Anton Webern Four Pieces for violin and piano, op. 7

[damiancho15]

just close your eyes and enjoy it

[allarmunumralla]

thanks for your comment vivvpprof. The deal is, I made this recording more than 10 years ago; the mic was so-so and the piano samples terrible, best I could find at the time. I lost my master when an ancient computer died, and I got this from a cassette tape dump. So rather than just let it die, I decided to go ahead and post it. There are a few more errors, fyi. I might just try to recreate this, but my experience has been that efforts to recreate a prior are usually inferior. Oh well...

[vivvpprof]

A simple deciphering of his dynamic markings wouldn't hurt, you know. Forte and fortissimo are indiscriminate (violin), the chord marked "kaum hörbar" (that is "barely audible") is struck with a force of an iron hammer... I appreciate the amount of work the piece needed for mastering it but... if you've done so much already, why not do a little bit more and achieve some sort of perfection?

[peppersax]

I love Anton Webern and never heard these pieces before. Webern was waaayyyy ahead of his time. I mean, think about it. What did this music sound like In 1910, if it sounds "out there" in 2010? He was a genius! BRAVO!!!!!!!!!

[Nai61a]

@peppersax It sounded the same in 1910 as it does now. If you mean: What impression did it make? that may be different. I studied all this stuff at university and I still think the Emperor has no clothes. Anybody, who bothered to learn the "rules" could write this; it's like composing a cryptic crossword: clever, sometimes entertaining for those in the know, but ultimately pointless.

[peppersax]

@Nai61a That's not what I meant! For example, John Coltrane sounds the same when we hear him in 2011 as he did in 1965, but when he was on the scene, to other musicians listening to what he what doing, may have thought that he was from another planet. Is that clearer? And for you saying that "anybody, who bothered to learn the "rules" could write this", is TOTAL NONSENSE. In fact, I would love to hear something that you've composed that makes Anton Webern's music "ultimately pointless".

[Nai61a]

@peppersax I see. I'm not going to enter into a lengthy discussion; sorry. However, you have misunderstood my "ultimately pointless" remark which was related to the idea of composing music by numbers/formula. Were I to compose in the style of Webern, this would not undermine Webern's music, it might reinforce it (although I am not claiming to have the extraordinary intellect of A W.). Judging by your enthusiasm for A W, you would hate my music (if there was any). I suggest you listen to: (cont)

[Nai61a]

@peppersax Britten, Tippett, Stravinsky, Janacek to see where I think 20th century music has gone. As to "TOTAL NONSENSE", well, fair enough if you really think that, but do look up twelve tone music and its rules & you may understand why I say what I do. By the way, I do understand what you mean about Coltrane - although I have never consciously listened to a note of his music; the point is that Coltrane is currently widely popular, unlike A W.

[Nai61a]

@peppersax And, by the way, perhaps you could send me something you have composed to support your right to comment. Because it seems to me that this cuts both ways: if you want critics to supply evidence of their expertise, you must expect supporters to be able to do the same thing.

[mahler151]

@Nai61a

And just what would give it a "point"? If some audience were able to instantly like and be enthralled by it?

[Nai61a]

@mahler151 It depends what you mean by "some audience". Over years of experience I have accepted and embraced the idea that music is, above all, an aural experience. If it doesn't appeal to your ears, if, emotionally, it doesn't touch you, if you can't, in some way, anticipate the next note, the next phrase, if the music doesn't "make sense" to you on a number of levels, it has no point. People pretend that Webern fits the bill. I ask them to whistle a Webern tune, as per his prescription (cont)

[Nai61a]

@Nai61a they can't whistle a Webern melody. This is not, per se, a problem, but it demonstrates that music composed by numbers doesn't have legs, historically. If you are one of those people who think that we will all eventually come round to it, forget it. We haven't and we won't. You might as well recommend a sudoku puzzle. I admire the intellectual exercise, but I don't like the outcome. I go out on the street and I hear car horns & I think: that's Webern.

[SykoLiu]

@Nai61a car horns are Cage.

Not to mention how car horns are usually tuned to a major third. Which would be more akin to Berg than Webern. :P

[Nai61a]

@SykoLiu Car horns are more likely to be Varèse, I think. My association of car horns and Webern was stupid, but it was the best I could come up with at the time and in the context of what I was trying to communicate to M151. And the tuning to a major 3rd is often irritatingly inexact! Drives me mad.

[SykoLiu]

@Nai61a Not to mention that many composers, or artists of any kind, would suggest that an experience need not be enjoyable to be meaningful. Try Penderecki's Threnody (an overused, but potent example). Not exactly what one could call a pleasant listen, but still incredibly powerful.

[Nai61a]

@SykoLiu I was not trying to associate the "enjoyable" with the "meaningful" necessarily: there are probably plenty of examples of deliberately un-enjoyable music which makes it's point: perhaps the opening of the finale of Beethoven's 9th... I was talking about emotional responses. The Hiroshima Threnody is undoubtedly emotional and an experience; in this sense it seems to be authentically meaningful. To me, Webern seems sterile, antiseptic, emotionless, inauthentic.

[SykoLiu]

@Nai61a But that is a matter of taste, not merit.

[Nai61a]

@SykoLiu Everything in art (and almost everything in life) is a matter of taste. I explained early in my exchange with M151 what my taste was founded on. Please read the whole exchange - if you can be bothered. We all make judgements of merit and they are all equally unreliable.

[SykoLiu]

@Nai61a Opinions are always inherently flawed, but judgments need not be.

And not everything in art is a matter of taste. Sure, your personal preference is just taste, but anyone with the "proper training" that you claim to have can surely see the significance and meaning of this piece.

This piece is no more sterile than many of the works of Mozart, or Bach. Rules are rules. Whether you follow this set or that set, it's the composer that makes the music, not the rules.

[Nai61a]

@SykoLiu In these confined spaces, one has to resort to shorthand; I hoped you'd realise that I meant that judgments in art are a matter of taste, not that everything (literally) was a matter of taste (although I suspect that some people would take the literal view). I don't know what else you'd base judgments on if it wasn't your taste, informed by education and experience, maybe but not necessarily. (Cont)

[Nai61a]

@SykoLiu (Cont) Also, I was not implying superiority in reference to my training; I was merely explaining that I had had to study the second Viennese school. The significance of the piece, historically, does not escape me. I don't have room or time to take up the "rules are rules" argument. Suffice to say that the "rules" should not be the main (sometimes only) driver of the art.

[Nai61a]

@Nai61a I've just re-read your remark about "many of the works of Mozart or Bach" being "sterile" and I realised I didn't challenge it. Please name one great work by either composer which you regard as "sterile" then, perhaps, I'll understand your definition of "sterile" and how it differs - utterly - from mine. I'm not a huge Mozart fan, but I would never qualify his major works as "sterile".

[Nai61a]

@mahler151 It depends what you mean by "some audience". Over years of experience I have accepted and embraced the idea that music is, above all, an aural experience. If it doesn't appeal to your ears, if, emotionally, it doesn't touch you, if you can't, in some way, anticipate the next note, the next phrase, if the music doesn't "make sense" to you on a number of levels, it has no point. People pretend that Webern fits the bill. I ask them to whistle a Webern tune, as per his prescription (cont)

[lionsloin]

Bravo John - Thanks also for running us through the score as it is performed. It really helps the viewer to understand better what is being expressed here. jjh