Messages

Google translate tells me that it now requires a password. it didn't before, so I guess that is what has changed. Have you tried contacting them?

That's very clever. Long may he keep up his good work!

Thank you eschiss - I have downloaded a lot of their recordings. The quality varies enormously, but it's great to be able to hear these rare pieces! I wonder who Steve's Bedroom Band are, and how many of them there are. I bit of me things it might be 'Steve' playing all the parts!

Time to go rooting and see if I have a recording of Draeseke 1, I think! 

"here's a composer I've never heard of who actually wrote something listenable!"

- Sadly, this does rather seem to be the attitude, with the exception of the proms, who always seem to have well-researched and balanced discussions about the music being performed.

I'm glad you agree! I would also rather hear 'lesser' orchestras play lesser-known works. As for Beethoven 5.... I'm a member of emusic.com and spent hours trawling through innumerable versions of Beethoven 5, Tchaik 5, Sibelius 2 etc (all pieces I love by the way), trying to find the increasingly infrequent gems. Can there really be a market for 1000s of recordings of Beethoven 5?

Apologies - this is probably territory this forum has covered several times before, but it is a pet peeve of mine!

Apologies for this being slightly OT - I asked Alan's permission before posting, and he kindly agreed.

I wonder if members might be able to help. I have a great passion for Russian and Soviet music (blindly collecting a lot of pieces I don't really like!). Some years ago I bought the first CD in a series of three double CDs of Ukrainian music published by Angelok1. It includes 11 pieces by 20th-century Ukrainian composers - none of which blew me away - though I did find Klebanov's Suite for Strings No.2 and Gubarenko's Chamber Symphony No.2 interesting, so I decided not to get the others. Well, my curiosity has got the better of me, and I'm trying again... unsuccessfully.

Set 1 is commonly available. However, the ONLY place I have managed to find, after several hours of hunting which sells sets 2 and 3 is here: http://www.classicalcds.net/angelok1/. However, when ordering I get a page error and am unable to send the order. I have e-mailed the owner, a seemingly very pleasant chap called Jeffrey. At first he seemed keen to help, but now he has been silent and not replying to my e-mails for two months. I have tried ordering on three different browsers on MAC and PC with no luck.

I have two questions - firstly, have any members ever ordered successfully from classicalcds.net, and if so, might you be able to offer any advice? Secondly, does anyone know of anywhere else I can get these CDs from?

Many thanks,
Lee

Can I put in a word for Lekeu here! if anyone doesn't know his piano sonata (there is a recording on youtube), it is, in my opinion, incredibly beautiful and an excellent piece of music to boot.

It is a big problem with audiences, I agree. I suspect that if someone were so suddenly discover a youthful (but rather dull and derivative) orchestral piece by Mahler, audiences would flock to it. However, when I recently programmed Kalinnikov 1 (better know in American I believe, than here in the UK), the immediate response was, "err... who?" I spent a lot of time saying, "But, it's REALLY good, honest!" The audience for the concert was ok, but I know it would have been far more had we done Sibelius 1, or Brahms 1! That's not a problem for me personally - I'm glad those people who were there got the chance to play or hear Kalinnikov 1, but it's a problem for the orchestra, because, being an amateur affair, it runs on a shoe string and small audiences means less money. I should imagine the same applies to professional set-ups.

I don't think, sadly, there will ever be an answer to it. Classic FM in this country has done a great deal to popularise classical music, but alas, over a very limited repertoire. Radio 3 on the other hand, has such an eclectic mix from Renaissance to Romantic and for Jazz to Avant-garde, I should imagine it is rather difficult for a non enthusiast to pick out what they might want to hear - I certainly dip in and out, and would never listen to it for an extended period.

Interesting that you should mention that Paul. I have quite a few friends who, with the greatest respect to them, suffer from a sort of musical snobbery, where by if a piece isn't by one of the 'greats', it can't be any good. They are often pleasantly surprised when I sit them down and make them listen to something a bit different. I think it is ignorance in the geniune meaning of the word - most people like what they know. Say something is by Tchaikovsky and people are immediately more receptive - the barriers come down rather than staying up and perhaps being reinforced.

Equally, I also think the 'great' composers also suffer from the assumption that every single piece they wrote is a work of genius. Mozart's early symphonies might be of great historical/biographical interest, and extraordinary for someone so young, but they aren't very interesting pieces of music for me (he says making a sweeping generalisation on the strength of the few he has heard!). The best pieces of 'second-rank' composers are far, far better (in my opinion) than the lesser works of the 'greats'.

Thank you all! 

Now you mention it, JimL, I suppose there is a similarity - it doesn't quite have the vim and vigour of St Paul's for me, though.

There are supposed to be two versions, and Octet Op.27 and a Chamber Symphony Op.27a (or something similar). Does anyone know if there is actually a version that uses chamber orchestra?

Thank you Alan 

Exciting news! Ever since I discovered his Piano trio No.1 (Op.17?) in a local library (for sale for 80p!), I have loved Juon. The Chamber Symphony is fantastic. I read somewhere that he was considered a link between Tchaikovsky and Stravinsky... not sure about that, but good music none the less. Does anyone know if the Five Pieces for strings Op.16 have been recorded?

I'm afraid I have to disagree with Amphissa's suggestion. I think it would actually create more work. I honestly really dislike the whole idea (largely because I would be booted out!), but even if it were implemented, I think it would mean more things to do. If it were not a simple, 'x number of posts and you're in' system, which as you say, could be easily circumvented by a lot of 'yes, what a lovely idea' posts, then it would mean moderators would have to look at each individual's posts and make judgements on the merits of those posts - another job to do, and perhaps not a terribly pleasant one.

It is the nature of all boards like this that the majority of members are 'lurkers'. Admitedly, some of them are just there to grab the downloads (and I was horrified to read that some dishonest people had been selling downloads from another forum!), but most people join because they are interested. I spend hours every week reading this forum, but as I mentioned earlier, unfortunately contribute little.

Lee

I just have two thoughts to add. Firstly, that I too, would be happy to pay a small amount to be a member of the site - I know it is not being asked for, but I just wanted to mention it.

Secondly, so far as the 1950/55 date mentioned, when I'm downloading or listening on eclassical, emusic, unsungcomposers, youtube etc, I download anything written before 1945 without batting an eye-lid (there is almost nothing, possibly excepting Webern, I find I can't listen to in that period). However, I tend to find that from roughly 1948-1950, the proportion of 'difficult' music (to my ears) compared to 'approachable', goes up considerably, with the 1960s and 1970s taking some very careful picking thorugh. So, if it were my choice (which it isn't, or course) to put some sort of blanket date on the site, it would probably be 1945. I am aware that I am missing pieces like Prokofiev's 7th and lovely cello sonata and Miaskovsky's 27th, amongst many others, but I think that would be a very 'safe' date. For me personally, 1918, as mentioned some posts ago, misses out most of my favourite pieces! I couldn't live without Shostakovich 5, hackneyed as it may be! 

Lee

These posts make fascinating and stimulating reading - please can I second most of what Dundonell and some others have said - far more eloquently that I have been rambling.

There seems to be (if I haven't missed the gist) a broadly general feeling that people like the site as it is... (I say 'people' - there have only been a few posters so far - I would encourage any others to come out of the woodwork and speak up if they value the site as much as I and others do).

This situation, however, is not fully acceptable to the owner/moderators, Alan and Mark. I don't see how many of the suggestions so far voiced will either change the work Alan and Mark do, to something they enjoy more or, if it is work (and it is work) they don't enjoy, reduce that work load. I have to admit, I don't really have a good idea what to suggest. Iy didn't really occur to me just how much work and exactly what they do until it was discussed in this post, for which I apologise to them both.

The best I can do is to second the suggestion that an additional moderator, with a keen interest in the spikier end of mid- to late-20th century music, might lighten the load. I can only imagine that both of you, Alan and Mark, having such a depth of musical knowledge, would be able to take a reasonable stab, at a glance, at the approximate style of a piece of music, just from the country of origin, date and composer's name, perhaps helped out in your assesment by a quick google search - this/these suggested additional moderator(s) could then take on the challenge of dealing with anything outside of your prefered remit. Any pieces which ended up with 'the wrong moderator' would probably be few and not a big burden.

Forgive me if this misses some vital aspect of running a site like this, and please, everyone, suggest alternatives. I wonder, though, if the best solution might be to find a way to keep the site running as it is, to Alan's satisfaction, and not a way to change it? Just my tuppence-worth. Ramble over.

Lee