Very interesting. It's Sat. I've errands to run thought I'd sample a little of this first. Having difficult time turning away want to hear what happens next.
Art is an interpretative activity. As far as we know, and of course I could be proven wrong, Art does not kill. Perhaps we should be grateful for this, and not be overly offended when other people make choices about Culture, that seem somewhat irrational to us.
Конечно, в познавательном плане очень интересно. Когда не смотришь на исполнителей, кажется, что двое, не владеющих инструментом, просто балуются. Необходимо иметь достаточный уровень наслышенности, и тогда начинаешь вникать и принимать автора
you want the best, you got the best, THE HOTTEST BAND IN THE WORLD .... err....a bird and a bloke on pianos and a couple of page turners.... ROCK ON! GWAR!
Art is art because this music has its own language. The main point to me is that as many other forms of contemporary art is not "seductive" at all. This music is at lowest level of sharing. We don't have any recognizable structure, but sounds. that do not form any "music" in a recognizable structure.
I like music where you can make as many mistakes as you like and nobody not even the composer can tell the difference, if it is marketed to me as deep intellectual art with reams of high faluting text from big named bigwigs, yes ah doooo......
And how would YOU know if the composer cant notice? You are just a listener, you cannot fathom create something like this! Never Stockhausen has tried to make "deep intellectual art" thats just a label some ignorant as yourself would choose. You cant understand. Ha!
So, the guys who dare not to explore the confines of what is understood are the good guys I guess? As long as you can understand it... that's the goal? I guess the hyper-Intelectual is you then, who need to undesrtand all in order to appreciate and have a positive reaction. I mean, I just listen to it and found a very deep spiritual, ritualistic-like manifestation, like Tibetan or other mantra-like manifestation (these are not even music per se, but sounds as part of rituals). I suppose the Tibetan stuff sucks because most people can't even undertand it, if you go with that logic... I guess most things suck, since we don't understand how most of the world works... I mean, most people just try to live their lives and use their criteria of need or connection with something in order to give it it's value without necessarily knowing all that's behind the thing in questions... but I guess most humanity is wrong then. They and their perceptions and internal logic bs. I don't even watch movies. I don't understand how is that I believe the story even knowing it is fiction. Some say it is connectet with universal elements of narrative and myth, but I don't understand that so that must be bs too.
@@riversandstones1644 What is this piece communicating, exactly? And how is it conveyed through the musical material? I can answer that question for Works by Schubert, Chopin, even advanced music like Dutilleux or Takemitsu; can you do the same for serialist works? The emperor has no clothes, quit fooling yourself otherwise.
@@colet1096 To think "all music" "communicates" feelings, emotions is sign of a faulty and limited view of music itself. Music can exist just by itself, without any meaning attached to it. Thats the beauty of it. Any meaning or anything you think it has (unless it is given to it by the composer) is a result of personal and sociological causes unique to each individual. Do you think Bach tried to "communicate" something in the Art of Fugue or the Musical Offering? Or perhaps he tried to map the whole range of human emotions in the 48 Preludes and Fugues? Those works contain practical demostrations of complex compositional operations. Solutions for musical puzzles. Theoretical devices turned into music. Although Bach had sacred music that had an obvious meaning. A great deal of his work does not. Your approach is wrong. Mantra is like a cathedral. It is the musical development of a twelve note theme that follows a preconcieved plan in Stockhausen's style. I suggest you listen to the Mantra lecture. Music of this kind is highly abstract, if you are searching for love songs here you are in the wrong place. You are the fool for thinking that music "must" fullfil you usual expectations. This is art.
This is one of my favorite piano duo pieces. Thank you
Very interesting. It's Sat. I've errands to run thought I'd sample a little of this first. Having difficult time turning away want to hear what happens next.
Art is an interpretative activity. As far as we know, and of course I could be proven wrong, Art does not kill. Perhaps we should be grateful for this, and not be overly offended when other people make choices about Culture, that seem somewhat irrational to us.
so good ...
well, whatever he is saying - new or not - we are listening with gratitude.
I'd like to learn enough of this for the next time I see an unattended piano at Nordstrom's.
'that exceeds any individual consciousness or musical ideal'. .....well exceeded mine for sure
After Webern my new obsession is Stockhausen. I love him!
Music is a form of art.
Therefore making this both.
Конечно, в познавательном плане очень интересно. Когда не смотришь на исполнителей, кажется, что двое, не владеющих инструментом, просто балуются. Необходимо иметь достаточный уровень наслышенности, и тогда начинаешь вникать и принимать автора
nothing wrong with a mantra to keep you going indefinitely
I think I heard the local Buddhist choir chant this last Sunday...
It's like I've never heard before..
Original-Platteneinspielung (vorzuziehen) mit den Brüdern Kontarsky.
that must be the allegro...around 53:15 ^^?
Who knew anyone made 22-foot grands?
you want the best, you got the best, THE HOTTEST BAND IN THE WORLD .... err....a bird and a bloke on pianos and a couple of page turners.... ROCK ON! GWAR!
"How much can I get away with?" must be the mantra.
Art is art because this music has its own language.
The main point to me is that as many other forms of contemporary art is not "seductive" at all.
This music is at lowest level of sharing. We don't have any recognizable structure, but sounds. that do not form any "music" in a recognizable structure.
It does have a structure and it IS articulated, if you cannot graspt it, its because you are weak-minded. You are not ready for this music.
@@riversandstones1644: Or just perhaps they have an aversion to "ugliness".
Who are the performers?
Elaborate.
ДЕРЬМО
I like music where you can make as many mistakes as you like and nobody not even the composer can tell the difference, if it is marketed to me as deep intellectual art with reams of high faluting text from big named bigwigs, yes ah doooo......
And how would YOU know if the composer cant notice? You are just a listener, you cannot fathom create something like this! Never Stockhausen has tried to make "deep intellectual art" thats just a label some ignorant as yourself would choose.
You cant understand. Ha!
So, the guys who dare not to explore the confines of what is understood are the good guys I guess? As long as you can understand it... that's the goal? I guess the hyper-Intelectual is you then, who need to undesrtand all in order to appreciate and have a positive reaction.
I mean, I just listen to it and found a very deep spiritual, ritualistic-like manifestation, like Tibetan or other mantra-like manifestation (these are not even music per se, but sounds as part of rituals).
I suppose the Tibetan stuff sucks because most people can't even undertand it, if you go with that logic...
I guess most things suck, since we don't understand how most of the world works... I mean, most people just try to live their lives and use their criteria of need or connection with something in order to give it it's value without necessarily knowing all that's behind the thing in questions... but I guess most humanity is wrong then.
They and their perceptions and internal logic bs.
I don't even watch movies. I don't understand how is that I believe the story even knowing it is fiction. Some say it is connectet with universal elements of narrative and myth, but I don't understand that so that must be bs too.
mistakes maybe but it does not matter because it happens according to rhythms and rapport with your consort pianist you cannot mess with
@@riversandstones1644 What is this piece communicating, exactly? And how is it conveyed through the musical material? I can answer that question for Works by Schubert, Chopin, even advanced music like Dutilleux or Takemitsu; can you do the same for serialist works? The emperor has no clothes, quit fooling yourself otherwise.
@@colet1096 To think "all music" "communicates" feelings, emotions is sign of a faulty and limited view of music itself. Music can exist just by itself, without any meaning attached to it. Thats the beauty of it. Any meaning or anything you think it has (unless it is given to it by the composer) is a result of personal and sociological causes unique to each individual.
Do you think Bach tried to "communicate" something in the Art of Fugue or the Musical Offering? Or perhaps he tried to map the whole range of human emotions in the 48 Preludes and Fugues? Those works contain practical demostrations of complex compositional operations. Solutions for musical puzzles. Theoretical devices turned into music. Although Bach had sacred music that had an obvious meaning. A great deal of his work does not.
Your approach is wrong. Mantra is like a cathedral. It is the musical development of a twelve note theme that follows a preconcieved plan in Stockhausen's style. I suggest you listen to the Mantra lecture. Music of this kind is highly abstract, if you are searching for love songs here you are in the wrong place. You are the fool for thinking that music "must" fullfil you usual expectations. This is art.
What crap!!