It is so wonderful when a highschooler posts idiocy then an intelligent person is able to tell us something.A full evening of reading trash has just been vindicated by mr.sienkivich. spaceba!!!
Music at its best has a message, after that it should be larger than life and inspire us towards our Maker, and increase gratitude, and thirdly the skill factor should be subtle, not the whole point of the music. All children are born with intelligence that surpasses that of the most intelligent adults until they trade it off for something far less valuable by the time they are two years old. Your clarinet history reminds me of this tragedy. Back track! It is worth it.
What on earth?! Sorry to dissent, but this is really atrocious (musically). Playing this should be like telling the story of a newborn butterfly, NOT an epileptic R2D2 on crack! Think of a butterfly galloping in the wind with unpredictable but never sharp, rushed or jerky turns, only to come to rest on a dandilion (i.e the slow section) that is suddenly scattered by a gust of wind, leading him to flurry off into more danger that leads him to his impending doom and a slow, disheartening death.
Sorry, but I think the piece escapes reduction into such a narrative form. Mantovani wrote the piece as a representation of a computer breakdown, i.e. the Y2K frenzy. He wrote it in 1999, and published it in 2000 par Henry Lemoine. Granted that, your "epileptic R2D2" is quite appropriate :) Chen does a good job. I have the score and MAN does his articulation blow me away!
@MstislavSienkievich Hardly. Comparative reality tells us that when a computer in the millenial age breaks down, it is a rather boring experience. The computer simply slows down and freezes. There is no wildness, no epilepsy. This is not the story of a 1970s Star Wars robot. I also find it rather redundant to be simply stating what you read off of the score notes as opposed to referring to any specifics of the text (i.e. the rhythmic markings - the 6/8 - 2/4 march, the cadenzas...).
@clairannette Wait a minute... you just criticized me for lack of imagination, and now you're saying that you don't want to imagine a more colorful, anthropomorphic version of a computer breakdown? Why not? It is a fine thing that you can visualize another interpretation. I could conceive of a performance like what you describe being just as effective and moving... and probably half a dozen other approaches that would work.
@clairannette Personally, I rather like epileptic R2D2. He sounds like much more interesting company than a butterfly whose wings haven't dried out yet. Butterflies don't gallop, last I checked either :-p
@Sherbrick These remarks are clearly the result of amateur study or lack of understanding of nuances in what BM wrote. Perhaps further analysis of the score will help you better understand, and I'd be happy to point out specifics that might otherwise lead you to a more "objective" perspective on the interpretation. Without the ability to objectify, people tend to respond to matters such as this on gut feeling. I pity you for your lack of imagination. I pity you for your lack of understanding.
@clairannette To be honest, I don't have a score in front of me. But does that make me unqualified to have a reaction to this performance and an opinion on it? No! Is this performance a strict attempt to recreate the composer's intentions? Perhaps not... but does that make it any less interesting or effective? No! I pity you for feeling that music is a purely "objective" art requiring purely "objective" interpretation. I feel you are missing out as a result.
@Sherbrick To be specific, I was referring to a lack of imagination with respect to the imagery of a butterfly "galloping" in the wind. As for music being a purely objective art, that was neither what I stated, nor what I implied. When one analyzes the score, the analysis objectifies his/her interpretation and provides justification for one's artistic decisions. This makes the performance tenably subjective - i.e. less egotistical & worthy of being defended by more than simply "personal opinion"
@Sherbrick And yes, of course, you are entitled to respond and have an opinion, just as I am entitled to respond and have mine. I would agree that education and understanding makes many things less interesting that would otherwise seem interesting and effective. It's like hearing the same joke twice. And I'll have to disagree on composer intent. In this business, an explicit attempt to deviate from the composer's intentions is blasphemy & whoever taught you differently needs to be fired. Fact.
@clairannette You and Stravinsky would have been kindred souls. But of course, historically, opinions on the degree of personal liberty to which the performer is entitled have varied greatly, and I see no reason why the rules should be set in stone now. And you referred to the "business" of classical performance... if the audience likes a performance and will pay to come back and hear more, does it matter how strictly the composer's intent was followed?
@clairannette Isn't it a given that any performance will be a combination of the composer's artistic input and that of the player? Perhaps it would behoove composers who do not want the slightest deviation from their exact vision to do a studio recording of their works, and not publish the score.
@Sherbrick Yes, it's a given. All the more reason to consider grounding or objectifying your artistic decisions in the "text" (i.e. unambiguous or indisputable elements of the score) in the event someone comes along with a dissenting or perhaps shallow view of what exactly those decisions were in respect of the composer. You'll see this surface in, perhaps, international competitions. Style is cultural - but some basics are indisputable (time markings, for example - BM was very specific!)
@Sherbrick For example, if BM writes for you to hold a note for 7 seconds, then rest on the fermata for 5 more seconds, then what on earth gives any performer reason to exercise his/her artistic liberty to play it for 4 seconds and rest for 2? Or make an explicit 0,5 second rest into 2 seconds? Or if he asks to fade from fff to ff, why decide you like it better if you fade fff to niente rather than ff, when there are specific markings for that in other places?
@Sherbrick Friends and colleagues of mine would likely state the contrary re: Stravinsky. That's a discussion for another year.
As for your question concerning the biz: this is a presumptive question unworthy of an answer. It is crafted under the assumption that the end game is only to gain an audience and earn money (pop culture is self-indulgent & egotistical). To suggest doing this while disrespecting the wishes of the creator is preposterous. No self-respecting artist would ever allow this.
@clairannette If you want to call it a business, then yes, I am assuming you're talking about earning money, which is why I replied as I did. If the goal is instead to study and perform in a strictly academic setting, in which one will be subject primarily to the critical review of peers, then one would obviously make every effort to study the score and play it just as specified. However...
@clairannette ...if the player has carefully analyzed the score, played the piece through many times accurately, and reflected upon the overall effect of the piece, that player should (in my view of the subject) have the liberty to say "hmmm, I think perhaps adding this particular nuance here, or a slight shift of style there might enhance the overall effect of this piece as I see it." ONLY with careful consideration with respect to the overall integrity of the work should this be done.
@clairannette It would be really boring if everyone played a song in exactly the same way. Once you'd heard a piece, why bother going to other performances of it? Why not just get a recording?
People aren't machines, and ought not to behave as such. No self-respecting artist would allow his or herself to become a machine.
@Sherbrick Not sure what you're getting at with this last response but... I go to other performances to find inspiration and perhaps extract/learn from ideas far beyond those I could ever conjure up, fathom, imagine, uncover or realize for myself. Generally those are performances I pay a lot of money to go hear and, in turn, are the kind of performances I get paid to give.
@clairannette Well, if it's all there in the score like you seemed to be arguing earlier, then no performer would be doing things that you couldn't conjure, fathom, imagine, uncover, or realize for yourself. But maybe it isn't all there set in stone in the score... and thus, great performers (like Chen Halevi in this video) are indeed giving me new ideas and inspiration!
Comment removed
instantcreations 10 months ago
It is so wonderful when a highschooler posts idiocy then an intelligent person is able to tell us something.A full evening of reading trash has just been vindicated by mr.sienkivich. spaceba!!!
lovesGenet 2 years ago
Chen is the new music master- brilliant performance!
NoseyFlynn48 2 years ago
Music at its best has a message, after that it should be larger than life and inspire us towards our Maker, and increase gratitude, and thirdly the skill factor should be subtle, not the whole point of the music. All children are born with intelligence that surpasses that of the most intelligent adults until they trade it off for something far less valuable by the time they are two years old. Your clarinet history reminds me of this tragedy. Back track! It is worth it.
tubatenorsax 2 years ago
Just wanted to say that the "epileptic R2D2 on crack" analogy is simply genius! LOL. I do like the performance, however.
kkrylovskiy 2 years ago 5
This is an absolutely astonishing performance! Not only is his technique flawless, but his musicality sells this piece. Bravo!
ClarinetSteve 2 years ago 3
What on earth?! Sorry to dissent, but this is really atrocious (musically). Playing this should be like telling the story of a newborn butterfly, NOT an epileptic R2D2 on crack! Think of a butterfly galloping in the wind with unpredictable but never sharp, rushed or jerky turns, only to come to rest on a dandilion (i.e the slow section) that is suddenly scattered by a gust of wind, leading him to flurry off into more danger that leads him to his impending doom and a slow, disheartening death.
clairannette 3 years ago
Sorry, but I think the piece escapes reduction into such a narrative form. Mantovani wrote the piece as a representation of a computer breakdown, i.e. the Y2K frenzy. He wrote it in 1999, and published it in 2000 par Henry Lemoine. Granted that, your "epileptic R2D2" is quite appropriate :) Chen does a good job. I have the score and MAN does his articulation blow me away!
MstislavSienkievich 2 years ago 2
@MstislavSienkievich Hardly. Comparative reality tells us that when a computer in the millenial age breaks down, it is a rather boring experience. The computer simply slows down and freezes. There is no wildness, no epilepsy. This is not the story of a 1970s Star Wars robot. I also find it rather redundant to be simply stating what you read off of the score notes as opposed to referring to any specifics of the text (i.e. the rhythmic markings - the 6/8 - 2/4 march, the cadenzas...).
clairannette 1 year ago
@clairannette Wait a minute... you just criticized me for lack of imagination, and now you're saying that you don't want to imagine a more colorful, anthropomorphic version of a computer breakdown? Why not? It is a fine thing that you can visualize another interpretation. I could conceive of a performance like what you describe being just as effective and moving... and probably half a dozen other approaches that would work.
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@clairannette Personally, I rather like epileptic R2D2. He sounds like much more interesting company than a butterfly whose wings haven't dried out yet. Butterflies don't gallop, last I checked either :-p
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@Sherbrick These remarks are clearly the result of amateur study or lack of understanding of nuances in what BM wrote. Perhaps further analysis of the score will help you better understand, and I'd be happy to point out specifics that might otherwise lead you to a more "objective" perspective on the interpretation. Without the ability to objectify, people tend to respond to matters such as this on gut feeling. I pity you for your lack of imagination. I pity you for your lack of understanding.
clairannette 1 year ago
@clairannette To be honest, I don't have a score in front of me. But does that make me unqualified to have a reaction to this performance and an opinion on it? No! Is this performance a strict attempt to recreate the composer's intentions? Perhaps not... but does that make it any less interesting or effective? No! I pity you for feeling that music is a purely "objective" art requiring purely "objective" interpretation. I feel you are missing out as a result.
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@Sherbrick To be specific, I was referring to a lack of imagination with respect to the imagery of a butterfly "galloping" in the wind. As for music being a purely objective art, that was neither what I stated, nor what I implied. When one analyzes the score, the analysis objectifies his/her interpretation and provides justification for one's artistic decisions. This makes the performance tenably subjective - i.e. less egotistical & worthy of being defended by more than simply "personal opinion"
clairannette 1 year ago
@Sherbrick And yes, of course, you are entitled to respond and have an opinion, just as I am entitled to respond and have mine. I would agree that education and understanding makes many things less interesting that would otherwise seem interesting and effective. It's like hearing the same joke twice. And I'll have to disagree on composer intent. In this business, an explicit attempt to deviate from the composer's intentions is blasphemy & whoever taught you differently needs to be fired. Fact.
clairannette 1 year ago
@clairannette You and Stravinsky would have been kindred souls. But of course, historically, opinions on the degree of personal liberty to which the performer is entitled have varied greatly, and I see no reason why the rules should be set in stone now. And you referred to the "business" of classical performance... if the audience likes a performance and will pay to come back and hear more, does it matter how strictly the composer's intent was followed?
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@clairannette Isn't it a given that any performance will be a combination of the composer's artistic input and that of the player? Perhaps it would behoove composers who do not want the slightest deviation from their exact vision to do a studio recording of their works, and not publish the score.
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@Sherbrick Yes, it's a given. All the more reason to consider grounding or objectifying your artistic decisions in the "text" (i.e. unambiguous or indisputable elements of the score) in the event someone comes along with a dissenting or perhaps shallow view of what exactly those decisions were in respect of the composer. You'll see this surface in, perhaps, international competitions. Style is cultural - but some basics are indisputable (time markings, for example - BM was very specific!)
clairannette 1 year ago
@Sherbrick For example, if BM writes for you to hold a note for 7 seconds, then rest on the fermata for 5 more seconds, then what on earth gives any performer reason to exercise his/her artistic liberty to play it for 4 seconds and rest for 2? Or make an explicit 0,5 second rest into 2 seconds? Or if he asks to fade from fff to ff, why decide you like it better if you fade fff to niente rather than ff, when there are specific markings for that in other places?
clairannette 1 year ago
@Sherbrick Friends and colleagues of mine would likely state the contrary re: Stravinsky. That's a discussion for another year.
As for your question concerning the biz: this is a presumptive question unworthy of an answer. It is crafted under the assumption that the end game is only to gain an audience and earn money (pop culture is self-indulgent & egotistical). To suggest doing this while disrespecting the wishes of the creator is preposterous. No self-respecting artist would ever allow this.
clairannette 1 year ago
@clairannette If you want to call it a business, then yes, I am assuming you're talking about earning money, which is why I replied as I did. If the goal is instead to study and perform in a strictly academic setting, in which one will be subject primarily to the critical review of peers, then one would obviously make every effort to study the score and play it just as specified. However...
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@clairannette ...if the player has carefully analyzed the score, played the piece through many times accurately, and reflected upon the overall effect of the piece, that player should (in my view of the subject) have the liberty to say "hmmm, I think perhaps adding this particular nuance here, or a slight shift of style there might enhance the overall effect of this piece as I see it." ONLY with careful consideration with respect to the overall integrity of the work should this be done.
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@clairannette It would be really boring if everyone played a song in exactly the same way. Once you'd heard a piece, why bother going to other performances of it? Why not just get a recording?
People aren't machines, and ought not to behave as such. No self-respecting artist would allow his or herself to become a machine.
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@Sherbrick Not sure what you're getting at with this last response but... I go to other performances to find inspiration and perhaps extract/learn from ideas far beyond those I could ever conjure up, fathom, imagine, uncover or realize for myself. Generally those are performances I pay a lot of money to go hear and, in turn, are the kind of performances I get paid to give.
clairannette 1 year ago
@clairannette Well, if it's all there in the score like you seemed to be arguing earlier, then no performer would be doing things that you couldn't conjure, fathom, imagine, uncover, or realize for yourself. But maybe it isn't all there set in stone in the score... and thus, great performers (like Chen Halevi in this video) are indeed giving me new ideas and inspiration!
Thanks for the discussion.
Sherbrick 1 year ago
@Sherbrick I am not all too certain that what was added or missing or railroaded here contributes to enhancing the overall integrity of the work.
clairannette 1 year ago
Bravo Chen...I am not sure if u was born for contemporary music,but I am sure u was born with the clarinet...Best wishes MINA...
minatsamou 3 years ago
This absolutely superb.
MstislavSienkievich 3 years ago
bravo. wow.
jmarquar 3 years ago
Chen is a monster at both modern and traditional music. World Class Player.
blummy 4 years ago
Absolutely amazing!!!!!
virtuosoclarinet 4 years ago
İ am definetely sure Chen was born for contemporary music!Bavo!
clarineturc 4 years ago
perfect...
kivanc22 4 years ago
Bravo Chen. C'est magnifique ! Merci pour cette sublime version !
andereseite 4 years ago
Indeed - Wow!
BilbyGirl 4 years ago