No ordinary masterwork. It's on another level. Cosmic in its greatness. The section beginning at 22:55 sums up everything heard before, and in such an incandescent way that it can induce an out-of-body experience.
The textures are extraordinary, and quite beautiful, but it doesn't make a lot of sense, even after listening several times and following the score. There's no shape or logic. Yes, I know, it's called the tree of dreams.
Well, Dutilleux's own description suggests that the piece constantly comes back to its own material and renew/expand it. But this is the problem with most contemporary pieces. It doesnt really matter how intricately the composer manipulates and shapes the material even in the most cohesive sense, most of the times audiences just don't hear it unless it is made incredibly obvious. ***academic snobs trigger warning*** This bit is where academic composers get incredibly defensive. The truth is, in this musical language, it is extremely challenging for human ears to pick up all that material transformation. After all, we aim to HEAR all of that, but a lot of what composers do cant even be noticed by audiences unless we look at the score closely, which at that point, the listening experience isnt even relevant anymore. We are examining the score for the sake of it. The way to go about this, in my opinion, is to really just enjoy the surface beauty of the music. I honestly cant care less about how he manipulates his material This is because Dutilleux's music doesnt require note-to-note score analysis in order to appreciate(like most serialist music). His sense of harmony, melodic writing, instrumental color and orchestration already offers a lot to appreciate on the surface. Not a lot of composers offer that.
@@KinkyLettuce Thanks for explaining better than I could dream of 🤣. Dutilleux's music is an auditory narrative to me. His pieces tell a story and I find most of the time I'm not at all concerned with the form. The toccata in his first symphony is an exception. I'm terms of contemporary form, I love the idea of "inhale and exhale." I read a paper analysing Grisey's Partials in that way, separating each section into inhales and exhales. It's a really unique way of looking at "form" in contemporary music.
@@KinkyLettuce I'd be inclined to agree with you in many cases - such as ultraserial music - but not with this piece, come on? It is so clear that the violin or some instrument is constantly playing motifs from the very first bars that one hears.
@@Flatscores you know, coming back to this after leaving that comment 2 years ago, I should have made it clear. My comment above really just generally applies to many contemporary pieces altogether. In the case of Dutilleux is a little different. I do agree that his music, especially this piece is actually rather clear with his handling of material. One only has to listen carefully
![Symphony No.1 - Henri Dutilleux [w/ score]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JmqOw-GymkU/mqdefault.jpg)
Prodigieux...Merci à vous.
Playing timpani on this piece will forever be a highlight of my music making.. one great part among many in this masterpiece.
No ordinary masterwork. It's on another level. Cosmic in its greatness. The section beginning at 22:55 sums up everything heard before, and in such an incandescent way that it can induce an out-of-body experience.
Interlude III is just brilliant
stunning concerto, one of my favourites!
Magnifique, merci
Thank you very much for the score.
18:02 Amazing
Sublime.
Cool
When did the Martians land - at what minute?
4:16 soli
8:19
Are there only three horns?
Yes!
The textures are extraordinary, and quite beautiful, but it doesn't make a lot of sense, even after listening several times and following the score. There's no shape or logic. Yes, I know, it's called the tree of dreams.
Did you read the description? Also if you're looking for proper form in Post Modern music I think you'll be very disappointed.
Well, Dutilleux's own description suggests that the piece constantly comes back to its own material and renew/expand it.
But this is the problem with most contemporary pieces. It doesnt really matter how intricately the composer manipulates and shapes the material even in the most cohesive sense, most of the times audiences just don't hear it unless it is made incredibly obvious.
***academic snobs trigger warning***
This bit is where academic composers get incredibly defensive.
The truth is, in this musical language, it is extremely challenging for human ears to pick up all that material transformation. After all, we aim to HEAR all of that, but a lot of what composers do cant even be noticed by audiences unless we look at the score closely, which at that point, the listening experience isnt even relevant anymore. We are examining the score for the sake of it.
The way to go about this, in my opinion, is to really just enjoy the surface beauty of the music. I honestly cant care less about how he manipulates his material
This is because Dutilleux's music doesnt require note-to-note score analysis in order to appreciate(like most serialist music). His sense of harmony, melodic writing, instrumental color and orchestration already offers a lot to appreciate on the surface. Not a lot of composers offer that.
@@KinkyLettuce Thanks for explaining better than I could dream of 🤣. Dutilleux's music is an auditory narrative to me. His pieces tell a story and I find most of the time I'm not at all concerned with the form. The toccata in his first symphony is an exception.
I'm terms of contemporary form, I love the idea of "inhale and exhale." I read a paper analysing Grisey's Partials in that way, separating each section into inhales and exhales. It's a really unique way of looking at "form" in contemporary music.
@@KinkyLettuce I'd be inclined to agree with you in many cases - such as ultraserial music - but not with this piece, come on? It is so clear that the violin or some instrument is constantly playing motifs from the very first bars that one hears.
@@Flatscores you know, coming back to this after leaving that comment 2 years ago, I should have made it clear. My comment above really just generally applies to many contemporary pieces altogether. In the case of Dutilleux is a little different. I do agree that his music, especially this piece is actually rather clear with his handling of material. One only has to listen carefully