I can't believe some of the comments here. If people think *this* is cerebral, they should try listening to some of Carter's music twenty years after this.
@drguitar78 yeah sure sure......music without structure is not music, i take it you feel the same pleasure when you hear random noises over a period of time?cuz that is what this is,and when it comes to abstract structure id rather listen to jazz than this.at least there you have a better chance of getting a motive or a repeated grrove that makes some sense.this, still doesnt classify as music.im seriously open to your arguments though,feel free to answer :)
I understand how it can seem random. I'm not sure that it's not, but I feel connected to it nonetheless. It would be interesting to do an experiment to test exaclty how random it is. Here's how you would do it: assign a set of numbers to the keys of the piano/frets of the cello. You could also discretize the note durations into small bins of time, say from 1/32 second to 4 seconds in 1/32 second increments. Then, you use a random number generator to obtain a musical code.
Hmm...on second thought, this is a ridiculous idea, but it would be interesting anyway to see if upon a million trials you could generate a peice that had an equivalent array of musical relationships throughout its composition.
I guess my point is, I see patterns in this music, and they are not simple..but I think that's why it's so beautiful. I liken it to an unpredictable film that has many twists and turns along the plot....if it was easy to predict, I'd probably get bored.
Hmm. while i don't mind spastic, complex and impulsive music, i don't like it in huge doses. This piece doesn't feel centered or structured at all to me, just... abstract noise.
This is one of the most beautiful pieces around my house! Having studied the score and worked through the piano part several times over the last 30 years - It is one of my all time favs - there are some extremely emotional moments in this piece - almost profound ..... A superlative performance!
I enjoy orchestral music, but I have never understood the modern composers like Carter. The music sounds to me like just so much dissonance. And those who profess to enjoy it come across to me as the townspeople in The Emperor With No Clothes. They know the music is terrible, but they pretend to like it because it makes them part of the soi-disant fashionable crowd. Admit you can't stand it and put in your Bach and Mozart CDs instead!
1 its not about modern composers, its about contemporary composition.
2 contemporary music doesnt apply to everyones senses. i happen to like enjoy this. the reason you and other people like mozart more, is because you like easy-to-listen music. as for people like me, we tend to analyize and understand music by listening.
The true classical composers are not "easy listening" That is calumny. There is a great deal of complexity to their compositions. In addition, they are actually enjoyable to listen to. What a remarkable accomplishment
When you say things like 'we tend to analyze and understand music by listening' you are implying that modern composition is purely cerebral and I think that is one of the biggest problems with the public's take on new music. If new music was only made to be admired through analysis then it would be nothing more than a craft. I find lots of aesthetic pleasure as well as cerebral admiration from modern compositions. Your attitude comes off as elitist and that's also a problem, alienation of people
@saladshootavvv Actually, actually, actually, this is simply a matter of taste. To my taste, I think new music (in the wide-spreaded concept of "new music", which is NOT music produced nowadays but serial music, electroacoustic music, "Stockhausen" music) is purely cerebral and this is the problem that New Music doesn't get into the public.
Remember: we, musicians, make music to the public, to the people, not for ourselves.
@BachClarinet Taste is also a product of exposure. Those who have no exposure don't understand the music. I can tell from experience, my friends who don't listen to "classical" music and only listen to repetitive riff based "pop" music find Beethoven overly cerebral and to them it's nothing but meaningless fluff. Which is of course WRONG. That's not a matter of opinion. The debates on new music shouldn't be "is new music random noise?" but instead "Which Xenakis String quartet is the best?".
@saladshootavvv Well, Beethoven and "pop" music have the TONALITY in common. And everybody thinks, first of all, new music is "random noise" because of Stockhausen's so great experiences with the sound waves, which I don't like, really.
@BachClarinet ALSO, How can you say Stockhausen is purely cerebral?!?! I LOVE to listen to Stockhausen and find his music colorful, imaginative, and full of interesting and wonderful textures, gestures, and musical ideas. Just because you haven't given "New music" (It's old now) the time it needs to sink into you DOES NOT mean that it's purely cerebral. ALSO, YES, you have a duty to the public. AND the public needs more new music. If you truly love your art you would understand that.
@saladshootavvv And I DO love my art, and DO NOT like this kind of new music. And you know that if you write a piece today out of those patterns "not so patternal", like some modal music, even tonal music. Each artist likes to express him/herself through a different style that he/she likes most. In my case, I wouldn't choose serialism or "Stockhausen music". About the exposure, I have to agree with you. I simply can't stand for it. Take some revolutionaries:
@saladshootavvv (cont.) Stravinsky, Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Barber, Khachaturiam, Villa-Lobos, Ginastera, and so many other composers that don't use serialism, write great pieces of music and are totally understandable to the ear. You have to find physical pleasure while listening to music, otherwise it wouldn't be a pleasing activity. If you want to pleasure your brain, get a Physics book, or Math, or Biology and enjoy your brain. A matter of taste. Just like you, I also fight. =P
@BachClarinet Stravinsky, Shostakovitch, Barber and Ginastera, have all written major serial works and Prokofiev pretty much predates it(only a fool would call Villa-Lobos a revolutionary) serialism is as much a tool as tonality is. there are good serial works and there are bad ones just as there are good and bad tonal works. the "cerebral" part of music is in the creation and its just as true of Bach and Beethoven as it is with Stockhausen. I find this music AESTHETICALLY pleasing and you don't
@BachClarinet I don't want to get in the middle of you and saladshooter but I wanted to let you know that Quatuor pour la Fin du Temps is not a serial piece at all and that I too love modernist music for aesthetic as well as analytical qualities...
I enjoy this music because on the surface it has a very spastic vibe but it also has a very centered feeling. My mind works that way. As an individual I enjoy this music very much because I can relate to it. I also enjoy the older more romantic-type classical music, but I admire it mainly for it's beauty. Technically speaking I find them both mind-blowing, when done well. You listen to either Varese's Ionisation or Mozart's Requiem and tell me both are not amazingly written.
And what about the many great performers who feel about Carter's music as they do about the great works of the past - Barenboim, Levine, etc? They are phonies, too, I suppose, and with plenty of time to waste on works they know are worthless.
In any case, don't feel bad if you don't understand this music, it wasn't written for you.
You certainly are. Perhaps the king of poseurs. You are also a dick. Run along and play somewhere else. Actually, I'm tired of being nice. Go fuck yourself, as I'm sure that you spend much time alone, vainboy.
If see by your youtube favorites that you like to watch vidoes of little Russian children doing gymnastics. Who is the one spending too much time by himself, sicko?
Just saw part of an interview on Charlie Rose (thank you PBS) so I searched to find Carter's music. I find it electrifying. Glad I stumbled upon him. I usually do not like classical music--puts me to sleep,just Jazz but this is great.
Believe it or not, they do. And when you look at the score and follow along, you can realize just how amazing a piece like this is through all the intricacies of rhythm (I didn't even realize most of the metric modulations had occurred until a few measures afterwards). So yes, they did write it down, and when you look at the writing you realize just how much of a great composer Elliott Carter has to be to be able to write such music down. There's a reason he's considered a major composer.
I can't believe some of the comments here. If people think *this* is cerebral, they should try listening to some of Carter's music twenty years after this.
WrestlingHeretic 4 months ago
ok if i take crack, a bit of mescaline and an ounce of ether, maybe i can classify this as music...
sweeney665 1 year ago
@sweeney665
I was at this recital, completely sober, and it was deeply moving...I felt transformed...like my outlook on life and reality was forever changed.
drguitar78 1 year ago
@drguitar78 yeah sure sure......music without structure is not music, i take it you feel the same pleasure when you hear random noises over a period of time?cuz that is what this is,and when it comes to abstract structure id rather listen to jazz than this.at least there you have a better chance of getting a motive or a repeated grrove that makes some sense.this, still doesnt classify as music.im seriously open to your arguments though,feel free to answer :)
sweeney665 1 year ago
@sweeney665
I understand how it can seem random. I'm not sure that it's not, but I feel connected to it nonetheless. It would be interesting to do an experiment to test exaclty how random it is. Here's how you would do it: assign a set of numbers to the keys of the piano/frets of the cello. You could also discretize the note durations into small bins of time, say from 1/32 second to 4 seconds in 1/32 second increments. Then, you use a random number generator to obtain a musical code.
drguitar78 1 year ago
Hmm...on second thought, this is a ridiculous idea, but it would be interesting anyway to see if upon a million trials you could generate a peice that had an equivalent array of musical relationships throughout its composition.
I guess my point is, I see patterns in this music, and they are not simple..but I think that's why it's so beautiful. I liken it to an unpredictable film that has many twists and turns along the plot....if it was easy to predict, I'd probably get bored.
drguitar78 1 year ago
very fine playing, but... boring!!!
as334 1 year ago
also not really....
luvandp3ace 2 years ago
the clicking sound can be taken out these days pretty easily with sound editing software
deemilieu 2 years ago
One of the finest sonatas for cello and piano, and this is just marvellousy played. Shame there's a skipping noise in the sound.
Beautiful.
celloguy 2 years ago
Hmm. while i don't mind spastic, complex and impulsive music, i don't like it in huge doses. This piece doesn't feel centered or structured at all to me, just... abstract noise.
sarahxboxbeara 2 years ago
Great! Colourful, well played!
quagapp 2 years ago
Excellent piece and great performance!!
NewMusicXX 2 years ago
Great music!
kombelpeter 2 years ago
Boy, the violin part sounds fun, don't it?
GolumTR 2 years ago
Violin? :')
kombelpeter 2 years ago 2
Thank you for posting this! This is fantastic!
jansma11 2 years ago
brilliant
markmando333 2 years ago
i think i was there that evening...
deemilieu 3 years ago
I was not making any reference to the composers. It is only the listeners who are the phonies!
Nick83Fairfax 3 years ago
Hey, remember music? I used to love that stuff.
swiz0r 3 years ago
This is one of the most beautiful pieces around my house! Having studied the score and worked through the piano part several times over the last 30 years - It is one of my all time favs - there are some extremely emotional moments in this piece - almost profound ..... A superlative performance!
hammondhead 3 years ago
that last note is simply magical. thank you for posting this. Great performance
Atttacca 3 years ago
I enjoy orchestral music, but I have never understood the modern composers like Carter. The music sounds to me like just so much dissonance. And those who profess to enjoy it come across to me as the townspeople in The Emperor With No Clothes. They know the music is terrible, but they pretend to like it because it makes them part of the soi-disant fashionable crowd. Admit you can't stand it and put in your Bach and Mozart CDs instead!
Nick83Fairfax 3 years ago
two things:
1 its not about modern composers, its about contemporary composition.
2 contemporary music doesnt apply to everyones senses. i happen to like enjoy this. the reason you and other people like mozart more, is because you like easy-to-listen music. as for people like me, we tend to analyize and understand music by listening.
macplo 3 years ago
The true classical composers are not "easy listening" That is calumny. There is a great deal of complexity to their compositions. In addition, they are actually enjoyable to listen to. What a remarkable accomplishment
Nick83Fairfax 3 years ago
When you say things like 'we tend to analyze and understand music by listening' you are implying that modern composition is purely cerebral and I think that is one of the biggest problems with the public's take on new music. If new music was only made to be admired through analysis then it would be nothing more than a craft. I find lots of aesthetic pleasure as well as cerebral admiration from modern compositions. Your attitude comes off as elitist and that's also a problem, alienation of people
saladshootavvv 3 years ago 7
elitist? ughhh ok, whatever.
macplo 3 years ago
@saladshootavvv Actually, actually, actually, this is simply a matter of taste. To my taste, I think new music (in the wide-spreaded concept of "new music", which is NOT music produced nowadays but serial music, electroacoustic music, "Stockhausen" music) is purely cerebral and this is the problem that New Music doesn't get into the public.
Remember: we, musicians, make music to the public, to the people, not for ourselves.
BachClarinet 1 year ago
@BachClarinet Taste is also a product of exposure. Those who have no exposure don't understand the music. I can tell from experience, my friends who don't listen to "classical" music and only listen to repetitive riff based "pop" music find Beethoven overly cerebral and to them it's nothing but meaningless fluff. Which is of course WRONG. That's not a matter of opinion. The debates on new music shouldn't be "is new music random noise?" but instead "Which Xenakis String quartet is the best?".
saladshootavvv 1 year ago
@saladshootavvv Well, Beethoven and "pop" music have the TONALITY in common. And everybody thinks, first of all, new music is "random noise" because of Stockhausen's so great experiences with the sound waves, which I don't like, really.
BachClarinet 1 year ago
@BachClarinet ALSO, How can you say Stockhausen is purely cerebral?!?! I LOVE to listen to Stockhausen and find his music colorful, imaginative, and full of interesting and wonderful textures, gestures, and musical ideas. Just because you haven't given "New music" (It's old now) the time it needs to sink into you DOES NOT mean that it's purely cerebral. ALSO, YES, you have a duty to the public. AND the public needs more new music. If you truly love your art you would understand that.
saladshootavvv 1 year ago
@saladshootavvv And I DO love my art, and DO NOT like this kind of new music. And you know that if you write a piece today out of those patterns "not so patternal", like some modal music, even tonal music. Each artist likes to express him/herself through a different style that he/she likes most. In my case, I wouldn't choose serialism or "Stockhausen music". About the exposure, I have to agree with you. I simply can't stand for it. Take some revolutionaries:
BachClarinet 1 year ago
@saladshootavvv (cont.) Stravinsky, Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Barber, Khachaturiam, Villa-Lobos, Ginastera, and so many other composers that don't use serialism, write great pieces of music and are totally understandable to the ear. You have to find physical pleasure while listening to music, otherwise it wouldn't be a pleasing activity. If you want to pleasure your brain, get a Physics book, or Math, or Biology and enjoy your brain. A matter of taste. Just like you, I also fight. =P
BachClarinet 1 year ago
@BachClarinet Stravinsky, Shostakovitch, Barber and Ginastera, have all written major serial works and Prokofiev pretty much predates it(only a fool would call Villa-Lobos a revolutionary) serialism is as much a tool as tonality is. there are good serial works and there are bad ones just as there are good and bad tonal works. the "cerebral" part of music is in the creation and its just as true of Bach and Beethoven as it is with Stockhausen. I find this music AESTHETICALLY pleasing and you don't
cnmaster01 1 year ago
@saladshootavvv And just to finish, I like some serial pieces, like Quatuor pour la Fin du Temps, which, to me, is really beautiful.
Serialism in a virtuosistic way, and in solo pieces, usually short pieces are, to me, more appropriate.
Symphonies, concertos, sonatas... hmmm, not that much. I stick to the short ones.
BachClarinet 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BachClarinet I don't want to get in the middle of you and saladshooter but I wanted to let you know that Quatuor pour la Fin du Temps is not a serial piece at all and that I too love modernist music for aesthetic as well as analytical qualities...
Shredlord12345 1 year ago
Comment removed
Shredlord12345 1 year ago
@BachClarinet quartet for the end of time definitely isn't serialist, it's pretty much tonal in a couple of the movements!
wacosiege 1 year ago
@BachClarinet OH COME ON THE QUARTET EVEN HAS A KEY SGNATURE! it only enters atonality briefly
cnmaster01 1 year ago
I enjoy this music because on the surface it has a very spastic vibe but it also has a very centered feeling. My mind works that way. As an individual I enjoy this music very much because I can relate to it. I also enjoy the older more romantic-type classical music, but I admire it mainly for it's beauty. Technically speaking I find them both mind-blowing, when done well. You listen to either Varese's Ionisation or Mozart's Requiem and tell me both are not amazingly written.
ZachRhea2 3 years ago
You say you don't understand, and that those who claim to are lying. Get a brain.
chaimgogol 3 years ago
I am certain my brain works just fine. I just don't happen to be a vain poseur, that's all
Nick83Fairfax 3 years ago
And what about the many great performers who feel about Carter's music as they do about the great works of the past - Barenboim, Levine, etc? They are phonies, too, I suppose, and with plenty of time to waste on works they know are worthless.
In any case, don't feel bad if you don't understand this music, it wasn't written for you.
chaimgogol 3 years ago
You're right, it was not written for the likes of me. I am not a self-important phony
Nick83Fairfax 3 years ago
No, you are a troll.
chaimgogol 3 years ago
You certainly are. Perhaps the king of poseurs. You are also a dick. Run along and play somewhere else. Actually, I'm tired of being nice. Go fuck yourself, as I'm sure that you spend much time alone, vainboy.
icenine2 3 years ago
Classy!
Nick83Fairfax 3 years ago
If see by your youtube favorites that you like to watch vidoes of little Russian children doing gymnastics. Who is the one spending too much time by himself, sicko?
Nick83Fairfax 3 years ago
Just saw part of an interview on Charlie Rose (thank you PBS) so I searched to find Carter's music. I find it electrifying. Glad I stumbled upon him. I usually do not like classical music--puts me to sleep,just Jazz but this is great.
stacydh 3 years ago
beatiful music
adfasdfgoj 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Do people write this before they play? I have never studied music from paper before I just listen to it. This is Horrid!
aqua2012 3 years ago
Believe it or not, they do. And when you look at the score and follow along, you can realize just how amazing a piece like this is through all the intricacies of rhythm (I didn't even realize most of the metric modulations had occurred until a few measures afterwards). So yes, they did write it down, and when you look at the writing you realize just how much of a great composer Elliott Carter has to be to be able to write such music down. There's a reason he's considered a major composer.
HerrWozzeck 3 years ago
my first Carter's piece heard when studying his metrical modulation.
thanks for the live performance video
101PROPOSE 3 years ago
Fine playing!
IBarry66x 3 years ago