I’m posting the first movement of Weinberg’s 21st Symphony conducted by Mirga Grazinyte-Tyla. I think he is a modern composer that has enough traditional groundings that he might resonate with you. It’s called Kaddish.
Let's talk music, no genre boundaries
This is an offshoot of the jazz thread. I and others found that we could not talk about jazz without discussing other musical genres, as well as the philosophy of music. So, this is a thread in which people can suggest good music of all genres, and spout off your feelings about music itself.
Showing 50 responses by audio-b-dog
It's time to talk about Shostakovich, a 20th century composer who cannot be overlooked. I heard his 5th symphony when I was young and have always had it on vinyl, but not a great performance. I did not venture further until Dudamel had a Shostakovich year, and I heard his tenth and twelfth, I think. They were too complicated to really register. I was reading Milan Kundera's "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" a few years ago. In the book he talked about two people staying up all night to discuss Shostakovich's 7th Symphony. So, I have been listening to it since. I posted a youtube video of the piece. It's very long, and if you haven't heard it, just listen to the first movement. @frogman stresses rhythm in music, and I think Shostakovich was deeply into rhythm. |
Good choices. I thought of recommending Bartok’s Concerto for Orchestra. I went to a live concert conducted by Dudamel. Fritz Reiner is my top choice for my album at home, but Dudamel did an excellent job. Reiner commissioned the piece and championed it. I thought it might have been a bit too dissonent for somebody finding their way into classical music, though.Thanks for the Hindemith piece. I’ve been trying to get to know his music better. Bernstein! Interesting. I’ll stream it. We were supposed to go to the Adams concert with Dudamel and Wang, but something happened (something always happens) and we had to exchange the tickets for something else. Now I’m really sorry I missed it. |
I have listened to the pianists you recommended playing Scriabin. I can see how they understand his spirit and bring it out. Do I understand Scriabin the way you do? I doubt it. From what I've heard, it's a bit to much strum und drang. That being said, it has taken me a long time to warm up to Schumann. Maybe if I live to 100...? I don't quite see musical periods the way you do. Bach composed during the "Baroque" period. He wrote a lot of sacred music and I think all of his secular music was written to nobility. The Brandenberg Concertos were presented to the lord of Brandenberg who put them in a drawer and never had them played. Such was the life of 18th century composers. From Bach through Mozart, composers were constantly writing for nobility, hoping to gain favor and a lucrative post. Mozart did write for the masses also. But Mozart stands above, as does Beethoven who followed and began the Romantic period. I think in Beethoven's day, composers were beginning to write for publishers who sold their compositions to the public. In my mind, it changed music a lot. I think Beethoven is the most complete composer. That is not to say that Bach was not the most spiritual and Mozart the most prolific writer of very accomplished music. (We must factor in that he died at 35--otherwise I guess that prize goes to Haydn or maybe Telemann.) Although I love more modern composers, Beethoven and Mozart are most often on my turntable. As you know, I have seasons tickets to the L.A. Phil and hear a lot of "current" music. The composer comes on stage and bows as the audience claps. Some are not even that old. Essa Pekka Salonen was our principal conductor until he gave up that position to compose, which pays much less money than performing. Rachmaninoff often complained about having to perform so often he could not compose as much as he'd like. What he did compose is often on my turntable as is Sibelius. So, I do have a liking for the late Romantics. But I play Stravinsky (considered a neo-classicist--whatever that means) just as frequently. I also like Salonen's compositions, though I've never played them on my stereo. I should now that I can stream. I think the difference between our tastes is that I like to become acquainted with new music, and as you've said, you like music which struck you and moved you in your youth. If I may, I will call the the strum und drang period of life. The first composer I played a lot was Wagner--his orchestration, not arias. He is very strum und drang. Probably moreso since that is a German expression. Next time I post here, I want to post about a very modern composer. As I have said, I think Mirga Grazinyte-Tyla will be one of this century's greatest conductors. She is only thirty-eight so she has some time to be even more recognized than she is. She has recorded two symphonies by Mieczyslaw Weinberg, whom she is championing. I have listened to them a few times, but never really listened. I will do so soon, and hopefully write about what I think. |
Well, you do like Phillip Glass. Have you seen the film scored by him, Koyaanisqatsi? I think it means life out of balance. I will keep trying Scriabin. It so far seems like a lot of emotion. But sometimes it takes me a long time to get used to a particular sound. As I have said, I had Flora Purim's more abstract albums for many, many years before I could appreciate them. I did not like Beethoven that much until maybe 15 years ago. I think that sometimes he creates very short themes, such as in his Fifth, bum, bum, bum,. bum. They are not always melodic, but they are extremely versatile when he pulls them apart and puts them back together again like a great jazz musician. When you listen to his Fifth, the theme, bum, bum, bum, bum, is for all the movements. He changes the cadence and the tonality, etc. so much that you hardly realize it. Brilliant. I think we must be careful, though, not to rule things out too quickly. Some music takes a lot of time to get used to. As you know, I traveled through the Middle East for many months. I was in Iran for at least a month. I heard their music every day, but I guess it was their popular music. I got to like it, but I did not miss it when I left. The cantalever on my phono cartridge got bent, so I can't listen to records. The app that connects me to my streamer is disconnected and I can't figure out how to connect it. So I'm digging through my thousand CDs. I can't believe the music I've collected and forgotten about. All of Charlie Parker's recordings. A lot of other jazz I've forgotten about. Tomorrow I'll dig through the classical stuff. |
Yes. People get locked into other endeavors also. A pitcher pitches a perfect game. A basketball player scores 40+ points. When I was teaching poetry, that was the hardest thing to teach. How to get locked into a poem so that you're no longer thinking. Kobe Bryant said to Pau Gasol, "You're the best center in the world. Stop thinking and shoot." In music, it's the same thing, and musicians touring and playing every night probably don't get locked in all the time. Eddie Harris was during this recording, and you've reminded me that I have some Eddie Harris albums I haven't played in years. Tomorrow. My pleasure. |
I think that many people, including myself, are looking for a wider spectrum of pleasure and "understanding" out of music than you are. For most of my life I could not appreciate Mozart, aside from a few pieces that were melodically pleasing. Now I appreciate him much more. I heard an interview with Juga Wang, the pianist, and she also dismissed Mozart until in her mid-thirties she now plays him. I go to sleep listening to classical music. Often I turn on the radio in the middle of a piece and I try to guess the composer. Piano sonatas are very interesting. I begin to realize that a sonata is quite complicated. I think it must be Beethoven or maybe Schubert. (I would know Bach no matter what piece they played. He is distinct.) I think that the piece of music is too complicated for most composers. (If it were Scriabin I might guess Chopin.) One time the composer was Haydn, and that made me realize that he could write quite complex music. Other times it was Mozart. And often it was Beethoven. Schumann, of course, is also complex. In the end, though, I listen to music for pleasure, and there are different types of pleasure. Some I would define as beautiful, others as perhaps enticing, or intriguing. I am sure there are many more words to describe beauty. I am now listening to Beethoven's Sixth, his Pastorale. It gives me a melodic pleasure. I would say it was beautiful. And appreciating beauty, for me, is also important. Sometimes I listen to upbeat Brazilian jazz for joy. Other times I will listen to "classical" jazz (Coltrane, Miles Davis, etc.) to perk up my mind. I have many reasons for listening to music. For me, Bartok I think stimulates my intellect the most. But his structure is pretty much classical. Not in the Schoenberg 12 tone category. But when somebody says "so and so is their favorite composer (or film maker, etc.) I will listen or watch to see what it is they like. I have discovered many new things that way. I like to discover new things. |
I was not talking about a wider spectrum of music itself. I was talking about a wider spectrum of reasons to listen to music. A wider spectrum of responses. I was talking about listening to music for beauty. Or listening to music for joy. Or listening to music for intellectual stimulation. You seem to focus on listening to music for "spiritual discoveries." I think I do also, but that is not the only reason. I also listen for the reasons I've mentioned above. |
I agree with you that music can have deep spiritual meaning. I don't agree, however, that for me all music, whether I enjoy it for beauty or melody or just for fun, must have spiritual depth underneath. Since it just seems to be you and me talking now, we cannot ask others what they think. I listened to the Eagles today because I like their melodies and the band. I don't think there was anything spiritual beneath that. You might be talking about what music means to you, but not necessarily to others. |
I don't have time to read all the books you throw out. I'm writing and researching a novel. But inherent in what you say, it seems to me, that you believe that your experience of music is at a "higher" level than others. "For sure we can as the ignorant crowd of consumers speak only about music "fun" visceral or not ...But i am not member of this crowd..." As an American poet, I was taught to come down to earth in my language and sentiment. And perhaps this is why we enjoy different things in music. I believe the highest sentiment can be found in a stone. As a boy in high school we had a small record store with two listening booths. I would sit alone listening to classical music while a bunch of kids would sit in the other booth listening to pop tunes. As you can see, I set myself apart as an "intellectual" at a young age. When I arrived at college I met a very pretty girl who danced joyfully to the Beatles. I learned to like the Beatles and many other rock groups and began to eschew intellectualism. I still do, although I read books on archaeology and sociology and religion, always with a bit of skepticism. This is to say, that I don't fear the thoughts of anyone. Einstein had to brew his tea and drink it himself. And I try to understand everyone. But no matter what logical distinctions I make, you always refer to your own taste as a "truth" of sorts. I want to embrace the taste of others. If I don't like what they suggest for me to listen to, then I won't. But I don't suggest that my understanding of music is superior to anyone else. That being said, and I've probably pissed you off, in the latest Absolute Sound, there is a long writeup on Brazilian music and great recordings of Brazilian music. I know we share that love. And here is my poem about a stone: Composite Things
Suddenly you find yourself for some unknown reason staring at the ground & there is only dirt.
You fall to your hands & knees & start digging fascinated by the bits of rock & detritus yesterday's litter mixed with things from the earliest beginnings.
Then you pick up a rock to brush it off, some common composite thing, but the whirling striations have caught your eye so you fall into an enchantment wondering how all these bits of sparkle swirling with white & brown ever got compressed into a package so small & how that has come into your flesh-pink hand at this very moment with the sky just as it is overhead, tilted slightly away.
Everything freezes together & stops for that moment, the universe itself a composite stone & you sparkling deep in its center.
|
Prior to my research into the ancient past, I would have agreed with @larsman about the soul. Something like a deep and abiding conscience, which not all people have. Christianity would say, I think, that everybody is born with a soul. Studies of psychopaths would disagree. As I studied ancient humanity, I found out that art and music seem to define humanity (Homos sapiens). Prior Homos species had the same body structure and just as large a brain cavity, if not larger in some cases. But not until about 60,000 years ago (some might say 100,000--it doesn't make a difference for my argument) we find a sudden burst of creativity out of the Homos genus. Tools, jewelry, art. From a Darwinian perspective, why would Homos Sapiens waste their time with art rather than finding food and lodgings? How does art help Homos sapiens in our survival? And yet there it is. Jewelry buried in caskets. Cave wall drawings and paintings. What was that all about? The oldest known musical instrument is a flute made out of an animal's horn from about 43,000 years ago. Most likely, prior to that there were instruments made out of wood and other materials that deteriorate. Like visual arts, music seems to go back to our beginnings, and we must have needed it to give it priority over other endeavors that would add to humans' survival. I think it's fair to assume that dancing may have gone hand in hand with the music. It is my opinion that people decorated their bodies, played music, and danced to celebrate their existence as part of the universe. The first deities of which we find evidence are pregnant female figures known as "Venuses." It makes total sense that early humanity saw femals as the creators, because when they saw animals and humans born it was always from females. I won't go into the evidence, but it seems that females were also the first cave painters. There is strong evidence that those first cave painters were shamans and priests. From what we know of the early feminine religions, they were much different than the later male-dominated religions. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, etc. believe in a male creator who stood apart from, and outside of the universe. The Torah (Judaic Bible) had no godesses, even though literature that influenced the Bible did have many strong goddesses. Why is this important to the soul and music? The Great Mother (highest feminine goddess) was a part of her creation, unlike the God we know today. She did not exist apart from the universe. So, when people sang and danced to the Great Mother, they sang and danced to the universe and their existence as part of it. Everything was a part of something. There were no individual souls like we have today. So music was joy on the deepest soulful level. Joy at our existence as well as a deep respect for the universe. And this is how I see music tied to the "soul." Although, I don't see the soul as an individual thing, as religions do today. We all share the universal soul with the Great Mother or whatever you want to call the creator who created by being a part of things, not outside and above things. I am sure this is different than how you have seen the soul as something that belongs to you. I see it as a collective thing that is to be rejoiced. Since this, I believe, reflects ancient thinking, very early composers could have written with a soul in mind that is similar to what I have just described. And for me, the deepest music is a reflection of this. |
I don't think AI can produce "real" art until it has a sense of mortality, love, loss, hearbreak, and a number of other very human emotions that art comes from. I don't think what we consider art came along until we were considered to be Homos spiens rather than any species preceding. In fact, one of the attributes that defines Homos sapiens is art, as well as sophisticated tool making. For a million years or more Homos erectus and Homo heidelbergensis had simple tools that didn't improve over that million years. Than, slam, bam, boom, there was an explosion of tool making, art, sophisticated burials and other things that defined Homos sapiens. That sudden eruption of consciousness is mysterious and it is who we are. |
Everybody's best guess. I've spent many years doing research to shape mine, but it's no more true than anyone else's. No observers wrote down anything about upper Paleolithic people.Best we know about music, I think, is the horn flute that is 43,000 years old and the supposition that other musical instruments deteriorated over time. My answer works for me and what I'm writing. But I'm writing fiction. |
Before Western religion dominated the west, the Greeks and probably others used to have Dionysian rituals which included music and sex. And now that you mention it, I think that is one of the problems I have with the "classical" period of classical music. It is too purified. I don't think the sexual aspect of music only came from Black churces. Later, of course, it was part of the blues. But if we look at the Scotch-Irish with their wild dancing, and I think they ifnluenced country music a lot. Klezmer music had some bawdy Groucho Marx type humor. And of course we can't forget Gypsy music with women throwing up their skirts as they danced Flamenco. A number of composers were influenced by Gypsy music, but after the 18th century. As we get into the 19th century with its romanticism, many folk traditions were drawn upon. Even a bit earlier, Haydn drew on folk traditions which included the sexual aspect. Here's a guitar concerto written by Rodrigo and played by Julian Bream. You might have heard it before. The second movement (I think) has the theme used in a very popular Miles Davis piece. |
I agree with you on all counts, especially AI versus human creativity. And thank you for the information on the 60,000-year-old Neanderthal flute, with a diatonic scale no less! I had either not heard of it or forgotten that I had heard about it. Perhaps the Neanderthals gave Homos sapiens the gift of music. So many of us seem to have a certain amount of Neanderthal DNA. It does not really matter, though, in regards to my main interest. Why was music and other arts created in a world where survival was of utmost importance. Why did humans need to create art. I think that question will lead to what @mahgister calls the spirituality in art. I have watched over the years a TV series called "Closer to Truth." A trained neurologist (and it seems so much more) named Robert Lawrence Kuhn takes up a philosophical and scientific question for six 1/2-hour episodes. One question was about art and religion. I cannot remember the name of the institute he visited that studied art and religion. One of the researchers there said that in ancient humans--upper Paleolithic Homos sapiens--art and religion were the same. Those people made no distinction between the two. It's probably clearer in the visual arts, since we have entire paintings and carvings from ancient times. In the book "The Mind in the Cave" by David Lewis-Williams, an archaeologist who has studied ancient caves, Lewis-Williams claims that these caves with early cave paintings were "churches." He has physical evidence to make these claims. He says that the animals drawn on these very early cave walls were not animals that were hunted for food. They were distant animals who were seen as "gods." It would take a thesis to explore this, so I'm just going to take it as fact for now. The point I want to make is that all art must have been extremely important to early humans or else they wouldn't have spent precious time normally used for survival creating and exploring art. I would say that if this argument is true, then early music, as well as the visual arts, would have been "spiritual" in some sense. And this is what we feel today, even those of us like myself who don't believe in traditional religion. And perhaps this is what @mahgister looks for when he talks about spirituality in music. I think music, as well as all of the arts, have branched out into things other than just spirituality, such as entertainment. In the Greek Golden Age (beginning around the 7th century BCE) we find plays about the gods as well as humorous plays that must have been for entertainment. And, of course, most of the arts are for entertainment today, especially music. But when a piece of music does appeal to the "spiritual" many people can hear it and feel it. I have not yet listened to Phillip Glass's "Akhnaten, but I have heard other Phillip Glass pieces that have that spiritual quality. And, of course, in jazz we can hear pieces that entertain and others that appeal to a more spiritual aspect of humanity. This is a topic I am much interested in. |
@bigtwin , Good song. I've heard it done by a number of women but I like this one. I first saw Tom Scott and the L.A. Express at the Troubador in L.A. He was backing up Joni Mitchell. |
I am posting a Van Morrison song that I wanted to post on the jazz forum, but I knew that others would not consider this song jazz. Yet I listen to it the way I listen to jazz. Not intricate, heady jazz, but something that lifts my spirit. I consider Van Morrison's voice to be the improv lead. So, go ahead and slap me across the face and say, "No way that's jazz." |
@stuartk, I like a lot of ideas in the youtube you posted. I think there is no question that music affects our emotions and moods. I have no idea what it means to affect our DNA. Although, I think that since I've begun listening to music all morning and early afternoon, I have become more "mellow" and accepting. I don't get stressed out the way I used to. As for your series of notes, I don't have an instrument to play them and I can't imagine them in my head. Maybe you'll play with them on your guitar? It seems like the Mhiz posted on the youtube were all mid-bass? As for patterning in general, I did a lot of reading about fractals and complexity a number of years ago. I've also read some interesting books on the evolution of the universe. The British physicist Paul Davies has written about the universe and God. I read a book about the Gaia Theory by James Lovelock many years ago. He talks about the universe and the earth being living beings. Mathematical fractals correspond to the shapes of leaves and other natural occurrences. An artist friend talked to me about some studies that found fractals in Jackson Pollack's art. I often wonder what the earliest music must have sounded like. I assume it had a strong beat and the melody from a flute or whatever was less important than it is today. Music is the only art that exists in time, as @mahgister has talked about, and I have a feeling that the beats in time are fundamental to any human music. Thank you for the list. I'll listen to the ladies later. I've been listening to Robyn as I write this because it's late in the day and I need a kick in the ass. I, too, love the female voice. Maybe I'll post some youtube examples later. |
All of this musical sophistication couldn't have occurred at once. Certain things must have happened first, then others, then others. Early Homos sapiens probably didn't have a concept of time beyond the sun setting and rising. Phases of the moon, too. This is a total aside, but I wonder what was inherited from the Neanderthals. Apparently they made art and buried their people. I don't think Einstein every speculated on how people experience time in relative time frames. It seemed to me that the twin going nearly the speed of light would experience relative time the same as the twin "standing still." A concept that nobody has ever explained to my satisfaction. How can it be that centrifugal force works whether we're on a space ship traveling 60,000 mph relative to the earth or resting on the earth? Below I will post a youtube of one of my favorite female singers, Tracy Thorne of "Everything but the Girl." In the jazz forum we were talking about Billie Holiday having a limited voice but tremendous depth of emotion. I am not comparing Tracy Thorne with Billy Holiday, exceept she also has a somewhat limited voice with not a lot of range, yet she hits me emotionally as deeply as any other singer. Her husband Ben Watt lays down the background. |
@richardbrand, @mahgister, As a few of you know, I have certain biases regarding music. @mahgister I agree with Neitsche too. He said tragic plays need music behind them. My interest is in religion. I am not religious, but a student of religion as it is an expression of historical periods and peoples. I don't think I'll get into the discussion about how music began because it is irrelevant to my beliefs. I think David Lewis Williams in his book "The Mind in the Cave" and G.R. Levy in her book "The Gate of Horn" made strong arguments that the ancient caves were churches. I won't go into my arguments about why I think women were the first shamans and priests, but Williams made a strong argument that the shamans and priests did the cave paintings. When I talk about "religion" from the Upper Paleolithic, I am talking about a spiritual expression without dogma. I see it as an existential expression. "I exist as part of the earth which is the Great Mother." It is pretty clear from archaeological findings that the idea of a deity was female up until maybe 9,000 years ago. The poet Enehduanna (circa 2300 BCE) lamented the lowering of the goddess Inanna's status below gods among the Sumerians. So, that gives a hint as to the timing of the elevation of male gods. Okay, back to music. I believe that art (including music) and "religion" were one thing to the primitives. They had no distinction between the two. So, I see music as an outlet of the spiritual expression that I/we exist as part of the universe, the Great Mother. The Great Mother was not above or outside the creation, she was part of it, a belief that would later be called Pantheism and be labled heretical. Again back to music. The music I like best has an element of "soul" to it, its roots ranging back to what I believe was the earliest music. And of course that early music included dance as @mahgister implied. |
I don’t think I can categorize the music I like. Similar to @Daledeee1, I have had a music system pretty much all my life. My first record player being given to me at around 10. I, too, now have Qobuz on a decent streamer that sounds better than a CD player because of the higher sampling resolution. I could only listen to new music, but some music has become the background of my life and I have to go back to it. It’s not songs, though. It’s albums. I could not make a list like @simonmoon of the musical attributes that appeal to me. Although I go to the L.A. Phil at Disney Hall and often hear new music. Sometimes I have purchased CDs of some new music I have heard and it becomes part of my collection, numbering about a thousand albums and a thousand CDs. Too much, I think. What are my comfort albums? I must hear Beethoven at least once a week. Usually several times a week. And Van Morrison is a regular on my turntable. I listened to a CD I haven’t played in many years. Szymanowski’s Symphonie Concertante. It sounded "experimental" enough (although probably a hundred years old) to be on @simonmoon’s list. Do you know this composer? I often play Sibelius, although he doesn’t have the complexity of Beethoven, but few composers do. I have been listening to a lot of jazz lately because I belong to the Jazz Aficianado forum. I’m listening to Coltrane’s "Crescent" now. Although I have the vinyl album, I was lazy and played it from Qobuz. Vinyl sounds better, but it’s kind of background music now. I was painting up until maybe three, four years ago. Larger canvases. Abstract colorfield. I used to play rock and dance as I painted. My back is not what it used to be and after a half hour, I had to quit painting. So, not worth it. But one of my top go-to groups was the Stones. Good dancing music. Also Robyn "Body Talk." Great dancing music. I write everyday (or at least aspire to) and mostly listen to jazz or classical music during the mornings. I know most pieces so well, they don’t distract me. Today I listened to Beethoven’s 6th Symphony. I have many versions of it. Years ago I picked up Bruno Walter’s version made around 1960 when he was 80. It might be the most popular version because he approaches the piece with such slow lyricism. Also at the top of the list for Beethoven’s 6th is Karl Bohm. I had to think hard about buying his album because he was an unapologetic Nazi, playing for Hitler. But then, so were a number of conductors whose albums I own. I can hardly listen to von Karajan anymore. His music seems to me like his photographs look: a poseur. Mitsuko Uchida has become my favorite classical pianist and I am posting the 2nd movement of the Schubert Impromptu 899. On this piece, I think she is most brilliant and her touch and nuance are absolutely alive. This is a stunning piece of music if you haven’t heard it. |
I heard the Dead play several times in places like the Fillmore Auditorium. If I remember correctly, Jefferson Airplane played with them a number of times. Also a group called Mother Earth, which I liked the best. They played country and R&B. Great band. One of my musical regrets is that I did not know that Janis Joplin was part of Big Brother. I didn't even know who she was until a few days before I left on my lengthy world trip. I wish I had seen her live. I'm posting an early Van Morrison song called "TB Sheets." Anybody who has a chance to listen to it, I'd be interested in how you would categorize it: rock, blues, R&B, jazz-rock? |
Sorry, but I can't do PMs. I worked with a support person, but it became complicated. I'm going to call back support and go through the ordeal of having my screen changed. Also, it's against the rules for me to share personal information with you. Can you upload one of your pieces so that you can post them here? TB sheets is absolutely a powerful song. I believe it must have influenced Van Morrison to write "Astral Weeks" which was a huge leap from previous rock n' roll. I'm posting an amazing recording of Patti Smith singing Van's "Gloria." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPO0bTaWcFQ I probably shouldn't have compared Sibelius to Beethoven. I have no shcolastic education in music. My knowledge all comes from listening to recordings and listening to live music. I heard Sibelius's First Symphony conducted by Esa Pekka Salonen live. It was quite an experience. Salonen I think captures the Finnish chill. It's not a bad thing. I've listened to Salonen live for years and have liked his superb control. I have many recordings of Sibelius's symphonies. The last set I bought was by Paavo Berglund. I have a record of Sibelius's Sixth conducted by Herbert von Karajan. I thought I didn't like the sixth until I heard it conducted by Dudamel (I think). Von Karajan killed it, and not in a good way. I will Qobuz Klaus Mikela and listen to his version of a few Sibelius symphonies. The Fifth is my favorite, but I've also gotten into his less dramatic symphonies, like the Third and Seventh. My guess is that his Second is the most popular. Sorry, I don't listen to Monteverdi. I think I heard one of his operas. I had opera tickets for 12 years but gave them up about 13 years ago. Monteverdi is a bit early for me. I've never developed a taste for music before Mozart, with the exception of Bach. Although, I do have several recordings of Albanani. And I am getting a bit more into Haydn. |
I listened to Klaus Mikela conduct Sibelius's 5th. It was excellent. He paced the first movement faster than I am used to but it worked really well. On all the movements his tempo did not vary to achieve dramatic effect. He reminded me of the reknown Carlos Kleiber whose Beethoven's 5th seems to be on the top of everybody's list. I will listen to more of Sibelius conducted by Mikela. @stuartk , I am working my way through your Bluegrass list. I liked Strength in Numbers, Sarah Jarosz, and Stray Birds. Their music is uplifting. I did not like Mick McCauley and Winifred Horan as much. Perhaps ironic that they're the classically trained musicians. Their music felt a bit pristine without enough rough edges. I didn't really answer your question about the correlation between genius and chronological time. When talking about art--all the arts--I don't really know what genius is. It's not exactly what I'm talking about. Certainly with all that Haydn accomplished, inventing the symphony, string quartet, etc., he could be considered a genius. The period he composed in, however, is not that interesting to me. It's a bit too refined. I like the emotionally charged Romantics and beyond. I am much more educated in writing, so I can talk a little more intelligently about it. After Shakespeare, English writers became boring for around 100 years. I've heard theories that Shakespeare was too intimidating to follow. Alexander Pope was a genius at rhyme and meter, but his poems are boring to me. And that pretty much holds through the 1700s until the Romantics begin with Wordsworth around 1800. Before I started painting, and realized I wanted to paint non-representationally, my wife and I would go on trips to various countries with interesting museums. In my mid-forties I felt myself pulled toward "abstract" non-representational paintings, and spent more time in modern-art museums. It wasn't that I couldn't appreciate earlier artists. They just didn't interest me as much. It's about taste for me, not the talent of the artists. More and more I am pulled toward modern classical music, Stravinsky, Bartok, Shostakovich, Corigliano, etc. I believe that Beethoven is the great genius of music, but often I want music closer to my time. |
I don't think that AI will be the end of good music or good art in general. The world has been flooded with dross in all the fields of art throughout history. As a writer working on a book for many years, I have to confront this fear almost daily. But most people have read formulaic beach reads from the beginning of mass-market publishing. You don't need AI to produce soulless music. It has been produced all my life. Even people under the most severe totalitarian regimes (which I think is more dangerous to truthful art) have written truths that threaten the overwhelming power of the state. If you have read the book or seen the movie "Farenhite 451," that is a great analogy about how small pockets of people seeking truth can keep the flame alive. Dystopian despair crushes the soul worse than anything else. |
I am a musical dunce when it comes to playing. My one claim to fame, however, is that I was chosen for senior chorus in 6th grade. I was a soprano (then). We sang "Inch Worm, Inch Worm, measuring the marigolds." I was raised in a secular household. We never went to services. I think that is why I was not biased against sacred music. I think Bach's Mass in B Minor comes straight from the heavens. Perhaps the best piece of music ever written. I had a chance to see it live in Disney Hall. We all sat down low because there were not enough people to fill the hall. Strange that so few people would want to hear such a beautiful piece of music. |
I don't know if you've ever read Oliver Sachs. He was a British neurologist and writer who wrote about synesthesia and music. His book Musicophelia was about how music affects the mind. There was also a documentary about the book. A fascinating study. I, too, was interested in music at a young age, but what I found interesting was more age appropriate. Elvis Presley in 5th grade. I also went to Pacoima Jr. High, the school Ritchie Valens went to. He came to our auditorium to give a free concert for the students. I was mesmerized that anybody could be so good. I had never heard a professional before. I liked the top ten when I was in elementary school and middle school. I went to my next door neighbor's to hear their new console (I don't know if it was stereo or not) and they played popular orchestral music. I said, "You listen to music without words!" At that age, I had no idea how people could enjoy music without somebody singing. Our musical enjoyment changes over our lifetime, as does what we listen to music on. When I only had $500 to spend on an entire stereo, I believed it was the best stereo in the world. Same when I upgraded it with $500 speakers. I always believe I am listening to music produced as well as it can be. And for my ears, at that time in my life, it is true. |
@stuartk , I like the youtube band you just sent me. Yes, they have rough edges, and I love her Irish accent, if that's what it is. One of the people you sent me to listen to, and now I've forgotten the name, seemed to be playing the same songs as David Grisman only sweetly on a guitar. It sounded like a classically-trained guitarist. I realized I have a Chris Thile album playing on the Goat Rodeo with Yo-Y0 Ma. To be honest, Goat Rodeo throws me a bit because of all its changes of moods within one song. I'll have to try tackling it a few more times. As for AI creating art. AI cannot feel love or the fear of death. AI cannot know what it is to have a broken heart. Until that is possible, and more--the deepest human emotions, like the grief of a loved one dying--AI will not be able to produce original art. And I don't think that AI can create good art now. It writes terrible poetry. I've asked it. It can, however, analyze a poem. It's damned good at that. I fed through chatgbt a very complex poem I wrote for my booi, and it nailed the poem within three seconds. That was impressive. At best AI will be derivative, perhaps blending the work of a number of artists. I believe that art is a product of human mortality. And AI is not mortal. I read the intro, preface, and the first chapter of "The Ever-Present Origin." I'm not sure if I will read the rest now or later. I'm in the middle of "The Plumed Serpent" by D.H. Lawrence and I want to finish it. Although, Lawrence's constant repitition and old style of writing (I've been trained to use one modifier, whereas Lawrence can string together a long list of adjectives) might drive me away from the book. I think "The Ever-Present Origin" might overlap with me on the research I've done for my book. Our Ven diagrams might have a lot of overlap. I'll have to look further. |
I would not be suprised if AI art outsells human art sometime in the near future. But derivative art probably outsells "original" voices today. Let us remember that Vincent Van Gogh's brother Theo was an art dealer. Vincent was luckier than most because he had an outlet. He sold one painting in his lifetime and that was to a friend, or for payment for lodging, or something. Most great artists die penniless, and then Jeff Koons is a multi-millionaire. So, when we are talking about great art, what are we talking about? Back to music. Composers like Schumann (both Robert and Clara), Rachmaninoff, and Essa Pekka Solonen have to perform for their money. Their artworks (compositions) don't make them enough money. I'm sure AI could do better than them when it comes to making money from compositions. AI could probably spit out fifty a day. What about "good" art. In regards to AI (and probably humans, too) we need to talk about consciousness. Nobody knows what it is. Great thinkers like Stephan Hawkings fear that AI will become conscious. Think Hal in 2001. But nobody knows really what comprises consciousness. I have my theories, but I don't have math to prove it. Ironic. Back to @mahgister's bits. @asvjerry's optimism is a tonic to some degree. From my perspective, as you know, we must hope for more feminine energy to be unleashed. We're dying under the dark gravity of male-think. Music and other arts by their nature are feminine whether written by men or women. Remember how poets used to invoke the Muse at the beginning of their works? |
Kenneth Rexroth on poetic meaning from chatgbt: Rexroth believed that poetry should not be reduced to a paraphrasable meaning. In his words:
To Rexroth, a poem isn't about something—it is something. It's a moment of awareness, a lived emotional or intellectual reality. |
I have been a big Tracy Nelson fan for a long time, ever since I heard her sing in the Firehouse in Berkeley. The whole band was good. They ranged from Ray Charles to Tracy doing "Mother Earth." (Posted below). I also saw her later in a country music bar in L.A. When I went up to her to tell her how great I thought she was, she brushed me off as if I were trying to pick her up. I wasn’t. I had a girlfriend at home who didn’t want to go to a sawdust country joint. |
Lucia Hwong used to be my best friend's girlfriend. She was absolutely beautiful (if you can find a picture of her in the 70's) and the daughter of the actress Lisa Lu, so she had to marry somebody with higher status than my raggedy friend who became a bass player. Her music, posted below, is as beautiful as she. |
I think we might be talking about the difference between idea/concept and action, and I think that relates to music. I think many, if not all, musicians find their music in action first and then record their ideas. A plain example would be Mozart sitting at the piano picking out notes in a certain order, shaping time. No doubt composers also compose in their heads, but I don't think they're seeing the notes written on the page. I think they are hearing the notes in their heads and perhaps then playing the notes on an instrument and then recording them. If that is the case, then the idea/ concept follows the action of hearing the notes and the timing. Malcolm Gladwell wrote a very interesting article on art called "The Late Bloomers." In case anyone wants to read, here is the URL https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/10/20/late-bloomers-malcolm-gladwell His basic theory is that artists either compose a work in their heads or they find it on the page, so to speak. Two examples he used was Picasso and Cezanne. Picasso, he said, was able to see his work in his head and then paint it. (Although I wonder, because I have seen Picasso studies for Guernica.) Cezanne found his painting on the canvas. Jazz musicians find their improvisations before they can think them. They have to bypass thinking, which I believe makes the best art. I worked on a Mark Rothko-inspired painting for months. I could not find shapes on the page that came alive. It must have been at least five months before I woke up one morning and said to myself, "That's easy." I had the painting solved in days because I felt it rather than thinking about it. On a more mundane level, I heard that Kobe Bryant once told Pau Gasol, "You're the best center in the world. Stop thinking about it and just shoot." Here action doesn't just precede thought, it bypasses thought. I think the greatest musicians are able to bypass thought and pluck the notes out of the ether, Perhaps what they call God. As Milton said, "I did not write Paradise Lost. God wrote it through me."
|
I think Keith Richards is talking about what I'm talking about, only he is much more poetic and communicative about the process. I guess that's because he goes through it. On the topic of AI and art. Do you think a computer can do what Richards is talking about? I will have to listen to that Moody Blues song. |
Sorry, but I don't know what prog rock is. I don't really know any of the names for rock. There are so many. I usually hear something, like it, and buy it, or stream it now. What are some of the more well-known prog (I'm assuming that means progressive) rock groups I might know? To tell you what a ludite I am, the Eagles are on my turntable now. Most of my friends turn up their noses at me for liking the Eagles. But the Ear will have what it desires. Slowly working my way through Orgin. It's a very interesting view of the world and philosophy. I think it might help in my endeavors. |
Okay, I'm into prog rock. I picked up a lot of those albums when they first came out. Loggins & Messina, Emerson, Lake, and Palmer, and others. I've always liked long cuts. Why doesn't Van Morrison fit into prog rock? Wouldn't his album "Astral Weeks" be one of the first? I guess a lot of the groups I like would fit into that category, although some would be later on, like Radiohead. Or does that move into another genre? BTW, I can play all this stuff while I write, as long as I've heard them before and know the words. I hate when women are left out. How about Joni Mitchell's later stuff? Hejira and beyond into her jazz work? How about Cassandra Wilson's "Traveling Miles." Although I guess that's considered more jazz. |
Somebody mentioned above not listening to the Beatles. Over the years as my friends gave up their record collections, they gave them to me. I inherited some great classical music that enlarged my range of appreciation. I was also given a Mobil Fidelity box set of the Beatles remastered. I find the one record I listen to over and over is the first record in their White Album with "Back in the USSR." That gets me on so many levels. |
I like that cut. I'll stream them. I have a few Poco albums that I play a lot. To be quite honest, I'm not a fan of genres. That's one of the reasons I moved from the Jazz Aficianado group. They seemed to have a exacting conception of "jazz," and I just like what I like. You said you aren't a fan of Freddie Hubbard's "First Light" and "Red Clay," but I don't think you'd say they aren't jazz albums. They're just something that doesn't hit you. I just like what I like and no longer worry about it. I used to want to be cool. Now I'm too old to be cool, and I really don't care. I know that Charlie Parker is considered a genius, but I hardly ever play him. My jazz ear was developed later in the sixties and seventies. Although I go to hear current groups and sometimes I like current jazz. As a musician, I think you are more aware of the craftsmanship. I can appreciate it, but I don't listen to music to appreciate how good the players are. One exception might be classical music. I've listened to it long enough to develop more of an ear. I picked up an album of Toscanini and Horowitz playing some piano concerto I knew well. I thought it was so awful, I had to look it up. Horowitz was married to Toscanini's daughter and there was tension between son-in-law and father-in-law. And did it show in the recording! And I am attuned enough in classical music to pick it up. A classical music DJ named Jim Svejda used to bad-mouth von Karajan so badly, but I just figured maybe he didn't like that von Karajan had played under Hitler. But over the years, I have come to find that I agree. Almost everything I have by von Karajan I don't like, with the exception of Mozart's Requiem. His schtick works with that particular piece of music. In popular music, I dont really notice how good the musicians are. But I think I lean toward good musicianship instinctively. But back to generes, I think they can limit people's taste. I had a male adult bias against Taylor Swift. Girl-teen music. But I have granddaughters and they listened to her, and I found I like some of her stuff. I listen to her "Red" album. I keep trying to punch my way out of the paper bags that age surrounds us with. Most people don't change their taste in music and art much past the age of thirty. On the prog rock front, I have several Buddha Box CDs. Do they count? And I also have a number of Massive Attack albums, and how about The Cocteau Twins? |
I remember listening to Stravinsky's Firebird on my little, cheap college stereo. Man did I enjoy that. I think the mind is the most important compnent in an audio system. Willfull suspension of disbelief. You can fill in the bass that isn't there and the space that isn't there with your mind. Beethoven's 7th is a much more dynamic piece than his 6th which was written to be laid back. If you can find Carlos Kleiber doing it, he's considered very good. Very, very good because it took him forever to get out a recording. He broke the budget on over rehearsing. Most of his recordings are almost perfect. He also somehow managed to find as much expression as everyone else while sticking to the script. I don't know how he did it exactly. @frogman ? |
Funny you should talk about my wariness of genres. I was just reading in the book that @mahgister recommended on the origins of thought that humanity is torn between the perspective of the individual and the collective. We are in danger of abandoning the perspective of the individual for the collective perspective. I think I am fighting for the individual perspective which would not favor the collective's definition of genres we can all relate to. The individual would (selfishly, perhaps) lean toward individual experience that would transcend words. This is all very complicated, and I hope I my summary did it justice. I see it in my writing as the feminine which would favor individual experience versus the masculine which would lean toward the group experience. Except our group experience has been defined by men, and this takes it to another level of complication which is too long for me to go into now. Although, we do need to define species and genuses to have a discussion, I must admit. This does have applications to music and art, but more later. |
"I listen for emotional engagement first and foremost. In this regard, someone with relatively little technique may be as "good" as a virtuoso... or even better. " (I don't know how to lift something from what you said and have a buff-colored background.) I remember when Bob Dylan said, "I sing better than Caruso." |