Understanding Classical Music

My experience has been pretty much the same, except that for me it encompasses any kind of good music, not just the Western European based classical tradition.

In fact, for me the connection between music and spoken/written language often borders on a type of synesthesia. A well written instrumental melody will sound like it was set to words which are unseen ... sometimes they're just on the precipice of perception, and I have an overwhelming feeling that if I just focus a little more I might be able to make them out ... it's sort of like when you wake from a dream, and the memory of it quickly starts to recede, faster than you can recall it.

That bittersweet "ache" is what I often feel when I hear music that directly correlates to language: it has "words," "sentences," "paragraphs," and will often ask questions and then answer them, the resolution of thoughts. And, not surprisingly, this is a huge factor which informs my own compositions.

Saxophone legend Sonny Rollins was asked what he meant by musical storytelling, and he answered that it was the difference between speaking gibberish and making sense, as well as making an emotional connection.

All best,
Fred

Dear Mike,

I saw this last night and my head began to ache in wondering how to reply!

This is because for me the greatest non-programmatic music neither needs a wordy narrative nor could such a narrative even begin to express the potential meaning [and this varies according to each individual listening to it and also for each individual over time] without narrowing its potential, which, wordlessly is for me, cosmic in its implication.

Thus I always prefer non-programmatic music to the stated programme variety, or even music with a fairly obvious subtext. Thus I prefer any Bach Fugue to Berlioz Fantastic Symphony and find much more in Beethoven's Seventh and Eight Symphonies than in say the Choral, The Fifth, or the Eroica!

But if it helps a person enjoy the great classics to read into it a story or narrative, I am delighted! So I will not put a spoiler on it! I happen to disagree, but that does not matter! You did ask the question, after all.

Even music that sets words has a meaning that far exceeds the significance of the words on occasion. Think of the Bass Aria late on in the Saint Matthew Passion, Mache Dich, Mein Herze, Rein, which roughly equates to make clean my heart!

Now here we are presented with a prayer to God to cleanse the sinful human heart of an individual who stands in Bach's music for something much bigger than any single individual because Bach's music makes such a humane setting of the words - these being already wonderful in themselves, IMHO. Far from being the romantic "narrative" gnashing of teeth we might expect from a later period we are presented with an ideal of contrition, and inevitable salvation. God is merciful; the individual is anyone who cares to engage in the process. Even that is to diminish the subtext! This is where modern performances of such subtle aspects fall, because they get stuck too much on the words, and even on the sounds of the words. The words are the starting point for a leap into the cosmos, as here set by Bach, whose actual music is a gentle and noble dance. Utterly certain in its progress, but not overshadowed by doubts in the Faith that is involved.

Of course, in this particular example, this exactly is where it gets difficult, for someone not prepared to engage in the actual context of Christian faith, but never mind that. In my view it even then transcends that. I have known people, who did not understand the German, or the Christian significance of the words, but who could find an ineffable uplift in this Aria!



I would guess that even the influence of Disney on modern culture has had its effect on the popular conception of Bach in say the Toccata and Fugue in D Minor, BWV 565, which was used in Fantasia. Of course if one wants to apply a narrative to every great piece of art music, then one is going to get very stuck in some cases! Such as the Art Of Fugue.

Once one drops the baggage of applying a narrative, then every great piece of music can speak at an elemental cosmic level that is more uplifting than any words ever could adequtely express, IMHO.

But each to their own, as we are all different.

As an aside to this I tend to think in an emotional and even graphic way - non-wordy.

When I produced a piece of civil engineering work at University - a 600mm long balsa wood bridge weighing 19 gram and passing the specification of carrying 16 kg with less than 1.6mm of deflection - I was asked for the drawings. None existed. The idea was in my head as a solid three-dimensional object, which was very easy to make stright into wood without an intervening drawing. It drew the blueprint of the idea, after it was built! The calculations for the elastic modulus of balsa, within the design, were done as figures on paper so that I knew it would pass the experimental testing done before the official public testing.

I think as individuals we all think differently, but remember that written words are a lot newer invention than music, and that words - even spoken words - are always descriptors of something more subtle than words can perfectly describe. Music has much older roots, and if it expresses anything at all, it expresses something both more signifcant than words can and also more elusive - nebulous if you like. To trap it in words is to reduce its varied and emotionally practically infinite potential. I think music in the Romantic period has attempted to catch up with out written literary age, and has largely been diminished in the process!

Sorry to disagree with your experience, and perhaps I am rare [though not unique in my experience] in having such an elemental but unwordy, and non-narrative-like view of at least some music.

But if it helps a person enjoy the great classics to read into it a story or narrative, I am delighted! So I will not put a spoiler on it! I happen to disagree, but that does not matter! You did ask the question, after all.

ATB from George

George, speaking for myself, you've misinterpreted ... I'm certainly not advocating applying a narrative nor reading a story into music, and unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure Mike isn't, either.

All music has a story, a narrative of form and momentum, an essential emotional truth. That the specific narrative is elusive is exactly the point ... it expresses the unspoken.

Best,
Fred

Dear Fred,

I am sure that you will not take in anyway badly, but my reply was actually for Mike, and started before before I saw your one!

I know quite a number of people who find it helpful to invent their own story to fit the music or elaborate a possible implied narrative, and fewer who don't. More this evening perhaps, but finding words for this is quite difficult.

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by fred simon:


George, speaking for myself, you've misinterpreted ... I'm certainly not advocating applying a narrative nor reading a story into music, and unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure Mike isn't, either.

All music has a story, a narrative of form and momentum, an essential emotional truth. That the specific narrative is elusive is exactly the point ... it expresses the unspoken.

Best,
Fred

Fred, you express my intent exactly.

Dear Mike,

You wrote, "After a while, you come to understand that every good piece of classical music conveys some compelling story, complete in every way, the same way a really great novel does."

So I spent 24 hours working out a reply to a misunderstood post! I still have no idea what point you are making in that case though, but I have expressed my view, so no need to explain it ...

Sorry to have wasted your time with a replay that does not address the question. {:¬)

ATB from George

George, I meant music has a narrative of musical themes, just as a novel has characters who participate in a narrative. It's not one for one, and I don't mean the musical narrative would be expressed in words, but rather in themes.

Dear Mike,

Even here I cannot really agree, as there are many sorts of music that are based on one theme alone, such as sets of Variations, Passacaglias [and Chaconnes], some Fugues [some are monothematic and some combines two or more themes in the development], And so on. Haydn frequently writes sonata form movements that are literally monothematic, even though the second subject group is a development of, and easily traced with the score as being derived from the first subject in symphonic finales, and much popular music is based on a single theme if we exit the classical arena.

In these cases there is no narrative of the themes to be found at all, but the development of a kernel of an an initial idea, so I believe your analysis of what is essentially a question of musical form and thematic, and harmonic architecture is essentially one of a tracing the development of themes and in some cases [such as Sonata form movements though not Theme and Variation sets] a question of the harmonic plan of the music and the development of an often quite spare thematic basis.

Of course some composers - say Schubert, Grieg, and perhaps Dvorak, among others - did not particularly use the development of existing themes but did exactly as you suggest and simply inserted a new theme at a crucial moment rather than develop the existing ones in new ways!

Now if your suggestion is that a great piece of music has some sense of shape, momentum, and proportion, such as a great novel or stage play might have, then I would agree, but after that I can see absolutely no parallel at all between the written or even spoken word and music at all - speaking in the general, rather than of say one specific musical example!

I can think of no analogy in the structures used in literature to any of the usual musical forms, such as variation, sonata, fugue, rondo, ritornello, and so on. Even the simple A - B - A - Coda form has no relation to anything wordy or literary, and I see no value in suggesting there is.

Once again I may have misunderstood your point, but truth to tell, I can see no parallel that makes the mention of literary works even useful in comparison to musical structures. It is as misplaced as comparing the structure of the canvas bearing frame [that a great oil painting is composed on] to the artful design that allows a historic church Dome or Tower to stand, even hundreds of years after it was built. The two simply are satisfying - of themselves.

In truth it is possible to find more parallels with Mathematics in music structure than is sensible between it and literary structures. About the only thing that links literary works and music is a sense of [of lack of sense of in some cases] momentum, and satisfying conclusion. The sense that the works concerned essentially make sense and are satisfying of themselves, and compel attention.

The only comparison might be perhaps that one may be considered as being as satisfying as the other. There, IMHO, the usefulness of comparison finishes.

Of course one may start to discuss programmatic music and then knowing the novel, play, or myth that the music is based, is paramount in comprehending the music. Indeed to fail to do so, may well lead to the music seeming to have quite serious logical and structural deficiencies!

ATB from George

George, I am responding to what I hear in Chopin, Debussy and Stravinsky, which have been the objects of my attention for some time.

Dear Mike,

I said in the last post, "Now if your suggestion is that a great piece of music has some sense of shape, momentum, and proportion, such as a great novel or stage play might have, then I would agree, but after that I can see absolutely no parallel at all between the written or even spoken word and music at all - speaking in the general, rather than of say one specific musical example!"

Now if from these great masters, Chopin, Debussy, and Stravinsky, you find a musical example which warrants this discussion, it is possible that in a "specific example" we may find that your literary comparisons have the potential for an interesting discussion, but that is not how you started the Thread!

You started in the general, and I continued in it. Understanding Classical Music

Best wishes from George

Dear Mike,

Perhaps you would mention here the piece that most suggests you proposition and we can start the discussion again on the basis of a clear understanding of what you are driving at. Thanks {:¬)

ATB from George

Dear Mike,

I doubt if you will get any arguments if you say there is a clear narrative to specific examples of music from these three Masters.

Please simply post the one which strikes the most obvious case for you and we can set off on this.

I will start the ball rolling from my favourite Haydn, who in his work called the "Last Seven Works From The Cross," sets the word rhythms in the Bible in his themes even though we only hear the rhythms, and not the words, at least in the versions for piano and string quartet!

This is what I mean by the proposition being specific rather than general.

I am sure that you can find your own examples. I am trying to make your case here, rather than demolish the possibility that what you say is ever the case!

ATB from George

But, George, as both I and Mike have said, the point is not to find an exact analogue of, for instance, the sonata-allegro form in written literature (although the basic overall arc of the sonata form -- exposition/development/recapitulation -- actually is one of the fundamental structures in literature, and certainly in theatrical forms such as plays, films, etc.), but that there are elemental organizational and structural premises in both music and literature that have much in common.

A well written melody has much in common with a well-written sentence ... its logic, syntax, clarity, and musicality.

All best,
Fred

[QUOTE]Originally posted by fred simon:


But, George, as both I and Mike have said, the point is not to find an exact analogue of, for instance, the sonata-allegro form in written literature (although the basic overall arc of the sonata form -- exposition/development/recapitulation -- actually is one of the fundamental structures in literature, and certainly in theatrical forms such as plays, films, etc.), but that there are elemental organizational and structural premises in both music and literature that have much in common.

A well written melody has much in common with a well-written sentence ... its logic, syntax, clarity, and musicality.

All best,
Fred

Dear Fred,

I have expended a fair amount of effort on two posts here aiming at a moving target!

All I want to discuss is a stable topic - not one that has been adjusted at whim during the course of the thread. That is a waste not only of my time, as well as many readers.

___________

You can maintain the literary parallels all you like.

I am not at all sure that I can think of many literary examples that follow sonata form, which is of course far more complex than your reduction of it. At its simplest is like this. "A" is the first subject or first subject group, and "B" is the second subject or subject group:-

A,B;
A,B [repeat, sometimes optional];
Development [generally based on the dominant key of the tonic of A, and in the US called Free Fantasia, and based thematically on A and B, and sometimes adding new material];
Recapitulation of A,B which may be exact or modified;
Coda [returning to ther tonic of A at the end in convention].

Even that is often simpler than what is sometimes done with the form, and I cannot think of one literary work that comes very near to this. Flash-back is never quite done like this! Of course there are simpler versions, but often the simplified form is refered to as the "Sonatina."

ATB from George

Sorry guys but my heads hurts after reading this.

To put it simply for me music should make an emotional connection with you.

OK George, the Chopin Preludes.

They seem to flow somewhat like a narrative. This is a very loose correspondence, just an impression, and nothing more than that.

You are making more of my comments than they deserve.

Dear Mike,

I do not know the works well enough to comment.

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by ewemon:
Sorry guys but my heads hurts after reading this.

To put it simply for me music should make an emotional connection with you.

Dear ewemon,

I quite agree! Analysing music is for musicologists as a rule. I know how to do it, but I find it a dry fruitless excercise that actually can reduce the enjoyment of the music at the level of a listener! There is a difference between being an informed listener, who understands the business of structure and analysis, and being a musicologist! I am in the former bracket!

ATB from George

OK George, how about Bach's WTC?

Dear Mike,

I find no literary parallels at all in the 48 Preludes and Fugues, sometimes called the Well Tempered Clavier! Essentially this is music designed as a musical education, which transcends this purpose by being great music of itself. Complete, and devastingly powerful in its effect on the listener ... Pure music which speaks in a fashion far beyond words! Well you could try to weight it down with words, but Bach was not someone who concerned himself too much with literary connections when he was not setting a text.

All in my humble opinion of course, and you may well enjoy entetaining connections which I would rather not make!

Now it may be true that one may see this one of the 48 or another as having this or that message, and that may be the same general message as me or not.

I am quite happy - on occasion - to listen to just one of them, or half of the set in one go, but I listen entirely in a sense of the music, rather than putting any thought into the process outside the music. I find it a meditative experience at its best, which allows everything else to be turned off. At the end I am uplifted, and probably more gentle with those around me! I ask for nothing more.

To be honest Mike, had I realised that this was about Chopin, Debussy, and Stravinsky, I would have saved you the trouble of reading my replies earlier in the thread, as this is a particular case where I know the music [generally at least] not well enough to make a valuable contribution.

If, in the future, I actually don't post on such a thread of yours again, you may still be sure that I have still read it, but have not felt I could make a useful reply. Here I have made a series completely useless replies, which cost me a good deal of thought, and wasted everyones' time including yours [to read irrelevant posts from me], because I replied incorrectly with respect to the topic. I apologize for that. A mistake I shall not make again in a hurry, if I can help it.

Best wishes from George

It's not all so serious George. I find the WTC has a non-specific narrative quality in the way themes are developed, especially the preludes.

I find that same quality in the preludes of Chopin and Debussy.

It is simply a feeling.

Dear Mike,

Not intending to judge anyone else from my own perspective, but there is nothing apart from my relationships with a handfull of true friends that is more serious than music for me. It is a route into a world without cynicism, abuse, lies, evil, and all manner of man invented causes of stress. I suppose that the literary aspects invariably are poluted for me with mankind's nastiness that is absent from the music that I love the best. Non-literary "pure" music! I probably consider the 48 to be the one work I would choose above all others if forced to make such a choice! I find quite a lot of Romantic music [including some Beehoven] to be impossible to enjoy for that fact that it concerns itself with exactly what I find Bach's music [and that of Haydn as well] avoids - the evils, sentimental failures of logic, and ills of mankind. The words of the Choral Symphony are a huge obstacle for me. Music setting words preaching revolution! No thanks. I can get my contact with revolution and strife on the ten o'clock news most days!

So I am apt to take such things as human relationships and music I love most very seriously. If my tone is too serious then I apologize, and as I said before, I shall try to avoid darkening the tone, by merely thinking about it rather than replying in future.

ATB from George

Dear George,

Of late, my wife and I have been reveling in the joy of the people around us, and have lavished time on music, as if she were a person.

This narrative quality that is so hard to define, I think it is simply the inevitable sense of satisfaction at having expressed a whole idea. Surely that has some shared kernel of truth between music and stories. The spoken and the played both unfold in time, and have a beginning, a middle and an end.

Music makes good stories.

Does feeling as I do mean I miss the music?

Reading Thomas Hardy aloud, one of the chief pleasures is in the rhythm of his words. It makes one think of music.

The rhythms in our languages are the well-spring from which all music came.

Dear Mike,

Of course your feeling of the emotional shape and direction of music does not reduce music for you! It is your approach - an approach that I suspect very many more people use than my one, why has for thirty years avoided such a method.

I am so totally happy that you can approach say the immense strength of perhaps the E Flat Minor P and F from the 48 in such a way!

As I said, far be it from me to judge anyone else, and it only pleases me hugely that some of the secrets and mystery of great music is your pleasure, by whatever means you approach it. Good and and lucky man for finding a key to the door.

I suppose it is because I care for music so much that I am so serious about it! Not wanting to impose my view, not even wanting to share it all that much. I want to share the music, not my view of it! Now if I get serious it is because I want to make it ways for the beginner to make the door open to great music. To me it is a question if opening the door a chink, and letting them push through the gap!

Once they start on the journey, I am not worried if they go to the romantic, the moderns, pr stick with the old masters like Bach or Haydn. I don’t suppose you quite realise how Catholic my musical taste is so here is a list of composers, whose music I have and love. Okay there is a small number of spoken word recordings as well, but 99.5% at least is what we call classical:

Albenitz
Albinoni
Bach
Beethoven
Bellini
Berlioz
Bizet
Blow
Borodin
Boyce
Brahms
Britten
Bruch
Bruckner
Bull
Butterworth
Buxtehude
Casals
Cherubini
Chopin
Corelli
Couperin
Debussy
Delius
Dittersdorf
Donizetti
Dowland
Dvorak
Elgar
Faure
Glazunov
Glinka
Gluck
Grieg
Gounod
Handel
Halvorsen
Handel
Haydn
Herold
Holst
Howells
Humperdinck
Janacek
Khachaturian
Lully
Mahler
Marcello
Marini
Mayr
Mozart
Mendelsohnn
Muffat
Mussorgsky
Nordraak
Pergolesi
Pezel
Popper
Poulenc
Prokofiev
Purcell
Rachmaninov
Ravel
Rameau
Rossini
Saint Seans
Schoenberg
Shostakovich
Schubert
Schumann
Scriabin
Smetana
Stravinsky
Svendsen
Sibelius
Sinding
Strauss [Waltz family not Richard Strauss]
Strauss [Richard]
Suk
Suppe
Tchaikovsky
Vaughan Williams
Verdi
Vividly
Wagner
Walton
Weber
Weinberger

Please do not dislike me for my gut-felt love of music, and the corresponding seriousness of me on the subject.

My very best wishes to you, dear Mike! From George

PS, and here is a list [almost complete] of the leading artists in the recordings, with the strange addition of the search word used for iTunes, where I am hunting via artist [I did this excercise to help me remeber, rather than actually to look it up each time!], rather than composer:

Adám Fischer [ad fischer]
Adolf Busch [busch]
Adrian Boult [boult]
Adrian Thompson [thompson]
Aksel Schiøtz [aksel]
Alan Civil [civil]
Alan Cuckston [cuckston]
Alan Hacker [hacker]
Albert Sammons [sammons]
Alfred Brendel [brendel]
Andras Korodi [korodi]
André Cluytens [cluytens]
Andre Moisan [moisan]
Andre Navara [navara]
André Previn [previn]
Annie Fischer [annie]
Antal Doráti [antal]
Anthony Collins [collins]
Anthony Lewis [lewis]
Apocalyptica [apocal]
Arkady Sevidov [sevidov]
Arleen Auger [auger]
Arnold Rosé [arnold ro]
Arthur Grumiaux [grumiaux]
Artur Schnabel [schnabel]
August Wenzinger [august]
Aurora Quartet [aurora]
Kuijken, (all family) [kuijken]
BBC [bbc]
Beatrice Harrison [harrison]
Bell' Arte-Ensemble [bell]
Benno Moiseiwitsch [benno]
Birgit Nilsson [nilsson]
Bob Geldoff [bob]
Bohuslav Matousek [bohu mat]
Bozo Rogelja [bozo]
Brian Johnston, Henry Blofeld And Dickie Bird [bird]
Christopher Finzi [finzi]
Bruno Walter [bruno wa]
Budapest Quartet [buda]
Buddy Holly [buddy]
Carlo Maria Guilini [guilini]
Carlos Kleiber [carlos kle]
Carmen Piazzini [piazzini]
Casals [casals]
Charles Mackerras [mackerras]
Christian Ferras [ferras]
Christopher Hogwood [hogwood]
Christopher Seaman [seaman]
Clara Haskil [haskil]
Claudio Abbado [abbado]
Clemens Krauss [clemens]
Clifford Curzon [curzon]
Colin Davis [davis]
Collegium Aureum [aureum]
Constant Lambert [lambert]
Daniel Barenboim [barenboim]
David Oistrach [oistrach]
David Saint [david saint]
Dennis Brain [dennis]
Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau [dieskau]
Dinu Lipatti [lipatti]
Dire Straits [straits]
Edith Piaf [piaf]
Edward Downes [downes]
Edward Elgar [elgar]
Edward van Beinum [beinum]
Edwin Fischer [edwin]
Egon Petri [petri]
Einar Steen-Nøkleberg [einar]
Elizabeth Norberg-Schulz [norberg]
Elizabeth Wallfisch [wallfisch]
Ella Fitzgerald [fitzgerald]
Emil Gilels [gilels]
Emma Kirkby [kirkby]
Erich Kleiber [erich kle]
Eugen Jochum [jochum]
Evelyn Rothwell [evelyn]
Felix Weingartner [weingartner]
Figuralchor und Bach-Orchester Stuttgart [rilling]
Flanders & Swann [flanders]
Francois Chaplin [chaplin]
Francoise Groben [groben]
Frantisek Maxian [maxian]
Frantisek Posta [posta]
Fritz Busch [fritz busch]
Fritz Kreisler [kreisler]
Gabrieli Quartet & Thea King [thea king]
George Enescu [enescu]
George Guest and collgegues [guest]
George Hurst [hurst]
George Szell [szell]
Georges Solchany [solchany]
Gerard Hoffnung [hoffnung]
Gerard Jarry [jarry]
Géza Anda [anda]
Geza Oberfrank [oberfrank]
Gioconda de Vito [de vito]
Graf Mourja [mourja]
Great British Experience [great british]
Guido Cantelli [cantelli]
Gustav Leonhardt [leonhardt]
Gwydion Brooke [gwydion]
H.Gremy-Ghauliac [gremy]
Hans Gillesberger [gillesberger]
Hans Hotter [hotter]
Heather Harper [harper]
Hausmusik [hausmusik]
Heinz Wallberg [wallberg]
Helen Watts [watts]
Helmut Walcha [walcha]
Henry Holst [henry holst]
Herve Joulain [joulain]
Hess, Myra [hess]
Hollywood Quartet [hollywood]
I Musici [I musici]
Iona Brown [iona brown]
Istvan Kertesz [kertecz]
Jacques Orchestra/ Reginald Jacques [jacques]
James Kreger [kreger]
Jascha Heifetz [heifetz]
John Barbirolli [barbirolli]
John Eliot Gardiner [gardiner]
John Lubbock [lubbock]
John McCabe [mccabe]
John Rutter [rutter]
Joseph Suk [suk]
Joyce Grenfell [grenfell]
Kammerorchester Berlin [kammerorchester berlin]
Karel Ančerl [karel]
Karl Münchinger [karl m]
Kathleen Ferrier [ferrier]
Kenneth Gilbert [gilbert]
Kirsten Flagstad [flagstad]
Kyung Wha Chung [kyung]
László Heltay [heltay]
Laurent Lefevre [lefevre]
Laval [laval]
Lawrance Collingwood [collingwood]
Le Quatuor Talich – Talich Quartet [talich]
Leif Ove Andsnes [andsnes]
Linde Consort [linde]
Lorna Anderson [anderson]
LSO: Hamilton Harty [harty]
Lubomir Maly [maly]
Malcolm Sargent [sergent]
Maria Scivittaro [scivittaro]
Marie-Claire Alain [alain]
Marjory Thomas [marjory thomas]
Matthew Best [matthew best]
Melos Ensemble [melos ensemble]
Michael Debost [debost]
Michael Gantvarg [gantvang]
Michel Corboz [corboz]
Milos Sadlo [sadlo]
Mogens Wöldike [mogens]
Mstislav Rostropovich [rostropovich]
N Jarvi [jarvi]
Neville Marriner [marriner]
Nicholas Ward [nicholas ward]
Ole Edvard Antonsen [antonsen]
Otto Klemperer [klemperer]
Paul Tortelier [tortelier]
Per Dreier [dreier]
Peter Schidlof [schidlof]
Philharmonia Orchestra / Tullio Serafin [serafin]
Philippe Bernold [bernold]
Pierre Fournier [fournier]
Pierre Hantaï [pierre hant]
Pierre Monteux [monteux]
Private Recording [private recording]
Pro Arte Quartet [pro arte]
Quatuor Mosaïques [quatuor mosa]
Quatuor Tatrai [tatrai]
Rafael Kubelik [kubeik]
Reginald Kell [kell]
Reinhard Goebel [goebel]
Robert Kajanus [kajanus]
Robert Parkins [parkins]
Robert Riefling [riefling]
Rolf Lislevand [lislevand]
Ronald Van Spaendonck [spaendonck]
Royal Opera House, Covent Garden: John Lanchbery [lanchbery]
Saltire Singers [saltire]
Sandor Vegh [vegh]
Simon Preston [preston]
Simon Standage [standage]
Solomon [solomon]
Strings of Zürich [howard griffiths]
Szymon Goldberg [szymon gold]
Tátrai Quartet [haydn quartet]
Terje Tonnesen: Norwegian Chamber Orchestra [tonnesen]
Thea King [thea king]
Thirston Dart [dart]
Thomas Beecham [beecham]
Tölzer Knabenchor (Conducted by R. Reinhardt) [reinhardt]
Tom Lehrer [lehrer]
Trevor Pinnock [pinnock]
Trio Hongrois [trio hongrois]
Truls Mørk [truls]
Vaclav Talich [talich]
Various Artists [various]
Vienna Octet [vienna octet]
Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra [vienna philharmonic orchestra]
Vitaliy Klymenko & Aleksendr Drach [vitaliy]
Vittorio Gui [gui]
Volker Wangenheim [wangenheim]
Wiener Oktett [wiener oktett]
Wilhelm Furtwängler [wilhelm furt]
Willi Boskovsky [boskovsky]
William Bennett [bennett]
William Walton [walton]
Wolfgang Sawallisch [sawallisch]
Yuri Ahronovitch [ahronovitch]

There may be some strange gaps like no Karajan, or Simon Rattle, but I have found a distilation of great recored performances, even from less famous names, rather than gone with headline, and famous omes as a rule. I start with the famous and dig deeper ...

Encore: My very best wishes to you, dear Mike! From George

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:

I suppose that the literary aspects invariably are polluted for me with mankind's nastiness that is absent from the music that I love the best. Non-literary "pure" music!

George, I agree that music can express things that literature can't. But vice versa also. I agree also that the best music expresses the highest human self, but so, too, does the best literature. There is human "pollution" in all art forms, as well as transcendence.

But, to reiterate once again (re-reiterate?), when I speak of the parallels between music and written/spoken language, I'm not at all talking about the content of the literature, but its organizational aspects ... its logic, syntax, clarity, and musicality. There are patterns and devices that make sense to the human brain, and they tend to crop up in many disciplines: music, literature, sciences, visual arts, etc. For instance, I hope you will agree that phrases in a melody can "rhyme," or that the ubiquitous "rule of 3s" occurs not just in language but in music, too ... a well-written melody, or an entire section or musical work, can have a "punchline," or at least a payoff, summary, or conclusion, much like a well-written sentence, paragraph, poem, short story, novel, etc.

quote:

I am not at all sure that I can think of many literary examples that follow sonata form, which is of course far more complex than your reduction of it.

I'm not making a claim for literary examples which follow every precise detail of some of the more complex examples of sonata form, but, rather, that even the most complex examples boil down in their essence to a simple (but no less profound) path: an idea is presented, the idea is developed, the idea is restated ... no further complexity or variation of the form deviates from that path, in fact, they all serve to illuminate that path.

quote:

Analysing music is for musicologists as a rule. I know how to do it, but I find it a dry fruitless exercise that actually can reduce the enjoyment of the music at the level of a listener!

You find it dry and fruitless, and of course that's your prerogative. But there is absolutely nothing inherent in the analysis of music that dictates a reduction in enjoyment of music, and, in fact, many people find that the analysis of music enhances their enjoyment greatly.

All best,
Fred

quote:

Originally posted by fred simon:
But, to reiterate once again (re-reiterate?), when I speak of the parallels between music and written/spoken language, I'm not at all talking about the content of the literature, but its organizational aspects ... its logic, syntax, clarity, and musicality. There are patterns and devices that make sense to the human brain, and they tend to crop up in many disciplines: music, literature, sciences, visual arts, etc. For instance, I hope you will agree that phrases in a melody can "rhyme," or that the ubiquitous "rule of 3s" occurs not just in language but in music, too ... a well-written melody, or an entire section or musical work, can have a "punchline," or at least a payoff, summary, or conclusion, much like a well-written sentence, paragraph, poem, short story, novel, etc.

I think this is too narrow a view of music. Yes, a lot of music is organized in such a way that it [I]can[\I] be compared to literature, but there are forms of music that cannot be compared to anything literary. They don't use verses, don't necessarily have melodies and start and stop rather than have beginnings, middles or ends. George gave some examples earlier along these lines. Certainly there are consistent themes in art, but wouldn't those themes by definition be universal and not intrinsic to any one form of art?