Vanessa Mae -- Toccata Fugue

That music should teach someone something seems like an interesting point of view to me, but it is at least by ancient grace that this thing is not ostentatiously displayed.

I am curious, what must/should music teach?

No, I mean, have you heard the orchestration for orchestra? Up to the 1' and 26'' it doesn't blow me away, especially at the beginning. But afterwards it has incredible energy. I think that at school no one is able to teach me how to do this kind of orchestration... always the same old routine. Honestly, everything would need to be redone; I didn't know this violinist, magnificent, fresh, brilliant.

Frank wrote:

Just for completeness, I wouldn't want anyone to get the wrong idea.

I would say we all talk later, right?

Yes. We will talk.

A me par di sentire un Bach stile Mario Merola.

Meno male che dura meno di cinque minuti.

Open content (youtube)

Frank wrote:

Every now and then I love to create this kind of imbalance in the forum to understand, as sometimes happens, how we stand on a "cognitive" level.

Techno music is a phenomenon of the '90s, so Vanessa Mae was doing what needed to be done at the right time; if I did it now, I would be at least anachronistic.... if anything, today I should orient myself at least towards mash-ups. Therefore, it's not that you are old, but rather that the tracks you listen to, as Ilenia reminds us, are already part of history. And let's not even pretend that electronic music has nothing to teach, let's not joke.

It's true, Frank, you really like these "games".

It's a shame to read so many sexist judgments but... what can you do? That's just how men are.

The likes that I had to give, I gave them all, and I have nothing more to add.

Anyway, I like to restate the judgment in which I recognized myself 100%:

Valchiria wrote:

I didn't know her, I think she has a good dose of genius

LucaCavaliere wrote:

A me par di sentire un Bach stile Mario Merola.

A sentence in which I read many flaws or rather, the result of many (in my opinion) flawed reasoning processes.

When you hear Vivaldi's transcriptions of Bach, you are listening to Bach's style; therefore, here you are not listening to Bach but to Vanessa Mae's style. If you don't like this style, I understand part of the statement. As a teacher, I can confirm that statistically, a composition student after 10 years of study manages, if they are good, to perform a good statistical reconstruction. Here it is clear that the treatment of the orchestra goes far beyond that; if you then stop at the violinist's phrasing (which disappoints your expectation since you would like to hear Baroque), you have understood little of the matter.

Here the matter is quite a bit deeper: first of all, it involves decontextualizing (many established composers do not know how to do this) pre-existing material, making it accessible to people who don't understand a thing about classical music, doing it well and at times genially, but above all by doing so highlighting all that rhythmic force that the piece already has in the original... to spite those who say there is no rhythm in classical music. Has anyone noticed that part of the work was done solely on the amplification of the original rhythmic movement? (Ad Oracolo likes it from a certain point on, who knows why?) Shall we talk about how the percussion and orchestration were treated? I assure you that there isn't an idiot behind it, but out of curiosity, I went to listen to something by Mario Merola—I mean, do we want to discuss this seriously?

And besides, why use him as a negative point of comparison? Another flaw: we are comparing apples with pears... perhaps let's use pertinent examples, if possible. If not possible, we already have an answer; let's talk about Techno-Classical, just to provide context.

Open content (youtube)

danielescarpetti wrote:

It's true that you, Frank, like these "games" very much.

It's a shame to read so many sexist judgments but... what can you do? That's just how males are.

The likes that I was supposed to give, I gave them all and I have nothing more to add.

Anyway, I like to report the judgment in which I recognized myself 100%:

I also liked Valchiria's post; the theater had above all a social function, no less than discotheques, and I am sure that people like Rossini would have understood it immediately. A word to the wise is enough.

Valchiria wrote:

I am curious, what should/ought music teach?

The statement was by Fabio, I also have a certain curiosity?

Should school at least teach you a trade and prepare you for the world of work?

This forty-year-old woman seems to me to have exemplified it quite well. Or perhaps they were referring to catharsis, ethics, etc. (an infinite discussion full of contradictions)

Today I'll shower you with likes Frank, but I recognize myself in everything you assert.

Last night when I listened to your first two proposals from Mae, my first thought was: if music in clubs were all like this, I would always be there dancing.

I think that people like Mae deserve a monument because they truly manage to bring classical music to those who don't understand a damn thing about classical music. And she does it in an absolutely superlative way.

danielescarpetti wrote:

Today I'm showering you with likes Frank, but I recognize myself in everything you assert.

Last night when I listened to your first two proposals by Mae, my first thought was: if music in clubs were all like this, I would always be there dancing.

I think that people like Mae deserve a monument because they truly manage to bring classical music to those who don't understand a damn thing about classical music. And she does it in an absolutely superlative way.

Bingo Daniele.

I looked up her unreleased tracks and, in my opinion, she has really understood the rhythmic factor; her songs are very sensual but they aren't quite that effective! Dear guys, she is talking about the rhythm of classical music, and I say this specifically regarding the present, even though 20 years have passed.

A teacher of mine always used to tell me that being able to recognize the strength of an idea is a great ability, you Frank always baffle me... if it were up to me, you could destabilize the forum even more often

danielescarpetti wrote:

Last night when I listened to your first two proposals from Mae, my first thought was: if music in clubs were all like this, I would be there dancing all the time.

...in effect, dancing to a bland little tune or to Bach, there's no comparison, right? Good thought Daniele, I'm with you

@ Frank

on this occasion it seems clearer to me to respond by interpolating mine into yours

Frank wrote:

A sentence in which I read many flaws or rather, the result of many (in my opinion) flawed reasonings.

When you hear Vivaldi's transcriptions of Bach, you are listening to Bach's style, so here you are not listening to Bach but to Vanessa Mae's style. If you don't like this style, I understand part of the statement.

Ok: I am listening to Vanessa Mae's style. And I reiterate: I don't like it.

As a teacher, I can confirm that statistically a composition student after 10 years of study manages, if they are good, to perform a good statistical reconstruction. Here it is clear that the treatment of the orchestra goes well beyond that; if you then stop at the violinist's phrasing (which disappoints your expectation since you would like to hear the baroque), you have understood little of the matter.

You are wrong about my expectation: I don't want to hear "the baroque," I want to listen to music; and I don't like this.

Here the matter is a bit deeper; for starters, it involves decontextualizing (many established composers don't know how to do it) pre-existing material, making it accessible to people who don't understand a thing about classical music, doing it well and at times genially, but above all by doing so highlighting all that rhythmic force that the piece already has in the original... to spite those who say there is no rhythm in classical music. Has anyone noticed that part of the work was done only on the amplification of the original rhythmic movement? (Ad Oracolo likes it from a certain point on, who knows why?) Shall we talk about how the percussion and orchestration were treated? I assure you there isn't an idiot behind it, but out of curiosity I went to listen to something by Mario Merola—I mean, do we want to talk about this seriously?

I have never stated, or implied, that there is "an idiot" behind it, but even if a product is INTELLIGENT, it doesn't mean I must automatically like it (I must be doing poorly on a "cognitive" level).

And why use it as a negative point of comparison? Another flaw: we are comparing apples to pears... perhaps let's use pertinent examples, if possible. If not possible, we already have an answer; let's talk about Techno-Classical, just to contextualize.

It is not a negative point of comparison. What I perceive in Mae's toccata is a charge of fiery, exhibited passionality in the style of Mario Merola (who I also don't like) and therefore I used this comparison. Whether this latter one is not Techno-classical matters little (to me) at the moment when one tries to talk about the spirit of one piece or another.

Open content (youtube)

Luca, think about it, there are people who don't like Beethoven. Everything can be beautiful or ugly, tastes are subjective... of course; but between Merola and this, I feel a gap.

I propose this to you

Can we agree that Vanessa Mae has completely integrated a Vivaldi tempo into her music? Not just the trill of Für Elise, but doing something that in effect doesn't even invite much dancing or listening afterwards.

Open content (youtube)

Luca, I respect your tastes but I don't share the approach. You cannot justify your taste by introducing justifying mechanisms such as: Mae's operation is like Gigi d'Alessio (more fiery). If anything, tell me what you don't like about the orchestration, because, what you find more or less off-target, etc. But here the subject is different. As Fabio did, it would have been enough to say I don't like it... anyway, he justifies himself with this "teaching" that music should provide. I am curious because for me tastes shouldn't be justified; if you don't like something... you just don't like it. Feeling the need to justify it already should be a red flag.

Perhaps, quite simply, it is enough to use positive examples to better express one's taste, rather than Mae mi piace ........... (at choice).

Frank... Why do you ask me to tell you what I don't like about the orchestration, why, what I don't find centered, etc. . .

when you then finish by telling me that in your opinion tastes shouldn't be justified, if you don't like something... you just don't like it ?????

in my opinion, however, tastes should come, not justified, but motivated.

I maintain this not for the purpose of arriving at sacrosanct and eternal truths, nor even out of a need to justify them to others. One can also establish an "inner dialogue" - discernment - with one's own tastes.

It is only in this way that taste matures.

With "tastes are tastes and there is no accounting for taste," in my view, taste does not evolve.

Tastes can be discussed: with respect.

Frank wrote:

what do you think of this Bach?

The clip doesn't displease me, perhaps a bit predictable to associate with a fugue... the escaping. Certainly everything is highly professional and polished, I really like the transition at 1'25'' (I am referring to the first video)

LucaCavaliere wrote:

Opinions differ: with respect.

I'll introduce it for a moment, okay, but you can't go out of context. If you don't like the genre, we are at a dead end... but if you liked it (I don't know), try as I was writing to provide an example where you see yourself reflected.

LucaCavaliere wrote:

in my opinion, however, tastes should come not justified, but motivated.

Perhaps it's just that I don't mind a reaction like: "I don't like it instinctively"; after all, we are also made of irrationality, but this

LucaCavaliere wrote:

is the only way taste matures.

is an interesting position, but one must be willing to undergo a journey... not forced or sudden, but desired to the point of maturing even other "truths" (since you mention this term)

And indeed you write

LucaCavaliere wrote:

With "tastes are tastes and there is no accounting for taste," in my view, taste does not evolve.

Since

LucaCavaliere wrote:

One can discuss tastes: with respect.

we discuss

You know I would never contradict you

With respect, I have already written it

Frank wrote:

one must be willing to undergo a journey.. not forced or sudden, but desired to the point of also maturing other "truths" (since you mention this term)

Of course. And in this sentence, you have already said everything.

However, I like to emphasize: "not forced", and "other 'truths'"