Current Compositional Trends and Techniques

[some guy]

I really oppose this Avantgarde movement. In my eyes, it has nothing to do with music and I am sad that it is being defined as "classical" music.

I won't answer your question for rojo, (though I totally could--I mean it!) but I do have some questions and comments of my own for you.

1) There is no "Avantgarde" movement. There are several. Do you oppose all of them?

2) What do you mean by "oppose"? (We see that you have come onto a thread about current practices to say that you disapprove of them. Does it go any further than that?)

3) Why do you oppose them? Any grounds for your conclusion that they have "nothing to do with music"? or for your sorrow that they're defined as "classical" music? The question here, in all seriousness, is "Who are you?" That is, "what do you know, and how well do you know it?" If your experience of new compositional trends is small, then your conclusion and your sorrow both may be a trifle premature. Of course, if your experience is vast, you probably won't have come to that conclusion nor be feeling sad!

4) Just a note about your calling Debussy and Ravel "traditional." At the time, Debussy was notable for having abolished rhythm, melody and tonality, and Ravel's music was, of course, repulsive. Which is not to say that you're wrong about current trends, of course (the conclusion most readily leapt to by folks hearing about contemporaneous critical perceptions of "the greats.") It is only to suggest the possibility that just as those critics were wrong about things that were new and unfamiliar to them, so too could you be wrong about things that are new and unfamiliar to you.

5) For your possible curiousity, if you want to know how I would respond to the question in 3): Someone who has loved "classical" music from a very young age, who started out with the usual suspects (in my case Rachmaninoff, Haydn, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky and Grieg) and soon included many other notables, including Bach and Debussy (!), who "discovered" Bartok in 1972 and has been busy listening to more and more musics from recenter and recenter--without, I hasten to add, at all ceasing to listen to and enjoy all the preceding notables.

Happy listening!

 

[rojo]

^^ Well, only fitting that the most knowledgeable person on the topic should be the first to reply. But now what can I add to that? Hmm. Not much. :grin:

Hi Rojo, I was just wondering, I know you also fancy "traditional" classical music like Debussy and Ravel. What do you think of the "avantgarde" music, some of which has been posted in the thread, compared to music by e.g. Debussy and Ravel? Is it possible to compare avantgarde to traditional classical music in terms of aesthetics?

I'm interested because I really oppose this Avantgarde movement. In my eyes, it has nothing to do with music and I am sad that it is being defined as "classical" music.

Hi Rune

Thanks for joining the discussion.

Yes, I adore (some of) the music of Debussy and Ravel; those two composed my three favourite pieces of music all time; that hasn't changed in years and years of music listening since I first heard them. I highly doubt that will change. But that won't stop me from listening to, appreciating and loving other things.

Can music by Debussy and Ravel be compared aesthetically to the music of Marclay, Cage, Boyd, Ferrari, Karkowski? Yes and no. But it would be no different than comparing Bach to Beethoven, or Haydn to Shostakovich. Same as comparing the Ferrari piece to the Cage piece. Like apples and oranges, the things are very different; but all these musics can be beautiful, amusing, deep, bombastic, basically any word you would use to describe the aesthetics of something. Just not necessarily for the same reasons. One may focus on lovely melody, the other on a rich timbral environment, another on superb harmonies; basically the musical elements the pieces are made of will be different (although not always) but they can all be appreciated.


Music changes. One can't stop change; life is change. Whether one is opposed to it or not. I can't be opposed to it, because otherwise, we'd be stuck listening to nothing but Medieval music. Not that I'm against Medieval music. I guess one could say I'm for diversity and co-existence. We can still have favourites though.

Oh yeah, and for a discussion on what classical music really is, or isn't; whatever! Visit this thread-

http://www.magle.dk/music-forums/6226-future-classical-music.html

 

[Corno Dolce]

Hello Rune,

How is your *Fisketreppe* doing? :grin:

Seriously, my relationship with the different *streams* of Avantgarde music is contentious and vexatious at best. I have had to *impute* in my mind "organ registers" as my default position in regards to Avantgarde musics. By that I mean each sound canvas used by different performers/composers will be classified as a sound cell/tonal generation cell which can then augment the *palette* from which I can then utilise and mix with other *colors*. In this way I avoid having to absorb the compositional work as a whole. I can deftly break down the work into its components and leave out that which I find to be of little value.

Cheers,

CD

 

[Rune Vejby]

Hi some guy,

I knew my brief, undocumented answer would provoke a reaction in this thread
Let me try to account for my opinion about Avantgarde/Current practices/whatever.

1) There might be several, there might be one. No one knows. I oppose most of the Avantgarde music I have heard so far. That's my best answer.

2) By "oppose" I mean "don't like"

3) If my experience was limited I would not reply to this thread. Don't get me wrong; I accept Avantgarde music as it is - I accept it as music. My problem is that it is being defined as classical music by many scholars and music institutions. Your video clip with John Cage is an excellent example of my point. It illustrates how classical music is being degraded to nothing more than entertainment. It is a circus where the clown (Cage) will perform a trick that will provoke a humerous reaction with the circus audience. (No, I don't believe Cage is a clown, it was just a metphore )... A perfect example of how music is reduced from art to entertainment. I find it humiliating. Classical music has become superficial and materialistic - just like all other genres of music! I find it really strange that the music like the Stockhausen clip in this post, is considered classical music. It bears striking similarities with some of the postmodern electronica music, so why not just categorize it as that? In stead, government-funded art foundations are now handing out the majority of their grants to "avantgarde" composers. See the irony in that? An art foundation handing out money to something that devours art itself!
But at the same time, I agree with Rojo that "music must change". It must, but at the same time it must stay recognizable. I still believe that the use of traditional classical instruments can "change" - by the use of both disharmony and harmony. Gorecki did this to some extend in his piano works, and many of us still do it...

4) I was trying to do a binary division between Classical music and Avantgarde - sorry if it did not come out clearly

Rojo and Dolce, thanks for replying I will get back to you soon - hopefully (I don't visit this forum as much as I would like to)...


Best regards
Rune

 

[some guy]

Hey Rune,

I guess we simply disagree about whether to call new art music "avantgarde" or "classical." (And surely the term avant garde is no longer a current term, is it? I certainly don't know anyone who calls what they're doing "avant garde," anyway.)

As for current trends, you say that

there might be several, there might be one. No one knows.

But surely that there are several is a known thing. Not sure I'm getting the gist of this remark at all at all...!

Michael

 

[Rune Vejby]

Hi Michael

Yeah, it is always difficult to reach a common idea about what constitutes a particular genre. If it makes any difference, "Avantgarde" to me is exactly what we see in the John Cage clip. The use of material objects rather than classical instruments, and the heavy use of samples put together. Many composers are doing something like that at the moment. I just choose to define it as "avantgarde". That's why I say that there might be one or several movements - it's a subjective thing to define genres

-R

 

[rojo]

Art versus entertainment. Hmm. Yet another can of worms to sort out. :grin:

About the Cage piece. I love the fact that this performance makes people laugh. It makes me laugh. Laughing is a good thing, at least, I like it. Why can't classical music be funny? I don't even have to say that; it already is, sometimes. There are operas with funny plots and characters, composers will sometimes put musical jokes in their pieces. etc.

But the funny part is not the only part of this piece. It's clever too. It challenges notions of what classical music is, or should be. And in a fun way, imo. Of course this idea may be pretty old now, but (correct me if I'm wrong,) it was pretty innovative at the time. And not to mention the interesting sonic environment he chose.

Tbh, I don't listen to Cage all that often. But then there are lots of things that I like that I don't listen to all that often. I'm glad I have listened to it, and it's great that I can when I want to. And viewing it again (because some guy posted it,) I enjoyed it yet again.

As for the 'circus' nature of the work, how about some operas? :lol: Wait; is opera classical? Bah, whatever. I just don't see the Cage piece as taking anything away from the seriousness (or whatever nature) of other works.

I guess in summation, what I'm trying to say is; why not? In any case, this is just one work by Cage. He did a lot of other things too. If one doesn't like this work, one may like another. Dunno. I never dismiss an artist's work as a whole just because I don't like one piece. Or two, or three...

Classical music has become superficial and materialistic? I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure today's composers are generally just as poor as composers in the past. Unless you're talking about John Williams. But that's another debate. :grin:

Regarding sampling, I'm in the process of sampling sampled music presently, so I'll check in later about that.

 

[rojo]

Currently listening to a work by Luc Ferrari.

Visage V (1958-1959)

Some very cool sounds in this, and some very pretty ones. Why do I think I've heard some of them before? I don't think I've ever listened to this... at least not that I recall. Lots of fading out; like things passing by. Diggin' that effect. Seeing as the piece is called Visage, I'm picturing walking down a busy sidewalk, looking at the different people's faces as they (or I) go quickly by. Each sound represents a different face. But hey, that's just my busy imagination. Some sounds near the end make me :grin:. Cool ending.

And now a more recent work.

Madame De Shanghai (1996)

Is that where I am? Who are these women? Where are they going? Orson Welles' La Dame de Shanghai? Hmm, gonna have to think about this one... Maybe something to do with Western culture's effect on China? Hmm...

 

[Corno Dolce]

Well - well - well,

A more exotic side of Ms. RoJo seeps through :grin::grin::grin:
Lets see now - there was a movie starring Rita Hayworth which methinks was entitled *La Dame De Shanghai* - Oh, BTW - here's a pic:

http://idannyb.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/shanghai.jpg


Cheers,

CD

 

[rojo]

John Oswald

While investigating Christian Marclay (thanks some guy :grin:,) I recently discovered this composer, saxophonist, media artist, and dancer from Canada. He is usually referred to as a collage artist. In 2004, he won (with six other artists) the annual Governor General’s Award in Visual and Media Arts, as awarded by the Canada Council for the Arts. One can read more about him here:

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=U1ARTU0002677

Most of y'all know I'm a fan of Michael Jackson, so an artistic creation based on a song by MJ is of course right up my alley. :grin: I've been listening to this work by Oswald repeatedly; usually I use headphones so as not to disturb peeps. But last night I had this blasting through speakers. 'Twas awesome. :crazy:

Unfortunately, the beginning is missing here.

Dab

http://x.imeem.com/w5dqYUeQ-Z

(Disclaimer: I do not condone, nor support the original album cover artwork.)

 

[rojo]

Well - well - well,

A more exotic side of Ms. RoJo seeps through :grin::grin::grin:
Lets see now - there was a movie starring Rita Hayworth which methinks was entitled *La Dame De Shanghai* - Oh, BTW - here's a pic:

http://idannyb.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/shanghai.jpg


Cheers,

CD

Ooh, lovely pic, CD.

Still not really getting the reference though...

 

[Corno Dolce]

How about China's influence on the West?

Ms. Rojo, earlier I was just distorting the thread just a bit - no worries - relax, and have fun - you are safe amongst friends and fans...

 

[rojo]

Elliott Carter is apparently a very busy man who's been composing for around 70 years.

http://feeds.latimes.com/~r/latimes/entertainment/news/music/~3/366796606/la-ca-carter17-2008aug17,0,4772769.story

From the article-

"He has always prided himself on making every piece something new, typically experimenting with new harmonic methods and structural principles for major compositions. In his late late period, Carter has found ways to become, if anything, less predictable." - Mark Swed, L.A. Times

I had a look for some Carter works; found Ursula Oppens performing Carter's Retrouvailles which was well-played and entertaining. Also heard Caténaires, don't know who was playing. Rather hypnotic; single note melody throughout, all notes of equal duration as far as I could tell. Enjoyable.