This was the week

Where's the music that's contemporary, but offers a fuller view of life than screams alone can give?

Blame Adorno!

I'd honor Adorno, for pointing out what lurks beneath modernist music. (In "The Philosophy of Modern Music" he said that dissonance was an expression of pain. Frozen pain, I think he said, because the pain was inherent in the music, but not overly acknowledged. Note -- this is important -- that he thought it was good to have pain in music, because pain was the only proper response to modern society. So his analysis is meant as praise of modernist mousic.

As for the new music, that etc., I'd start with minimalism, and work from there.

I only know the triumphlied through its piano 4 hands arrangement, and I think in that format its reasonably successful..

I'd be curious to know what you'd think of the full version, for very large chorus and very large orchestra. (The largest orchestra, I've read, that Brahms ever used.) It's available on iTunes, so if you like you can download it instantly. The piece is meant to be grandiose, and I don't know if a four-hand arrangement can convey how it really sounds.

After 26 years programming classical music on radio I am still amazed that programmers/presenters still dont know that there are people LISTENING OUT THERE..Music that has the jewel box simplicity you talk of can be preserved by moving to something equally as febrile and simple. There are many symphonic pieces both old and new that can "fit" if the programmer just LISTENS....and also expands their mind in all forms of music. It's called, in radio,"flow".....

Good point. I think Terrance McKnight, host and programmer of WNYC's "Evening Music," Mondays through Thursdays, is a master of flow. I'd be curious to know what you'd think of his programming. Of course you can listen to WNYC on the Web.

Sermon over.

I think, in regards to the Tom and Jerry piece, that the visuals contribute a great deal to the narrative intelligibility of the music. When I watch Tom and Jerry, I generally follow the narrative in terms of the visuals (now Jerry is sneaking past a mousetrap, now Tom is falling off a roof, etc) and the music provides a sort of emotional emphasis to the primarily visual narrative.

Without the visuals, I would have a hard time following the narrative of the music alone. That narrative is still there, but presented in terms of abstract ups and downs without the concrete ideas of "Tom" "Jerry" "The Old Lady" "The Dog" etcetera, the narrative is more abstract, and because of that I find it harder to follow along.

That's my own experience with these cartoons, I don't know if that is the norm, but I suspect it is out of the arrogant belief that most people's experience is rather like my own.

Of course the visuals make the narrative clearer, and more intelligible. They give the narrative a subject, and show each event.

But the music, on its own, isn't hard to follow, in the sense of understanding when it changes, and what the changes might mean. (I'd underline "might.")

And I think that's also true of other music, even without visuals.

Just a note about WNYC.

First, I am an addict, a WNYC fanatic and zealot, from about 1980, Tim Page, Sara Fishko, Steve Post, Stan David,etc.

Terrance: Terrance is a breath of fresh air. At first, I was nervous. George Preston and Brad Cresswell had labored so intensely to bring us wnyc2, and done such a great job programming music there (I am definitely a fan of New Music, I even bought some Golijov). This influence, mixing in a fair amount of New Music with the rest of the "500 years of new music", "non-generic Classical Music, this influence carried over to Evening Music and the overnight.

Terrance will give us Bessie Smith next to Meredith Monk. What is this, but cool?

If one does not like a piece, well, it's like New Jersey weather: wait a bit, it will be over and change.

All of the breast beaters (just take a look at some of blogs at insidethearts.com) in Public Radio should take lessons from WNYC.

To quote a previous post: "After 26 years programming classical music on radio I am still amazed that programmers/presenters still dont know that there are people LISTENING OUT THERE.."

Well, after 30 years doing the same, I can say that my awareness of my listeners would have prevented me from programming Vuori's symphony. Not because it's new, not because some individual listener might not like it. Because as I listened to it, I couldn't easily imagine a listener turning on the radio when it was playing, and thinking: "What's this? Cool! I've got to stay tuned!" No, the reaction I imagine is more like: "Oh, brother! Here we go again with the dissonant modern sounds!" That's probably unfair to Vuori's artistry, but that's the way it goes, at least on the radio.

Now, most of the programming I do is daytime, which limits the selections somewhat. Still, I'm constantly on the lookout for new works with the capacity to reach out to the listener, to intrigue, to attract rather than repel. Whether it's Nico Muhly or Eric Whitacre, or any number of current composers, I eagerly program them. If it's a work that doesn't seem like it wants to reach an audience, I feel no responsibility to provide an audience for it. Of course, my judgment is to an extent personal, and my choices are different from someone else's. But I have the responsibility to choose, and to lead. So I do

Speaking to the one-concert comments...

I do believe that smaller, more concentrated concerts can have a mobilizing effect on audiences. Especially with new music. I know of two concert series that already have this format. One is run by Trumpeter Brian McWhorter, who is a professor in Oregon. He has a series of noon-time concerts that run a mere 12 minutes each. He has said that this is a very successful endeavor, and has a lot of buzz on his campus.
The other concert series is actually one that I co-run at Manhattan School of Music. It's called the Tuesday Night Power Concert Series, and it is focused on 20 minute concerts at 10 pm. Our goal is to reach students and general audiences with a concentrated performance of contemporary music from the early 20th century to world premieres. Or idea has been to condition audiences to listen to new music more openly, and to eventually lead them to longer, fuller performances on their own. We have had good crowds, usually around 30 people, and up to 70 at times, for a concert of all world premiers. So there is much to be said for this option.

Hi.

True, Springsteen doesn't write / perform metal now, but, before he ever signed a recording contract, he did write for and front a band or two which had a distinct metal sound - think Led Zepellin.

I've heard some of those songs, and they really are awesome.

Thanks.

Well, the tempo of the recording is ploddingly excruciating and the texture covers up what I always imagined as a light and lively first movement. I think if you listened to the piano 4 hands arrangement you might reassess the music... besides, wasn't that a common complaint of his contemporaries, that his music sounded better at the piano?

"No, the reaction I imagine is more like: "Oh, brother! Here we go again with the dissonant modern sounds!" That's probably unfair to Vuori's artistry, but that's the way it goes, at least on the radio."

I would probably listen to the end to see who was the composer. Something I would not do if it sounded like a Haydn or early-Mozart symphony or like a lot of the endless baroque music that seems to always be playing on the air.