Forgot your password?
Capsaicin, January 30, 2011 in Music Discussion
Jan 30 2011
May 17 2011
Feb 1 2011
Jan 31 2011
Such an obvious choice but Chopin is the perfect ambient music. It reveals its beauty when you don't actively listen. It's neither very dark and heavy, nor bright and light hearted, it just moves alon
Copypasting a guide to Back from an internet chummer:
Alright, here's a brief guide to the works of Bach, since the distribution of his output appears to be pretty confusing to both newcomers and veterans. I'm going to stick to what i consider to be his major works (or at least those that are worth listening to), ignoring all of his minor works as well as a few which are quite obviously spurious or simple adaptations of the music of other composers. I'm also going to ignore a few of his works which have been converted into something else, something Bach did quite often, unless the conversion warrants an explanation. Understand that as far as we know, at least one fourth of his music has been irreparably lost, but its probably safe to say that the majority of his major compositions have been preserved (or so we like to hope, anyway).
Now, technically speaking, his music is divided into three periods (or four if we count his last decade as separate, since much of the music he wrote during his final years he wrote only for himself). Sorting his works by date is difficult because we don't always have detailed or accurate chronological information regarding a given piece, but we can always infer the date on stylistic grounds alone. At any rate, his music is divided as follows: an "early" period, comprising all of the works written before his move to the Court of Weimar, a period which spans from his teenage years (with compositions possibly dating as far back as 1700, when the composer was 15 years old) all the way to 1707 or 1708. After that we have the so called Weimar period, spanning from 1708 to 1722, and finally the Leipzig period, which spans from 1723 all the way to the composer's death in 1750, at the threshold of the classical era.
So, let's start:
1) Early era, mostly juvenillia
The majority of his early music comprise works for organ or harpsichord, with only a few cantatas appearing towards the end, before his move to Weimar. The works in this period are obviously inspired by the music of the German organists of the day, chief among them being Dietrich Buxtehude. All in all, the music of this era is pretty uneven. Bach shows an extraordinary command of the keyboard and an highly developed contrapuntal technique, but he still didn't develop a personal voice and really, at times, one would be hard pressed to even tell that this was Bach. The music isn't necessarily bad, but it just lacks the degree of perfection and transcendent expression which marks all his mature works. Only towards the end of this period we start to see a change into the Bach we know.
Now, we can start with several works for organ, three large chorale partitas for organ (BWV 766, 767 and 770), which are probably his oldest surviving compositions (those are a type of archaic variation form), six preludes and fugues for organ (BWV 531, 533, 536, 549, 550 and 551), plus three organ fantasias (BWV 563 and 570 and 1121), two standalone organ preludes (BWV 568, 569), and an organ "canzona" (BWV 588) in the style of Frescobaldi (a very ancient baroque musician). Overall, the music isn't that great, though it is quite proficient, with a few notable moments of sporadic brilliance. The most interesting piece here is probably the 531 prelude and fugue, which has a very bouncy contrapuntal texture and some crazy octaves in the middle of the fugue, which already display how advantaged his keyboard technique really was at this stage. The music is probably really of little interest to most people, though certainly not entirely forgettable. I also sort of like the canzona, a very gracious piece which shows nothing of the odd tentativeness marking the other pieces (might have been written at a later time).
After this we have several works for harpsichord, beginning with a couple of capriccios (BWV 992 and 993), followed by two keyboard suites (BWV 820, 822), plus several so called sonatas in the style of Reincken (a contemporary of Buxtehude), a suite which appears to be either for keyboard or lute (BWV 996), and finally the seven toccatas (BWV 910 to 916). Again, much of the music is really not that great (though not bad, either). Despite their names, they are all technically suites, and the name derives from the form used in the opening movement (with the exception of the 916 "toccata", which actually starts with a concerto). What's notable about them is that some of the movements are large fugues, larger than anything written by Buxtehude, which already shows that even at this stage Bach was already trying to push the envelop, even if his creative powers were yet to reach their fullest capacity.
BTW, before we go further, a brief word about performances here. As far as the organ works are concerned, my main sources are the earlier Helmut Walcha set (he made two, the first one being the best) and the Wolfgang Rubsam set. Both performers are excellent, where they differ is approach. Walcha has a rather heavy, thick approach to texture, with methodical and perfectly chiseled lines, which is best for certain compositions, such as the later prelude and fugues. Rubsam has a lighter touch, preferring faster tempos with a greater variation of tones and color. Whichever is best depends on preference. If you really must have only one, i would pick Walcha if anything because his approach is better for the late stuff, but i will mention my favored for each performance. As far as those early works are concerned, definitely Rubsam, if anything because his approach makes the boring parts sound less boring (or go away faster i guess).
As far as the harpsichord works are concerned, my favored performances are those contained in the complete set compiled by Brilliant. This is a company known for producing cheap recordings, often using relatively unknown performers to cut costs, which doesn't necessarily mean bad performers, and sometimes those recordings are better than what can be found under more expensive labels, which is definitely the case here. So basically, unless otherwise specified (or unless you know of something better, which you can relate to me), always go for the Brilliant performers. Definitely avoid any of the harpsichord recordings from the Bach 2000 set, which are quite shitty.
2) Between Arnstadt and Weimar
Finally, here is where the genius of Bach starts flowering for the first time. There's a little ambiguity to how many of those works were written in Weimer or whether they were written slightly before that. Definitely no earlier than 1707. This period begins with several cantatas (BWV 4, 106, 131, 150, 196 and the secular cantata BWV 71) all in the style of Buxtehude, which show incredible maturity, not necessarily technically, but definitely in terms of expression. BWV 4 and 106 in particular are amazing and must definitely count as his very first genuine masterpieces. BWV 71 is good as well, probably his most elaborate cantata from this batch. Of course, some may disagree about the value of all those cantatas (Bach really did write a crap load of them), and their quality seems to be rather variable across the board. Though i have yet to explore them all, i would say that, in the main, at last one third of them are basically not worth listening to more then a few times. A second third are probably worth keeping around, and the remaining cantatas are among his masterpieces. Since he wrote so many of them, i think this guide might be of help to anyone new to this material:
The ratings are invariably subjective, but from my own experience i would argue that they are relatively accurate, and as a start it is as good as any. As far as recordings are concerned, my favored is the new complete set by Masaaki Suzuki. You can find the whole thing on Avaxhome. I think Suzuki is the premier Bach conductor of modern times, and unless otherwise noted, he is my first choice for the choral music of Bach.
After this, we finally get into his first great works for keyboard. First, we have two prelude and fugues for organ (BWV 535 and 537. Rubsam), which while not as great as those he would write shortly, are already a major departure from those written before, especially in terms of expression. Then, we have three toccatas and fugues (BWV 564, 565 and 566. Rubsam, Walcha and Rubsam respectively), which IMHO are not as great as the preceding preludes and fugues, though they are still major works compared to his earlier stuff. The first one has an odd adagio in the middle and is actually more of a concerto grosso than an actual toccata and fugue. Word has it that this is a rather difficult piece of perform. The second composition begins with the now famous d minor toccata, a piece which is rather unorthodox, simpler technically than what Bach could write but possibly meant for some specific function, possibly as a way of testing organs. The fugue is very nice and definitely the highlight of those three compositions. The last toccata and fugue begins with a brief toccata then enters into a large but unusual fugue. The fugue starts normally enough but than brakes into another brief toccata section, after which the fugue starts anew following a new rhythmic scheme. All in all it seems those pieces are more like experiments and quality wise they stand somewhat at a crossroad between his earlier, lesser works and those that are soon to come.
After those, we have some misc organ works. Two fantasias (BWV 564 and 713, Walcha and Rubsam respectively), very expressive works (particularly BWV 564), a fantasia concerto (BWV 571, Rubsam), a lesser work which may belong to an earlier period or may not even be by Bach (or sections of it may not be by Bach), an "alla breve" miscellaneous organ piece (BWV 589, Walcha), short but displaying some fine contrapuntal writing, and four standalone fugues (BWV 574, 575, 578, and 579. Walcha, Rubsam, Walcha and Walcha). The quality is somewhat variable. The BWV 578 seems to be pretty popular and is probably the most interesting of the bunch.
He also wrote some harpsichord pieces, starting with a very interesting fantasia (BWV 918), which sounds like it may even have been written at a later date, a fantasia and fugue (BWV 944), which begins with an handful of free arpeggios and brakes into a finely crafted fugue (also sounding very mature), a stand alone prelude (BWV 922) which is just about the wackiest thing Bach has ever written and its hard to say what, exactly, it was written for, if anything (possibly even a joke). Than, we have an aria with variations (B989), which was modeled after a similar piece by Buxtehude and is a mighty fine work. Finally, we have two suites for keyboard (BWV 818 and 819), which may or may not have written at a later date (possibly along the same time as the French Suites. The 818 certainly sounds like it). I like to place them here just keep the next section clean of lesser compositions.
Here, finally, begins the mature Bach. Most of the works written in this period are instrumental, and here belongs the grand majority of his chamber or orchestral works, as well as a huge chunk of his organ music.
Right off the bat we have several major works for organ, which i like to divide in three sections according to the year they were written. First, we have two preludes and fugues (BWV 532 and 534, Rubsam and Walcha) and a large chorale partita (BWV 768, Rubsam), all written at around 1710. All three are major works, very large in both scope and reach. BWV 534 is probably the best composition Bach wrote up to this date and quite frankly it leaves Buxtehude completely in the dust in every possible way. Next, we have two more prelude and fugues (BWV 541 and 545, Rubsam for both) and a large fantasia (BWV 572, favored performance by Scott Ross. Since this is an hard recording to obtain, i would go for Walcha), dated 1712, all equally major compositions. And then, finally, we have two toccatas and fugues (BWV 538 and 540, Walcha and Rubsam) and a passacaglia and fugue (BWV 582, Walcha), dated 1713, which literally leave anything written before completely in the gutter. I mean, everything. Those compositions are a major breakthrough in the history of music and possibly the finest baroque music ever written at this point, before Bach, miraculously, managed to top himself.
After revolutionizing organ music forever, he then proceeded to revolutionize the cantata genre, starting with a series of cantatas of variable quality written between 1714 and 1716, the greatest of which being BWV 21, which also happens to be one of the greatest cantatas ever written (Suzuki recorded this twice, my favored being the one from volume 12 of his series). The other cantatas are BWV 12, 18, 31, 54, 61, 63, 132, 143, 152, 155, 161, 162, 163, 165, 172, 182, 185 and 199. Stylistically, all those cantatas seem to have dropped the Buxtehude model in favor of the Italian model, which exalts the dramatic qualities of the text but all the action is relegated to boring recitatives, which act as a sort of buffer between the various musical pieces. The quality of those cantatas is indeed very variable, and some of them are actually quite forgettable. Refer to the website i listed for reference.
Ok, so we now get two more major organ works (BWV 543 and 547, Walcha and Rubsam), dated 1715 (547 might have been written later, hard to say. They are all so good at this point) and his first breakthrough for harpsichord, the so called "English" Suites (dated 1718, more or less), which were written in response to those of Handel, and also coincide with another major influence coming from an unlikely source, namely, Vivaldi (specifically, his opus 3). This can be seen chiefly in the opening preludes of those suites, which are written in the style of a concerto. Those pieces also show some influence from Couperin, particularly in the elaborate ornamentations. Those are very difficult works, thick in texture and heavy in counterpoint, uncharacteristically for the genre. I recommend the recordings by Kenneth Gilbert, who happens to be one of my favored Bach performers.
Next, we have the Cello Suites (BWV 1007 to 1012. Pierre Fournier), another breakthrough, this time revolutionizing baroque chamber music (i'm going to drop the words "breakthrough" and "revolutionary" since henceforth they pretty much apply to every single composition he wrote. In fact, consider any further works to be a "major" work unless otherwise noted).
After this (all written around 1720), we have the so called "chromatic" fantasia and fugue (BWV 903. Scott Ross). Then two more organ works, a fantasia and fugue (BWV 542, Walcha), which is another of those earth shattering pieces, and a charming piece called a "pastorella" (BWV 590, Walcha). Then, we have the sonatas and partitas for solo violin (BWV 1001 to 1006. Performer: Nathan Milstein. He recorded them twice, the first recording being the best IMHO). Those compositions are more ambitious than the Cello Suites, but not in the sense that they are necessarily greater in terms of inspiration, they are just more varied in terms of forms used. It probably occurred to him that the form could be expanded only after writing the cello suites. BTW, the fugue from BWV 1001 was later reused for an expanded prelude and fugue for organ (BWV 539, Walcha), one of his transcriptions that's worth mentioning since both the new version and the original are major compositions.
Ok, so now we have a plethora of concertos for various instruments. Supposedly, Bach wrote a crap load of these, all around 1720, but only several survive, most of whom were "re-scored" for harpsichord around 1738 (mainly, all of them except for the violin concertos, which exist in their original form as well as for harpsichord), and this is how we know them today. Four of those concertos were definitely written at a later date. This leaves the remaining harpsichord concertos (BWV 1055, 1056, 1060, 1063, 1064) and the aforementioned violin concertos (BWV 1041, 1042 and 1043). Efforts have been made to restore the harpsichord concertos to their original instruments, but so far i seem to prefer them on harpsichord (or maybe the recordings i have of those restorations are just shit). And speaking of recordings, so far my favored ones are from Trevor Pinnock, which, while very good and better than anything else i've heard (and i have heard many), they have one major flaw in that the harpsichord is recorded as if it was a continuo, probably under the idiotic notion that this is how it "was at the time" (historically "informed" performers sometimes make stupid mistakes like that), even though Bach obviously wrote those harpsichord parts to be the dominant ones, effectively making these the first keyboard concertos, which makes even more sense considering the piano concerto was a form popularized by his children in the first place (obviously taking after their father). As for the violin concertos, i like the recordings Kujien made in the 1980s. All of those concertos are inspired by Vivaldi, and not surprisingly, they are far superior to the latter in every way. Bach also transcribed concertos by various composers at the request of his employers at Weimar. Most of those are direct conversions and are not worth mentioning, but one of them is different in that he actually expanded on the original, "fixing" the counterpoint and putting a few touches here and there. This is the 10th concerto from Vivaldi's opus 3, and quite frankly the Bach version is better than the original, though not by that huge of a margin. Worth keeping in mind i guess.
More chamber works follow, first, a series of six violin sonatas with continuo (BWV 1014 to 1019. Favored recording, Carmignola and Marcon), written between 1720 and 1721. Those are lesser works than the pieces for solo violin but they are still very good, and they are notable for being among the first pieces (if not the very first ones), where the keyboard part is equal to the violin part, effectively making them the first violin sonatas in a classical sense. Those are followed by similar works written for the viola da gamba instead (BWV 1027, 1028 and 1029. Performer, Savall).
After this, we have the so called "Brandenburg" concertos (BWV 1046 to 1051. Performer, Savall or Pinnock), which are basically written following a type of concerto grosso popular in Germany at the time (which differs from the model of Corelli used by Handel in his great opus 6). They are less serious than his other works, but they are notable for being among the most colorfully orchestrated concertos in the entire repertory of the baroque, using a wild variety of instruments and really emphasizing the "grosso" part of this form.
Next, we have several works which Bach wrote wrote for pedagogic purposes (mostly as a teaching tool for his own kids but also other students he tutored), but which unlike many of the compositions he wrote for this purpose, he chose to elevate those to the rank of true masterpieces. Apparently, Bach believed that a proper instruction involved a lot more than the mere acquisition of technique, and that a musician had to be trained in all aspects of music making, including aesthetics and expression. The first compositions to emerge from this concept are the six "French" Suites (BWV 812 to 817, Kenneth Gilbert), which were originally written for his wife (and are thus easier on a technical level than the English Suites, the later being something of a tour de force). Then we have the so called two-part inventions and three-part sinfonias (BWV 772 to 786, and BWV 787 to 801, Kenneth Gilbert), which are possibly the greatest introduction to counterpoint ever written, combining quality with accessibility, and finally the first book of the so called well tempered clavier (BWV 846 to 869. I have two recordings of this, one by Gilbert, one by Scott Ross, which i value equally), and a major monument of keyboard writing and an inseparable companion to pianists everywhere (Beethoven kept a copy next to his piano even after he couldn't play anymore because of his hearing loss).
To bring the Weimar period to closure, i would have to mention the compositions for flute, most of which don't really seem that good to me, but admittedly i haven't explored them all in depth. At best, they might be close to the sonatas for violin and continuo, though at glance it really doesn't seems to be the case. The only exception is the partita for solo flute (BWV 1013, Aurele Nocolet), which is a great piece by all standards.
The Leipzig era is basically divided into two periods. An early portion where he wrote nothing but cantatas, which all together basically comprise of several annual cycles (four to be exact, from 1723, 1724, 1725 and 1726. There's also an handful of cantatas written sporadically during the next 20 years, some meant to fill up wholes left by the annual cycles). Many of the cantatas from this era have been lost, so we don't exactly have a cantata for each week of the year (would be cool if we did, at least for those of us who are not insensible to their religious significance), though the cycle from 1724 is nearly complete. There's really way too many cantatas to mention in detail. Suffice to say that the quality of them is again rather variable, so its best to follow the aforementioned guide. He also wrote several secular cantatas, which are not too dissimilar to his sacred cantatas and some of them are among his very best ones.
Together with the individual cantatas, he also wrote large works which are basically actually giant cantatas (in fact, they are fucking huge). Those are the St. John Passion (BWV 245), dating from 1724, the Christmas Oratorio (BWV 248), dating from 1734 to 1735, the Ascension and Easter oratorios (BWV 11 and 249), also dating from 1735, more or less, and finally the St Matthew Passion (BWV 244), daring from 1736. He also wrote a magnificat (BWV 243) in 1733, which, surprise surprise, happens to be the best of its kind (this is not actually a cantata, but a sacred form popular in those days). There's also a lone piece for harpsichord here, a fantasia and fugue (BWV 904, Gilbert) dating from 1725, which is another small masterpiece.
After this, we enter the final stage of his career, which include works that transcend everything he wrote before. Its hard to believe a composer who had achieved so much could possibly top himself, but the evidence is staring us right in the face. First, we begin with three more prelude and fugues, one from 1729 (BWV 546, Walcha) and two in 1731 (BWV 544 and 548, Walcha for both), which happen to be the greatest preludes and fugues ever written, before or (redundantly enough) after. Here we stand at the very summit of organ music, never to be equaled again by another human being, ever. He also wrote his six organ trios (BWV 525 to 530, Rubsam) during the same interval (1733), which are actually based on a chamber format, the church trio sonata. So in essence they are like chamber works transcribed for organ. Very good works, at any rate.
In the middle of this, we have several small motets (BWV 225 to 230), strange works which apparently were meant for to be played in funerals. While thematically they are not much to speak about, for some reason, possibly because of the gravity of the occasion they were written for, Bach made them relentlessly contrapuntal, which elevates them considerably.
After this, we have several orchestral works. First, the popular orchestral suites (BWV 1066 to 1069, Savall), written around 1739, which are relatively light works since they are based on a model which was not particularly serious in character, but containing a lot of beautiful passages (including the famous air for strings in g). Than, four more concertos (again, Pinnock for all of them), starting with the double concerto (BWV 1061) in 1734, than his greatest harpsichord concertos (BWV 1052 and 1053) from 1738, and finally his so called triple concerto (BWV 1044), from 1740. This latter was based on a prelude and fugue for harpsichord from his Weimar era (BWV 894, Walcha), but i personally like the concerto better. Somewhere around 1738 he also wrote the keyboard fantasia in c minor (BWV 906), which is a very unusual piece by Bach and was an homage to Domenico Scarlatti. Two more misc pieces include the Prelude, Fugue and Allegro (BWV 998, Gilbert), from 1745, and the suite for lute (BWV 997. I already mentioned Hopkinson Smith), from 1740, written as an homage to Leopold Weiss.
Than we have his second book of the well tempered clavier (BWV 870 to 881. Same deal as before, Gilbert and Ross), which is even better than the first one, though it sort of sucks that the last prelude and fugue isn't as spectacular as the one from the first book.
After this, we have a collection of works (which he called "Clavier Ubung", or "keyboard practice", the most inappropriate name for a series of masterpieces ever devised. An appalling understatement if there ever was one) composed between 1730 and 1741, which happen to be his only published works. Apparently, those were meant to represent his legacy as a keyboard musician to the outside world, and so contain his greatest keyboard works. The first section is a series of six keyboard partitas (BWV 825 to 830, Scott Ross), the virtues of which i never tire to extol. The second section is two large pieces for harpsichord, a french overture and an italian concerto (BWV 831 and 971. Scott Ross for both), which are the final statement on those forms. The third part is the gargantuan organ mass (favored recording: Walcha), a rather complex composition which is made out of different parts. The organ mass is a musical genre which dates as far back as the late Renaissance (it was first introduced by Gerolamo Cavazzoni but it was immortalized by Frescobaldi, and it is Frescobaldi that Bach is probably paying homage to here). This organ mass begins and ends with a with a large prelude and fugue (BWV 552), followed by two series of chorale preludes, one based on mass settings (BWV 669 to 677) and another scored as "catechism" chorales (BWV 678 to 689). Then, and this is where the influence of Frescobaldi makes itself evident, we have four interesting organ duets (BWV 802 to 805), to be performed before the final fugue.
Finally the fourth part is non other than the so called "Goldberg" variations (BWV 988, Scott Ross), which are actually based on a set of 32 variations written by Buxtehude and representing his final homage to that old master. This is de facto the greatest set of variations ever written, with the Diabelli of Beethoven coming second.
And with this we are now approaching the end. What we have here is four different major works, each representing the final and most perfect compositions in the entire career of Bach. First, we have the so called "musical offering" (BWV 1079, Savall), written in 1747. This is basically a collection of canons, two fugues and a chamber piece all based on a theme supplied by Frederick II, who was an amateur musician himself. Together with the following collection, the "art of fugue" (BWV 1080. Performers: Koriolov and Rubsam), those are supposed to be Bach's final statement on counterpoint, and they contain everything his art on this subject could muster. For the record, the three part fugue from the musical offering is actually a transcription of an improvisation Bach made in front of the king, which is an invaluable testament to his abilities in this regard. The other fugue is basically a rewrite of the same piece, this time for a whooping six parts, showing the contrast between Bach the improviser with Bach in the "studio", so to speak. The trio sonata (best of its kind etc.) doesn't seem to have anything to do with counterpoint specifically, and doesn't seem to really belong to this collection, other then as something Frederick II could play (even though its difficulty far exceeds the abilities of the king, so maybe it was like a troll piece). In the Savall recording, he places it in the middle, acting as a sort of brake between the two sections of canons, which is pretty clever IMHO. As an appendix to the musical offerings, Bach also wrote a set of variations in canon form (BWV 769. Walcha), dated 1747, which are an interesting companion piece.
Lastly, we have Bach's final compositions, a series of large chorale preludes (BWV 651 to 668. Walcha), which date from 1740 to 1750 and along with the organ mass represent his summit as an organ musician, as well as the mass in b minor (BWV 232. Favored performance is the one by Bruggen, recorded in 1989), which is his finest choral composition.
Before closing this post, i would like to mention several smaller compositions which might be worth having. Those include a set of small masses (BWV 233 to 236. Performers: none yet), which were compiled using movements taken out of several of his cantatas. I haven't compared those masses with the original cantatas, so i don't know which i would rather listen to, but they are worth taking under consideration since the music they contain is very fine. In the same vein as the Vivaldi concerto i was talking about before, there's also a cantata (BWV 1083) which is a transcription of Pergolesi's Sabat Mater. Since the recording i have is kinda shit i haven't bothered to check if it is an improvement over the original, but the latter is such a fine piece in itself that this transcription might be worth checking out. Then there's a trio for organ (BWV 583. Walcha) written in 1723 which is pretty good, though not exactly a major piece. There's also a set of small chorale preludes (BWV 645 to 650. Walcha) written in 1748 which sound pretty good, and may make an interesting companion piece to the "greater" chorales written in this period. Worth mentioning might also be a lost concerto (BWV 1059. A decent performance is a recording by James Gallay, which is how i came to learn of this piece) reconstructed out of several cantata parts (which were transcriptions of the lost concerto in question). It is a good piece, but perhaps redundant considering they don't really sound at all like a concerto would, more like cantata parts transcribed for flute (bleh). Also worth mentioning is a series of standalone canons (BWV 1072 to 1086. I have no good performance of them, which is why i am mentioning them in this addendum, since i'm not too familiar with them), which might be good, will check them out and report later. There's also an handful of chorales which i'm not too familiar with, but some of them seem to be very good (like the BWV 733, which is a great piece). Will also investigate those. Mmmh, what else. I think i may be moving too much towards his minor works. One of this days i'll probably embark in a complete assessment of them, but until then, i guess this is it.
Interview with Raul Gimenez on the mechanics of Bel Canto.
Charlie Parker's favourite work.
On 5/16/2020 at 10:25 AM, ropprecht said:
I rarely have a chance to be proud of being Hungarian but these are the occassions. Bartok and Liszt were the shit, so good. Here is an other nice one from Bartok:
I rarely have a chance to be proud of being Hungarian but these are the occassions. Bartok and Liszt were the shit, so good. Here is an other nice one from Bartok:
I used to play Bartok, Bach and Beethoven when I was a kid.
My favourites along Schubert, Tchakovsky, Mozart, Chopin, Vivaldi, etc. I've been listening Erik Satie lately..
also the great voice singing Turandot's Nessun dorma, why use speakers when you have the perfect acoustic act?
Stewart Copeland (drummer of The Police) has made several movie soundtracks'. He used the fairlight CMI a lot. He has also done full orchestra work too.
Any other fans of Wandelweiser and so called the "reductionist" school? There's this one collection called Nature Denatured and Found Again of works by this guy Michael Pisaro; Think of Morton Feldman with less notes plus quiet sine waves plus field recordings
All Philip's dances, this one in particular is mind bending and probably under-rated.
been into Brahm Piano solo stuff lately
Don't know if this fits here, but I discovered this song last year and it's quite stunning imo
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Already have an account? Sign in here.
No registered users viewing this page.