The last genre by which composer to dispense with?
Posted by: u5227470736789439 on 29 April 2009
Recently I was talking to Frank F, in a rather post-middle-aged way, [me not him you understand], and suggested that after a while a person might arrive at a point where he or she actually loose the will to investigate a great deal of new [to the individual] music, but would rather know better a selection of the music already known.
Let me add that Frank disagreed with this, and thought that most people never loose the curiosity to carry on finding new music. I have to say that I must therefore be unusual in the sense that I really would not now feel the need to invetigate much new music, though I would never be so closed as to ignore the possibility of finding some that utterly captivated me.
Which rather brings me to the point of this thread [if anyone is faintly interested], and the thought that if you [as each individual], had to choose a genre of music by only one composer, which and by whom would it be?
I will set the ball rolling with the thought that no music seems so wonderful to me as the keyboard works of JS Bach. I would regret placing the String Quartets of J Haydn second, and the Symphonies of Beethoven third, [while anything sung by Ella Fitzgerald comes before other forms and composers for me], and so by my stricture being forced to drop them, but for the sake of argument, it is certain to me that I could live possibly, and fairly happily, with only Bach's keyboard works for the rest of my days, whereas my life would be very short without any music!
So what is your genre of last resort, and who would be your chosen composer to provide the music within it?
ATB from George
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by fred simon
I think we need to better define terms here ... genre in music usually means classical, rock, jazz, folk, etc., often synonymous with style.
You have cited three (Western/European) classical composers, and one non-composer performer who performed mostly pop and jazz ... plenty of cracks for confusion to rush in.
Best,
Fred
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by droodzilla
Interesting question George. On the matter of musical curiosity, I periodically resolve to ease up on buying new stuff, to enable me to spend more time listening to the music I already have. But somehow, my will always seems to weaken, and I can't see this ever changing. I like hearing music I've never heard before too much, and thankfully, I like the majority of what I hear.
To answer your question, like you, I would choose Bach's keyboard works, as long as you would permit me both piano and harpsichord performances. Haydn's string quartets after that for me too, but when it comes to Beethoven I'd favour the piano sonatas. Then again, I'm not sure if I could survive without ever hearing Bach's works for solo violin again...
Cheers
Nigel
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by u5227470736789439
Dear Fred,
Not nit-picking, but surely the string quartet is genre, the concerto is a genre, or the piano sonata a genre?
Perhaps, I have the wrong definition of what a genre is? If so please advise.
ATB from George
PS: I do agree that casting all the diiferent forms of keyboard works by JS Bach as being within one genre is probably already stretching the point, but people do stretch points on the Forum, me not excepted ...
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by u5227470736789439
Dear Stu,
Not given up, but less worried about not listening to every possibility before the end!
ATB from George
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by fred simon
George, of course you are correct that genre can also mean a particular form of composition, for instance, string quartets or symphonies. I just needed some clarification because you cited three composers in one kind of music, and a non-composer performer of another kind of music, which opened up a window to confusion.
My general answer to the question, though, is that I could never restrict myself to even one kind of music, much less one form of composition from one composer of one kind of music. My ears remain forever wide open to all kinds of music, in all forms, from any era, both known and unknown to me ... nothing short of all human musical expression.
Best,
Fred
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by Guido Fawkes
I could possibly survive only listening to English folk music, but I'd miss out on much and if I didn't listen to the odd new record from another genre from time to time and I'd have to go through life without discovering the merits of many new artists like Basia Bulat, Bellowhead, the Zutons. Also to never listen to Delia Derbyshire's music again because she wasn't filed under folk would be beyond hard. And of course, I'd miss out on the Beatles, TMBG, CCR, Amon Duul II and Chas n Dave.
So could I exists on a diet of Shirley Collins and Half Man Half Biscuit until the end of my days?
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by Whizzkid
Now that I have opened Pandora's musical box its going to be extremely difficult to shut it I'm having lots of fun trying out new music but also see a day when my collection is of a certain size that I'll relax and get know it more intimately.
Now could I just pick one artist or genre and be satisfied I'm afraid no is the answer as I have learned over the years that for me variety is my spice of life and I go through periods of listening to certain artists or genres and then change and then become absorbed into another artist or genre. Its my cycle of musical life.
Dean..
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by u5227470736789439
Dear Fred,
I threw Ella as an example which certainly does not fit the genre stricture, but kinda would be a block on the shelf of recordings in many cases.
Bach's keyboard works would sit together for me as would the recordings of Ella, though I do appreciate this is hardly defining the issue according to genre.
I am sure I was being a bit slack, but it was to attempt to draw people into this who may not particularly like the classics.
I am not suggesting that this fining down process is inevitable, but it has struck me over that last few weeks that I have played almost no music other than harpsichord suites by Bach or Organ works. I have not been pining for other works. In the last month apart from Bach I have listened to Beethoven's Seventh and Second symphonies, which came up all the fresher for their isolation. [Both of them in the live performances under Klemperer issued fromm BBC recordings by Testament].
So I started to ponder the thought that it could considered as being a way of deciiding on an order of personal preference that was noit quite so restrictive as say your favourite eight tracks ...
Dear ROTF,
Surely you could contemplate survival with only HMHB for company!
ATB from George
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by mikeeschman
good one george,
beethoven first
stravinsky next
and j.s. bach
if allowed a fourth and fifth, i would have to pick prokofiev and brahms.
and i do mean each composer's entire catalog.
if i could have all five, i think that would keep me happy for many decades.
and scores for everything ...
Posted on: 29 April 2009 by mikeeschman
quote:
Originally posted by mikeeschman:
good one George,
Beethoven first
Stravinsky next
and J.S. Bach
If allowed a fourth and fifth, i would have to pick Prokofiev and Brahms.
...and i do mean each composer's entire catalog.
If I could have all five, I think that would keep me happy for many decades.
and scores for everything ...
my wife adds Debussy and Chopin.
and I always want my Munrow's "Instruments of the Middle Ages" handy.
Penderecki's "Devils of Loudon" holds a creepy fascination.
The dvd of Messiaen's "Quartet for the End of Time" must be allowed.
Bruckner can go.
Mozart is for playing, not listening.
I might like to keep a Mahler 2nd by Boulez/Vienna and a 3rd by Bernstein/NYPhil.
Yes, I could sign up for that.
As a more realistic matter, We have about 2,000 recordings and 1100 scores.
I think it is time to learn more about some of them.
Posted on: 01 May 2009 by Sloop John B
Charles Thompson IV's guitar works both solo and accompanied would be top of my list.
SJB
Posted on: 01 May 2009 by Sister E.
I could quite happily spend my days listening to the entire oeuvre of Dusty Springfield - such a goldmine of wonderful music. I treasure her albums even more than those of Judy Garland and Doris Day. That's MY genre and I'm proud of it!!
Posted on: 01 May 2009 by u5227470736789439
Dear Siss,
Why not be proud?
I have been listening to th old keyboarworks of JSB and findinding the most intnense involvment ...
ATB from G
Posted on: 01 May 2009 by soundsreal
Hi George, could you give a listing of one of your fav bach piano recordings so I could hear what all the fuss is about? Thanks in advance..
I'd be too torn to have to limit myself. If there was ever a fire here, I'd probably burn for not being able to make a quick decision.
It could go like this...
the entire Elvis Costello catalog, or
entire Richard Thompson catalog, or
entire Sandy Denny, or
entire Robyn Hitchcock, or
entire Doc Watson, or then
entire Shostakovich, or
entire Tchaikovsky
and most definitely the entire Magnetic Fields...
like I said, I'd probably burn
Sister, I'd have to have a little Dusty as well. Did you know Richard Thompson said she was his favorite singer? For me high praise indeed.
One good thing, if we were definitely limited to one group, at least I wouldn't have to hear Norah Jones or Diana Krall or Patricia Barber or John Mayer ever again, and that would be holy compensation....
Posted on: 02 May 2009 by Sister E.
Hi Soundsreal,
Strip away all the camp and the make-up surrounding Dusty and you have a truly great artist. I'm not surprised Richard Thompson lavished praise- he 's not the only one. All the top producers she worked with in the US regarded her as one of the most talented singers they had ever came across.
Sister x
Posted on: 04 May 2009 by pe-zulu
To me it is no surprise, that I would choose precisely the same group of works of the same composer as George: The keyboard works of J S Bach (including of course the organ works). I would miss a lot of other works (maybe the piano sonatas of LvB the most), but in an "emergency case" there would no trace of doubt in my mind.
Posted on: 04 May 2009 by u5227470736789439
Dear Soundsreal and Pe Zulu,
I wonder if you would agree that in the harpsichord works of JS Bach, a great start might be made with the First Partita, and as it goes quite well on the piano then it makes a piano performance recommendation less off-beam than usual.
I suggest for the initiate that the performance given of it by Dinu Lipati [very clearly recorded on a piano] will certainly serve to start you off!
In the Organ Works then making a start is easier, because some of the individual pieces really are famous and already widely known. So it is possible to buy a Best Of .. album and work out from the famous pieces. There is a grand 2CD issue from Decca with Peter Huford playing a nice selection of works from the large scale to the intimate, which really is a good start.
ATB from George
Posted on: 04 May 2009 by soundsreal
Thanks, George. I'll find a copy of the Lipati and report back.
Take care!
So no Chopin?
Posted on: 06 May 2009 by pe-zulu
quote:
Originally posted by GFFJ:
I suggest for the initiate that the performance given of it by Dinu Lipati [very clearly recorded on a piano] will certainly serve to start you off!
A start with piano is of course better than no start at all.
quote:
In the Organ Works then making a start is easier, because some of the individual pieces really are famous and already widely known. So it is possible to buy a Best Of .. album and work out from the famous pieces. There is a grand 2CD issue from Decca with Peter Huford playing a nice selection of works from the large scale to the intimate, which really is a good start.
Yes, a good start. Hurford´s style may be considered a bit conservative, but he plays with great authority.
Posted on: 06 May 2009 by soundsreal
I do have a Bach for Harpsichord Lp, Albert Fuller on the Reference Recordings label. Are any of you familiar with it?
It contains:
Italian Cto
Prelude and fugue in f minor
Prelude and fugue in d
French suite #6
Anna Magdalena notebook
