Now that my turntable is turning properly again, I have been going through my randomly acquired record collection, weeding out duplicates and triplicates, and notice that some pieces seem to be quite a bit more popular than others. Things like Beethoven's symphonies, Brandenburg Concertos. I am considering actively acquiring more of the best musical compositions. Any suggestions what the top 100 classical compositions might be? I liked Brahm's Third but not his First Symphony, and would appreciate hearing opinions on the best few works of each composer as well as the most popular composers.194 responses total.
Ok, I will prime the pump. I had multiple copies of Handel's Messiah, Water Music and Fireworks Music. They are all superb. Did Handel write anything else that everyone should own? (Not that I have every heard anything by him that is not worth listening to).
Did Handel write the Creation? I've only heard short segments of it, but it's supposed to be quite nice.
Thanks, I will check it out at the library. I like Handel but have only those three pieces (I had multiple copies). What are Mendelsohn's best liked compositions? I have Songs Without Words, Two Concertos for Two Pianos and Orchestra, and The First Walpurgis Night.
Don't neglect Mendelsohn's lovely Midsummer Night's Dream!
Mendelsohn's Elijah, also. Handel has quite a lot of other really nice music which I hear on the radio but haven't gotten around to identifying and obtaining, besides ones already mentioned. Judas Maccabeus and some coronation anthems come to mind among choral music, but he wrote some wonderful instrumental stuff besides Royal Fireworks and Water Music. I hesitate to get into this item; I'd just be listing either stuff I happen to have or my favorites, & in general I don't know the literature systematically enough to have much justification. But I'm interested in what others have to offer.
Mendelsohn's "Italian" symphony is very nice. His violin concerto, too. The Hebrides, or "Fingal's Cave," overture is popular.
Here's a version of a list I made up for an item in the old music cf about what music you'd take to a desert island. The selection is very personal: it includes some things that most people would regard as neither popular nor great and omits many masterpieces. It includes no opera at all. Barber: Adagio for Strings Knoxville: Summer of 1915 Piano Concerto Violin Concerto Bartok: String Quartets Concerto for Orchestra Piano Concerto #2 Beethoven: Piano Concertos String Quartets Piano sonatas Symphonies Chamber music Berg: Violin Concerto Brahms: Haydn Variations Piano Concerto #2 Symphonies Tragic Overture Violin Concerto Copland: Appalachian Spring Symphony #3 Debussy: La Mer Nuages Prelude a l'apres-midi d'un faun Piano music (esp Preludes Book 1) Elgar: Cello Concerto Holst: Egdon Heath Mendelssohn: Hebrides Overture Italian Symphony A Midsummer Night's Dream Violin Concerto Moussorgsy: Pictures at an Exhibition (Ravel's orchestration) Mozart: Later symphonies Later piano concertos Rachmaninov: Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini Symphony #2 Ravel: Concerto for Left Hand Daphnis et Chloe Ma Mere L'Oye (both piano & orchestra versions) Le tombeau de Couperin (both piano & orchestra versions) La valse Schubert: Impromptus, sonatas, and other piano music Die Schone Mullerin Winterreise "Death and the Maiden" Quartet "Unfinished" Symphony Symphony #5 "Great" C major Symphony Schumann: Piano Concerto Symphony #3 Shostakovich: Symphony #10 Sibelius: Symphony #2 Symphony #4 Symphony #5 Symphony #6 Tapiola Stravinsky: Petrouchka Le sacre du printemps Symphony of Psalms Tchaikovsky: Symphony #4 Symphony #5 Symphony #6 Violin Concerto Vaughan Williams: Fantasia on a Theme of Thomas Tallis The Lark Ascending Symphony #3
heh. Not my list at all. No Bach, Vivaldi, Telemann, Mozart, Haydn, Handel, ............ ?
There are some marvellous pieces that I loved ages ago but haven't kept up with over the years. Clarinet and bassoon concerti by Carl Maria von Weber, for example. Also, Handel's various pieces for recorder(s) and harpsichord, often transcribed for flute and piano; Mozart's horn concerti; Rossini's overtures; Haydn's symphonies and string quartets (minor omission there!); Haydn's trumpet concerto, with that theme in the third movement that you'll recognize the instant you hear it; Dvorak's "New World" symphony; Sibelius's Finlandia; Smetana'a Moldau; Grieg's Piano Concerto; Holst's Planets. There are other pieces I've grown attached to more recently that need to occupy my soul for a while longer before I'd be comfortable recommending them to anyone. At the top of that list would be Mahler's 6th symphony. The consensus seems to be that it's Mahler's masterpiece, but I don't think it's his most popular music. Just the opposite, in fact, because of it's extremely pessimistic take on life.
There is some Mozart on my list in response #7, btw. I have to add Mozart's Serenade for Thirteen Winds, sometimes called the Gran Partita. And, if you want popular, Eine Kleine Nachtmusik. There are many web resources. You can find lots of recommendations in the "Classical CultureBrief" section of http://www.culturefinder.com/ some of which were written by yours truly.
This will keep me busy for a while, thanks. (Can someone tell me if there is a way to print responses directly other than printscreen?) But please don't stop. I liked Leonard Bernstein's Candide overture, did he write anything else similar? I liked the 2 2 3 rhythm.
Bernstein didn't write anything much like the Candide overture, that I know of. The closest you might come to it are the overtures to Rossini's operas, and a couple of overtures by Russians: Glinka's "Ruslan and Ludmila" and Kabalevsky's "Colas Breugnon" (sp?), especially the latter. Also, Brahms's "Academic Festival" Overture and Barber's Overture to "The School for Scandal" might please you.
I have Academic Festival Overture on the back of one of my three copies of Variations on a Theme by Haydn, will listen to it, thanks. I had thought the Candide was Dvorak at first because of the rhythm. The Festival Overture says it is based on student songs, none of which I recognize.
The Overture is a keeper, which puts me back to two copies of Haydn Variations or Symphony #3. I have to find a second shelf, quick! I liked the Rachmaninov Paganini and also Concerto #2 (two copies).
One odd thing about Rachmaninov's Paganini Rhapsody is that when you come to the 18th variation every woman in the room falls into a swoon, usually with a little sigh or a murmured, "Oh! I love this!" Works every time, on all ages, sexual orientations, political points of view, whatever. And all it is is a variation of Paganini's theme: an inversion of it, to be precise. Go figure. I notice I didn't include any Prokofiev in my list. His "Classical" Symphony is very popular. His 3rd piano concerto is a knockout. And of course Peter and the Wolf.
I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this, but The Creation is by Haydn, not Handel.
I've always been very fond of Prokofiev's Lt. Kije suite.
Re 15:
Don't forget Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet Ballet music!
Re 16:
Good thing you caught me there. I wasn't quite sure about that...
This item is so broad that it's hard to choose what to mention... I'm
surprised that nobody's mentioned Shostakovich's 5th Symphony yet, which is
one of my favorite, if not the favorite, of any symphony that I've heard.
Sibelius symphonies are quite nice too (I'm most familiar with 2 and 5).
Let's see... I don't anybody's mentioned Rimsky-Korsakov yet. Scheherezade
is quite famous and a great piece, but I've never heard any Rimsky-Korsakov
that I haven't liked. Berstein's Candide is wonderful (the music school's
production that's been running this weekend is fantastic -- if you haven't
seen it yet, you'd better rush to catch tomorrow's matinee). There's so
much more to mention; I'll get to it later to avoid producing a very long
list.
Did Mendelssohn write anything bad? I just acquired Scotch Symphony with Hebrides Overture. I have not found Sibelius interesting, what should I be listening for? In fact I have not found much written since 1900 interesting, but I am obviously missing something and would like to learn.
Sibelius's Finlandia is very popular. The Swan of Tuonela and Valse Triste used to be popular. The symphonies might be an acquired taste, except possibly for #2, which has always been popular. Don't worry if you like pre-1900 music better than post-1900 music. Most people feel the same way about it, and there's enough excellent pre-1900 music to keep an LP collector busy for years. Mendelssohn was extremely consistent. His music might not all be equally popular, but I don't think you'll find anything truly bad on LP. He was so consistent, in fact, that he could write the overture to Midsummer Night's Dream as a teenager and complete the rest of it in his thirties, and it all sounds of a piece. He never really "evolved" in that sense.
There's also a symphony by Sibelius that I've been hearing on the radio a lot, and which I'm coming to like a lot. Not sure what exactly it is, though.
What does it sound like?
heh. If I say it sounds rather like breakers crashing on a rocky shore, is that any help to anyone except me.
(That was *supposed* to end with a question mark. <sigh>)
2nd symphony, 4th movement
Hmm. I guess it *was* a helpful description. I'm not sure, but that sounds vaguely right. (I admit that I don't relate well to non-musical descriptions of music, and would have a *really* hard time identifying anything at all from a description such as the one I gave.)
The Polovstian Dances (I need to check that spelling!) from Borodin's Prince Igor are a good listen - well worth checking out. Some of Beethoven's Overtures are quite fun as well - especially the Egmont.
Saint-Saens wrote some very popular pieces, including Carnival of the Animals, Danse Macabre, his 3rd symphony (the so-called "Organ Symphony") and the Introduction and Rondo Capriccioso.
Sebelius 2 is fantastic... he's cool. Shostakovitch is great, I'm a huge fan of his 5th symphony.
I've also been hearing on the radio occasionally, & **really** liking, Dvorak's Bagatelles. To the best of my knowledge I'd never heard the things before a year or two ago.
Speaking of Dvorak, his Te Deum is an excellent piece - one which is quite often overlooked (well, over here anyway!).
Re 22-26 (and, in passing, 29): I guess the description wasn't so helpful, after all. I just heard the thing again, and it was the very end of Sibelius's Symphony No. 5 in E-Flat. Sorry for all the confusion. There were some earlier parts I wasn't so crazy about ...
I just discovered I liked Borodin, at least his Quartet No. 2 in D major. What else did he write besides of course No. 1? He was a physician and a chemistry professor who wrote music on the side, says the jacket.
His most famous pieces are the Polovtsian (sp?) Dances and In the Steppes of Central Asia. Many of his best tunes, including the famous melody from the 2nd quartet, can be heard in the musical "Kismet," which is based entirely on his music.
The BBC Music Magazine had Borodin as their composer of the month not too long ago, May 1998, I believe, if you want to learn more. I love the last movement of Sibelius's 5th symphony... it's got a great horn part.
Ever notice that the series of bass notes that accompany the horn part the first time it appears is the horn part at one-third speed?
No, I hadn't... but that does sound interesting. I'll take a listen. One thing I had noticed about that horn part, however, is that the intervals played there match the intervals played by the piano towards the end of the second movement of Rachmaninoff's Second Piano Concerto when the piano is accompanying that lush orchestral melody. I'm not suggesting that there's a quotation, but it's interesting to notice that the same sequence of intervals can sound so different musically, but they have the same spine-tingling effect. On me, at least.
You're right! I never noticed that. You know, the first time I heard Sibelius' 5th, the horn part in the 3rd movement reminded me of something, and I've never figured out what it is. (In forty years, no less.) I betcha that's it. The power of that movement is in the combination of the dense veil of strings, like a waterfall; the majestic horn theme; the woodwind theme, which the horns are actually only accompanying; and that oddly clumsy-sounding series of notes in the basses. It's breathtaking.
I did listen to the last movement of the 5th symphony, and that bassline is fascinating. I had honestly never noticed that before. I'm going to have to start tuning my ear to the lower part of the orchestra more often :) To add to this item's original topic, I'd like to suggest Roy Harris's 3rd symphony. I hadn't heard it until very recently (on one of the LPs I picked up from keesan in the auction), but since then I've discovered it popping up all over, including on two other recordings that were already here at home! On all of its liner notes, it's been called an "American classic". Interesting. Anyways, I particularly like the Pastoral section and the transition into that section. There are some incredible and unique woodwind harmonies going on there, and later on some fascinating melody bits passed around in the woodwind section. I'm calling them "bits" because they never seem to fully complete a thought before stopping and letting another instrument take over.
Harris's 3rd symphony is a wonderful piece of music, and you're right about those melody bits. There really are no coherent themes in the piece, although you get the impression they're trying to emerge in a couple of places, My favorite part is the first section. I like the way it starts with one voice (cellos), and then other voices join in one at a time, first in unisons and octaves, then in bare fifths, and eventually in multipart harmony. At the end of the first section there's a spot where the violins play an unaccompanied melodic line that rises to a high note, then quickly drops through a series of steep steps down to a low note which is audibly an open string. The note is held briefly, then resolves to a chord, A jaw- dropping effect. Believe it or not, Harris had a fairly rigorous theory behind the whole thing.
I can believe that, though the theory is probably way beyond me :) It'd be worth checking at the library for a miniature score, though, just for fun. In the last section of the piece, the predominant theme (although it's never completed without interruption, as has been pointed out) seems suspiciously familiar. Somebody was telling me that they had heard it as part of a Copland piece. Is this true? Could it be some adaptation of a folktune? Or is it familiar just because I might have heard it on the radio at some point?
The whole thing sounded familiar to me from the moment I first heard it. Its an American thing, I think. Visitors not welcome.
I went to the library today and, remarkably enough, they actually had the score to this symphony -- how many public libraries can say that, I wonder? I haven't really sat down with it yet, but I've followed along with it once. They way Harris wrote the gurgling woodwind passages and the shimmery, water-like string passages are pretty remarkable.
I haven't looked at a score of Harris' 3rd since I myself borrowed one from the music library at school, ages a go, but I remember thinking the same thing.
(by the way, as this is a tad off the subject, are the parts in an orchestral score written in concert pitch or the key of the instrument? Can it go either way, depending on in what era the music was written?)
It's been a long time, and I always played concert-key instruments myself, but ... I'm pretty sure that (say) trumpet or clarinet parts are not written in concert key but in the key appropriate for the instrument. (That's for the parts the players see; I don't know about the conductor's score, & won't bother you with speculations.) That said, after a certain level it's likely that the musician will sometimes find himself asked to play along with something from someone else's music; so players of those instruments are apt to learn at least some basic on-the-fly transposition skills.
When I played clarinet in an all-girls' junior high, which had no brass instrument players, we had a lot of practice in transposing the cornet and trumpet parts, which I think meant reading the line below (above?) the one written and being creative with the sharps and flats. We were pretty much bottom level but you cannot run an orchestra without someone playing the brass parts. It got to be normal after a while (like wearing those glasses that make things look upside down for a while). I can now use this talent to play Bach Well-Tempered Klavier pieces that have 7 sharps or flats in a key with fewer of them.
Hmmm, clarinets are pitched in Bb, as are all trumpets and cornets you'd find
in a school band, so there would be no need to transpose.
Full concert scores show the conductor the same music the player sees, so
there is no need to mentally transpose. However, condensed ("piano") scores
of 3 or 4 staves will be in concert pitch.
Regardless, it *is* a very good skill to learn, transposing (on the fly).
French horn players are habitually forced to do it, as most old parts were
written for Eb horn, whereas now horns are pitched in F, but no one is going
to go back and write out F horn parts for them! :-)
Right, I knew that each individual player's part was written in the correct key, being a French Horn player myself (and having played other instruments in the past). It was the conductor's score that I was curious about, as I was looking at some of the chords in the Harris score and I wasn't sure whether I'd need to transpose or not. It appears that I will. And, yes, transposition is a very necessary skill to have to play French Horn, especially in pieces originally written for natural horn. For example, I played in a Mozart opera fairly recently where every movement (is that the correct term when speaking of opera?) was in a different key.
Although, some contemporary composers do write their scores at sounding pitch. But they usually state if they have done so in the preface page. It can be frustrating if you have spent ages analysing a piece and then find out that you shouldn't have transposed parts of it!
Operas have acts, scenes, and whatnot. I'm not sure what units you're thinking of, but I don't think "movement" is correct.
The units I mean include each area, duet, trio, recitative, orchestral interlude, etc. Anything with music attached. I'm pretty sure 'movement' isn't the right word, too. The sad part is, I did thing of the word just a little while ago, but I forgot it again.
s/area/aria ??
*laugh* Yes, precisely...
I have typed up and uploaded to my home directory a list entitled RECORDS.99 which you are all welcome to read if someone will tell me how to change the read permission so it is readable. Please suggest what I should remove from or add to my collection. And let me know the names and dates of those composers who were referred to on the jackets simply by their last names (alongside a detailed biography of the performers). This is only the baroque and later part of the collection, and is intentionally heavy on baroque, also Haydn and Dvorak and Mendelssohn - did I miss any of their better works? In cases where there are three of something it was intentional, either I could not choose between them or a piece was combined with something else. Brahms Symphony No 3 may end up there in triplicate for such reasons. The list is of performances, not of records (some of which are therefore found scattered about under different composers). The Murray Hill is a 16 volume set which I will probably not keep, of lesser known performances, that was being discarded at Kiwanis - anyone want it for a starter set?
Your file is world-readable, Sindi. (Unless you do something to make it otherwise, files you create will normally be so.)
Thank you. Can anyone fill in the names and dates of any of the composer in /a/k/e/keesan/RECORDS.99? And suggest any good works that I have missed? And how do I change whether a file is readable or writable?
With the unix command chmod. You can look it up with the command man chmod at a unix prompt. The format is, for example, chmod 644 <filename> The number is a string of octal numbers. The first place (6) is permission for you, the second (4) for the group, and the last (4) for all others. Each octal number represents a binary number. 6 = 110, 4 = 100, etc. A 1 in the first place is an "on" for read permission; a 1 in the second place is an "on" for write permission; a 1 in the last place is an "on" for execution permission (for programs). Thus, 644 is personal read and write permission, but only read permission for others. 600 would produce a file depermitted for all others. The rules are a trifle different for directories. In your directory you see 644 written as -rw-r--r--, where rw- is the same as 110, and r-- is 100. Directories have to be executable, so you will see the x at the end, e.g., drwx--x--x = 711 is the permission for a directory that you have complete access to but others cannot read but they can read files in the directory (if you give them the file name). The common directory permission is 755, which allows others to read the directory file list as well as read files in the directory. (I wrote this tutorial to remind myself of the rules!)
This is beyond me. I discovered that I can read and write to files in my home directory, and read but not write to those in Jim's. If I ever need to make my files unreadable I will figure this out. Or not post private info there.
Two personal favorites which I don't find in keesan's list: Beethoven's 9th Symphony Stravinsky's Firebird Suite (not the entire ballet, which I find tedious)
Keesan, there is another way of using `chmod' which I find easier.
Instead of the octal numbers you use a three-part code.
The first part of the code contains a combination of: `u' for the owner
(yourself), `g' for the owner's group, `o' for everyone not in the group.
On a system like Grex, you can probably just lump `o' and `g' together
to refer to all users excluding the owner.
The first part can also be simply `a' to refer to everyone with an account
on the system.
The second part is either `+' to enable the permission or `-' to take
it away.
The third character stands for which permission: `r' for read, `w' for write,
or `x' for execute. There are a couple of others too, but they probably aren't
important to anyone except programmers and admins.
The most common cases would be:
chmod a+r <file> ; to make the file readable by all
chmod og-r <file> ; to make the file readable by only the owner
(you are taking read permissions away from the `g'roup
and `o'thers; it doesn't matter to the command whether
they had them in the first place or not)
chmod a+w <file> ; to make the file writable by all (probably not
a good idea)
chmod og-w <file> ; to make the file writable by only the owner
I hope this was helpful.
Here is some of the composer info you wanted, and a few personal
recommendations--none of them are baroque, but perhaps you'll give them a
listen.
Georges Bizet (1838-1875)
Max Bruch (1838-1920)
Marc-Antoine Charpentier (1634-1704)
Frederic Chopin (1810-1849)
Chopin wrote many sets of wonderful solo piano music, and I'd recommend
listening to his Etudes, Ballades, and Nocturnes for a start.
Claude Debussy (1862-1918)
Debussy wrote some Nocturnes as well, but his are for orchestra. Give
them a listen.
Paul Dukas (1865-1935)
Antonin Dvorak (1841-1904)
Georges Enesco (1881-1955)
Gabriel Faure (1845-1924)
Faure wrote some fantastic chamber music. One of my favorites is his
opus 120 trio for violin, cello, and piano.
Christoph Gluck (1714-1797)
Edvard Grieg (1843-1907)
Try the Piano Concerto (A minor, I believe).
Zoltan Kodaly (1882-1967)
Edouard Lalo (1823-1892)
Gustav Mahler (1860-1911)
Marin Marais (1656-1728)
Felix Mendelssohn (1809-1847)
Modest Mossorgsky (1839-1881)
Niccolo Paganini (1782-1840)
Sergey Rachmaninoff (1873-1943)
I love Rachmaninoff's music. Some things to try are his other piano
concerti (there are four in all), the preludes for piano, and symphony
no. 2
Ottorino Respighi (1879-1936)
Respighi wrote a whole "Roman triptych", which consists of The Pines
of Rome, The Fountains of Romes, and Roman Festivals. My favorite of
them is The Pines of Rome.
Nikolay Rimsky-Korsakov (1844-1908)
Camille Saint-Saens (1835-1921)
Johann Strauss the Younger (1825-1899)
Igor Stravinsky (1882-1971)
Many thanks for all the information about changing read and write permssions,
and all those dates and suggestions. I print-screened it all (Yes I know how
to extract an item but it is too much work). I have all nine Beethoven
Symphonies, two of most of them, and have sung the Ninth, just forgot to list
them for some reason.
Kiwanis has classical LPs for 10 and 25 cents, so I just borrowed $5.60
worth to test out and see if I can tell apart the same piece played by
different performers. Most are in excellent condition. The more expensive
LPs ( up to a dollar) tend to be more recent popular stuff. You would not
believe the number of records of Tijuana Brass! (Also in the ten cent area).
TJ Brass? I'm a big fan, however I only have 4 of thier albums
((I would indeed believe the number of Tijuana Brass albums turning up at Kiwanis. I vaguely recall they were the #3 selling band of the 1960s. Sometime I should see if any of the Kiwanis TJB LPs are in better shape than some of the copies I have. :) Should we start a TJB item in the Music conference, omni?))
Sure.
I have collected some Chopin (piano sonatas 2 and 3, 4 ballades, Piano Concerto 2), Rachmaninoff (Concerto 2 and Symphony 1 and Symphonic Dances) and now Liszt's Hungarian Rhapsodies 1 and 2 and Enesco's Romanian Rhapsodies 1 and 2. Thanks for the suggestions. What else did Enesco and Liszt write, and were there other good Romanian and Hungarian composers besides Bartok? Has anyone heard of any Bulgarian or Yugoslav classical composers? Polish other than Chopin? Czech other than Dvorak, Smetana?
Hungarian: Kodaly, Ligeti, Dohnanyi Polish: Lutoslawski, Penderecki, Gorecki Those are the ones whose music I've liked enough to have on disc, anyway. Antal Dorati, who was better-known as a conductor, wrote a symphony that I like very much. He was Hungarian. When you talk about Hungarians, you probably need to distinguish the Magyars from the Szekelers, which I can't do for you except to say that Bartok boasted of being a Magyar.
Magyar is the Hungarian word for Hungarian. Janacek is Czech. Which of the above were pre-20th century?
They're all 20th century.
How does one change a mono recording to stereo? I found a library book listing the author's fifty favorite composers, starting with Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. (talk request, bye for now)
You don't. Mono is mono, and will never be stereo. Well, you CAN, but then you would need some sophisticated equipment, and even then you may not get true stereo. My impression is that the piece needs to be recorded in stereo to be stereo.
I agree. Some amplifiers have settings called "simulated stereo" and "simulated surround" that add a reverberation effect, and in some cases shift the bass to one channel and the treble to the other, but it never sounds like the real thing.
I have records that were 'digitally remastered' from mono to stereo. Toscanini performances. How did they do this? Would anyone else besides the author of my book want to list who they consider to be the top 50 (or at least top 10) classical composers? I will refrain from posting #4 and beyond for a while. This author heavily favored the 19th century and listed only Palestrina as a good Renaissance composer. He apparently felt obliged to include a few 20th century composers. 0 women. Were there any women composers before 1900? Have there been any since then?
Vinyl records are pressed from what is called a "master" which is essentially a reverse record. The "remastering" usually involves adding a second channel to the master tape, then recutting a new master disk for pressing from the new master tape. The tape in this case is usually 16 track with 8 being devoted to each channel. Telarc Records of Cleveland uses a unique process in which they do most of the mastering in the studio or concert hall as the piece is being recorded thus forgoing the need for additional tweaking. The result is magnificent. With the advent of CD's, the technology has gotten more and more sophisticated. There are DDD disks which use all digital equipment to produce the CD, and AAD which employs analog tape, but digital recording to the disks. Try Clara Shubert.
I think that by "Clara Shubert" is meant Clara Schumann, wife of Robert. She wrote some music of her own: it's fairly good, if you like stuff that's vaguely a cross between Robert's music and the Chopin/Liszt school. There are in fact many pre-20th century women composers, but no undiscovered masterpieces have come to my hearing, though some pleasant enough works have. This isn't a slight against women: great composers are much rarer than great writers, partly because extensive musical training is almost always needed to express one's gift. Consequently "mute inglorious Miltons" are probably legion, and since, as feminism has taught us, women have always been slighted in the educational sweepstakes, it's only logical that gifted women will be even less likely to get the chance to write masterpieces. Equally no wonder, then, that the number of significant women composers in the 20th century is much greater. My favorite living woman composer is Ellen Taafe Zwilich, a fine craftswoman in the Copland/Barber tradition. And nobody interested in the more intriguing exotica of modern music should fail to check out the truly strange Russian, Galina Ustvolskaya.
OK, some "top" composers: JS Bach, WA Mozart, LV Beethoven (BTW, those 3 made A&E's "top 100 people of the millennium, so they *must* be great, right? ;-). I guess you get into a debate of quality vs. quantity (with some acceptable level of quality). I think that Tchaikovsky should probably be on the list. Rimsky-Korsakov, Stravinsky, Shostakovich are some other top-notch Russkies. For sheer output, you have Hadyn and Telemann. I guess I'd be more comfortable with a "top 50" rather than "top 10", as you could then bring in a lot more without having to weigh QvQ issues so much... And don't forget some truly brilliant composers most frequently associated with jazz, but "crossovers": George Gershwin and Duke Ellington.
Another Polish composer, 20th Century: Szymanowski. I only know of him because Leslie sang in the chorus for his opera "King Roger." I don't have a good grasp of how mono recordings were turned into fake stereo, but it was quite common for maybe two decades, a legacy from the era when the word "stereo" meant that the recording had to be better than a recording with the word "mono." Audiophiles whined constantly about fake stereo reissues of old monaural recordings, and maybe around 1980-ish the record companies started to put out their historical reissues in mono, when that was what they had for the original master. "Electronically reprocessed STEREO" is now pretty dead and buried, as far as I can tell.
Feel free to list a top 50, as the book did. I found another book on great composers listing the top 26. To shorten the list they omitted the Renaissance, confined the Baroque to Bach and Handel, and shortened the 20th Century to Stravinsky, Bartok, Ravel, and the additional Holst and Gershwin. They also added Offenbach and Elgar and Rachmaninov, not on the first list. A major omission was Wagner, number 4 in the first book! 'Great' meant different things to the two authors, obviously. I suspect the first author was doing a list of historically important figures, as he included von Weber (who sounds just like a parody by Mozart). He had some pretty nasty things to say about Wagner, but included him anyway. The second author chose composers of broadly-appreciated music, omitting Richard Strauss but including Gershwin. So was the fake stereo produced by playing high sounds in one channel and low sounds in the other? I will listen to my recording and make guesses. What do people think of music that requires a story-line to listen to it? (Tone poems, ballets, movie music). Some composers seem to have specialized in it. I don't get the point of listening to movie music sans movie.
You would probably get a fake stereo if one channel was slightly time shifts. At least, it would sound a little echo-like. I liken mono to listening to music through a hole in the wall, and stereo to listening to it through two holes in the wall.
We listen to records through a hole in the wall called the kitchen door,
actually it has to pass through two doors and around three corners. I think
the high notes probably get somewhat attenuated. Maybe I should turn up the
treble?
Just heard Handel's Dixit Dominus. Did Handel write any bad music?
Aren't two ears also two holes in the wall?
Yes, but they can receive the sounds emanating from *many* holes in the wall (up to, no wall at all, as in a concert hall).
I can't think of a single piece of "program music" that I listen to solely because of a story line. If the music itself is bad, it wouldn't matter to me that it's based on a great story. If the music is good, it wouldn't matter that it's based on a silly story, either. Anyway, I don't think it's possible for music alone to tell a story. There have to be words for that. Re movie music, some of it is quite good. Some of it is shamelessly imitative. Bill Conti, who wrote the famous "Rocky" theme, steals from serious composers right and left. He stole the music for "Victory" from Shostakovich's 5th symphony. He stole the soul-lifting main theme for "The Right Stuff" from Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto. Sometimes a film composer will borrow a style from another composer. A good example is the music John Williams wrote for the celebrated forest battle in Return of the Jedi; it sounds exactly like a scherzo Prokofiev might've writen for one of his symphonies or ballets. In fact, if there was a market for elaborate musical parodies, John Williams would corner it.
Isn't PDQ Bach a strong contender? I just got about 50 slightly used cassette tapes at Kiwanis. (Tapes run up to a dollar for prerecorded, generally 10 cents for home recordings). What is the difference in quality between: TDK D series is normal bias, TDK SA and SD both high bias. Memorex dBS and MRX I, both normal bias Maxell: XL II, UD II (high bias), UD and C and LN (all normal bias). I also have BASF LH-EI and BASF Professionall II (high bias) Fuji FR-II (high bias), Sondy HF, MP 8 , Scotch BX. (I did not get the no-name, Radio Shack, or K-MART). TDK AD lab standard. Memorex MRX3 Oxide. Maxell UDII CD Maxell Metal. I have not found much program music that I like. Mussorgsky is nice. Any recommendations? The author of my first book decided to teach himself about classical music at age 70 or so, after a career as assistant secretary of defense, and took copious notes which ended up as a book for other beginners. How do I set a tape deck that has two buttons for the above types of tape? Bias norm or CrO2 (presumably same as high). Eq. norm or CrO2. FeCr is supposed to be norm bias CrO2 eq. Is FeCr metal? What setting to use for MRX oxide?
Re program music:
There are some excellent tone poems that are
supposedly based on more or less detailed programs.
Richard Strauss perfected the genre. Most of his
music grates on my nerves so cruelly that I can't
get much enjoyment out of it, though. Dvorak wrote
a series of very engaging tone poems. Sibelius
composed some beautiful music under this heading.
The Swan of Tuonela and Tapiola are two of my
favorites. In modern times, we've seen some tone
poems in which either there is no program or else
the composer ain't talkin'. Barber's Fadograph of
a Yestern Scene and his three Essays are examples
of this. One programmatic piece that I find
breathtaking but that you probably wouldn't have
much use for, keesan, is Elliott Carter's Concerto
for Orchestra, which he based on St John Perse's
poem "Vents" ("Winds"). There are examples all
over the place. As always, find what you love and
and love it.
I'd say Smetana's Moldau is program music, & it's very nice - part of a longer
work ("My Fatherland" or some such) which as a whole is good, if I recall.
I'm not very fond of the genre as such, but I think that's because it became
fashionable after the musical styles I like best were no longer used. I can't
really imagine liking a piece *because* of some non-musical association the
composer had in mind, but if it's musically good I don't mind its being
program music.
(In that last bit, I think I'm just agreeing with what Michael said in #83.)
I found some more nice program music by Rimsky-Korsakoff, Mussorgsky, Borodin and Glinka. At least the names of the pieces sound like program music. I will give Smetana a try. Supposedly later Richard Strauss was less awful. Also listened to 1812 Overture and Beethoven's Wellington's Sieg - probably supposed to be shooting but I heard fireworks. (Re the 1812, Jim thought he recognized the tune. I said it was Chaikovsky. Jim said Chaikovsky must have stolen the tune from the 1812 Overture. Jim is not good at this, he was serious. But he likes the same music I do despite a memory problem). Francesca da Rimini, also by Chaikovsky, I did not find interesting. It seems not to make much sense without the story line from Dante. Am I wrong? Are songs (vocal) considered program music? How about songs without words? Jim recognized Stranger in Paradise in one classical piece played on the radio this afternoon - can anyone name it? 'Take my hand, I'm a stranger in paradise.' (For someone who claims to have a memory problem he can recall an awful lot of lyrics). He thinks several other melodies from that same piece were made into popular songs. "The bear went over the mountain" was in a piece mentioned above-which? What is the original tune called?
A Night on Bald Mountain by Stravinsky? It's Tchaiskovski. or something like that.
Moussorgsky. "Stranger in Paradise," and all the other music in the musical "Kismet," is based on Borodin. I love Smetana's Moldau. The main theme eventually became "Hatikvah," the Israeli national anthem.
[A tune in Wellington's Victory sounds like "The Bear Went over the Mountain."] I don't think songs, with or without words, are ever referred to as "program music." Ballet scores might qualify, however, as does what is called "incidental music" -- music meant to be performed during the action or between the scenes of a stage play. Some of it is quite famous, such as Sibelius' "Valse Triste," which is one of the musical numbers he wrote for a play by his brother- in-law in which, among other things, a woman dances a waltz with Death. "Valse Triste" was staggeringly popular in its day, but is now all but forgotten.
Re resp:89 - Hm, guess I didn't know that about "Kismet." Kind of like "Carmen Jones", where the music is Bizet but the words are Oscar Hammerstein II.
I usually don't think of ballet & incidental music as program music, but I feel the same way about it - if it's good music, it's good music. In this category, I think my favorites are Tchaikowski's Romeo & Juliet & Mendelsohn's Midsummer Night's Dream. _A_propos_ the latter, maybe 15 years ago I heard (on some NPR program) a performance of it with Shakespeare's words added. I think it was a live concert; wish I could find a recording of it. (I tried.) Same for Carnival of the Animals with Ogden Nash's verse; I've heard that on the radio more than once but never been able to find a recording.
I don't understand why there is often a stigma attached to program music. Is it considered less serious than "pure" music? Many of my favorite pieces are considered program music. Does that mean that I have bad musical taste? And, on a side note, what is it about Richard Strauss that seems to bother several people here? Strauss isn't one of my favorite composers, but I don't object to his music and there are some pieces that I particularly like, such as Death and Transfiguration, and Don Quixote. (I enjoy his horn music, too, but that sounds so different from his tone poems that I don't think it falls into the same category).
Maybe a larger percentage of program music was written by people who could not write good music and tried to sell the titles?
I always had the understanding that "program music" was music created for its own merit, not associated with an opera, symphony, concerto, etc. (Although a symphony itself could be considered program music, I guess.) If that understanding is correct, I don't see what could be more "serious" than program music.
Well, it does mean a piece of music that stands on its own, but it also means a piece of music that's written to depict something (like Wellington's Victory etc.) rather than just for the sake of the way it sounds.
Ja, OK. But what does "serious" have to do about it?
The term "program music" means, not music designed to be played on a program, but music _with_ a program, i.e. that tells a story. Tone poems, like Richard Strauss's, or Smetana's "Moldau", or the "1812 Overture", are program music; symphonies and concertos usually aren't. There is a tendency for program music to appear more on pops concerts than regular symphony concerts, and to be the preferred classical music of people who don't listen to much classical: that's one source for the notion that program music is less serious. I, for one, tend to find program music less satisfying than abstract works, but it would be a long job to explain why. That's not the only reason I find Richard Strauss terminally boring, though. (Mahler is frequently abstract, and even more tedious.) I found the key to my problems with Strauss when I listened to Lorin Maazel's 60-minute orchestral precis of Wagner's Ring Cycle. It sounded like a 60-minute Richard Strauss tone poem, except that it was a lot better than any actual 60-minute Richard Strauss tone poem.
From e-webster: program music Function: noun Date: 1879 : music intended to suggest a sequence of images or incidents So my "understanding" of program music was wrong, exactly opposite. So yes, I could see how some "snob types" might assert that music written to tell or support a story is less serious than music written for its own sake. But what's the point of such an assertion? Take Dvorak's "New World" symphony: Yes, it's a symphony in form, but its melodic elements are impressions of what he heard visiting the USA. Now those melodies might or might not have been taken from folk music that told a story. But it shows that to write serious music you need not have it burst forth from some "fountain of seriousness". Tchaikovsky's Finale of his 4th symphony builds on a melody based on a Russian folk tune. Well, why the heck not?!
;From Arthur Loesser's Men, Women, and Pianos, a Social History: Favorite subjects for program music included storms (rain, waves, wind), shepherds playing pipes, etc. Josef Wolfls at an 1800 concert played" "The quiet sea--the rise of a squall--lightning, thunder, a heavy storm which however subsides after some time--former conditions of the sea--transition into a well-known song on which the player makes variations and improvisations" Another favorite topic was dances, and yet another battle scenes. It did not take a lot of musical talent to write bugle calls, cannon shots, cavalry charges, fog of battle, cries of hte wounded, national anthems, and victory balls. There was a special notation for pianistic cannon shots (played with the flat of the hand on the lowest notes). In fact two notations, one for English and one for French cannon, were used in Wellington's Sieg. Hybrids: Hummel's Waltzes with Trios and a Battel-Coda for the Apollo Rooms. "This coda has been described as undanceable; thus, we might arrive at a picture of the Apollo Rooms customers suddenly poising on tiptoe in mid-waltze to enjoy the musical fracas." Special pedals were often built into early 19th century pianos with which to imitate bells and drums for military pieces.
There's really something of a continuum between program music and abstract music. Using a folk tune (like Tchaikovsky), or something that sounds like a folk tune but isn't (like Dvorak's New World), doesn't make a piece program music, though it may make it national music. Some supposedly abstract works have "secret" programs that the composer had in mind but that he didn't intend listeners to know about: that's the case for all of Tchaikovsky's major symphonies (nos. 4-6). Then there are people who, preferring program music and having a hard time treating abstract music as abstract, have written their own programs, sometimes attributing them to the composer. The story that the theme of Beethoven's Fifth is "Fate knocking at the door" is an example of that. There was a lot of this fake program-writing going on in the 19th century, and that, more than anything else, is what gave program music a bad name among abstract-music lovers.
I have heard that Beethoven's Fifth is written "about" the French Revolution. Supposedly some of the themes are taken from Revolutionary songs of the fighters.
Not only is it possible to superimpose a program on an abstract work, it's also possible to make up a new program for music that already has one. Disney did that in Fantasia, where, for example, music for a ballet about a ritual sacrifice in pagan Russia becomes the accompaniment to a kindergarten history of life on earth up to the extinction of the dinosaurs. I think program music was generally regarded as a category of music neither good nor bad in itself until those cherubs' asses morphed into pink love-hearts during Beethoven's 6th in Fantasia. It takes artistic integrity and a real effort of will to look at that and say, "Nevertheless . . ."
I think I can say with a fair hope at accuracy that there are no French revolutionary tunes in Beethoven's Fifth or any others of his symphonies. There's a story that the Third (the "Eroica") was originally dedicated to Napoleon, but that when he declared himself Emperor, Beethoven angrily tore up the page. But that story may well be no more accurate than the one about "Fate knocking at the door." The Eroica is sometimes seen as presenting a biographical picture of an anonymous Great Man, but if viewed as program music it's rather odd, as what is the Funeral March doing in the middle? Possibly the work you're thinking of is "Wellington's Victory", a stunningly awful piece of hackwork that Beethoven tossed off for some celebratory concert. In it, the English, represented by "God Save the King", defeat (by being louder than) the French, who if I recall correctly are represented by "The Bear Went Over the Mountain".
(Actually, the Fantasia use of the music from the Rite of Spring wasn't as ridiculous as it sounds, since IIRC -- it's been a while since I've seen it -- the music they use is mostly "nature waking itself up" rather than dancing or sacrifice) (And I think the French are represented by the French song whose tune was borrowed for "The Bear Went Over the Mountain," if that makes any sort of difference)
See the new item I just started in Music on popular music at Kiwanis. Gems from the classical collection in the ten cent bin: 1. Phillipe Entremont: Ritual Fire Dance and other Piano Pieces 2. Jessica Crawford at the Organ (with heavy mascara): Gypsy Love Song, A Wandering Minstrel, Buttercup, Artist's Life, Treasure Waltz, and other organ favorites (?) 3. Antonio Janigro, An Album of Cello Favorites. Granados Goyescas, Paradies Sicilienne, Senaille Allegro spiritoso, Popper Chanson villageoise, Falla Ritual Fire Dance, Popper Papillon, and some better known composers 4. Mendelssohn Songs Without Words 5. Miniatures by Johann Strauss 6. Biedermeier Dance Music III, Joseph Lanner, Dances Polkas and Waltzese by Joseph Lanner, including Wilde Jagd, the Dance Around the Bride, Favorit Polka (1801-1843). The book on piano music I am reading mentions that a lot of easy popular music was written in the nineteenth century (playable on organ). Anyone know more about any of the above? These are the records that did not sell for five months, even at ten cents, but must have been popular at one time.
Mendelssohn's "Songs without Words" are miniature piano pieces which were highly popular in the 19th century, but are way too sugary for most people's tastes today. The most famous, "Spring Song", has shown up on old animated cartoons to comically accompany characters weaving around drunk on springtime love. I've seen those cartoons a lot more often than I've heard the piece in concert. Josef Lanner was the first of the red-hot Viennese waltz masters. He was pretty much driven off the market, though, by the superior product of one Johann Strauss, who in turn was succeeded by his even more talented son, Johann Strauss the Younger, who is surely the Johann Strauss of the other CD, as _he_ was the guy who wrote "The Beautiful Blue Danube", "Tales from the Vienna Woods", and the other works that actually survive from the Biedermeier civilization. I've rarely heard any Lanner, and didn't find it too memorable, but it could be an interesting historical curiosity if you like that sort of stuff.
'the other CD'? We are talking vinyl here. Has anyone ever heard or even heard of Ritual Fire Dance before? I have played Songs without Words and like them.
According to http://www.wfu.edu/wfunews/releases/092399v.htm, there is someone named Phillipe Entremont who is a conductor and piano soloist with the Vienna Chamber Orchestra as of this year. No idea about the piece, though; never heard of it.
Isn't Ritual Fire Dance from Falla's El Amor Brujo? I'm not familiar with much Falla beyond El Sombrero de Tres Picos, which I love, so I can't confirm that.
I never even heard of Falla until running across him at Kiwanis. What can you tell us about him (her?).
Manuel de Falla. Spanish. Early 20th century. Wrote some colorful Spanish-sounding music that became very popular, including the aforementioned El Amor Brujo (Love, the Magician) and El Sombrero de Tres Picos (The Three-Cornered Hat). The latter is truly brilliant, in my opinion. His name appeared in a memorable NY Times crossword puzzle that featured puns on the names of famous composers: "HANDELWITHCARE," "PUTOUTDEFALLA."
CD, LP, whatever. De Falla's "Ritual Fire Dance" is a snappy little show-stopper. Part of a ballet, it was written for orchestra but is often arranged. I've heard it on harp.
Which composers are generally thought of as writing 'light classical'? (I have recently seen it as Lite).
A few composers (Johann Strauss, for one) wrote only light classics, but most of the best light classics were written by composers who also wrote "heavy classics". Even the Three B's, some of the "heaviest" composers of all, wrote their share of light classics: Bach's "Air on the G String" and "Sheep May Safely Graze", Beethoven's "Fuer Elise" and "Turkish March", Brahms's "Academic Festival Overture" and "Hungarian Dances". But some composers whose most often- played works are mostly light include Edvard Grieg, Franz Liszt, and that one-work wonder Bedrich Smetana of "Moldau" fame. (Yes, I know he wrote lots more, but radio stations apparently don't know it.)
You musn't forget Leroy Anderson, master light classical composer and creator of such popular works as "Sleigh Ride", "Bugler's Holiday", and "The Typewriter".
And of course, the classic "Syncopated Clock" which has always been one of my favorites.
Grofe ("Grand Canyon Suite", etc.)
Can anyone suggest outstanding compositions by lesser-known composers who only wrote one or at most a few good things? Something on the order of Pachelbel's Canon, Faure's Requiem or Bizet's Carmen. A few things I ran across that I like are Pergolesi's Stabat Mater, Borodin's Polovetsian Dances, Bruch Violin Concerto, Enescu's Romanian Rhapsody, Franck's Symphonic Variations and Symphony. In other words favorite pieces by not-so-favorite composers or composers who wrote very little.
Actually most of those composers wrote quite a lot. Faure, for instance, wrote a lot of outstanding chamber music; and Bizet's Symphony is a delight. Borodin's Polovetsian Dances is (are?) an excerpt from a whole opera, "Prince Igor", and two other pieces by him show up in pops concerts a lot: an infectious tone poem called "In the Steppes of Central Asia" and the "Nocturne" arranged from his String Quartet No. 2. Some other purportedly "one work" composers whose most famous work I like a lot -- these are all early 20c -- are Holst's "The Planets", Janacek's "Sinfonietta", and Orff's "Carmina Burana". Turning back to the late 19c, I'm suddenly flashing on "The Funeral March of a Marionette" by Charles Gounod, now vaguely forgotten but once famous as Alfred Hitchcock's tv show theme (I'm told). And there's a work, once hugely popular but now entirely forgotten, "The Rustic Wedding Symphony" by Karl Goldmark, who never wrote anything else that I know about.
Elgar's "Pomp and Circumstance march number (I think) four" a.k.a what they play at all the graduations. Elgar apparently was a well-respected composer at the time, but I only know his name on account of that one piece.
But both Holst and Elgar wrote lotza lotza stuff. And a lot of it I would consider good stuff. Whether it's well known or "hits" is another matter...
Elgar's "Enigma" variations remains a popular piece, and much of his other music sells well enough for the Elgar section at Harmony House to be quite ample. Holst is less well represented, but there are still many well-known pieces. If you've ever played in a high school band, you probably know Holst's two concert suites for band. I would consider Samuel Barber a true one-hit composer, along the lines of Pachelbel. He wrote barely 50 opus numbers, none of which even comes close to the Adagio for Strings in popularity. I would've said his Violin Concerto is a close second, but really nothing comes close to the Adagio, which, in the estimate of one man (Ned Rorem, an envious no-hit composer) is *always* being played, somewhere in the world, at any given moment.
You forget "School for Scandal"... (Sammy Barber)
Really? Is it programmed much? I think it's a wonderful piece, and was happy to see the little oboe tune from the trio section excerpted as a Christmas melody by John Fahey on one of his Christmas CDs; but I didn't think the overture was listened to enough to save Sammy from one-hitdom.
Pachelbel wrote some other rather nice stuff - I heard some, all things for harpsichord (if I recall) some 25 years ago, so I don't recall very well. The one piece of Bruch's which *I* would pick is the Scottish Fantasy. The violin concerto you (keesan) mention has a similar flavor, & is very nice. I've heard other things of his which I don't like as well. (Remember, I mostly don't like anything recognizably 20th-century ...) I also like Faure's Requiem enough to think of it as if it were his one major piece, but indeed he wrote others well worth listening to. Michael, you forgot Barber's Agnus Dei (heh, heh).
Well, presumably the guy did _write_ other stuff. You don't just wake up one morning out of the blue, write the Adagio for Strings, and then forget all about it.
He wrote the Adagio when he was twenty-six, as the slow movement of a string quartet. (He wrote to a friend, "It's a knockout," so he knew.) He then arranged it for full string orchestra and gave it to Toscanini, who premiered it.) There is very little of Barber's music that I would consider negligible; several works are masterpieces. The trouble with his music is that most of it is a shade too cultivated to please the masses of people who love the Adagio, but way too old-fashioned to have pleased the critics and academics who were hung up on serialism and minimalism during most of his creative life. Plus, he didn't have a "theory" or "school" or "movement" to back his music up with; I think that made it inaudible to people who need such things. "I just keep on doing, as they say, my thing," he once remarked; "I think that takes a certain courage." The trouble with Barber himself seems to be that he was an outspoken guy who made enemies of some very powerful people. At the height of the Ives craze, for example, he could've just kept his mouth shut or made noncommittal noises to spare the feelings of the various luminaries who were "discovering" Ives. But he said what he thought: Ives was "a clumsy amateur." He used to taunt serialist Rene Liebowitz by referring to him as "Maestro Ztiwobeil," and then ask, "What's the matter? Don't you recognize your own name in retrograde?" Stuff like that. It caught up with him, in spades, when his opera Antony and Cleopatra bombed at the opening of the new Met in 1966. A *very* high-profile failure. The critics went into a feeding frenzy; Barber sank into a depression from which he never fully recovered. Favorite Barber works of mine: School for Scandal Overture (wrote it when he was 20) Music for a Scene from Shelley First Symphony Essay #1 and Essay #2 Capricorn Concerto (flute, oboe, trumpet and strings) Violin Concerto Cello Concerto Medea (ballet score) Knoxville: Summer of 1915 (soprano and orchestra) Summer Music (woodwind quintet) Vanessa (opera) Toccata Festiva (organ and orchestra) Piano Concerto The Lovers (oratorio on poems by Pablo Neruda) Fadograph of a Yestern Scene I would say his big-ticket masterpieces are probably Knoxville: Summer of 1915, Vanessa, and the Piano Concerto. So there you have way more about "Sammy" than you probably wanted to know.
Thanks, I will try Barber and Elgar. More suggestions will be welcome.
I didn't know about those snippy comments of Barber's (on Ives and Leibowitz, two people I can mostly live without). I think more highly of him for having made them. Perhaps Ives would not have objected to being called a clumsy amateur. He reveled in being a clumsy amateur. _The_ Elgar Pomp and Circumstance march, the one everyone knows from graduation, is No. 1. The famous part isn't the first theme, either, so don't be alarmed when, at the beginning of the track, you think, "Uh, oh, I've got the wrong one." Under the title, "Land of Hope and Glory," it became a famous British hymn, one of two to come from classical compositions of that era, the other being "I Vow To Thee My Country" (which some may remember from Princess Diana's funeral), which came from Holst's _Planets_ (Jupiter). The popularity of these led to an era when conservative British composers put wanna-be hymns in most of their compositions ...
Can anyone tell me more about the following composers, all of whom died on Mozart's birthday, which happens to also be my brother's birthday? ---- From: "Morris M. Keesan" <keesan@world.std.com> To: "C. Keesan" <keesan@cyberspace.org> Subject: Re: Happy Mozart's 200+ Yes, Verdi died on 27 January 1901. Other composers who died on 27 January include 1629 Hieronymus Praetorius 1802 Johann Rudolf Zumsteeg 1850 Philipp Roth 1851 Karl Moser 1904 Adam Minchejmer 1930 Jean Hure 1941 Iver Paul Fredrik Holter 1949 Boris Asafiev 1954 Paul-Marie Masson 1964 Lieb Glanz 1969 Hanns Jelinek 1978 Marguerite Canal none of whom I had ever heard of before looking them up at http://www.scopesys.com/anyday/ . I recognized only Praetorius, and I recall he was born by some other name. What sort of music did the others write? (I will impress my brother with your answers).
Never heard of 'em. [One of my favorite Barber stories is the time his live-in lover, Gian-Carlo Menotti, threw a party at their Mount Kisco place for a bunch of show biz types (Menotti was the party animal of the duo) and Barber locked himself in the bathroom for the whole evening because he didn't want to meet Talulah (sp?) Bankhead.]
The Praetorius I know was (I think) Michael, but either I could be wrong or Hieronymus could be his real name. Never heard of the rest of them, AFAIK.
There were two Praetoriuses, Michael (nee Schulz) being better known.
Philip Roth the author sounds familiar, but not Philipp Roth the composer. Yeah, these are all new to me too.
Maybe I should check that site for composers who died on my own birthday.
I've played a renaissance (sounding) band arrangement of a suite by a Praetorious, first name Jan. Didn't recognize the other composers.
Okay, how would you choose from the followng versions of Brahms' Variations on Haydn? 1. Bruno Walter and Columbia Symphony Orchestra, pre 1962 (he died then), Columbia Odyssey mono 2. George Szell and Cleveland Orchestra, 'Mom and Dad for XMAS 1972', Columbia Masterworks stereo 3. Leonard Bernstein and NY Philharmonic, dated 1978, stereo, Columbia Masterworks 4. Herbert von Karajan, Berlin Philharmonic, D. Grammophon, with jacket nots in French, English and German (nice for a translator, good translations) Choose one or at most two, and please explain why. None are scratched - usually that makes the choice easier, though I have picked scratchy Artur Rubinstein over unscratchy Serkin (who plays more like a computer). I don't mind the mono.
I'd keep 'em all, but if I had to have only one it would be the Karajan if it predates about 1980. Otherwise, Bruno Walter. Brahms needs careful deliberation and a little old-fashioned European sentiment, both of which Walter and Karajan excelled at, imho. But without hearing the recordings, this is just guesswork. My advice is listen to all four and decide for yourself.
Btw, I have the Haydn Variations by Toscanini on LP and by Bernstein on CD. I like Toscanini better, but the sound on the Bernsein DG CD is spectacular.
No date on the Karajan but I have not found a record dated after 1978 at Kiwanis yet. I also have Bruno Walter's 3rd and 4th Symphonies - and Bernstein'a 4th and Karajan's 3rd. Handel - Five choices on the Water Music. I think I will skip the arrangment by Eugene Ormandy (on the same record as Sir Hamilton Harty's reorchestration of Fireworks Music). Leaving: 1. Vanguard quadraphonic, Augmented Wind Ensemble of the English Chamber Orchestra, Johannes Somary, 'a suite drawn from the original version', consisting of 11 pieces. 9 trumpets, soloist John Wilbraham. 2. Westminster Gold, stereo, Vienna State Opera Orchestra, Scherchen, 48 minutes of something unspecified. 'As basic sources we must acknowledge the folloing: (five manuscripts). MCMLXX. This one seems to be the most complete but neither on the jacket nor on the record is there any list of movements. 3. Argo/Decca, 1972, Academy of St Martin-in-the-Fields, Neville Marriner (who I read did not use period instruments then). Consisting of three suites, in G, D and F, from one manuscript in the Fitzwilliam Museum. Counting Menuet and Trio as two rather than one, there are 20 movements. Fireworks Music on the same record. 4. MHS, digitally recorded, 1986 (I spoke too soon on dates above), Royal Philharmonic under Yehudi Menuhin. Combined on one record with Fireworks Music, Amaryllis Suite, but on the part of one side where it is located, they fit in (in the arrangment by A. Baines) 13 movements. Nothing about original instruments in any of the recordings. Anthony Baines took the three suites and selected and edited and arranged them to form a suite. His editing includes some alteration fo the original note values and the addition of some ornaments and phrase markings. Baines himself added optional timpani, trombone, flute, bassoon and clarinet parts, all of which are used here. Does MHS tend to use altered versions very often? Any reason to keep anything but the Academy version? One comment is that Handel might have composed various water musics at various times and then got sort of confused together. The only reference to period instruments is the Vanguard quadruphonic, in which the augmented orchestra contains: 13 listed oboe players 'etc.', five bassoon players 'etc.' , two contrabassoons, two serpents, lots of horns and trumpets. MCMLXXII They chose to record only the best of the movements. 'it seems clear that the Water Music was not all written at the same time and as one unit, why not make up one's own suite as did Handel himself for a concert he conducted in 1741?' Possibly the D-Major movements were written in 1717 and the F-major in 1715 for a different barge part. They 'utilize Handel's own magnificent original scoring', including a harpsichord. Apparently only 2 oboes and one bassoon were recorded in any one movement. Please help me to choose two or three of these. Back to the Brahms. I like all the versions and will have to listen more closely.
The Hatry-Handel sounded like a large mostly string orchestra, with lots of variations in dynamics and tempo. More 19th century than Baroque. Ormandy-Handel sounded much the same. That record also had three movements from a Corelli trio sonata played by a string orchestra, with lots of variations in tempo and dynamics. Vanguard quadraphonic is playing Royal Fireworks with mostly winds and percussion, 24 oboes, 12 bassoons. (The Water Music used 2 bassoons). I doubt the string version of Fireworks would have been audible above the fireworks. (Were there actual fireworks)? We have a quadraphonic receiver, but not turntable. The photo inside shows half the players on a balcony. Does one put two speakers overhead?
It was an easy choice on Handel - the version with 24 oboes by English Chamber Orchestra, and St. Martin in the Fields. The others did not sound a whole lot like Baroque, more like late 19th century symphonies. I found a few other oddities: Chopin's piano pieces arranged for the Philadelphia Orchestra. The tunes sounded a bit familiar but it was not an improvement. Art of Fugue for woodwinds. Bach's Trio Sonatas for a very loud pedal harpsichord by E. Power Biggs. I have to choose a couple versions of Beethoven's 6th Symphony. In rough chronological order: 1. Bruno Walter and Philadelphia Orchestra on nonbreakable vinylite, long playing microgroove (as opposed to those large grooves on the breakable 78s) Manufactured in Canada by Spartan of Canada, Limited, "Radio's Richest Voice". (mono, of course. Columbia Masterworks. With notes about bubbling brooks. When did Walter conduct Phila Orch? 2. William Steinberg and the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra. In stereo, with multicolored cover (the last was pink on white). Original COMMAND master recorded on 35 mm magnetic film. Command Classics. No notes except about Steinberg, which imply this record is 1966 (early Stereo). 3. Quadraphonic (seventies?). Eugen Jochum and the London Symphony. How many conductors have they had since 1950? Angel/EMI. 1978. Notes about warm sunshine, gentle zephyrs, gurgle of brook, nightingale, disappearing clouds, etc. EMI is a division of Capitol Industries. I have a few old-looking records by Capitol. 4. Leonard Bernstein and Wiener Philharmonic on Deutsche Grammophon stereo Trilingual notes that I can only read without my glasses. 1981. Notes about the harmonies and motivic development. 5. Michael Tilson Thomas and English Chamber Orchestra (the same people who brought us Handel in Quadraphonic with 24 oboes). 1979, CBS Masterworks. Slightly worn but worth it. The notes ignore the bubbling brook, devote one line to stabile [sic] tonalities, and several paragraphs to performance practice. gut strings, lack of violin chin rests and cello spikes, pitch one semitone lower, dotted-note rhythms. Do these different approaches (emotional, rational, and technical) reflect the attitudes of the composers, or simply fashions in playing? I would probably keep the first (Walter) and the last two.
Jochum and the London Symphony I found rather dull. Steinberg and the Pittsburgh Symphony were too loud for my taste. Found another gem. Heritage of the Baroque Volume 1. The Telemann Society Orchestra. Richard Schulze conductor, Theodora Schulze oboe and recorder..... Playing: Richard Schulze: Variations of "What're ye' goin' to do wi' a drunken sailo? Richard Schulze, Recorder; Dorothy Walters, harpsichord. This set of variations is built on a slight modification of the well known folk tune. Schulze is a famous seventeenth [sic] century composer who was born in 1928. [sic!] [So was he the composer, the recorder player, or the conductor?] The Fairchild combination stereo/monaural record .... In short, the Fairchild Combination Stereo/Monaural Disc will outperform any other monaural or stereo record [rest is in italics] on its own ground! Since we do not manufacture and stock separate monaural and stereo versoins of its releases, we can pass considerabel savings on to you. HOW IS THIS ACCOMPLISHED? The Fairchild Compatible Stereo Disc is not "fake" stereo, nor it is produced by any electronic "gimmickry". It is a true stereo record, with stereo definition and depth actually superior to ordinary ....... Question: How does a stereo record differ from a mono record, and do we believe the record jackets that say you can play a stereo record on monaural equipment and it will sound better than monaural? Were there stereo records that could not be played on a mono phonograph? Kiwanis had, I think, two copies of Volume I of this series. A Musical Heritage Society Compatible Stereo release. Did MHS improve over the years? This jacket is burgundy embossed to look like leather, the embossing job being poorer than that used by Concert Hall Society, who they may have been imitating. One piece is by Michael Praetorius. (My brother informed me that those people who died on his birthday were not composers except Verdi).
Can't help you with the baroque stuff. I enjoy having it on in the background once in a while, but it doesn't grab my attention. I'm married to my Toscanini recordings of the Beethoven symphonies, but I also enjoy the period- instrument performances by John Elliot Gardner, whose name I might be misspelling. I'm a sucker for schmaltzy orchestrations of Chopin. I bet the Philadephia Orchestra exel at this, with that luscious string sound Ormandy is said to have imparted to them.
This record is now available again at Kiwanis for about fifty cents, want it?
I don't like to listen to LPs anymore, but thanks anyway! You've motivated me to go out a buy a schmaltzy CD or two, however.
A few days ago I bought a CD of the Emerson Quartet doing Schubert's "Death and the Maiden". I'd heard their version on the radio and was fairly blown away by the edgy bow work involved. This is probably not introductory quartet music but it isn't the late Beethoven quartets either.
I just read that the six Bach trio sonatas which J. Power Biggs played on the pedal harpsichord were in fact written not for separate instruments but for pedal organ. The three parts were played by left hand, right hand, and feet. (Donald Jay Grout and Claude V. Palisca, A History of Western Music) Bach liked challenges.
Um, *E.* Power Biggs, I think.
Yes.
Elgar's variations sound much better on my radio than they did on an old record on an old record player, but I think it is mainly the performers.
I did prefer Bruno Walter for the Brahms, thanks. Which of the following would you choose and why for Beethoven's 9th: MMS long play Netherlands Philharmonic with Walter Goehr. He conducted a majority of the MMS recordings, all of which I like. 50s? Columbia Masterworks LP high fidelity: NY Philharmonic with Bruno Walter RCA Red Seal stereo, A Basic Library of the Music America Loves Best, Chicago Symphony Fritz Reiner Curtin Kopleff McCollum Gramm and the Chicago Symphony Chorus. I sang this one with our university choirs and the BSO (I think it was). I hope the Chicago Symphony is better than we were. The RCA jacket has pictures of other jackets of World's Favorites: Grand Opera, Beethoven Sonatas, Showpieces (Song of India, Le Coq d'Or....), Ballets, Concertos. Artur Rubinstein, Van Cliburn, Domingo. Which orchestras and conductors were considered the best in the fifties, sixties and seventies? RCA got the 9th Complete on 1 LP, MMS used two full and two partial sides, one movement on each side. Columbia split the third movement. Do the newer LPS hold more than the older ones or did Goehr just take it slower rather than trying to be complete on 1 LP? Actually, MMS got movements 2 and 3 on the same side, complete. And shared movement 1 with some Bach and Mozart, and 4 with Barber of Seville, and the fourth side remained for a Vivaldi Concerto, Scarlatti, Chopin, Brahms Academic Festival Overture, some Carmen and Flight of the Bumblebee. All by the same orchestra.
Goehr I'm not familiar with. I love some of Reiner's recordings, but I don't know how he fared on the 9th. Walter is probably the most listenable. I'm curious to know what you think. The 9th, btw, is the one Beethoven symphony that John Eliot Gardiner (note the correct spelling) and his period instrument orchestra don't excel at, in my opinion. The overblown ultraglorious sound of the modern orchestra works best.
RCA has the answer. RCA takes the guesswork out of building a BASIC CLASSICAL MUSIC LIBRARY. THe WORLD'S FAVORITE MUSIC performed by the WORLD'S GREATEST ARTISTS. (The world was a bit smaller back then and listened only to classical western music.) In order of publication: (* - I have it, x - would not want it) The World's Favorite: 1. Grand Opera - Celeste Aida - Habanera - Lucia: Sextet - Vesti la giubba - Anvil Chorus - Un bel di more. (Can anyone identify the actual operas these are from?) *2. Beethoven's Fifth, Schubert's Unfinished Symphonies *3. Tchaikovsky's Pathetique Symphony (sixth) 4. Rhapsodies: *Roumanian No. 1 (Enesco?) - *Hungarian Nos 2 and 6 (Brahms?) - Espana (whose?) - Cornish (whose?) 5. Marches: Stars and Strips Forever (Sousa) - Colonel Bogey (?) - March of the Toys (?) - Pomp and Circumstance (Elgar?) - more 6. Reveries: Schubert's Serenade - Air on the G String (?) - Clair de Lune (Debussy) - Greensleeves (?) - more 7. Dances: The Sleeping Beauty Waltz (?) - Sabre Dance (?) - Russian Sailors' Dance - Hungarian Dances 5 and 6 (Brahms? Bartok?) - Ritual Fire Dance (Falla) - more *8. The World's Favorite Tchaikovsky: 1812 Overture, Capriccio Italien, Marche Slave 9. Finlandia (Sibelius) - The Moldau (Smetana) - Bolero (Ravel) - Capriccio Espagnol (Rimsky-Korsakov?) X10. Grand Canyon Suite (Copland?) - El Salon Mexico (?) *11. Tchaikovsky and Mendelson Violin Concertos - Heifetz *12. Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto 1 *13. Grieg Piano Concerto Rachmaninoff Paganini Rhapsody *14. Beethoven Sonatas - Moonlight Pathetique Appassionata *15. Gaite Parisienne (Offenbach) Les Sylphides (?) *16. Strauss Waltzes 17. Overtures: William Tell, Poest and Peasant, Zampa, Light Cavalry, Orpheus in Hades, more (who wrote all of these?) 18. Film Themes: Love Story, 2001, Laura, Exodus, West Side STory, Romeo and Juliet, Mary Poppins (does this count as classical?!), Cabaret, Breakfast at Tiffany's, others. (Who wrote all of these?) 19. Showpieces: Scheherezade (whose?), Song of India (?), Le Coq d'Or (R-K), Bridal Procession (?) 20. Showpieces: Pines of Rome (Respighi), Pictures at an Exhibition (Ravel?) *21. Showpieces: Sorceror's Apprentice (Dukas), Night on Bald Mountain (Moussorgsky), Danse Macabre (?), Peer Gynt SUite 1 (Grieg), Flight of the Bumblebee (RK) *22. Dvorak's New World Symphony *23. Beethoven's 9th (they bill it as the best ever, why no. 24?) *24. Beethoven Violin Concerto *25. Concertos: Rachmaninoff 2, Liszt 1 26. Gershwin Rhapsody in Blue, Concerto in F, American in Paris *27. Tchaikovsky Nutcracker and Swan Lake 28. Chorales: Hallelujah (Handel), Battle Hymn of the Republic (a chorale?), A Mighty Fortress, Land of Hope and Glory, Jesu Joy of Man's Desiring, more *29. Chopin - various 30. Van Cliburn (the only performer rather than composer): Fur Elise (Beethoven) Clair de lune (Debussy) Reverie (?) Liebestraum (?), Traumerei (Schubert), Rondo alla Turca (Mozart?), Brahms' Waltz, more. Please identify composers listed as ? and correct any wrong guesses. Are there any pieces on this list you would subtract from your own list of favorites? I can think of plenty to add, such as Mozart and Haydn, the Renaissance and Baroque periods. This set would better have been titled Favorite Music of the Romantic Period. Was this really the standard repertoire in 1972?
154 got in ahead of 155. I have only listened to Reiner so far, not bad.
The music for _Breakfast_at_Tiffany's_ was by Henry Macini; they probably meant "Moon River" as the theme. I think _Orpheus_ is Jacques Offenbach.
This was certainly not the standard repertoire in 1972. Here are my answers to this pop quiz: "Celeste Aida" is from Verdi's Aida. The "Habanera" is from Bizet's Carmen. "Lucia" is "Lucia di Lammermore." "Vesti la giubba" is from Pagliacci. The "Anvil Chorus" is from a Verdi opera which I forget. "Un bel di" is from Puccini's Madama Butterfly (first syllable of "Butterfly" rhymes with "foot," if you want to be all Italian about it.) Rhapsodies: Roumanian No. 1 is undoubtedly Enesco's greatest hit. The two Hungarian ones are probably by Liszt. Espana is probably by Chabrier. The Cornish rhapsody I don't think I know. Marches: Colonel Bogey was used in the movie Bridge over the River Kwai, which is why it's on this disk, but who wrote it I don't know. Malcolm Arnold? March of the Toys might be Victor Herbert. Pomp and Circumstance I'm sure means P&C #1 by Elgar, the one with the "graduation march" (as we think of it in this country -- in England it's the anthem "Land of Hope and Glory," by which I believe they mean England). Reveries: Air on the G String is by Bach. Greensleeves is probably the Fantasia on Greensleeves by Ralph Vaughan Williams. The Sleeping Beauty Waltz is from the ballet by Tchaikovsky. Sabre Dance is from Gayaneh by Khachaturian. Russian Sailors' Dance I really ought to know, but I've forgoten. Some Sovcomposer, I think. Hungarian Dances 5 and 6 are probably Brahms. Capriccio Espagnol is probably the one by Rimsky-Korsakov. Grand Canyon Suite is by Ferd grofe. El Salon Mexico is by Aaron Copland. Les Sylphides is Chopin. Of the listed film themes, only 2001 counts as "classical" music, because Kubrick drew all of the music for that movie from existing "classical" pieces. The most famous one, and the one probably on this disk, is the opening "dawn" sequence from Also Sprach Zarathustra by Richard Strauss, which was later adopted by Elvis Presley for the opening of his Las Vegas act and then became an intolerable cliche. And I didn't even like it that much to begin with. I don't know who composed most of the other themes. West Side Story is Leonard Bernstein, of course. I think Henry Mancini wrote the Breakfast at Tiffany's music. There have been a couple of Scheherezades. My favorite one is by Ravel, but the more famous one is by Rimsky Korsakov. Le Coq d'Or is also Rimsky. "Bridal Procession" might be Wagner. Pictures at an Exhibition was a piano piece by Moussorgsky which was arranged for orchestra by several composers. The only arrangement you ever hear is by Ravel. Danse Macabre is by Saint-Saens. Liebestraum is probably the one by Liszt. The Rondo alla Turca is undoubtedly the one by Mozart, from his 9th (?) piano sonata.
Grand Canyon Suite is by Ferde Grofe. Sorry.
Would you suggest that I own any of the ones I could not identify? Anyone want to list all the good composers who did not make it onto the 30 record set? They did get Bach, Handel, Mozart (not Haydn), Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Dvorak, Tchaikovsky, Liszt, Grieg, Wagner, Ravel, Debussy, Rimsky-K, Mussorgsky and Rachmaninoff, Smetana, Sibelius. Bizet, Puccini, Verdi. A bit heavy on the Tchaikovsky, why? Thanks for all the answers. I have also seen one-disc compilations of all the best classical music (at K-Mart).
Isn't the standard "Bridal Procession" by Mendelssohn?
It used to be Wagner coming into the church, Mendelssohn going out. Now it's Pachelbel both ways. Yech. Note, btw, the absence of Pachelbel's "immortal" Canon from the RCA list, which was compiled back before the New Age had blown the dust of well- deserved oblivion off of that stupefyingly dull piece of music.
I thought Sabre Dance was Rimsky-Korsakov, but I couldn't think of his name yesterday.
Khatchaturian, from the ballet Gayaneh.
That's what you said, the first time.
If Pachelbel's Canon is so boring, why do so many people like it so much? Surely they can't be so enamoured of being bored. Seriously, I suggest a real difference in perception of the meaningfulness of music here. Some people find it in simple chord progressions; others in complex structures. The second type call the music the first type like "boring" or "dull" or "mindlessly simple". The first type call the music the second type like "Augenmusik" (if they know the term).
(They don't know the term.) They like it not because they're enamored of being bored, but because they have bad taste. ;-)
Nothing wrong with simple music. Every 12-bar blues ever written is the same three chords, over and over again, song after song, album after album - but they're three _really good_ chords. I happen to like blues and dislike Pachelbel, but I imagine that there are people who would say the same sort of thing about Pachelbel's canon. It is one of the standard chord progressions, after all.
If you're gonna play the same eight chords over and over, you'd better be a Bach passacaglia, or the last movement of Brahms' 4th symphony, or something like that.
Pachelbel's cannon is classical music light. It tends to be a bit over-played but it's a short enough piece, so no big deal. It's time to get over it, Michael.
I like it, for what it is. I'm not much affected by pieces being repeated - I just become more familiar but not jaded by them. I played Beethoven's 6th so much at one stage in my life that I could (and still can) identify it from two bars - but I still like it.
Re "time to get over it": you first. ;-) Re #171: I can identify most Beethoven symphonies from hearing a bar or two, plus lots of other music besides. Repetition has nothing to do with it: I hated Pachelbel's Canon the first time I heard it. You realize I'm doing it mostly for effect now.
No. Please, tell me it's not true. ;-)
I bet that's what you said when you first set eyes on the cello part of P's Canon.
There is a story there but I'm not going to give you any more ammunition. ;-)
I think you already told it -- that's what I was referring to.
[A search for the string pachelbel turns up Oldmusic cf, Item #2, Response #175. Check it out!]
Fuck.
[Almost choked on my coffee.] Really, I never thought you wouldn't remember entering that. At least now you know there's someone who faithfully reads what you enter, and remembers it later one. That's pretty good, don't you think? Okay, well, I guess I'll stop typing now.
<nods> Quit while you're ahead.
Good heavens, I was just re-reading this and saw resp:131. Sindi, Morris Keesan is your brother? I've known Morris distantly through science fiction fandom for 15, maybe 20 years.
Yes, he has been an addict since his teens, and goes to conventions in Japan and Australia. You can see his baby photos at world.std.com/~keesan, some of them probably with sci-fi fans in them. I am related to all the Keesans in this country - Morris, my uncle and his second wife, and their son and his family. Most searches for Keesan turn up something sci-fi, with photos. Maybe you can persuade him to come to an Ann Arbor area convention. Morris has about 1000 LPs but now more CDs, he says.
I don't often buy music, but I've decided I want some. This looks like as good a place as any to ask for recommendations. :) I have some of this stuff on cassette, and some of it on 8-track, but I want to get it on CD, for durability and because I don't have an 8-track player and don't carry a cassette player around. So the question is: Which is the best CD version to get? (And yes, I do know that "best" is a meaningless term. ;) I'm looking to get a copy of Wagner's Prelude and Liebstod from Tristan und Isolde and the Ride of the Valkyries (and wouldn't object to Forest Murmurs, but I may already have that on CD). I'd like to get R. Strauss' Also Sprach Zarathustra. Bartok, but I don't know any specific pieces (I'd like to try his microtone compostions). Dvorak's New World Symphony. Flight of the Bumblebee (I've liked that one since it was used as the theme for television show; it may have been used on the radio show before that). Sabre Dance. And that's probably all I can get right now. So which recordings do you like?
I don't think it makes that much difference. Minute differences in quality between classical performances are mostly of interest to obsessive experts, and are likely to cause the casual listener unnecessary heart palpitations. To save money, you may want to find a CD that has both the Prelude & Liebestod and the Ride of the Valkyries on the same disk. That'll cut down the number of options right there. And there's probably some "Russian Orchestral Showpieces" disk that has both Rimsky-Korsakov's Flight of the Bumblebee and Khachaturian's Sabre Dance on it.
The diamond tip disappeared from my Empire stylus. We have four Empire cartridges so I moved over a stylus from a different number cartridge. THe second tip disappeared. (Jim tells me if I am going to clean the stylus with a brush to do it from back to front so it won't knock off the diamond tip). There are many different Empire styluses that apparently are each supposed to take a different diamond stylus - why? The more expensive cartridge wants one for $50, the others for $25-35. What happens if I put a cheaper stylus in a more expensive cartridge? (I already did that and it sounded a bit tinny but that might be my speakers or the cartridge getting old - I think it sounded tinny with the original stylus). The various styluses are physically interchangeable, at least the Empire 1000 stylus fit just fine into the Empire 5000 XEI cartridge and the other two look the same (1000E and 2000 and 2000E/III). The 2000E/III is $50, the 2000 $25 and the 1000E $30 or $35. We also have a few other turntables with different cartridges that look like they would fit this turntable. Should I pick one that is the same weight, or must other things match? We can adjust the tone arms for different weights of cartridge. I have a 1980 catalog of stereo components that sells separate tone arms as well as cartridges and turntables, and implies that it is very important to get a precise match, but Jim thinks that is not necessary since I cannot hear the differences anyway and don't play things loudly.
The E stands for elliptical, which is more expensive, so apparently I accidentally robbed the stylus out of something appropriate (1000E to 5000EXI). Radio Shack is a bit cheaper on the smaller selection that it carries, but you have to be persistent. The friendly guy there said all their Empire styli were $13. When I expressed surprise, he noticed that they had six different Empire styli (2000 and 2000E but not the others). Plus shipping.
Another online needle place (needle express) said they had a 2000E stylus for $50 (advertised online for $30) and an X66 for the 1000E or 5000XEI for $30. I asked about the 2000 (which I think is not meant to take an elliptical stylus) and he said to use the X66 (EX66?) and you might need to adjust the angle at which it hits. The 2000E stylus should work in the other three but has a needle guard for the extra $20 (surely this cannot be the only difference). Empire cartridges and styluses stopped being made 8 years ago. THe 1000E stylus is shorter than the 5000EXI. Jim adjusted the cartridge somehow so it did not rest on the record (while rebuilding it with a paperclip because it has always been broken, the single/multiple adjustment never worked so it is now always single). According to who you believe, elliptical styluses sound better in new records but worse in old ones and contact more surface so wear less; contact less surface so wear more; wear out all the frequencies at an even rate, whereas the conical diamonds contact only the top of the groove and play only the lower frequencies so wear those out faster; no difference in wear. Conical ones are better at ignoring scratches and more rugged. Cartridges wear out and should be changed every two years; every two needles; when they sound bad or tinny; when they lose one channel. Diamond styluses should be changed every 1000 hours or 2 years; every 200-300 hours; every 2500 hours; when they need it which you determine by taking it to the record store and having them look under a microscope; when they sound bad; when they break or disappear. Everyone agrees that diamonds are not forever but wear a lot longer than sapphire and even more longer than osmium. I found one site that still sells diamond needles with 3 sapphire needles as part of the set (which presumably gives you a few weeks to mail order a replacement while rapidly wearing out the temporary sapphires) - $3.50-$10 for BSR etc. They did not sell Empire, which is too new. Nobody sells osmium but one record jacket listed them. Nobody even mentioned steel needles, or the fact that a record can still be heard (probably with the quality of a steel needle) after the diamond tip disappears.
A former Kiwanis customer brought us her turntable and replacement; stylus from Radio Shack, which she said would 'not play'. Jim took a look and they had sold her a stylus with square peg to go into a cartridge with round hole. Radio Shack told me she could return it despite warranty being up.
Jim is correct that you should brush the needle only from back to front, thus simulating the motion the needle would see while riding in a groove. Exerting much force in any other direction will destroy the needle, yup. I always used a Discwasher SC-2 stylus brush. Other than that, I mostly cringed while reading sindi's accounts of trying to economize on turntable and stylus parts. But I suspect I value my LPs a lot more than Sindi does. I figure the cartridge and stylus were designed to work as a system, and since a likely outcome of messing with that system is wearing away more vinyl than necessary, I wouldn't want to risk it. I'd never heard anyone talking about cartridge wear before, except as a function of age as various rubber parts oxidize a bit. My current cartridge is probably over ten years old. 1000 hours was the standard figure I heard for the useful life of a diamond stylus; I have no idea how many years that would be for me now, but in the old days I got a new stylus every 12-18 months. (I should get a new stylus, but the price has doubled since last I got one, and I'm feeling cheap.) Phono stylii and their diamond tips should not "break off" under normal use. If this is happening repeatedly, there needs to be more gentleness in handling the tonearm, or else something is very badly set up in tracking force, or stylus-cartridge match, or something. I think this has happened to me maybe once in 30+ years.
I buy my LPs by the pound - it comes out to about 10 cents each. One stylus
is $30 plus $7 shipping, or 370 records. I readjusted tracking force down
to 1 gram and it still works (we had it at 2 grams). IT was probably my bad
cleaning technique. I got a better record cleaner and the needle no longer
picks up dust.
If cartridge only wear out with age, why would someone recommend
replacing them every 2 years? Do they wear out faster with use? I was
reading that they contained a magnet - perhaps it oxidizes faster when warm?
(Sindi, can I copy the last few responses about turntables & parts into a new item to be crosslinked between the Classical and Music conference? Or should I just link this one...? )
I doubt that the Music conference wants to know about classical LPs, so better to just do a copy, I think. Useful info: Needle doctor 1-800-229-0644 is the one that has the right stylus for every turntable I have challenged them with. Needle.express.com 1-800-982-2620 did not return my phone call. They had a lower price on one stylus. elexatelier.com returned my email with useful info and pricing Radio Shack is on average the cheapest but has the smallest selection. Kiwanis has some new or used cartridges and needles. Anyone know the name of the record store downtown that has some needles for sale?
OK, I did some cut & pasting, and item:64 is now for the discussion of LP playing hardware, linked to the music conference. Performance evaluations of classical music LPs still belong here.
Re 192: Doesn't Encore Records sell needles?
You have several choices: