How Would One Approach Studying A Piece Like This

Stellina wrote:

I didn't think so, but I'm starting to like it ...

.... you can never listen enough

My cousin plays it every Saturday when she comes for lunch, the only thing is that she can't manage to use the pedal... She can't reach it!

Sublime... not everyone is granted the ability to understand.

I played this music a few times after an apocalyptic binge.

And I was even speaking Japanese.

Try it and believe me.

...mine was a serious request ...

Tiger wrote:

.... one never listens enough

I agree, if I hadn't listened first, I would never have known that I could like it. The problem is approaching a repertoire of this type ... perhaps there isn't even any pedagogy ...

But I wasn't joking at all! I wonder what interest a composition can arouse that has the same "contents" as the keys stomped on by a 2-year-old child on the piano, if not that of remembering a 2-year-old child stomping on piano keys. Common sense suggests to me that one could listen to it at most once; the second time would have already worn me out, and in fact I resisted for 15 seconds, skipped ahead a few minutes, listened for another 5 seconds, and then turned it off.

I am quite sure that if Xenakis hadn't been written on the score but my name instead, nobody would have given a damn...

I firmly believe that one should reflect on the quality of what is heard regardless of who wrote it. Being named Xenakis does not necessarily mean that everything coming from his pen is of indisputable quality; the same thing, in my opinion, applies to performers—being named Lang Lang doesn't make all the music coming from his hands beautiful. I listened to one of his interpretations of Liszt's Liebestraum on YouTube and I must say it was quite mediocre...

... meanwhile you could read

http://www.mtosmt.org/issues/mto.01.7.3/mto.01.7.3.wannamaker.html

TheSimon wrote:

I wonder what interest a composition can arouse

Perhaps the link I posted can provide an answer

TheSimon wrote:

Common sense suggests that one could listen to it at most once; by the second time, I would have already been worn out, and in fact, I resisted for 15 seconds, skipped a few minutes, listened for another 5 seconds, and then turned it off.

Tant'è che Stellina lo vuole suonare...de gustibus non disputandum est

TheSimon wrote:

I am quite sure that if Xenakis's name wasn't written on the score but mine instead, nobody would give a damn...

...try to invent something new and convince people...then we shall see ...
Xenakis wasn't born Xenakis, so it could have had a laxative effect .... but history says otherwise...

TheSimon wrote:

I firmly believe that one should reflect on the quality of what is heard, regardless of who wrote it.

Indeed, but if someone doesn't listen, how can they evaluate?

TheSimon wrote:

Being named Xenakis does not necessarily mean that everything that comes from his pen is of indisputable quality

Obviously, but there is someone who wants to play it, plays it, puts the video on YouTube ... so Xenakis is right. If he had never done it, we would be talking about something else, I don't know, someone random, Brian Eno

And then there are those who explained to us that some rubbish like this is even used in music therapy sessions ...

TheSimon wrote:

The same thing applies to performers in my opinion; being named Lang Lang doesn't mean that all the music that comes from his hands is beautiful. I listened to one of his interpretations of Liszt's Liebestraum on YouTube and I must say it was quite mediocre...

Same argument as for the composer: listen, evaluate, and decide.

How to approach the study of a composition like this?

Starting from listening, studying and analyzing other pages by the same Author, who was not only

a composer, but also an architect, friend and collaborator of Le Corbusier.

As a composer, he applied probability theory and mathematical logic to compositional technique,

consistent with his conception of music as an agglomeration of masses and sound lines.

"Niche" music, which can intrigue and even please, if one is interested in the search for new sonorities,

beyond the limits of traditional taste.

Music that can provoke ironic reactions, misunderstanding and total rejection, like much of the music

composed in the last seventy years.

Let us not forget, however, that great pianists, such as Maurizio Pollini, have not hesitated to propose music

by Boulez, Berio, Stockhausen, Nono....

No no alt, let's split it...

You can say that for you it is a beautiful composition, and anyway your nickname can only be biased; I don't like it at all, I find nothing aesthetically beautiful about it, it's my opinion and I beg you to respect it. I have listened to many things by Stockhausen as well as Xenakis, some of which I found interesting, others that gave me nothing. I know very well that just as Stockhausen did, Xenakis also used and experimented with mathematical algorithms. To me, they don't invent anything new. Innovation is not relying on mathematics. Creating algorithms that generate a composition is not making music. I could invent a program that generates mathematical algorithms and which, based on these algorithms, generates music—much more than what they have written; I could thus make hundreds of compositions a day, but this would not make me a composer at all, even if I wrote the mathematical algorithms by hand. Art FOR ME is something else entirely. This is also demonstrated by the number of followers that these eminent composers carry with them... A truly limited number. And I will say more... I have the impression that many of those who claim many of these compositions are moving only say so to avoid being criticized and not to seem inferior to those who, like you, support them tooth and nail.

This is what I really think. The fact that Pollini has played one or two studies by Stockhausen does not mean that EVERYTHING Stockhausen wrote is high-level. I would also like to understand if the fact that great performers play compositions by contemporary artists makes these composers great, or vice versa... Mah.

This is just to say that Chopin does not need to be played by Pollini or Horowitz or Rubinstein to be recognized as great; according to what Boesendorfer claims instead, for Xenakis, Stockhausen and company, it would seem so (I didn't say it, Boesendorfer said it).

Finally, I would like to launch an appeal to those who think that pieces like this are, as Fantozzi used to say, "cagxxxe pazzesche" [crazy sh*t], to express their TRUE idea and not to remain silent just because 4 out of 100 people would otherwise consider them obtuse. In mathematics (just to stay on theme), the statistics of what is right are made by large numbers, not small numbers, barring VERY RARE exceptions...

The problem is that in this world, more and more often, we witness a true lack of character... Having character also means going alone against a category, and I am certain that many people think like me, but due to a lack of character they stand there saying yes even if they think it's a no, just for the fear of being criticized.... Please....

TheSimon wrote:

The problem is that in this world, more and more often we witness a true lack of character... Having character also means standing alone against a category, and I am certain that many people think like me, but due to a lack of character, they just stand there saying yes even if they think it should be a no, solely out of fear of being criticized.... Please....

Finally a bit of wisdom. Let's always apply this concept, eh!

Simone, what can I say. It doesn't seem to me that those who hate this type of music tend to stay quiet. On the contrary.

I like Herma very much.

And I find your comments very aggressive. And, ultimately, off-topic. I respect your opinion but I do not agree with the tone in which you expressed it.

A Stellina.

alas, I am not a pianist, so I can only advise you to listen a lot, study the score, try to understand its meaning or give it your own. In the interpretation you posted, I felt a profound search for the underlying harmonies. But not everyone loves this way of performing Xenakis; often the construction is highlighted, the large form, favoring dynamic indications, crescendos, a sort of overall movement of sound. I wouldn't know if these thoughts should accompany you from the very first hours of study, or if they could be a subsequent step... certainly a piece like this demands perfect technical control.

In fact, my "joke" was meant to signify that in relation to the question:

> How would one approach studying a piece like this?

it is presumed that they have already evaluated that I am interested; then, one can or cannot share their methodology.

Anyway, I'm glad to know that TheSimon doesn't like it, that's understandable... in fact, I don't expect everyone to go looking for my video on the tube

They are deliberately aggressive, but not against Xenakis (our user) or Boesendorfer, rather towards the sycophants who think like I do but lack the ability and the balls, excuse the term, to voice what they actually think. You say no, perhaps because you are on the other side and these people I am referring to will never tell you otherwise, precisely because they fear confrontation and are suck-ups... As far as I'm concerned, Boesendorfer and Xenakis can listen to this piece as much as they want, why would they bother me? However, it seems appropriate to express my view. If even this is not allowed, then there is no point in being here talking, since you don't want to agree with me. I am always ready to change my mind if given the right reasons; therefore:

I apologize for the OT and I want to get back ON TOPIC by asking the following...

In any case, since people are talking about these pieces that must be understood, and you teach me that they are the product of mathematical algorithms, I would like you to provide an analysis of this piece, citing the mathematical algorithm that was used, why that particular mathematical algorithm was used, how the score was then generated starting from those particular numbers, and finally how the analysis of a piece like this differs from the harmonic and historiographical analysis of a piece from the classical period... Thank you.

I await your response

... in the link you will find many answers, have you had a chance to read it?

thallo wrote:

In the interpretation that you posted, I felt a profound search for the underlying harmonies.

Underlying? Help me

TheSimon wrote:

of a piece from the classical period.

Classical or from Classicism? I ask, because this is a classical piece...

TheSimon wrote exactly:

"Chopin does not need to be played by Pollini or Horowitz or Rubinstein to be recognized as great, whereas according to what Boesendorfer claims instead for Xenakis, Stockhausen and company it would seem so (I didn't say it, Boesendorfer said it)."

But what exactly did Bösendorfer write?:

"However, let us not forget that great pianists, such as Maurizio Pollini, have not hesitated to propose music

by Boulez, Berio, Stockhausen, Nono...."

Perhaps I am not well acquainted with the subtleties of the Italian language, I simply wanted to note that a pianist

like Pollini deemed it appropriate to make these cited authors known to the public.

I agree that this proves nothing. It was just an observation of mine; I don't like them even if they were performed by Pollini, but I listen for a matter of my own personal musical culture, and I respect the tastes of people who know how to appreciate

what I am unable to appreciate: even this, for me, is character.

And then, excuse me Simone, I esteem you very much, but I agree with Thallo in saying that, this time, your intervention seems

aggressive.....a matter of character?

Ma then I didn't understand what character has to do with it

But why am I offering cups and being answered with sticks? And then Claudio, coming from you... Have you ever reread the answers you've given to someone? I simply asked for clarifications and I didn't take it out on any of you, I even wrote that; I don't understand why you are making it a problem of personal resentment, as if to say "I'm taking it out on Stefano" and Enrico feels slighted even though he has never even met Stefano in person, but no one is answering what I actually asked. Maybe it's me who doesn't reflect or reason, but I would really like someone to justify the greatness of THIS COMPOSITION, because I am not talking about all contemporary compositions, I even wrote that in a few posts above, but about this one in particular... I would like someone to justify the questions I asked a post ago...