Helmut Lachenmann Concert Preview - April 14, 2008

[MrAlexKeaton]

Reading all the comments below, I have a different theory:

"Emperor With No Clothes."

[parquar]

He is basically using instruments for percussive purposes...

very simple, nothing special, arbitrary... at least Schroenburg however its spelled went by a mathematical system involving intelligence

[RabiesJr]

I disagree. Its not purely for percussive purposes. it happens to have more of a percussive sound because there are less 'tonal' notes and melody. I think its more about timbre and energy than percussion.

[parquar]

Sorry I meant percussive by just using all sound qualities other than the exact relations of frequency

[EdiEllerymissing]

So you're hunting Lachenmann's videos to criticize with arbitrary comments based on your ignorance. Have you ever watched the score of Kontrakadenz or any of his orchestral works? I may send one to you, then you analyze it and tell me it's "very simple, nothing special, arbitrary". There's a lot of craftsmanship in his works. Every bar, is very complex. I repeat, if you can't understand this, then don't lose your time listen to this. It's probably to mucho for your little mind.

[davidsbuendler]

complexity isn't really a good thing, is it? and great art should never be "too much" for even a little mind. great music goes straight into the soul. if it only touches the mind, it's nothing great. so don't argue about complexity, mathematical systems and intelligence. it's got nothing to do with the greatness of music.

[EdiEllerymissing]

That's just your postromantic way if think the music. For me, and a lot of people it's not just about "to touch my soul". That's kind of naive. Music and art it's about a concept, about a society, about a critical point of view, about explore your mind and an honest creation. If Lachenmann's music doesn't "touch your sould" it's because it was not made for that. That's old and odd. His music is not complex because he want to make it more complex, but because that's the way he listen...

[davidsbuendler]

it's not "postromantic" (but maybe "postmodern"). it has nothing to do with "romantic" thinking. music has always and everywhere served the purpose of touching the soul and lifting it into other spheres. concepts can never compete with feeling and nature. it's sad and kind of arrogant if someone believes that. the human mind can never ever "top" nature. actually i believe that's an old and odd believe. something which people thought at the beginning of the 20th century.

[EdiEllerymissing]

It's interesting your nick. If found a resemblance with Schumann publications in the XIX century. To talk about postmodern it's to talk about nothing and everything at the same time. The only thing that defines postmodern it's to be after the modernism... which means nothing. The purpose of art, not just music is not about the "soul". It's a problem of perception. I do like this music and I do feel something with this, not because it's complexity, but because of the sounds, (...)

[EdiEllerymissing]

And the way Lachenmann arrange them in time and space. That's the way I feel it. It kinda "touches my soul", but I won't define it like that, cause, for me, soul is a human construction above his needs of a life beyond this one. I don't find any sense in your words about "nature" and top it... but I don't understand why are you arguing about this. You can't deny Lachenmann is a great composer, and if this doesn't touch your sou, the don't listen to it. For me it's good music.

[parquar]

There could be 40 Lachenmann's while you couldn't say that about JS Bach. You may also admire the 'craftsmanship' in geological formations created with no intelligent design, or arbitrarily chosen sounds in nature. You are glorifying post-modernist abstractions lacking in realistic entertainment value with qualification only in the ideas behind it as a general concept rather than the substance. Of course you don't have to put an intelligent response but rather throw in a couple "ignorant"s

[EdiEllerymissing]

As you just did? XD. PLEASE, introduce me any of those 40 Lachenmanns, cause I want to know every one of them. You know, your semantic is weird. I think "craftsMANship" is a word applied to the human activities, not the nature chance. Art is not about entertainment, but I'm tired of arguing about that, cause your answers are just disqualifications based on perception and not in logic, aesthetics or reason. You want to debate about what you feel, not art. Then I throw my ignorance to you...

[parquar]

The human mind operates in its own interest only and music was created and/or continued to 'please the ear', if you will, so this type of music is made to 'please the mind' based on emotional response / interpretation of aesthetics? Logic, aesthetics, and reason can only come from perception. Perception is our only hold on reality, obviously. Possibly one perceives this as original due to its rarity and thereby praises the composer for his creations? You haven't said what you love about this btw

[EdiEllerymissing]

Everything in the human life comes, at first term, by perception, but it doesn't finish there. Imagine that early humans just stay on their perceptions about nature. We would probably still think that thunders comes from a superior being that is punishing us for being bad people. Is that makes any sense to you? That's why we humans create science, philosophy and art, cause we turn what we perceive into a rational concept. Your abstraction of reality is very poor if you keep with your perception.

[parquar]

The existence of a superior being would be a simple deduction. If more deductions are combined then they work to discover more over time. That point really helps me convey what I'm trying to ask. In Bach music, one picks out various themes and interprets their placement within different tonal contexts. That is very abstract and when understood, is naturally enjoyable. If, however, qualitative signals alone are brought to the brain, where is the abstraction? It is only emotional/conceptual

[EdiEllerymissing]

It's annoying to argue somebody so irrational and incongruous. Again, science, art and philosophy doesn't come after perception, not even by a chain of deductions, they come after concientious thinking. If you're not prepared to listen to Lachenmann's music then it's a cryptic code for you (perception), if you are familiar and you like it then you appreciate it and listen what you need to listen. People was not prepared to listen Bach music, that's why he was not appreciated in its time.

[parquar]

Concientious thinking is nothing more than a series of deductions from experience, with the application of logical principles such as occam's razor as learned through experience. The world of the brain is entirely based on its pre-existing surroundings and the experience taken in. People "not being prepared" is different from what I believe. It seems more that he was ignored due to his musical conservatism. People much smarter than I surely didn't consider him a composer so it is about style

[EdiEllerymissing]

Well, then you're not really smart, and the people around you is just a little bit smarter than you. You know, you just said what I told you from the beginning but with your own words. You're not very bright, don't you. You're partially right, Bach was ignored because of his musical conservatism, but the people prepared like Mozart, Beethoven, Schumann and Mendelssohn appreciate his music because of that, their PREPARATION! Whether you like it or not, Lachenmann is an excelent composer.

[parquar]

Ah since I say that in the entire world there were, in musical practice, more intelligent people out there, which to say otherwise would be entirely arrogant, you turn modesty or general human decency as another irrelevant name-call to back your flurry of red-herring and ad hominem arguments. Just as those composers appreciated him more from their preparation, contemporaries appreciated less from their preparation, which told his style to be stale. You have yet to point out a merit in his music

[EdiEllerymissing]

Bourgeois was not prepared for Bach's music. They want an easy music they may listen while they do business. That obviously made a change in the way music was conceived. Then Bach was out of style and Roccoco music, Sturm und drang and finally classicism where the result of the social change. You may read this in Foucault, if you don't consider my opinion informed enough (you know who I'm talking about, right?).

[parquar]

Yes I would not argue for one second about the point with the bourgeois. Other composers like Handel don't give a composer legitimacy in those times, it would be the opinions of the nobility, who were into the superficialities of style to a degree at which they would not properly recognize a great master. His scores have to be complex to outline playing techniques and difficult rhythms, but that proves little of relevance. This is more an argument of philosophy which I will elaborate on next

[EdiEllerymissing]

Oh my, I don't understand you. You said "Just as those composers appreciated him more from their preparation, contemporaries appreciated less from their preparation". For his contemporaries you were talking about composers or nobility. If you were talking about nobility then there's a logic fail here, cause you're mixing Beethoven and Schumann with nobility: two different semantic fields. If you were talking about composers then I don't understand your last comment.

[parquar]

sorry I cut out one word. "noble contemporaries", those having musical knowledge but not in depth. That isn't mixing because preparation can also be negative in a given circumstance, which is what I was making a point about with the "contemporaries". It is a logically sound juxtaposition now that I better explained it hopefully.

[EdiEllerymissing]

Then, of course Haendel don't give a composer legitimacy, we were not talking about legitimacy. We were talking about comprehension, preparation and perception. If you want the legitimacy of Lachenmann then you already lose, cause he gain legitimacy probably before you were born cause, in your terms, people who legitimate music this days grant him legitimacy long time ago, whether you like it or not.

[parquar]

His great acclaim comes very much from stylistic trademarks and "newness" as opposed to the rhythms and, where applicable, notes. That is a part of other art more commonly than music, and not something I am particularly inclined to enjoy more. For example, anybody could have written the piece "4:33", but John Cage took up that idea, and it can never be used again legitimately. I wouldn't listen to it 10 times a day because he was so creative in coming up with that because it is silence

[EdiEllerymissing]

Jejeje! I wouldn't listen yo "4:33" ten times a day. Cage legacy is more about sound and processes more than "notes". His concepts are very creative, and even if you don't like it, he was very structured and concrete. He changes music conceptions and that was very hard in his time. Now, Lachenmann, as you may listen in this interview, wanted a new sound. That was his musical inner search. It has nothing to do with "newness" and, believe it or not, he's a fine trained musician.

[EdiEllerymissing]

Lachenmann is very different to Cage, cause he was formed in with Nono in a serialist tradition at the Stuttgarter Musikhochschule. He's more a traditional musician compared to Cage. Cage was self-taught, Lachemann follow the old path of the composer, and if  he want's to compose "concrete music" (in his own words) and not abstract music like Nono is cause that's what he listen inside, in his mind,

[EdiEllerymissing]

And, if anybody could have written "4:33" then, why it was not done before him?

[parquar]

Nobody that had made the connections/paid their dues to become prominent in the music world at that time otherwise believed seriously in the concept of such a piece to make one themselves. This is generally speaking because I have not the time to have become a modern music expert at all but I'm sure people thought of the concept of a piece with all rests, and it was having the career path to actually want to implement something so out there that took time. His solo for slide trombone lol

[EdiEllerymissing]

Jejeje, Solo for slide trombone! Jajaja. You make me smile XD. You know, 4:33 is not about rests, but about silence and the natural resonance of the environment in a concert room. But you're right, Cage didn't have the handicap of being a "serious" composer, so he dares to create a different music. We should be thankful for that.

[EdiEllerymissing]

You're not treating with some ignorant guy. You're not ignorant to, but you're partial and unprepared. If you are a musician you may analyze any Lachenmann's score and look all the merits of his music. After all this years I don't see why can you question the merit of Lachenmann's music. There are a lot of musicians, composers and philosophers that say Lachenmann's music is worthy. WHO ARE YOU? What have you done? What is your preparation in music and art? Can you even read a score?

[parquar]

Say as just an example somebody argues against Nihilist philosophy. THey wouldn't question Nietzsche's intelligence, or even condemn him personaly, but the product; the philosophy, the person would be against. (I have nothing against those philosophies btw just an example) It is just if you are fascinated with innovative techniques enough to consider the means a great portion of the merit, even if it may limit the scope and purpose of the work.

[EdiEllerymissing]

Again, you're talking about perception here, and your perception is different to mine. For me, the means of Lachemann's work are just as important as the result. I like the same his music above the "innovative" techniques. I don't have to watch at the score to understand and like the sounds, timbre, polyphony and rhythms he creates. It's all about that. I like the same this music than Schumann or Bach's music cause it's own merits.

[YmcjutcICQctolQGgkym]

0:10 seconds in; "It takes the piss..."

[RabiesJr]

ha ha, well spotted (or rather heard)!

[ArsSub]

His works invite listeners into uncharted sonic realms, into a freed new way of listening. You have to negate or even neglect the tradition to preserve it.

[0205812709]

Save on beads and let the pigs eaten their faeces!

[alexioco]

i just cannot hear any beauty in this, no inspiration, just a noise of instruments, making silly noises is all i hear, i mean come on...

[sptfgpn]

People said the same thing about the Spice Girls, and they did alright for themselves. Give it another listen. You might grow to like it.

[Benne86piano]

it,s difficult.you can say that emotion and the thing what the stereotype calls "what is music all about" are really missing... it s a typical german phenomena,since nazi-Time,that music MUST be very complex and everything what just"touches the heart" is dumm and leads to a stupid non-thinking buzz, and it might be, that this new codex really got TO FAR with very complex music like this, but that does neither say that its BAD nor that its worlds greatest music...

I'm german myself by the way...

[kluetenkloeter]

This is plain ridiculous. Of course, it is NO music. It is noise, nothing else. You could rather put an elephant on stage, let it take a dump and declare it art as well. This is a preposterous example where "art" has ended up: in a dead end street.

[philipphilipphilip09]

wtf? and Helmut calls this music????

This is noise, not music!

[nebula32]

wrong! this is music of the highest order.

[gianbirino]

This is great music and o great composer!!!

The Accadeny and the banal person can't understand.

Still and Hear!!!

[sonicpsychiatry]

Go listen to some Phillip Ass you silly troll!

[mailnoslihp95]

wtf is this.

[atralfalgar]

And the comoser name it "music" ???????????

Horrible, seedy, just composed to break us ears! It make me think of a saucepan under a shower.

[HellenicMagic]

More than obvious that you are a fun of minimalism. You repeat the same pattern on every video!

[atralfalgar]

Because it's true.

[anaklasis]

And you say that you like Shostakovich's music...who broke some ears in his time?

[atralfalgar]

Shostakovich knows how to compose. he doesn't type everywhere to make money. It controlled music to conquer dictatorship and to win freedom !

[HellenicMagic]

This guy comes to my video-response (see above) and repeats this very particular comment, also left here, quite every day. I don't know if he is a fun of minimal music or has a weird sense of humor. Oh, by the way he claims he is a composer!

[anaklasis]

Did you listen to "The Nose" or his 2nd Symphony?

And now you can say that he knows how to write music...but I can ensure you that fifty years ago many people considered the opposite thing.

[atralfalgar]

But it was 50 years ago. The glance on its music changed and there is no more an American censorship.

[PenthesileiaAmaz]

Have You read my reply to Your comments on the Hellenic Magic video response? You begin to upset me. Have You got any further argument to state, rather than prosily repeating Yourself with the EXACT phrasing? PLEASE, do spend two minutes to read my comments. If language is a problem, I shall be more than happy to provide You with a translation in Your mother-tongue. PLEASE open Your mind to new prospectives and stop making comments that are an absolute libel to a true masterpiece!

[atralfalgar]

a master-piece, that ????????????

[PenthesileiaAmaz]

I should not bother arguing with an ignorant like You, as You have chosen to present Yourself, since there is NO argument AT ALL You can get involved into. Your mental state and Your brain power is not sufficient to provide You with efficient intelligence in order to ague a case. But I cannot resist expressing myself with only two words: SHUT UP! And bother me no more.

[bobmusic00]

fucking sweet...way to go getting these videos up mec!

[jaynogg]

oh yeh and Lachenmann is the man! Met him before a concert before! Legend! He was so modest too, which is a surprise considering how much extraordinary music hes produced!

[jaynogg]

was this filmed in the future? cos as far as the Gregorian Calendar and I are concerned april 14th 2008 hasnt occurred yet!

[komsfon]

Lachenmann is a MASTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!