Jazz for aficionados

i have been real busy. i will respond to links tonight.

No pressure, Acman3; I was not taking you to task with my comment at all.

****But the real shocker for me, is that not one of our 'pros', commented on the performance of Water Music and Fireworks by the French Orchestra. ESP, the conductor!! What do you think of this guy?****

Well, if you insist; and, please understand that my lack of enthusiasm for this performance and Niquet is the very reason that I had not commented. I, too, love the sound of period instruments and I love performances that educate about the history of the music; but, I have some issues with this performance.

First of all, for a really great performance of this beautiful music on original instruments try Trevor Pinnock with The English Concert; and for my favorite with modern instruments but still using period performance practice try the Marriner/St Martin In The Fields.

The Niquet performance by comparison has some real problems with the ensemble playing. There are some major and distracting problems with intonation, especially the horns and trumpets. While period instruments (natural trumpets and horns) are harder to play in tune than modern instruments, recordings like Pinnock's don't suffer nearly to this degree. Additionally, having the woodwinds standing was an odd choice. It looks good, but there is an imbalance between the winds and strings, the winds being too prominent in relation to the strings. Overall, not a memorable performance on musical grounds; but, impressive visually and educationally and there is value in that. Niquet is the type of conductor that drives me nuts. There is, again, a sense that it is about what looks good. His technique is showy and dramatic with large motions that serve no musical purpose. Like the Andre Rieu performance, it's not my cup of tea. BTW, the Baremboin/LVB is great; he is one of the very best classical musicians on the scene today.

There is a historical inaccuracy in the presentation of the Niquet performance. The Music For Royal Fireworks was composed for wind band (no strings); that is what was heard at that first royal performance. It wasn't until later that Handel reorchestrated it for full orchestra as heard on the Niquet performance.

Lastly, you'll just have to take my word for this (perhaps Learsfool will chime in on this), and I bring it up because you have often commented about performers appearing to be working too hard at "performing"; but, I would bet that those musicians were coached to "perform"; to make gestures that looked good and made them appear to be "involved". This goes to my previous comment and it's something that, having been in those shoes, one just knows. Glorious music 'though.

*****First of all, for a really great performance of this beautiful music on original instruments try Trevor Pinnock with The English Concert; and for my favorite with modern instruments but still using period performance practice try the Marriner/St Martin In The Fields.******

I have the Marriner / SMIF CD. I am almost embarrassed to admit I have six CDs of this music. The first one I purchased years ago was "The Academy of Ancient Music / Hogwood" It's on authentic instruments also.

****Niquet is the type of conductor that drives me nuts. There is, again, a sense that it is about what looks good. His technique is showy and dramatic with large motions that serve no musical purpose.*****

My thoughts exactly. I remember thinking, this guy is demonstrating that maybe Conductors are not needed past rehearsals. But the man is French, so looking good is important. Did you check out the shoes?

I understand that Andre Rieu is an excellent musician, that found he could make a lot more money as a showman. His stuff is not serious. I just love 'Amazing Grace' on bagpipes.

The band Barenboim conducted was the Israeli-Arab group he established. He did all nine symphonies during that Proms. There is a DVD out. Thinking of getting it. Like I need more sets of LvB.

I thought the horns were the highlight of the performance. They sounded so 'real / natural', on my computer setup. I love that sound. Not disagreeing with you, just to my amateur ears. And, the visuals were great. I think that makes a tremendous impact on a person's perception of the performance. The sound and video were excellent by youtube standards.

Thanks for your review. Very insightful.

Cheers

Wow, lots of posts since I was last able to check in! Sorry guys, but I am in the very busiest part of my season right now and simply don't have time to listen to all these links. In a couple of weeks, I could go back and do so, but right now I just can't.

Rok, I pretty much agree with everything Frogman has said. I actually had a music theory major in my undergrad as well as my horn major, so I am qualified to teach it, and have privately. Triads are the basic building blocks of pretty much all Western music, until you get into the 20th century avant garde composers. Triads continue to be the basis of all popular music, including even most jazz, though it is much more experimental. Frogman's suggestion of buying a keyboard is a good one, however I would also suggest a set of books written by a guy named Paul Harder. They are "programmed" courses - meant to be taken at your own pace. You cover up half the page that has the answers as you work through. There is an accompanying CD. He has one for Fundamentals of Music that would be great for you, and then there are others that reach the equivalence of freshman and sophomore college music theory, much more than you would probably want to know, unless you really got into it.

Now for the abstract art stuff. Basically, yes, I agree with the author of your book. As to your questions - yes, music is more abstract than painting. As the author says, painting is two dimensional - you can see and even touch it, and can look at it over and over again. Music is only heard, and then it doesn't exist anymore, at least that particular performance, unless it was recorded (Richard Strauss and other composers and conductors and performers were horrified at the very idea of recorded music when the possibility first arose, by the way - recordings have fundamentally altered the way people think about music compared to even just 100 years ago). This is much more abstract.

if someone had never heard Don't Cry For Me Argentina before and did not know that it had words, it would be purely abstract for that person.

The other questions are more interesting - you are getting into aesthetics now. Someone putting words to an established tune definitely gives a meaning to the result that is not abstract anymore. However, you could also make up a completely different set of words and seemingly (or really) giving the music a totally different meaning. Which one would be correct? Would either be at all close to what the composer may have been thinking/feeling? He/she may be completely horrified. These questions do not have a simple answer.

Another fantastic performance of the Water Music, by the way, is the English Baroque Soloists, conducted by John Eliot Gardiner, who is my favorite period instrument group conductor. The natural horn playing is superb, far better than any other I have ever heard, including the one Frogman mentioned, which is a good one indeed.

Didn't see the video in question, but Frogman is probably correct that they were coached. Video has also fundamentally altered the way people think about music, especially performing, in mostly negative ways. Now there are huge numbers of people that think if you aren't wildly moving around or making funny faces, you can't possibly be emotionally involved. That's a load of crap.

Hope that decently answers your questions. Need to get to bed now. I promise I will go back and listen to some of these clips you guys have posted when I get time.