behave like a fountain so it would seem to be a commercial name rather than a technical name. Anything prior to that wiki refer to as a reservoir pen, and that IS how the pen is designed, and that may be a technical term used by French manufacturers around the same time. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ahinton
|
|
« Reply #67 on: 23:28:49, 20-03-2008 » |
|
I'm unaware of any who use a brand name when referring to pens of the rollerball or fountain variety Alistair, Maybe 'Fountain' pen IS an American brand name. Wiki shows a Klein/Wynne pen from 1867, clearly marketed as a 'Fountain Pen'. A pen of that type does not behave like a fountain so it would seem to be a commercial name rather than a technical name. Anything prior to that wiki refer to as a reservoir pen, and that IS how the pen is designed, and that may be a technical term used by French manufacturers around the same time. Yes, but does anyone refer to that kind of pen as a "fountain"? Please let's get back to the topic! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John W
|
|
« Reply #68 on: 23:34:26, 20-03-2008 » |
|
Yes, but does anyone refer to that kind of pen as a "fountain"? Please let's get back to the topic!
Yes if they are my age, but I see what you were saying, my kids always referred to an 'ink' pen. Back to subject. Whatever the link Holliger's composition has with Schumann I still think it was very selfish to place the Holliger in the middle but I suppose it was put there to 'balance' the programme? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
harmonyharmony
|
|
« Reply #69 on: 23:36:48, 20-03-2008 » |
|
Back to subject. Whatever the link Holliger's composition has with Schumann I still think it was very selfish to place the Holliger in the middle but I suppose it was put there to 'balance' the programme?
Selfish? By whom? By the quartet? Because it inconvenienced you? Isn't that an incredibly self-centred way of viewing this? Or is it ok because you represent a majority? The views of minorities don't matter? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
'is this all we can do?' anonymous student of the University of Berkeley, California quoted in H. Draper, 'The new student revolt' (New York: Grove Press, 1965) http://www.myspace.com/itensemble |
|
|
|
ahinton
|
|
« Reply #70 on: 23:42:10, 20-03-2008 » |
|
Yes, but does anyone refer to that kind of pen as a "fountain"? Please let's get back to the topic!
Yes if they are my age, but I see what you were saying, my kids always referred to an 'ink' pen. Back to subject. Whatever the link Holliger's composition has with Schumann I still think it was very selfish to place the Holliger in the middle but I suppose it was put there to 'balance' the programme? Well, despite admitting that I've yet to hear the Holliger piece (much to t_i_n's apparent consternation in what might be another context altogether), I cannot imagine that Thomas Zehetmair would have placed the Holliger in this programme between a Schubert quartet and a Schumann one as a mere gimmick, for marketing or any other purposes; I have sufficient confidence in his integrity to believe in advance that he knew precisely what he was doing and why in that piece of programme planning. Much the same has been said by other insensitive people about the principle of placing, say, Bartók 5 betwee a Haydn quartet and one of the Beethoven Rasoumovskys - but why on earth not? In either case, it doesn't at all seem to me to be about some silly idea of forcing people to listen to some contemporary (or comparatively recent) quartet repertoire. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John W
|
|
« Reply #71 on: 23:43:05, 20-03-2008 » |
|
So is it a question of who is selfish?
Self-centred? I wasn't thinking primarily of myself, I was thinking of that poor audience, trapped, squirming, fidgeting, whispering, waiting for relief and the Schumann. I was OK, unhappy, but I could switch off.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
harmonyharmony
|
|
« Reply #72 on: 23:45:36, 20-03-2008 » |
|
So is it a question of who is selfish?
Self-centred? I wasn't thinking primarily of myself, I was thinking of that poor audience, trapped, squirming, fidgeting, whispering, waiting for relief and the Schumann. I was OK, unhappy, but I could switch off.
But that assumes that the audience felt like you! This may come as a complete surprise and shock to the system but SOME PEOPLE LIKE CONTEMPORARY MUSIC. In fact they seek it out. There may have been some members of the audience who didn't enjoy the experience but I'm fairly sure that there were more than a few who did. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
'is this all we can do?' anonymous student of the University of Berkeley, California quoted in H. Draper, 'The new student revolt' (New York: Grove Press, 1965) http://www.myspace.com/itensemble |
|
|
|
John W
|
|
« Reply #73 on: 23:49:33, 20-03-2008 » |
|
So is it a question of who is selfish?
Self-centred? I wasn't thinking primarily of myself, I was thinking of that poor audience, trapped, squirming, fidgeting, whispering, waiting for relief and the Schumann. I was OK, unhappy, but I could switch off.
But that assumes that the audience felt like you! This may come as a complete surprise and shock to the system but SOME PEOPLE LIKE CONTEMPORARY MUSIC. In fact they seek it out. There may have been some members of the audience who didn't enjoy the experience but I'm fairly sure that there were more than a few who did. hh, The whole bitch with this thread is that some members are pissed that SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE CONTEMPORARY MUSIC and the same members don't like discussing that John |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Pace
|
|
« Reply #74 on: 23:56:03, 20-03-2008 » |
|
The whole bitch with this thread is that some members are pissed that SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE CONTEMPORARY MUSIC and the same members don't like discussing that That bitch sure needs some smacking up. I doubt any of us sympathetic to contemporary music are unaware of what you say above, to say the least. We're happy to discuss that, but hopefully in terms somewhat more intelligent than simply 'it's absolutely appalling', it's 'not music', and the like. But, I remember this comment of yours: Richard, I do not write complex messages. You don't say. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 23:57:41, 20-03-2008 by Ian Pace »
|
Logged
|
'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
|
|
|
|
