Do you know Brian Ferneyhough

Never heard of it, I confess my ignorance.

It could be interesting to look at pieces like: Second String Quartet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMB9239-fmo

Version with score

Open content (youtube)

I didn't know him. But I can't make heads or tails of him.

What year is the composition from?

Arzigovolato3 wrote:

What year is the composition from?

recorded on 26/09/1980... the first [performance] on 02/10/1980

Incredible, already more than thirty years ... it's history by now ...

Incredible the '900

I heard something months ago.

I'll look ridiculous using these terms, but what can I do?

I would like to say that regarding contemporary music, speaking of performance techniques, I really like certain articulations on strings; for example, those passages where the bow is

made to "bounce" on a string until creating a sort of increasingly fast repetition, giving a sense of softness and elasticity, or the effect obtained by passing the

bow forcefully over the strings beyond the bridge, recreating a cold, rough sound, and many other facets.

camy86 wrote:

I didn't know it. But I can't make heads or tails of it.

At the beginning of the piece there is a legend; it is worth reading it carefully, otherwise one can indeed struggle. Even a paper support could be of greater help.

Rotore wrote:

Even paper support could help more.

... the problem is finding it

Piccinesco wrote:

I'll sound ridiculous using these terms, but what can I do?

I would like to say that regarding contemporary music, speaking of performance techniques, I really like certain articulations on strings; for example, those passages where the bow is

made to "bounce" on a string until creating a sort of increasingly fast repetition, giving a sense of softness and elasticity, or the effect obtained by passing the

bow forcefully over the strings beyond the bridge, recreating a cold, rough sound, and many other facets.

It is probably part of an exploratory approach to timbre.

Tiger wrote:

... the problem is finding it

...that's why I'm here

camy86 wrote:

I didn't know him. But I can't make heads or tails of his dear work.

It is certainly not simple, and some of Lachenmann's pieces are even worse... because the level of difficulty is raised even further.

Try listening without trying to understand anything; it isn't narrative music...

New complexity, I like it, but I have never analyzed one of his pieces in its entirety (if there is someone who has done so, they deserve a Wikipedia page just for that).

There are several scores on YouTube, including the one posted by frank; I also have others - I believe - if anyone were interested

micamahler wrote:

however, I have never analyzed one of his pieces in its entirety (if someone has done so, they deserve a Wikipedia page just for that).

Something can also be said about the piece, I never thought about writing articles on Wiki ...

micamahler wrote:

i have others too - I believe - if anyone were interested

If you have them in PDF, would you send them to me?

Thanks in advance

I meant to say that you would deserve a Wikipedia page in your honor, something like

Frank (xxxx - xxxx), musician and forum member, has performed a complete analysis of a piece by Ferneyhough!

One of the suggestions often given is to listen a lot because it is an enrichment for the musician who, if they manage to internalize listening, can draw from a more extensive repertoire.

(it's not a provocation, eh!)

What kind of enrichment should pieces like this leave? I mean, I haven't memorized anything of what I have listened to—not that it's a problem—but so how does one relate to the initial assumption?

micamahler wrote:

New complexity, I like it

"New"?

To me, it sounds quite dated... in short, if someone were to write like this today, they would sound truly "old".

In the end, this musician is a mandatory step for anyone wishing to approach a type of complex writing—and I emphasize writing... because ultimately, it is essentially as if he were even putting the current "rubato" in writing.

I agree with Xenakis, it's interesting to read the adjectives (a big romantic). So nitpicky about values and then he writes "flexible" at measure 39...

One thing to be said, however, is that his vision, although utopian, is one of enriching the score with as much information as possible, almost as if to say: "Ok, you want to do rubato, but I want it like this".

I repeat, utopian but it can make sense; after all, too much freedom can also mean leaving the performer to their own "limitations"/"mannerisms". Whether shareable or not, it is a respectable thought.

I wrote "new" complexity because that is how this movement is called