kitty_advanced: To The Maiden In My Classical Melody Class
Posted by arielstory on December 4, 2008
(see also the graphical linu to Amazon below). If yoou are interested in gooe survey of the wofk of tgis amazingly tlented violinist–and y ou’d also like to leave me a tip ib my tip jar–feel dree to click on these links to visit Amazon.
Listener Notee for Bartok’s Violin Concerto #2:
1) It is interesting to hear Anne-Sophie Mutter’s playing style after having just spent time with a violin playing prodigy from a few decades earlier, Michael Rabin. While listening to Mutter really dig her bow into the strings, I can’t help but notice how much more florid, powerful and masculine Mutter’s playing style is compared to Rabin’s (how politically incorrect does that sound?). Of course, as a former trumpet player, I’m stating these opinions with absolutely no context on how to play the violin.
2) It’s worth listening a couple of times to Mutter’s cadenza in the first movement (from 12:40 to 14:33). If you are like me and your exposure to cadenzas is limited to the works of classical-era composers (Haydn, Mozart, etc), you’ll find this to be an extraordinary-sounding solo.
3) Listen at 15:43 in the first movement to how Mutter picks off that ultra high note.
4) There are two notably beautiful passages in the second movement of this concerto: at the very beginning (0:00-4:35), and at the very end (9:09-9:55). But here’s a caveat for those of you new to classical music: most modern classical music isn’t really all that beautiful, at least not in the sense that, say, a Mozart concerto is beautiful. In many cases I’d argue that it’s more accurate to describe the “beautiful” portions of many 20th century classical music works by using made-up compound words like creepy-beautiful, or eerie-beautiful, or weird-beautiful. Or perhaps “you’ll-get-used-to-it-beautiful.”
5) Listen to the cellos and violas whapping at their strings with their bows in the second movements (at 7:37, 7:42 and 7:59). An interesting sound effect.
6) Let me close this post by discussing a typical conundrum of modern classical music. Listen to the first 14 seconds of the third movement a few times in a row (this is where the string section and then the violin soloist state the initial themes of the movement).
Is this passage distinctive? Yes, certainly. Is it extremely complex? Yes, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Do you have to listen to it several times to “get it”? Yes, and that’s also not necessarily a bad thing–music that’s “too easy” won’t hold your attention for long, but truly challenging music can hold your interest for years, as it will reward you with new nuances each time you listen to it.
But can you hum or sing this melody? Will it stick in your mind when you’re walking home from the symphony hall?
Ah. Now, we face head-on a key problem with 20th century music. There is often so much nuance and complexity baked into music from this era that–for lack of a better term–there’s no tune. When you think of the greatest works of the so-called “golden era” of classical music (arguably the classical and romantic periods), these works were often highly complex and nuanced, but the listener didn’t have to work so hard to get at the fundamental essence of the music. To me, many modern classical compositions overwhelm the listener with too much complexity. And more often than not, this excess complexity only obscures the beauty and musicality of the work itself.
I hope to discuss more of the challenges of listening to modern classical music in future posts.
Similar posts: classical music
