I'm usually fairly supporting when it comes to avantgard artists, but Boulez is, simply put, a monumental piece of shit, a 20th century Lully. His corruption of governmental funds destined to the Arts (ruining the careers of 4 generations of French composers), the fact that this piece of shit won 17 Grammy Awards (you really blew those opera houses, right?), his absolutely selfish choice of becoming a conductor (even though he was barely competent and costantly took licenses that made no sense in that context). So, bad interpretations, the act of selling out the European avant-gards and cutthroat opportunism that destroyed the careers of the young, and why did he do all this? For nothing, in his last years he recognized that the 19th century was essentially a wasted century, that he was a bully and that his fame lasted just 10 years (after Stochausen came in he had to sell out by conducting... imagine young Boulez seeing his old self conducting the Bolero: truly tragicomic). I'm usually not that harsh, but I'm glad he's dead.
I find no faults in his compositions, which I find enthralling at times, useful (as a composer) always. He failed as a public intellectual and conductor (ending up ruining his cultural context), not as a musician.
tl;dr: Boulez is a worthwhile composer, an absolutely inconsistent director and one of the worst offender to the academic scenes of fine arts in Europe.
Oliver Sullivan
I know very little of his life. Did he move away from composition and towards conducting at the realisation of those greater than him?
Juan Lee
i don't really feel nearly as negative as you do towards his conducting, a lot of his DG recordings are pure shit, but you can find some pretty interesting stuff earlier on in his career.
he conducted since his youth
iirc he did it to pay the bills since he hated teaching
Charles Cook
What's the best recording of the Turangalila-Symphony?
It's an experience so I think its cool to see the performers actually playing.
>How do you guys feel about Boulez? Incredibly important conductor. Meh composer.
Hudson Barnes
i don't like his Webern as much as i do other conductors, but it's not bad.
though for most people it was how they first heard those works and it's convenient since it's a AIO set.
Angel Russell
>but you can find some pretty interesting stuff earlier on in his career. I know, which is why I said, in the end, that he was inconsistent as a conductor.
>Did he move away from composition and towards conducting at the realisation of those greater than him? Boulez had the entire Euroean avant-gard in his hands, he then lost it to Stockhausen, so he started conducting to mantain his fame and relevance. He certainly got more traditional later in his life, but I don't think he ever thought in those terms (if anything I can't imagine Boulez having low self-esteem). He never fully moved away from composition, although he slowed down his creative process considerably after he picked up conducting. He started composing his third sonata in the late '50s. When he died in 2016 it was still unfinished.
Jacob Adams
his most interesting recordings i feel are his early bbcso stuff. not the best orchestra but it seemed he had real rapport with them.
Gavin Reyes
yeah, for sure. that's where he peaked for me too.
Brandon Wright
Can anyone go into detail why Boule'z Mahler is bad or terrible?
Noah Ortiz
age
Zachary Nguyen
I'm surprised more conductors haven't done in All-in-one given the, at least academic, interest in Webern's work.
Angel Hughes
What do you guys use for mega? There must be a better way than waiting every time the limit is hit
Charles Taylor
soulseek
Lucas Cruz
megadownloader bypasses the limits on mega
Matthew Murphy
Seems like it's just for general file sharing, not mega. Is there a good selection of music there?
Thanks m8
Cooper Thompson
that p2p is created by former napster creator, so yes.
Tyler Turner
Other than Rite, what should I listen to from Stavinsky?
Jackson Ortiz
Firebird, Symphony of Psalms, Ebony Concerto, Symphony in C, Violin Concerto.
Levi Carter
Everything else. He did not compose that much music, I'm sure you could marathon it in 2-3 days if you really love his music that much.
Brandon Nguyen
My personal limit is about 10h for a single composer, I want to get through the 20th century by the end of the summer. I'll look into his entire body of work though. Thanks.
Also, any rec's on specific recordings/conductors?
David Gray
i like Firebird by Gergiev and rest by Steavinsky himself. also Petroushka and Le Sacre du Printemps if you liked Rite.
Henry Turner
There's nothing wrong with Boulez.
His recordings are almost always revelations, as with Debussy/Ravel, Mahler, Bartok, Stravinsky, etc.
His compositions (as you stated) are impeccable. Sure he "lost" to Stockhausen but that's because Boulez was still fairly traditional when it came form and structure in European music; he didn't want to go full Cage/Feldman like Stockhausen did. That's not weakness, that's strength of conviction (even if Stocky's pieces from that period are great).
And don't you dare insult IRCAM, it led to tremendous advancements.
you mean Mozart? yes, he was a degenerate of the highest caliber
Matthew Collins
Typical Freemason hack
Alexander Cruz
not an argument
James Stewart
favorite mahler 6 recs?
Joshua Kelly
legitimately, Boulez' fucking hated that piece until I heard his
Ryan Reed
boulez as a conductor is great. usually he's very precise and clean and reveals all the layers in a way that's really nice and refreshing.
boulez as a composer is interesting because his early stuff is great for being just absolute no shits given serialism and there's a purity and intensity about it, but his later stuff is all exotic and beautiful and dripping with sonorous textures and gamelans and shit and it's just nice to listen to
he's a good person i like him
Brayden Gutierrez
>mfw Brucker 7th Adagio
Angel Howard
All Bruckner symphonies really I like his vocal works more
Nathaniel Kelly
im listening to ...explosante-fixe... right now because of this thread and it's really fucking good music guys, goddamn
Jaxon Powell
You'll probably also like Repons, Anthemes 2, Messagesquisse
Nolan Reyes
>His recordings are almost always revelations Quirks and gimmicks do nit count as revelation. He had affinity for a very limited pool of composers, which does not help since he interpreted a good chunk of the repertoire. Also his Ravel is trash, Maurice himself would have hated it.
>Sure he "lost" to Stockhausen but that's because Boulez was still fairly traditional when it came form and structure in European music >principles I have not criticized him for having lost to Stockhausen. I've criticized him for having been the worst kind of opportunist, and for having bullied generations of European composers into a compositional philosophy that he himself seen afterwards as a failure, and for having diverted govenrment fundings destined to composers into a single school of thought. Also as soon as he lost control over the avantgards he turned into the worst kind of sellout, revealing that he did not care about those principles in the first place, which is even more obscene. I've got no trouble with his compositions, I just think that he has been one of the worst enemies Art faced in the 20th century. Again, the principles he held turned him into the 20th century Lully. I certainly can't say that about Feldman, Cage and Stockhausen (composers of which you have implied an inherent inferiority to Boulez), in fact I can only say good thing about their involvment in art management.
>And don't you dare insult IRCAM, it led to tremendous advancements. I have not insulted it.
Joseph Sanders
>Quirks and gimmicks What does he do that is "gimmicky?" >and for having bullied generations of European composers into a compositional philosophy that he himself seen afterwards as a failure "Generations?" What are you talking about? Integral Serialism was only the fad from 1945-1960. Immediately afterward we see mass exodus towards other forms. He didn't bully "generations" but him and Stockhausen certainly were the top people for that brief 50's period. >Also as soon as he lost control over the avantgards he turned into the worst kind of sellout That's Stockhausen, who went to Mikrophonie and similar experiments to ape Cage and Feldman. >I just think that he has been one of the worst enemies Art faced in the 20th century. That's objectively false, John Cage was the biggest opponent to Art as an institution. >I have not insulted it. Oh, so government funds going towards IRCAM isn't a problem for you? But the compositions that came out of it are a problem? Jesus Christ, you have no understanding of this music do you?
Nolan Cooper
I've found some scores in my grandma's attic. I've tried to listen to Mahler's 9th, which I can sing from memory from start to finish, and I could follow it for maybe 15 bars. After that I've just started sectioning the symphony, noting on the scores the main voices and certain rhythms. So far I've traced 2 movements. Should I keep doing it? Will I get used to it, to the point where I won't need to take notes? Should I drop it and do solfege for years and then come back?
Connor Torres
>mfw
Ayden Ortiz
>What does he do that is "gimmicky?" A far too broad statement, it depends from piece to piece. >He didn't bully "generations" but him and Stockhausen certainly were the top people for that brief 50's period. Then you know nothing of how commissioned compositions worked in the '50s and '60s. He bullied generations in the sense that he disqualified from "serious music" anything that was not serialist in nature. In those years, either you composed in that style in Europe, or you were out. People did not just forget how to compose tonal music in the 20th century, simply all the venues that were available were artificially clogged by the avantgards. People like Boulez were the worst offenders in this regard. And about the usage of the word "bullying": Boulez himself used it to describe his modus operandi of those years. One does not need to be a reactionary to be disgusted by such behaviours.
>That's Stockhausen, who went to Mikrophonie and similar experiments to ape Cage and Feldman. I'm talking about his career as a conductor in the second half of his life. I have no problem with the philosophies of any of those composers, nor I have reasons to oppose them. If their example alone is enough to move entire generations of musicians, without the interference of opportunists and manipulators, then I'm fine.
>That's objectively false, John Cage was the biggest opponent to Art as an institution. John Cage was not a corrupt careerist, ruining other people's lives left and right. His philosophy does not deserve violent opposition.
>Oh, so government funds going towards IRCAM isn't a problem for you? But the compositions that came out of it are a problem? Nice reasing comprehension. Nowhere I ahve criticized contemporary music of any kind, especially not in such a general manner. Instead I've criticized the corrupt monopoly that was promoted by Boulez on weak ideological/aesthetical claims. This does not mean that I'm criticizing his music or IRCAM.
Brayden Lopez
>A far too broad statement Nice, couldn't even name one thing >He bullied generations in the sense that he disqualified from "serious music" anything that was not serialist in nature. From 1950-1960, that's arguably not even one generation of composers. >I'm talking about his career as a conductor in the second half of his life. He wasn't recording Schumann, Smetana, Tchaikovsky, or countless other schmaltzy shit. He only conducted music from that time that was truly formative and forward-thinking like Wagner, Mahler, Bruckner, etc. >John Cage was not a corrupt careerist But you're talking about someone being an "enemy to Art." Boulez fully believed in artistic institutions; it was Cage who wished to dismantle them. >Instead I've criticized the corrupt monopoly that was promoted by Boulez on weak ideological/aesthetical claims In a 10 year span.
Nice, you really are - as 50's Boulez would say - U S E L E S S
Angel Ramirez
>This is how the regular /classical/ poster looks like
Aaron Gomez
who's the Mercury Rev of classical music
Samuel Watson
I do want to say Boulez's take on Mahler's 9th is maybe one of the most offensively awful things I've ever heard, the opening doesn't even sound like the same piece
Jackson Peterson
i don't find his conducting that gimmicky, he mainly seems concerned with transparency which appeals to me
Blake Lewis
well no one on earth understood mahler like boulez so of course it wouldn't sound similar to brainlets such as yourself
Jordan Moore
The Rondo movement is good at least
maybe he was mad about having to do it with Chicago instead of Vienna
Jackson Jackson
not him but boulez did program schumann. he just didn't make records.
as an aside the scenes of goethe he conducted is probably imo my favorite recording of it
Ethan Gomez
you shut your whore mouth about schumann
Landon Lewis
Programming isn't something you have total control over, there's entire boards in order to control that.
Nolan Thompson
Boulez did conduct Schumann, though. there are more than a few live recordings existing. also, Boulez didn't consider Bruckner formative or forward-thinking, and very rarely conducted him.
Bentley Allen
Lol if you genuinely think Boulez understood Mahler better than horenstein, mengelberg, Klemperer or Walter (most of whom knew him personally, which I'd doubt you're even aware of) I don't even know what to say to you
Joshua Lee
>Boulez didn't consider Bruckner formative or forward-thinking, and very rarely conducted him. He didn't record as much either, isn't the recording of 8 the only one he did?
Gabriel Carter
he certainly had say over what he conducted, and still conducted with enough zest that would suggest that he was at the very least sympathetic to schumann.
Juan Collins
I just don't think he was "selling out" just because he conducted more often after a period of writing the greatest music of the 20th century
Evan Scott
>Nice, couldn't even name one thing Again, nice reading comprehension.
>From 1950-1960, that's arguably not even one generation of composers. That's the seed he planted, which keep growing to this day. It's not like everything returned to a state of equilibrium as soon as he started conducting.
>He wasn't recording Schumann, Smetana, Tchaikovsky, or countless other schmaltzy shit. He only conducted music from that time that was truly formative and forward-thinking like Wagner, Mahler, Bruckner, etc. Let's burn all the opera houses, but let me conduct the Bolero first.
>But you're talking about someone being an "enemy to Art." Boulez fully believed in artistic institutions; it was Cage who wished to dismantle them. You're blinded by ideology. Boulez literally ruined lives, Cage was just very skeptical of certain prejudices of art, and he exposed said skepticism in a series of inoffensive essays. Is this an enemy of Art? If lucid arguments are enough to make you tremble, then your convictions are not solid enough. In Boulez's case the intensity and coherence of your convictions was useless, for he would have just cut you out from the art music circuit as soon as he discovered you used a tonal melody once.
>Nice, you really are - as 50's Boulez would say - U S E L E S S Ah, the same word Boulez literally used to describe his managerial efforts. I got that reference, right?
Lincoln Torres
His trasparency is most of the time incompatible with the pieces he's playing. Listening to him conducting Scriabin is like listening to Gould playing Mozart. Embarassing. Sure, I'll notice a few more details here and there (you could notice them by reading on a score anyway), but the result will be mediocre at best, surely not something that does justice to the composition itself.
Benjamin Wright
i have mixed feelings on his Mahler. i wouldn't really say he "understood" Mahler in the sense that he conducted him in a vein of authenticity or something, but he had his own individual take on Mahler. iirc, Boulez conceded himself that Mengelberg came closest to Mahler, but he personally refused to conduct him that way. too romantic for him, probably.
i suppose in the sense that Boulez ignores the numerous rubato/ritardando/portamento/etc. markings littered in the scores, he is adhering to Mahler's own idea of, ''what is most important in music is not to be found in the printed notes.'' but Mahler would've likely hated it himself (he was extremely picky when it came to conductors of his music)
anyway, i do like a few of his Mahler recordings, but it's mostly the early ones and it's always live. the DG recordings have terrible engineering -- all you really have to do is compare contemporary live recordings of his Mahler to his DG ones and listen the breadth of difference one finds. the DG recordings are too relaxed, smooth, polished, and the orchestra is overtly miked in that awful uncanny DG sound which doesn't really sound anything like an actual orchestra. artificial x-ray. i know some people prefer that kind of sound, but i don't really think it gives an accurate representation of the conductor, nor does it lay easily on my ears. a lot of his CBS recordings are simply worlds apart - a lot more fire, a lot more energy, and the same precise transparency he was always known for. his Wagner recordings around that time are frankly some of my favorite conducted, and it's even more admirable when you listen to the cries of boos, whistles, and yelling in the Bayreuth audience at its first performances. of course, there are some vocal issues in his Ring cycle, but it's performed with just the right amount of energy, in my opinion.
he has a recording of the 9th with the LA Phil as well, but it's the only other one i'm aware of.
Dominic Turner
Just name one gimmick, all I'm asking. >That's the seed he planted, which keep growing to this day Fucking what? So Max Richter, Nils Frahm, Andrew Norman, and in general an entirely dead Serial scene? That's what Boulez wanted? You're an idiot. >Let's burn all the opera houses, but let me conduct the Bolero first. Obviously he softened but that's not "selling out." >Boulez literally ruined lives It worked out well for Riley, Reich, and Glass who made careers out of rebelling against his beliefs.
Adrian Lopez
Literally 1960, Ligeti writes Apparitions followed Atmospheres. Stockhausen immediately leaves Serialism. Berio eventually writes Sinfonia. British composers write atonal music, but without serial style.
This is Boulez exerting control? This is his "seed"?
Bentley Campbell
>This is Boulez exerting control? This is his "seed"? I'm done. Read Boulez and Beyond, and see how Boulez was actively meddling, bullying and polarizing the European academia. It's all well documented. Again, I'm not talking about ideology here, I'm talking about managerial conduct.
>Just name one gimmick, all I'm asking. As I've mentioned in another post, Boulez applies the same degree of clarity to most of his performances, wether he's conducting Webern or Scriabin. In Webern case it's optimal, in Scriabin case instead it completely goes against the aesthetic principles of the piece itself. Boulez don't seem to mind, because he's getting his clarity. Gimmick.
>So Max Richter, Nils Frahm, Andrew Norman Try mentioning some academic composer.
>and in general an entirely dead Serial scene? Boulez admitted his inherent failure in the last years of his life. There are numerous interviews in which he talks about it.
>That's what Boulez wanted? As I've said earlier, Boulez was a careerist that dropped his ideals as soon as he could get even more money by conducting music he aborred until a few days later. As long a he mantained said ideals, he enforced them through manipulation, nepotism and downright opportunism.
>Obviously he softened but that's not "selling out." That's not selling out for Bernstein, it is for Pierre ''It is not enough to deface the Mona Lisa because that does not kill the Mona Lisa. All art of the past must be destroyed'' Boulez.
Ayden Hall
>Again, I'm not talking about ideology here, I'm talking about managerial conduct. So he controls, but he doesn't control at all. Got it. >clarity. Gimmick. Clarity isn't so much a gimmick as it is an endgoal of any conductor. I find it funny that you call anything by Boulez you don't like a "gimmick" or "selling-out." >Try mentioning some academic composer. Hahahaha fucking Norman you idiot. But sure, Clara Ionnatta has nothing to do with Serialism either. >Boulez was a careerist that dropped his ideals as soon as he could get even more money Where's your evidence it was for money and not just abstaining from composition when the principal style (Serialism) was going away?
Let me guess: teenager in music school?
Lucas Martinez
Interesting how the poster seems to think "If they are American or British, they aren't academic."
Jesus Christ the level of pretension!
Carson Wood
none of those hacks were as talented as boulez as a conductor or composer and none of them had styles of composition that had mahler's music as their direct antecedent
you're done.
Jonathan Morris
>So he controls, but he doesn't control at all. Got it. Yeah, I guess the head of the avantgarde and the professional model for everything that came after him was totally not relevant in the development of art music.
>Clarity isn't so much a gimmick as it is an endgoal of any conductor Sure, if you're a blockhead who can't understand that different composers adhere to different philosophies, which means that different composers need different treatments. Just like cold contrapunctual playing is perfectly usless in Mozart sonatas, perfect clarity simply go beyond the main point of pieces like The Poem of Ecstacy. Apparently you and Boulez can't understand it.
>Hahahaha fucking Norman you idiot. He does not work in academia, objectively. I'm not trying to defame him, he literally never worked in that context, nor has he infiltrated it through his inflence.
>Where's your evidence it was for money and not just abstaining from composition when the principal style (Serialism) was going away? So Boulez effort was linked to the academic serial tradition? Nice, this goes against literally everything he said about music, art and composition.
>Let me guess: teenager in music school?
Hudson Foster
>Sure, if you're a blockhead who can't understand that different composers adhere to different philosophies Every conductor has good records and bad records, their specialties and their shitties. I would never listen to JEG outside of 1791, nor Bernstein past 1850.
Nice job evading Clara Ionnatta!
>So Boulez effort was linked to the academic serial tradition? I'm just confused how you think it's selling out when there's no evidence it was for money. There are many explanations, especially that the 60's saw massive cultural revolution.
>have to piss really bad >20 minutes left in the last movement
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Jose Walker
cinema music is designed to be "nice" like that
if you want anything comparable to the masters you wont find it because that shit you posted is corporate crap shilled out for big dollars. real classical is pure, ripe with soul and passion.
Henry Thomas
what about bernard hermann
Jaxon Bennett
that's basically mediocre pseudo-"epic" movie soundtrack intended for mass-consuming... JUST LIKE ROMANTICISM you will love every single composers from that era so do yourself a favor
Bentley Ramirez
if peein' ya pants is cool consider me miles da- Beethoven
Colton Young
But what do you not like about it? What if you don't consider it from an intellectual angle and just appreciate it for exciting, normie-tier tonal music?
Chase Johnson
>What if you don't consider it from an intellectual angle
Maybe classical isn't for you.
Lincoln Bailey
Nah I was just memeing i think it's okay though "soundtrack classical" is simply not comparable to actual western art music
