Liszt envelopes and OT Chesapeake Bay stuff

[Sarah Fox]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Hi Rich,

Alas, I know very much about a few things and a little bit about many =
other things.  I'm afraid music history comes under the latter category, =
besides which, Liszt isn't really my cup of tea.  ;-)

As for being "IN" the Chesapeake...  Well, I admit I didn't think out =
the negative connotations to that comment.  <wink>  I'm happy to report =
that I didn't go for any swims along the way, although I did get soaked =
a couple of times (one storm going and one returning -- with a gorgeous =
pair of near-simultaneous lightning strikes not far off our starboard =
and port -- don't know why the tall aluminum mast in the middle was =
spared a few bizillion Joules).  Fortunately I had just equipped the =
boat with a GPS guided navigation computer that worked beautifully -- =
much better than the new engine that overheated when all our wind died.  =
In addition to the new GPS, new computer and new engine, there was also =
of course the new sailor -- me.  I was grateful that two of the other =
three crew members knew their sailing well.  Quite an experience!  I can =
see how this stuff gets into people's blood. =20

I count the hot shower I just took as one of the 10 best I've ever had.  =
:-)

Peace,
Sarah
Back Home

PS I hope sailing isn't too off-topic for this liszt.
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Classic Touch Ent=20
  To: Pianotech=20
  Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 11:17 PM
  Subject: Re:Envelope pushers(jazzers)/Liszt(was Ahmad Jamal)


  Hi Sarah!

  On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 01:22 AM, Sarah Fox wrote:


    Hi again, Rich,
    =20
    Just a quick note before I disappear for a couple of days.  (I'll be =
out sailing :-)

    Do you mean in the composer, improviser or performer sense or all =
three? Are we talking composition, technique, 'sound' sculpture, =
voicing? all of them?The answers (observations, extrapolations, wags) =
could probably fill a book or two, hotly debated by all. Perhaps I'm =
misunderstanding the focus of the question, but it just seems there are =
so many variables many of which point in the 'which comes first, the =
chicken or the egg?' direction.
    =20
    I suppose I mean "all three" Liszts.  I'm thinking particularly of =
the limitations Liszt experienced from the slower repetition rates of =
earlier actions.  I understand he hungered for a faster, more nimble =
action, and he considered the modern repetition arm a godsend.  It =
opened up many more possibilities to him both in composition and =
performance.


  Hi Sarah,

  AH! In the case of Liszt/pianos/rep.rates I'd debate this. I don't =
know specifically what you mean by 'modern repetition arm', but =
considering the end of his concert career (~1850) my recollection is =
that he played nothing like a modern grand action. The Erards of his day =
were 'quicker' than our 'modern' grand action. I think the modern grand =
is in large part due to market conditions (promoters demand bigger halls =
with more seats to accommodate more( paying) folks anxious to hear/see =
the masters/ requiring instruments with much bigger volume/ much more =
percussive potential than the fortepiano). However, once the modern =
grand is created we see composers and performers exploiting its =
percussive potential. Don't know whether that's because of fortepiano =
limitation or palette/style preference.
  By following the Liszt, A. Rubinstein, Josef Hofmann legacy we arrive =
at proteges (such as William Harms and Shura Cherkasky) carrying on in =
the 'bel canto' style of performing. They were focused (just my =
opinion/perception) on exploiting both ends of the dynamic range of the =
instrument with a self imposed limitation at the gate of percussiveness.

  My take on Liszt aside, my original questions [re: Do you mean in the =
composer, improviser or performer sense or all three?
  Are we talking composition, technique, 'sound' sculpture, voicing? all =
of them?] were intended to focus on envelope pushing in general =
(composition and performance) and its relation to limitation in whatever =
form it takes (is the limitation from within or without).


    What they are able to write/perform depends very much on the =
technology beneath their fingertips.=20

    I'm sure that this is true much of the time, but some composers

  (this should have said composers/performers)

    seem to conjure sounds, and textures, articulations, voicings, =
temperaments without regard to whether or not the instruments, =
technology, or performers are capable of producing it. Sort of 'I have =
this idea ( by the way the system for notating this hasn't been created =
yet) and I'll describe it as best I can: can you figure out a way to =
make it happen?'
    =20
    Ah, but in the end, the composer must make the music accommodate the =
technical limitations of the instrumentation, whatever they may be.  I =
don't think I've ever heard of a composer composing for an instrument =
yet to be created, although it almost wouldn't surprise me -- and I'd =
almost understand.  The weirdest thing I ever did was to write a piece =
that incorporated a bobbling hammer.  Of course it could only be played =
on *that* piano!

  Perhaps this is a matter of semantics mostly born of my decision to =
make a reply at 1:30 AM when I should have gone to bed.

  Best,

  Rich Olmsted (sans vichyssoise d'alphabet)=20

  PS. 'IN' the Chesapeake ?!?!? If it was someone else I would assume a =
typo...so I'm asking.


    Well, gotta go!  I have a very long day tomorrow, and we'll be up =
early to catch the tide.
    =20
    Peace,
    Sarah Diane Fox, Ph.D., NPT, NPR, NRP, ABCDEFG
    Soon to be in the Chesapeake=20

    =20



---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/af/e9/b5/05/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--