Originally posted by Pulcinella
View Post
Musical questions and answers thread
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by teamsaint View PostSomething for you to practice over the weekend , Pulcers. Don't block your pharynx for too long though is my advice.
But, as you might have spotted in a comment elsewhere, we first basses have to reach the F sharp above middle C quite often and sometimes with a leap rather than a run up the scale.
The runs were OK last night, and there's a few weeks to go yet to get the jumps better.
Local Guildhall orchestra playing The Rite in York Barbican tomorrow night.
I shall keep my eyes out for the pavillons en l'air!
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Pulcinella View PostI could have sworn that I had seen the instruction en clair associated with the horns in The Rite of Spring, but a quick skim through the score didn't reveal it.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostI think you've misread "Horns eclair", Pulcie (= muted with a chocolate cream pastry).I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ahinton View Post...It is indeed pavillons en l'air (or "bells up" in horn players' slang, I guess) and appears for the first time in the bar before fig 46 on p.41 in the Ritual of abduction movement.
It's 'Schalltrichter auf' in German - Mahler certainly uses it, Strauss too..
Btw - 'bells up' doesn't mean 'held upside-down'. The horn is held at about 45 degrees from the body.
I found this advice:
"You also need to be careful about seating positions. You don’t want to bump into the player on your right as you raise the bell, and you don't want to be playing directly into someone's face. This can be a particular problem for amateur groups performing in relatively cramped spaces in old churches ...
[The horn should be] horizontal (no higher than that), hand still in the bell.
The bells-up position is also treated as a license to produce a raucous tone with maximum brassiness. if the truth be told, 90% or more of the sound effect can be achieved without raising the bell. But is it marvellously dramatic to watch!"
Last edited by Pabmusic; 18-05-19, 03:33.
Comment
-
-
Is there an equivalent in classical music performance to literary criticism? If there is, where is a good place for a complete beginner to start (reading)?
Can a musical performance be interpreted by listeners in the way a literary work is by readers? Or can interpretation in music always/only mean that of the work and by performers? By interpretation, I mean more than ‘this is how it sounds to me’ but the listener’s response based on critical theories. Or at least on some rational bases. Or are those many excellent reviews we hear on (or use to hear ) Record Review based on the accumulation of the reviewers' specialist studies (this does sound rather obvious)? Come to that, what exactly does it mean to interpret music, by listeners, that is? I do apologise for this appallingly ignorant question.
This is wiki’s definition of literary criticism.
Literary criticism (or literary studies) is the study, evaluation, and interpretation of literature. Modern literary criticism is often influenced by literary theory, which is the philosophical discussion of literature's goals and methods. Though the two activities are closely related, literary critics are not always, and have not always been, theorists.
Whether or not literary criticism should be considered a separate field of inquiry from literary theory, or conversely from book reviewing, is a matter of some controversy. For example, the Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism[1] draws no distinction between literary theory and literary criticism, and almost always uses the terms together to describe the same concept. Some critics consider literary criticism a practical application of literary theory, because criticism always deals directly with particular literary works, while theory may be more general or abstract.Last edited by doversoul1; 10-08-19, 21:33.
Comment
-
-
The musical equivalent of literary theory for me would be musical analysis, though I doubt that this holds the same relationship you mention with criticism (in the case of music). I also am not sure about applying this to discussion of musical performance as distinct from a composition 'itself'. Otherwise I would have suggested something about musical semiotics and off the top of my head, books by Nattiez.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by doversoul1 View PostIs there an equivalent in classical music performance to literary criticism? If there is, where is a good place for a complete beginner to start (reading)?
Can a musical performance be interpreted by listeners in the way a literary work is by readers? Or can interpretation in music always/only mean that of the work and by performers? By interpretation, I mean more than ‘this is how it sounds to me’ but the listener’s response based on critical theories. Or at least on some rational bases.
This is wiki’s definition of literary criticism.
Literary criticism (or literary studies) is the study, evaluation, and interpretation of literature. Modern literary criticism is often influenced by literary theory, which is the philosophical discussion of literature's goals and methods. Though the two activities are closely related, literary critics are not always, and have not always been, theorists.
Whether or not literary criticism should be considered a separate field of inquiry from literary theory, or conversely from book reviewing, is a matter of some controversy. For example, the Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism[1] draws no distinction between literary theory and literary criticism, and almost always uses the terms together to describe the same concept. Some critics consider literary criticism a practical application of literary theory, because criticism always deals directly with particular literary works, while theory may be more general or abstract.
One thing worth mentioning is that a study of literary critical theory can help give really valuable insights that can apply outside of the strictly literary.
If anybody is interested in a beginners guide to literary theory, Peter Barry’s book is absolutely invaluable.
Last edited by teamsaint; 10-08-19, 21:41.I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
-
I’m probably way off here, not least because my study of literary theory is slim and long ago, but I tend to think of most musical writing ( reviews etc) that I encounter as being closely related in style to Cambridge close reading, rather than attempting to use more theoretical techniques to interpret the music, or musical event.Last edited by teamsaint; 10-08-19, 21:53.I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by doversoul1 View PostIs there an equivalent in classical music performance to literary criticism? If there is, where is a good place for a complete beginner to start (reading)?
Can a musical performance be interpreted by listeners in the way a literary work is by readers? Or can interpretation in music always/only mean that of the work and by performers? By interpretation, I mean more than ‘this is how it sounds to me’ but the listener’s response based on critical theories. Or at least on some rational bases. Or are those many excellent reviews we hear on (or use to hear ) Record Review based on the accumulation of the reviewers' specialist studies (this does sound rather obvious)? Come to that, what exactly does it mean to interpret music, by listeners, that is? I do apologise for this appallingly ignorant question.
This is wiki’s definition of literary criticism.
Literary criticism (or literary studies) is the study, evaluation, and interpretation of literature. Modern literary criticism is often influenced by literary theory, which is the philosophical discussion of literature's goals and methods. Though the two activities are closely related, literary critics are not always, and have not always been, theorists.
Whether or not literary criticism should be considered a separate field of inquiry from literary theory, or conversely from book reviewing, is a matter of some controversy. For example, the Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism[1] draws no distinction between literary theory and literary criticism, and almost always uses the terms together to describe the same concept. Some critics consider literary criticism a practical application of literary theory, because criticism always deals directly with particular literary works, while theory may be more general or abstract.
... though at that price, you might wish to wait until a local library gets a copy!
Already available - and somewhat cheaper - is the companion book on Music Theory:
[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Thank you both for your swift responses. I am particularly puzzled by talks and writings about performances which is, unlike text or music itself (likely to be written down), impossible (so it seems to me) to pin down the point and say for instance ‘this phrase suggests such and such as analysed in [a theory or an article]’ etc..
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostYour timing is immaculate, dovers - published later this month:
... though at that price, you might wish to wait until a local library gets a copy!
Already available - and somewhat cheaper - is the companion book on Music Theory:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cambridge-H.../dp/0521686989
Many thanks
Another ignorant question;
Do I understand that music theories go beyond music itself (composed works) to thinking about performance?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by doversoul1 View PostDo I understand that music theories go beyond music itself (composed works) to thinking about performance?
a long list to wade through
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by doversoul1 View PostDo I understand that music theories go beyond music itself (composed works) to thinking about performance?
Are you looking for a History of performance practice, dovers? There's another companion volume to those Cambridge volumes I mentioned - though it is expensive:
[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
Comment