THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Fun Stuff => BAND => Topic started by: Mnementh on 03 Apr 2006, 14:29
-
I've been listening to a lot of Rachmaninov and Dvořák lately. I both enjoy it and find that I'm more productive when listening.
Just about everyone is going to be familar with Rachmaninov, though they may not know it, because parts of his Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini are often featured in films. Dvořák's Symphony No. 9, From the New World is also quite famous, and people are oft acquainted with it.
Does anyone else enjoy this sort of music? What are you listening to?
-
I had a period where I listened to that style of music, It was my Music Appreciation class Freshmen Fall Semester. I can't get into Classical I don't know why maybe it's because I'm uncivilized and shallw headed
-
I don't know a lot about classical music but I do know that Rachmaninov is the shizzee.
-
Wagner. End of discussion of late romantic composers. Seriously, though, a lot of that stuff is pretty good. However, it does get a little bit heavy and, I'm trying to think of the best word for what I'm trying to say, overblown, I guess. Best example; Mahler's Symphony of 1,000. It's just a little too much. Everything was bigger, louder and heavier. Except in the French school, which thankfully ushered in modality and more exotic tonalities, which are a breath of fresh air after all of that extremely bombastic stuff.
-
I'm not very good at placing the eras of Composers, but I do know that Borodin was active around that time and I like his work.
-
wagner. fo' realz.
-
He's basically responsible for the second Viennese school (Schoenberg, Webern and Berg), and they're practically solely responsible for the entire modern period of music, or at least all of the maximalist stuff.
-
Ooooh, late Romantic, I love me some Mahler symphonies.
I listen to tons of opera, and recently a lot of it is coming from the late Romantic period. Wagner is always good (right now I'm discovering Der fliegende Hollander) and I love Strauss (Richard that is) and Puccini as well.
I've also been listening to a lot of Mussorgsky, especially Boris Godunov(one of the best operatic bass roles ever, and I'm a bass, so that's cool) and St. John's Night on Bald Mountain.
Oh and also Gounod's Faust.
-
I love Strauss (Richard that is)
Gott sei dank. For a second there, I thought I might have to never take your opinion seriously ever again.
-
You can't even talk about late romantic without mentioning Debussy. He IS the transition between late romantic and modern.
-
I love Strauss (Richard that is)
Gott sei dank. For a second there, I thought I might have to never take your opinion seriously ever again.
Haha...I just saw Susan Graham in Der Rosenkavalier at the Chicago Lyric a few months ago, which was an incredible experience to say the least. One of the foremost mezzo's of our day in one of her signature roles at one of the best opera houses in the country=really amazing!
-
You can't even talk about late romantic without mentioning Debussy. He IS the transition between late romantic and modern.
I love Debussy, although I love Ravel a bit more.
-
You can't even talk about late romantic without mentioning Debussy. He IS the transition between late romantic and modern.
I love Debussy, although I love Ravel a bit more.
The problem with this is that neither of them did much REAL innovation. It was all done by one man before them, much more radically.
Yes, I speak of Erik Satie. A true genius. Debussy gets all the credit Satie deserves-Ravel and Debussy (admittedly grudgingly) agree.
Granted, when you name your pieces "Dried-Up Human Embryos" and "The Dance of The Naked Spartans" (Embryon Desseches and Gymnopedies, respectivley) people are going to over look your work. Very similar to Zappa.
Go look for his work. He blows everyone else out of the water. Big influence on Cage, and pretty much every single modern composer, whether they know it or not. (He wrote the first atonal piece, though it doesn't sound very atonal)
His music is generally either Somber or incredibly hilarious. GO buy the two cd set of his piano music by Aldo Cicclionni. You'll be glad you did!
-
I've never heard of him, but with song titles like Dryed up Human Embryos and The Dance of the Naked Spartans, as well as being mentioned alongside Zappa, I'm TOTALLY looking him up.
-
Jean Sibelius.
-
I've never heard of him, but with song titles like Dryed up Human Embryos and The Dance of the Naked Spartans, as well as being mentioned alongside Zappa, I'm TOTALLY looking him up.
Other fantastic titles (All which sound amazing)-
Jack In The Box (A Pantomime for Piano in 3 acts)
3 Distinguishes Waltzes
3 Pieces in Form of a Pear (Named after Debussy remarked that some of Satie's newer pieces 'lacked form')
Flabby Prelude to a Dog
Other innovative things Satie did-
First 'Muzak' (Though Satie called it 'furniture music', and his idea for it was far more idealistic, not at all in common with what we mean by the phrase today)
First film soundtrack
(In case you can't tell, I'm as big a fan of this guy as I am of Zappa...and that's freaking huge.)
-
(He wrote the first atonal piece, though it doesn't sound very atonal)
Some would argue that the opening of "Tristan und Isolde" is atonal, as it kind of sidesteps functional tonality. However, I will certainly agree that Satie is probably the most important of les six, and at least as important as Wagner in the grand scheme of musical evolution.
As a side note, one of my friends is/was doing a project on Tailleferre as her thesis for her music history degree.
-
Though I don't know all that much about classical music, I really like Frederic Chopin's works, he composed a lot of different works that are pretty well-known, plus some others. also I just realized the other day that Eric Carmen used Rachmaninov's Piano Concerto no. 2 for "All By Myself". that kinda annoyed me.
-
Don't know as much as I should about classical music but Dvorak's 9th might be my favorite piece of music ever. Its also the reason behind my love-hate feelings torwards John Williams.
I also can't stand Wagner for some reason.
-
You're certainly not the only one who can't stand Wagner. I know plenty of very musical people with great appreciation of art music who just don't like Wagnerian opera.
The important thing is, whether its your personal taste or not, to acknowledge his absolute genius. (And of course also acknowledge his rather distasteful political views)
-
Are Saint-Saens, Orff and Mussorgsky under this period? Because I like all of them.
I'm quite poppy in my liking of classical. My favourite classical pieces are probably:
JB Bach - Toccata and Fugue in D Minor
Carl Orff - O Fortuna
Camille Saint-Saens - La Dance Macabre
Modest Mussorgksy - A Night on the Bare Mountain
Edvard Grieg - The Hall of the Mountain King
Frederic Chopin - Le Marche Funebre
I've never found any Italian classical I liked.
-
I believe they are all from this period.
Mussorgsky is an insane genius. Like I mentioned earlier, Boris Godunov is mind-blowingingly wonderful, and I agree, Khar, that St. John's Night on Bald Mountain or Night on Bare Mountain is a lot of fun...Although work still needs to be done to clear up misconceptions about his composing. He knew when he was doing the "wrong" thing, and used it for effect.
And there's a lot more to Carmina Burana than just "O Fortuna"
I was going to be sad that you don't like any Italian classical and then realized almost all of the Italian classical I like is opera, and, well, opera isn't for everybody.
As far as Italian opera goes, I love all the standards: Rossini, Puccini, and Verdi. Although, Verdi's Messa da Requiem isn't opera and is one of my favorite works right now.
-
Liszt.
Not all of his music is absolutely fantastic to listen to (although some of it is very good) but if you are a good pianist, after playing his music you will apreciate it a lot. At least I did. I didn't really care about him at all, but playing the Hungarian Rhapsody #2 is really really enjoyable.
-
Yeah, I just can't really get behind opera.
I know there's more to the Carmina Burana, I have it on record and CD, but that is so the best bit.
-
Liszt.
I allways giggle when I hear his name. As you know, he wrote the Loony Tunes theme.
-
Jean Sibelius.
Seconded.
-
You're certainly not the only one who can't stand Wagner. I know plenty of very musical people with great appreciation of art music who just don't like Wagnerian opera.
The important thing is, whether its your personal taste or not, to acknowledge his absolute genius. (And of course also acknowledge his rather distasteful political views)
Wagner is...interesting.
And there's a lot more to Carmina Burana than just "O Fortuna"
And I must say, I'm generally not a fan of that piece. I saw it performed by the NSO and TWC, and just plain wasn't that interested. Maybe if I gave it a few more listens...
I was going to be sad that you don't like any Italian classical and then realized almost all of the Italian classical I like is opera, and, well, opera isn't for everybody.
As far as Italian opera goes, I love all the standards: Rossini, Puccini, and Verdi. Although, Verdi's Messa da Requiem isn't opera and is one of my favorite works right now.
The Requiem Mass is indeed badass. Italian opera is nice, but if I want opera, it's either Classical opera (okay, just Mozart, really) or something like Wozzeck.
-
If I want opera, it's rock opera :p
-
Oh god no. THE HORROR!
-
If I want opera, it's rock opera :p
Jesus Christ Superstar and Joe's Garage for life, baby.
-
Andrew Lloyd Webber deserves death by a means most foul, even if everything he did after "Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat" was the greatest thing to happen to man. It just so happens that it's now, though I've heard Jesus Christ Superstar doesn't suck. I'm still not going to see anything that he ever wrote.
-
Andrew Lloyd Webber deserves death by a means most foul, even if everything he did after "Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat" was the greatest thing to happen to man. It just so happens that it's now, though I've heard Jesus Christ Superstar doesn't suck. I'm still not going to see anything that he ever wrote.
Jesus Christ Superstar was at a time when Andrew Lloyd Webber had talent, and ambition, and wasn't afraid to stray from the path. It's the only work of his I really enjoy.
-
i dont know era's, what kind of dates are we talking about? like, 14th century? mid 18th century? what?
-
If I want opera, it's rock opera :p
Joe's Garage for life, baby.
FUCK YEAH
-
If I want opera, it's rock opera :p
Yeah. "Tommie" is Krieg.
-
The problem with this is that neither of them did much REAL innovation. It was all done by one man before them, much more radically.
Yes, I speak of Erik Satie. A true genius. Debussy gets all the credit Satie deserves-Ravel and Debussy (admittedly grudgingly) agree.
I agree with this completely, however innovation is not my priority when listening to music, especially in pieces by men who were dead before my grandfather is alive. Gymnopedies is one fucking awesome piece of music though.
-
i dont know era's, what kind of dates are we talking about? like, 14th century? mid 18th century? what?
It's the same as eras for literature, art, culture and everything. How old are you? You strike me as pretty young, in which case I'll forgive you. Anyways, you can find a bit about the periods of music on this page (http://music10.ucdavis.edu/HistoryTP.htm). Google is your friend, if you want to know something!
-
I actually sorta liked Jesus Christ Superstar, if only for the sheer ridiculousness factor. It had some pretty good songs, I'll say that much.
But is it weird that after seeing it Judas was my favorite character?
-
Jesus Christ Superstar was at a time when Andrew Lloyd Webber had talent, and ambition, and wasn't afraid to stray from the path. It's the only work of his I really enjoy.
Like I said, I'm told it's pretty good by people whose musical tastes I hold very highly. I'm still not going to listen to/see it, just because of that one musical abomination that was Joseph.
-
Andrew Lloyd Webber is a scourge on humanity who doesn't deserve mention in the same thread as these late Romantic geniuses...haha, well maybe he's not quite that bad, but he is pretty terrible. Sondheim, on the other hand, is amazing...
-
The problem with this is that neither of them did much REAL innovation. It was all done by one man before them, much more radically.
Yes, I speak of Erik Satie. A true genius. Debussy gets all the credit Satie deserves-Ravel and Debussy (admittedly grudgingly) agree.
I agree with this completely, however innovation is not my priority when listening to music, especially in pieces by men who were dead before my grandfather is alive. Gymnopedies is one fucking awesome piece of music though.
Yeah, listening to music purely for innovation is a fairly stupid thing. But I said that it response to the statement that Debussy 'was the transition between impressionist and modern music' when in reality that was more Satie.
Andrew Lloyd Webber is a scourge on humanity who doesn't deserve mention in the same thread as these late Romantic geniuses...haha, well maybe he's not quite that bad, but he is pretty terrible. Sondheim, on the other hand, is amazing...
I went to a musical theater school for three years, and I still don't get why everyone loves him so much.
I actually sorta liked Jesus Christ Superstar, if only for the sheer ridiculousness factor. It had some pretty good songs, I'll say that much.
But is it weird that after seeing it Judas was my favorite character?
For the most part, everyone loves Judas after seeing Superstar. It's actually more about Judas and his suffering than it is about Christ-and besides, Judas gets all the best songs. (Heaven on Their Minds)
This post is quote-astic!
-
The only two I can remember are the one at the beginning (JEEEEEEEEEESUUUUUUUUUUUS!) and the "What do we do about Jesus of Nazareth?" one. Those were both pretty good though.
-
You mean course "This Jesus Must Die" if you want to look it up likee a terrible person.
My favorite one is King Herod's Song, because it's RIGHT IN MY RANGE. Fuck yeah.
-
I actually sorta liked Jesus Christ Superstar, if only for the sheer ridiculousness factor. It had some pretty good songs, I'll say that much.
But is it weird that after seeing it Judas was my favorite character?
Jesus Christ Superstar is shit when compared to the best Jesus musical:
JESUS CHRIST VAMPIRE HUNTER (http://www.odessafilmworks.com/jcvh/index.html)
-
Is that a musical? I remember seeing it mentioned here and there, but.
-
Well, it does contain some musical numbers, but in all honestly I'd say it isn't.
-
HEY JESUS. YOU DON'T KNOW US, WE'VE NEVER SPOKEN TO YOU. WE'RE THE ATHEISTS AND WE'RE HERE TO KICK YOUR ASS
And then they just keep coming out that van...
...such a good film.
-
i dont know era's, what kind of dates are we talking about? like, 14th century? mid 18th century? what?
Generally referring to the mid 19th century into early 20th century, but more accurately referring to people like Smetana, Dvořák, Janáček, Liszt, and Wagner, who moved away from the classical romantism of composers like Brahms and Beethoven, but still retained obvious romantic influence in their work.
-
Smetana is'nt that importent in late romantic music.
-
Liszt.
Not all of his music is absolutely fantastic to listen to (although some of it is very good) but if you are a good pianist, after playing his music you will apreciate it a lot. At least I did. I didn't really care about him at all, but playing the Hungarian Rhapsody #2 is really really enjoyable.
Man I wish I had a piano. I used to love playing Liszt: he's one of the most wilfully misunderstood of all composers. If you believe everything you hear you'll think that Liszt is all about LOUDER! FASTER! But that's bullshit. There's so much dynamic variety in his compositions. I especially like his religious works, like the Ave Marias - Liszt was basically wrestling with his Catholocism throughout his life, and that conflict comes out so strongly in his music (see also: the Consolations). It's almost overwhelming: you're listening to a man try to find peace with himself. From a purely pianistic point-of-view, meanwhile, Liszt knew the piano inside-out, and when you play his compositions you get an incredibly powerful sense that your getting the most out of the instrument that you possibly can.
Man I wish I still had a piano.
-
Liszt's arrangements of Beethoven's Symphonies for piano are awesome. Not necessarily awesome to listen to (I haven't heard any of them, that I can remember), but awesome because they're a reduced score for a Beethoven Symphony, which is nice for studying.
more accurately referring to people like Smetana, Dvořák, Janáček, Liszt, and Wagner
That's a real interesting collection there. I wouldn't have necessarily put them together as being demonstrative of late romantic. I mean, they are most assuredly late romantic, but I don't think they're the really well-known/important names. Also, thanks be to D'vorak for starting an American school of concert music that didn't copy the German masters. Then we had people like Cowell come along with American Experimentalism, which is one of my favorite early 20th century movements.
-
Ah, but you see, that was what I was aiming for, almost in an indie snob sort of way, for instance, Beethoven and Wagner produced some wonderful music, but everyone knows them and everyone listens to them. I want some variety.
I'm particularly fascinated by the Czechs because of the influence of local folk music on their work.
-
What was mainly interesting was the Czech focus of the composers, which is also why I'd say they probably weren't really that indicative of late romanticism, as the most widespread effects were felt from the western European composers (French and German, most notably). D'vorak was heavily influential and important, but like I said, though, I'd definitely classify D'vorak as writing American compositions.
-
And the Czech composers weren't the only nationally oriented eastern composers of the Late Romantic. I think people like the Balakirev Circle are fairly important as well.
And I don't really understand how being an indie snob should apply to a discussion of the important Late Romantic composers, there's a reason Beethoven and Wagner are famous. Of course that doesn't mean we should neglect less famous composers, but Wagner is hardly the romantic equivalent of a spoiled pop star of today as far as musical ability. Popularity, perhaps...
-
Borondir... I sald "almost in an indie snob sort of way." It's a goddamn analogy.
Analogy. A similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.
Simply put, I wanted to bring up names that aren't the big names, something lesser known. In that sense, Beethoven and Wagner are old hat, not because they're any worse, but because most people have heard of them, ie... their popular. And I was using the Czechs as an example. As an illustrative instance if you will.
Stop being so dense.
-
Well, I think my only reservation in using those to explain the late romantic movement is that the person to whom you were trying to explain the movement has likely never heard of any of those composers, as he does not seem too involved in the concert music world.
However, I completely understand where you're coming from. Why bother mentioning Beethoven? Everyone's already heard of him, so you're not telling people things they already know. I mean, isn't the cool thing about talking about music getting into something one might not have heard yet? Well, that's what I think the cool thing is.
-
Bassardist, exactly, I think the whole point of talking about music is to expand ones horizons. In part that's why I started this thread, to see what other people were listening to and to see if I could discover something new.
:)
-
AHHH GOTTSCHALK AHHHHGHHBLARGKAK
(http://w3.rz-berlin.mpg.de/cmp/gottschalk.jpg)
srsly!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Moreau_Gottschalk
Somewhere between Joplin and Chopan, and so so very good.
I'm gonna post a couple of his tracks in the forced listening thread just to throw them off. I will link them here as well, stay tuned.
-
Ah, good Nawlins concert music. I actually had a teacher in high school named Mr. Gottschalk. I've already posted some Adams, though it was one of his most accessible works (ha! They're all really accessible).
-
OK, well Beethoven isn't Late Romantic period anyway...;)
I wasn't being dense, I was just thinking the same thing as Bastardous Bassist that the person asking had no or very little grounding in art music, so your list doesn't bring him any closer to understanding what we are talking about.
No hard feelings, we all love this music and finding out more about it, but I think education for others is cool too...
I guess this is what we run into with a serious discussion of art music in a place like this, since most people are only vaguely familiar with it...
P.S. I understand what analogies are, it just seemed like your list was presented as a definitive representation of Late Romantic composers.
-
Heh. Sorry about that. I was kind of in a pissy mood to begin with. I shouldn't have been such a dick.
-
If you like Lizst as a piano composer, I'd like to metion Shopin and Schubert (although Schubert is from the begining of the romantic period, his "songs" for piano are exallent). I remember having fun studying them when my music class started to learn romantic music.
Shopin actually took piano music to the next level, developing alot of small songs. He's one of the first composers that took preludes and connected them together, like other composers did with miniatures for piano (see: Schuman's Carnaval, a good example of miniatures connected to an extended piece. Although, I rally did'nt like studying it).
Also, anybody else here has fun watching Mezzo's Clasic Sequence?
I really like like it. Alot of Beethoven, Some Mozart (I actually never really liked him) and I've seen Wagner and Brahms there too.
Even some modern music.
-
I've played a little Chopin and Schubert, but they didn't really grab me the way Liszt did.
-
Well, they both did different things then Lizst. I just wanted to mentioned composers who did quiter and "softer" works for piano.
-
Liszt wrote plenty of quiet stuff, it's just that pianists as a general rule tend to ignore all his dynamics because the general consensus in the classical music world is "Liszt must be played fast and loud"; that, and the "Show us yer technique" mentality of the classical music world means that concert pianists tend to favour Liszt's big showcase pieces over his smaller, more reflective compositions.
-
Yes, but Lizst is well known for his faster "Show us yer technique" pieces and Chopin is know for his quiter works although they have both expiramented in all kinds of works for piano. They were both friends, btw.
-
Liszt wrote plenty of quiet stuff, it's just that pianists as a general rule tend to ignore all his dynamics because the general consensus in the classical music world is "Liszt must be played fast and loud"; that, and the "Show us yer technique" mentality of the classical music world means that concert pianists tend to favour Liszt's big showcase pieces over his smaller, more reflective compositions.
The other reason for playing the BIG FAST LOUD pieces is that, for me at least, playing at top speed for the most part of nine minutes straight is guaranteed to clear up any kind of minor depression. Very useful therapy.
-
Also, anybody else here has fun watching Mezzo's Clasic Sequence?
What's that?
Some Mozart (I actually never really liked him)
Listen to his clarinet concerto. Last piece he ever wrote. It's amazing. Also, the Jupiter Symphony (41) is amazing. Aside from those, it's hard to get into Mozart without studying him and listening carefully. Yes, his stuff is simple, but it's so subtle and elegant that makes it incredible.
-
Heh. Sorry about that. I was kind of in a pissy mood to begin with. I shouldn't have been such a dick.
Wait, what? Did you just apologize? THIS IS THE INTERNET. we don't do that here.
*head explodes*
PS I would post gottschalk now as promised but I am not at home. mebbe later.
-
Also, anybody else here has fun watching Mezzo's Clasic Sequence?
What's that?
Mezzo is a french music channle, but not MTV crap music. Everything from Jazz to Modern music and Opera. I really love that channle. Anyway, they allways have these sequences, one for Jazz and one for Classical music. Both sequences show video clips from concerts and live shows. I remmember that I saw The Summer Stom from The Four Seasons preformed by the israeli filharmonic orchastra, very cool indeed (I have a recording of that concert).
Some Mozart (I actually never really liked him)
Listen to his clarinet concerto. Last piece he ever wrote. It's amazing. Also, the Jupiter Symphony (41) is amazing. Aside from those, it's hard to get into Mozart without studying him and listening carefully. Yes, his stuff is simple, but it's so subtle and elegant that makes it incredible.
I learned about him and got a 100 on a listening test of his works. But it never grabbed me like Beethoven's 8'th and 14'th sonates for piano for example.
-
I'm talking about dissecting his music and really taking a look at how he does his part-writing. I mean, I just look at the ease with which he avoids potential problems and am amazed. After discovering that, his music just has this sublime quality. Beethoven, on the other hand, is like a bick through a window. Not subtle, but much more raw.
-
I did try to understand what people find in his work, but I never figured it out.
Maybe I'll get it in a few years.
-
Yeah, maybe that's it. I never got into Mozart until partway through college. All that teenage angst found solace in Beethoven, and mostly romantic composers, with a heavy dose of metal.