"Variations" for a friend

Frank! . . . what can I say: you have chosen one of JSBach's most astounding introspective journeys!

Going a bit more on the "lighter" side, there would be Beethoven's Eroica Variations.

And come on: also the Choral Fantasy op. 80, also by Beethoven.

Speaking of variations: I have just returned home from the Auditorium Gaber (Pirelli Skyscraper) where I listened to the Bach-Busoni Chaconne for the first time . . . Struck by lightning!

I was already enthusiastic about the original . . . .

Of course Luca, there are as many variations as you want ... I was looking for something special

...do you know Stravinsky's Variations «In Memoriam Aldous Huxley»?

no, I don't know them (to tell the truth, I practically know nothing about Stravinsky).

Also last night the piano recital concluded with three pieces from the Petrushka Suite . . . beautiful!

can you send me a link to those In memoriam variations of an interpretation that you like?

On the tube there is this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oeoV5X1Ha0

Open content (youtube)

The Huxleys are beautiful, as is Bach for that matter!

hi Frank,

in the days following your first post (the one with the video of the variations) I thought with interest and curiosity about your initial motivation: to make someone appreciate variations in general, precisely because this person does not like such a procedure.

It would be interesting to know why they do not like variations.

LucaCavaliere wrote:

It would be interesting to know why he/she does not like variations.

I don't know yet (but I have my suspicions), but if he/she tells me ... you will know

I think that a compositional process in itself can or cannot be appreciated, it may be that it is not congenial to him/her, but the music that can result from it is what counts... therefore, whether one appreciates variations or not ... we can enjoy pieces like the one in this topic

I listened to them (Stravinsky's Variations "In Memoriam Aldous Huxley") but I still don't know them: I didn't understand anything.

I have problems with the 'language'. Maybe in the future it will get better.

LucaCavaliere wrote:

...I didn't understand anything.

It happens

LucaCavaliere wrote:

I am having problems with the 'language'. Maybe in the future it will get better.

It is dodecaphonic work; one interesting thing is to compare them (even just at a listening level) with Schoenberg

Arnold Schoenberg: Variations for orchestra op.31 (1926/1928)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFvtSGCFVO0

Let me know what you think from a listening comparison. I should warn you that they are very different works, written in different eras and with completely different purposes... as "someone" says ... you will be able to taste what is called "Progress" and "Reaction", referring to the '900

Open content (youtube)

Certainly, knowing your friend Frank, you probably thought it was a good idea to suggest Bach to him.

However, while I was reading and listening to all the music proposed here, I thought that, perhaps, the best way to delve into the world of Variations might be by starting with these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOTHiagFhqk

What do you think?

As for the variations by Schoenberg and Stravinsky, what can be said? "Progress"..."Reaction"...? In the end, it all seems like "Progress" to me and anyway "Wonder"!

Open content (youtube)

Carlos… I have listened to both but I cannot make comparisons. Being a language I do not know, it all sounds the same to me. Just as happens to everyone when they happen to hear a language they do not know. Perhaps I am also wrong to say that it is a language I do not know. Perhaps they are even two different languages (you can tell me this).

Daniele says "marvelous". I can share his impression, while specifying mine a little. For me, it is the wonder of someone who, in a completely dark environment, is attracted now here, now there, by a sound or an odor they have never heard before. And they feel a bit uneasy.

Thank you for your dedication and your patience.

Two things.

1) My ignorance of previous posts in this forum (or of music criticism!) does not allow me to identify that "someone" you put in quotation marks.

2) I would be curious – very – to know the "completely different purposes" of these two works by Schoenberg and Stravinsky.

I am curious, but answer me at your convenience.

Funny note (at least, for me):

in the beginning, the theme of the discussion was the relationship with 'variations' in general, from a friend of Carlos's.

Now we are talking about progress and reaction, the '1900s, my difficulties...

Don't you find that going off-topic in a discussion (something that never bothers me when it is done with grace and a desire to engage) is somewhat equivalent to the way Beethoven treated variations in his late works!?

But the friend was Frank's, Carlos has nothing to do with it....he himself went OT, he probably enjoys it

LucaCavaliere wrote:

1) My ignorance of previous posts in this forum (or of music criticism!) does not allow me to identify that “someone” you put in quotation marks.

Could my prediction be Adorno?

Thank you Gerardo for the correction!

I apologize to Frank and Carlos for the oversight.

Luca

Great piece Daniele

For the curious, I'll post the link to this article

http://www.musicacolta.eu/2009/12/07/la-follia-di-corelli-sonata-per-violino/

LucaCavaliere wrote:

I apologize to Frank and Carlos for the oversight.

If these were the problems

danielescarpetti wrote:

Certainly, knowing your friend Frank, you must have thought well to suggest Bach to him.

…and I fear I thought wrongly… he ended up with Stravinsky, thank goodness for the OT

danielescarpetti wrote:

But nevertheless, while reading and listening to all the music proposed here, I thought that, perhaps, the best way to delve into the world of Variations might be by starting with these:

What do you think?

Wonderful, but as they say: every head is a little world… so in my opinion even these would have "failed."

danielescarpetti wrote:

As for the variations by Schoenberg and Stravinsky, what can one say? "Progress"..."Reaction"...? To me, in the end, it all seems like "Progress" and anyway "Wonder"!

Look. Schoenberg's piece is exemplary in the canonical sense of the term and is a must for anyone who wants to know dodecaphony and its history. He too had his reaction, there are other more recent works to dig through…

I take the liberty of asking you what struck you most to make you use the adjective: "Wonder" (not that I don't agree)

LucaCavaliere wrote:

Perhaps I am also wrong to say that it is a language I do not know. Perhaps they are even two different languages (you can tell me this).

Since music is also made of code and syntax, I find it appropriate to speak of language, even if it must be said that it connotes but does not denote; it can have multiple senses but no meaning.

LucaCavaliere wrote:

Daniele says "marvelous". I can share his impression, while clarifying mine a bit. For me, it is the wonder of someone who, in a completely dark environment, is attracted now here and now there, by a noise or an odor they have never heard before. And they feel a little uneasy.

In my opinion, to appreciate something one does not necessarily need to know its mechanism; it could mean that music is finished... and we came very close... if we go back thirty years. Musical arguments should always prevail over the "extras."

LucaCavaliere wrote:

1) My ignorance of previous posts in this forum (or of music criticism!) does not allow me to identify that "someone" you put in quotation marks.

Irrelevant, a highly accredited musicologist maintains that the 20th century is dominated by two great poles: Schoenberg and Stravinsky, described in an extreme synthesis as progress and reaction.

LucaCavaliere wrote:

2) I would be curious – very – to know the "completely different purposes" of these two works by Schoenberg and Stravinsky.

As I was saying to Daniele, the first is an exemplary composition of dodecaphonic variations, the second is a free piece... variations are already something else here, as is the dodecaphonic technique. And it goes without saying, thirty years have passed...

LucaCavaliere wrote:

Now we are talking about progress and reaction, the 20th century, my difficulties...

Don't you find that going off-topic in a discussion (something that never bothers me when it is done with grace and a desire to engage) is somewhat equivalent to the way Beethoven treated variations in his late works!?

I probably got the title wrong; if I figure out how to do it, I'll change it... at most, I'll ask TheSimon, who seems a bit overloaded lately...

Following Luca's suggestion regarding Beethoven's variations, I have opened this topic

http://www.pianoconc...-le-variazioni/