News:

BEFORE POSTING read our Guidelines.

Main Menu

Recent posts

#11
As is the Violin Concerto/Symphonic Poem Le Ménétrier (The Minstrel) from 1911.

Most of it I find very attractive, but unfortunately d'Ollone's orchestral works are rather difficult to get performed because of his unfortunate choices (in hindsight) of genre. The Fantaisie is too short at 13 minutes (alas, don't get me started about the demise of the Konzertstück); the scènes lyriques, orchestral songs, cantatas and chorales are uncommon genres for a modern concert hall; at just under 20 minutes, the wonderful symphonic poem Les villes maudites is really too long for the overture slot but too short to be the major orchestral piece of the evening (not even counting the required choir). Le Ménétrier may the only work I know of his to have a realistic shot at revival in the concert halls. That's a pity, because a lot of his music is tuneful and driven, yet contemplative in a way somewhere between Pierné and Tournemire. Of course, there's also quite a lot of chamber music, which is all just wonderful.
#12
I generally agree with what's being said here, but I do ask myself whether we - as a modern audience - are that well suited to judge this piece on its own merits. We simply lack experience with this subgenre of 19th-century theatrical music, which may sound very "trashy" to our ears. Hurwitz doesn't really help, because calling something "really a symphony" provokes comparison with what is a very different world of music; there was a very good reason why Suppé didn't want to do that and it goes well beyond the arguments mentioned by Hurwitz. Having said all that and liking Suppé's Fantasia more than (apparently) most of you do I still think it's hard to make the case that it's a major re-discovery. However, I do think it's an interesting piece.

Quote from: tuatara442442 on Today at 01:14His aesthetics is peculiar from time to time. He thought Pfitzner's PC, and by extension, all of his compositions are extremely boring.

Can't say I wholly disagree there, though.
#13
This is the problem with paying attention to one critic who (inevitably) will have his own enthusiasms and blind spots. I mean, I think Draeseke is as great as Brahms and can't stand Sullivan's Savoy operas, so it's hardly surprising to find that Hurwitz, even with all his vast experience, has his own oddities. Listen to him, by all means (I do too), but read other opinions if at all possible - and make up your own mind!
#14
This post made me have a listen to his fantaisie for Pno & Orch. What a perfectly concise work. It has no rambling "filler" passages and dead spots.
#15
I wasn't volunteering to reconstruct the scores from the performances, lacking those skills, but if anyone ever is, the more source material (than just one performance) they have to work with, the better.
#16
You are more willing than I to cut a critic slack.
#17
His aesthetics is peculiar from time to time. He thought Pfitzner's PC, and by extension, all of his compositions are extremely boring.
#18
Quote from: Alan Howe on Yesterday at 16:59Hurwitz thinks Sullivan was the greatest British composer.
I always take that as an over-correction on the low status of comedic music
#19
Hurwitz thinks Sullivan was the greatest British composer. The Savoy operas are fab, of course, but what else did he write that's great music? Answer: nothing. Hurwitz is welcome to his opinion, but the problem is that he does somewhat dominate the market in YouTube videos of classical recordings. And that's a bad thing for objectivity...

The Suppe is trash - I've just checked. IMHO, of course.
#20
I wondered about irony, but I don't think so. He really means what he says and what he says makes sense, except that it's about such a poor piece.