Carl on Chopin

/tuning/topicId_49273.html#49340

I can't think of a better description of someone who took the piano
to its greatest artistic heights with his written music, than
a "great composer". How could he have pulled it off otherwise?

Maybe you haven't heard the right Chopin performances.

P.S. A lot of prog-rock fans look to Chopin as the very
first "progressive" composer.

> /tuning/topicId_49273.html#49340
>
> I can't think of a better description of someone who took the
> piano to its greatest artistic heights with his written music,
> than a "great composer". How could he have pulled it off
> otherwise?

First of all, I wanna say that Chopin blows my mind, and I
consider him a composer of obvious historical importance. I
just don't think he's quite up to Mozart, and certainly not
in league with Beethoven. For one, he failed to reach beyond
a single instrument. For another, if you strip away the
arrangement fireworks you find yes, a new and functional
harmonic style, but a lack of variety in devices (counterpoint
to name one), little compelling (to me) deep structure, and
no true innovation. Nobody agrees with me but I think Lizst
did better on some of these points!

> Maybe you haven't heard the right Chopin performances.

That's for sure. Try though I might, I haven't been able to
find ones that don't suck. They all play it so lifelessly,
so rigidly, so base-2. I gather Partch had similarly strong
opinions, and I think his interpretations were either lost or
never recorded (I should ask Philip Blackburn, or maybe Jon
knows), but boy would I kill to hear them!

Chopin was my grandmother's favorite composer, and I think her
performances are still some of the best I've heard.

> P.S. A lot of prog-rock fans look to Chopin as the very
> first "progressive" composer.

Poppycock.

-Carl

hi Carl and others in the Chopin thread,

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> > /tuning/topicId_49273.html#49340
> >
> > I can't think of a better description of someone who took the
> > piano to its greatest artistic heights with his written music,
> > than a "great composer". How could he have pulled it off
> > otherwise?
>
> First of all, I wanna say that Chopin blows my mind, and I
> consider him a composer of obvious historical importance. I
> just don't think he's quite up to Mozart, and certainly not
> in league with Beethoven. For one, he failed to reach beyond
> a single instrument. For another, if you strip away the
> arrangement fireworks you find yes, a new and functional
> harmonic style, but a lack of variety in devices (counterpoint
> to name one), little compelling (to me) deep structure, and
> no true innovation. Nobody agrees with me but I think Lizst
> did better on some of these points!

i agree with you that Lizst is one of the most underrated
composers ever.

but i also don't hold against Chopin the things you do.

i can easily overlook the fact that "he failed to reach
beyond a single instrument", since he *perfected* the art
of composing for that instrument.

Chopin wrote beautiful melodies, cloaked in an innovative
harmonic style -- which, BTW, has its experimental roots quite
firmly planted in the soil of Beethoven -- and all of it
surrounded by "arrangement fireworks" which virtuosi love
to show off. and wonder of wonders ... after all that,
it *sounds* fantastic!

i agree with Partch's assessment of Chopin as the one
composer who was able to approach the "Monophonic ideal"
in instrumental music. if any composer ever figured out
how to make the piano (with all its mechanization) *sing*,
it was Chopin. and that's an achievement.

> > Maybe you haven't heard the right Chopin performances.
>
> That's for sure. Try though I might, I haven't been able to
> find ones that don't suck. They all play it so lifelessly,
> so rigidly, so base-2. I gather Partch had similarly strong
> opinions, and I think his interpretations were either lost or
> never recorded (I should ask Philip Blackburn, or maybe Jon
> knows), but boy would I kill to hear them!

_Enclosure Two_, in the last track "Harry's Wake", has a
snippet of a very drunk Partch trying to play a bit of Chopin.

it could have been much more interesting than it is if
Partch's coordination skills hadn't been so diminished
by the alcohol.

-monz

> Chopin wrote beautiful melodies,

This would be my primary point of departure.

> cloaked in an innovative
> harmonic style -- which, BTW, has its experimental roots quite
> firmly planted in the soil of Beethoven

Chopin and Beethoven are at opposite ends of the spectrum,
for what I listen to in music.

> after all that, it *sounds* fantastic!

Yes, it sure does.

> _Enclosure Two_, in the last track "Harry's Wake", has a
> snippet of a very drunk Partch trying to play a bit of Chopin.
>
> it could have been much more interesting than it is if
> Partch's coordination skills hadn't been so diminished
> by the alcohol.

Pinch me, if I was at home I'd pull it out this instant.
Don't know how I missed that?

-Carl

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> > Chopin wrote beautiful melodies,
>
> This would be my primary point of departure.
>
> > cloaked in an innovative
> > harmonic style -- which, BTW, has its experimental roots quite
> > firmly planted in the soil of Beethoven
>
> Chopin and Beethoven are at opposite ends of the spectrum,
> for what I listen to in music.

yes, i think i understand what you're saying there.
their respective styles do seem *very* different.

but really, if you've taken the time to do harmonic
analyses of some of the more experimental Chopin pieces,
you'll see that he's simply pulling the same kinds of
harmonic tricks that Beethoven hid under *his* hat.

> > _Enclosure Two_, in the last track "Harry's Wake", has a
> > snippet of a very drunk Partch trying to play a bit of Chopin.
> >
> > it could have been much more interesting than it is if
> > Partch's coordination skills hadn't been so diminished
> > by the alcohol.
>
> Pinch me, if I was at home I'd pull it out this instant.
> Don't know how I missed that?

"Harry's Wake" is quite long, and this occurs fairly close
to the end of it. i'd have to listen again to give an
exact timing ... perhaps if i get time, i will. it's
one of the most amusing segments on Enclosure Two, so
it would be worth it to me ...

-monz

Chopin appears to be influenced by John Field Quite a bit. He used to tune
his own pianos and Lou Harrison thought it was pretty much some meantone
tuning which if you look at the openings, this makes sense. Beethoven sound
more Pythagorean to me. The Big C really seems more adventursome , possibly
more influenced by shubert. on the other hand i don't think it is possible
to NOT be influenced by the Big B

monz wrote:

> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> > > Chopin wrote beautiful melodies,
> >
> > This would be my primary point of departure.
> >
> > > cloaked in an innovative
> > > harmonic style -- which, BTW, has its experimental roots quite
> > > firmly planted in the soil of Beethoven
> >
> > Chopin and Beethoven are at opposite ends of the spectrum,
> > for what I listen to in music.
>
> yes, i think i understand what you're saying there.
> their respective styles do seem *very* different.
>
> but really, if you've taken the time to do harmonic
> analyses of some of the more experimental Chopin pieces,
> you'll see that he's simply pulling the same kinds of
> harmonic tricks that Beethoven hid under *his* hat.
>
> > > _Enclosure Two_, in the last track "Harry's Wake", has a
> > > snippet of a very drunk Partch trying to play a bit of Chopin.
> > >
> > > it could have been much more interesting than it is if
> > > Partch's coordination skills hadn't been so diminished
> > > by the alcohol.
> >
> > Pinch me, if I was at home I'd pull it out this instant.
> > Don't know how I missed that?
>
> "Harry's Wake" is quite long, and this occurs fairly close
> to the end of it. i'd have to listen again to give an
> exact timing ... perhaps if i get time, i will. it's
> one of the most amusing segments on Enclosure Two, so
> it would be worth it to me ...
>
> -monz
>
>
>
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

Hey all,

Look, as a professional pianist most of all, I feel I can say authoritatively
that Chopin revolutionized the textural and idiomatic writing for the
instrument-for that alone I consider him an unqualified Olympus of a
composer.

His music is also drop dead gorgeous, and extremely revolutionary and foward
looking structurally and harmonically.

I cite a single example: the prelude #4 in e minor. Anyone who cannot
understand why this harmonically sophisticated and adventurous and
revolutionary has a hole in his head, or is being a numbskull for attention's
sake.

In the 4th Ballade, there is a prime example of his rhythmic sophistication
(actually, I think Chopin is the most rhythmically inventive composer before
Stravinsky, not including the Renaissance...) there is a ii-V progression
towards a D-flat episode of a climactic melody where the bass plays 6 against
the right hands' 9 (or 2 against 3 if you will), but the right hand also has
a flagged melody voice every fourth note. Besides being dizzyingly rhythmic,
the passage is jaw droppingly, orgasmically, beautiful !!!!!

On Tuesday 09 December 2003 05:53 pm, Carl Lumma wrote:
> > Chopin wrote beautiful melodies,
>
> This would be my primary point of departure.
>
> > cloaked in an innovative
> > harmonic style -- which, BTW, has its experimental roots quite
> > firmly planted in the soil of Beethoven
>
> Chopin and Beethoven are at opposite ends of the spectrum,
> for what I listen to in music.
>
> > after all that, it *sounds* fantastic!
>
> Yes, it sure does.
>
> > _Enclosure Two_, in the last track "Harry's Wake", has a
> > snippet of a very drunk Partch trying to play a bit of Chopin.
> >
> > it could have been much more interesting than it is if
> > Partch's coordination skills hadn't been so diminished
> > by the alcohol.
>
> Pinch me, if I was at home I'd pull it out this instant.
> Don't know how I missed that?
>
> -Carl
>
>
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--
OCEAN, n. A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made
for man -- who has no gills. -Ambrose Bierce 'The Devils Dictionary'

> Look, as a professional pianist most of all, I feel I can say
> authoritatively that Chopin revolutionized the textural and
> idiomatic writing for the instrument-for that alone I consider
> him an unqualified Olympus of a composer.

None of this was up for debate.

-Carl

hi Aaron and Carl (and whomever else in this thread),

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...>
wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> Look, as a professional pianist most of all, I feel I
> can say authoritatively that Chopin revolutionized the
> textural and idiomatic writing for the instrument-for
> that alone I consider him an unqualified Olympus of a
> composer.

i'll say "Amen" to that!

my own personal favorite moment in all of Chopin is in the
absolutely gorgeous Etude in Ab, op. 25 no. 1, measures 25-26.

in measures 15-16 he made a surprise modulation to C-major,
then uses that as the dominant to go into F-minor ... no
big deal, that's just the relative minor of the Ab-major
tonic.

then he abruptly shifts back into Ab-major, only to suddenly
modulate into C-major *again* in measure 22. then, using
the Ab-B-D-F diminished-7th chord as two pivoting rootless
dominant-7th chords, he modulates even more abruptly into
A-major in measure 24!

ah, then measure 25 ... 2 beats of A-major, then one beat
of a B dominant-7th-flat-9 chord with the A (the 7th) still
in the bass, then the magic happens on the fourth beat:
he treats the D# and F# as enharmonically equivalent to
Eb and Gb, and also holds over the C, and drops the A down
a half-step to Ab to make an Ab dominant-7th chord, which
resolves with indescribable beauty at measure 26 onto a
Db major-6th chord which also contains the major-7th on
the first beat. wow.

and of course, during all these harmonic shenanigans, the
sextuplet 16th note arpeggios have never stopped.

IMO, there is absolutely no other piece of music for the
piano which compares with this. and the only other stuff
that comes close is ... all the rest of Chopin's work.

-monz

On Wednesday 10 December 2003 04:19 am, monz wrote:
> hi Aaron and Carl (and whomever else in this thread),
>
>
> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...>
>
> wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > Look, as a professional pianist most of all, I feel I
> > can say authoritatively that Chopin revolutionized the
> > textural and idiomatic writing for the instrument-for
> > that alone I consider him an unqualified Olympus of a
> > composer.
>
> i'll say "Amen" to that!
>
>
> my own personal favorite moment in all of Chopin is in the
> absolutely gorgeous Etude in Ab, op. 25 no. 1, measures 25-26.
>
> in measures 15-16 he made a surprise modulation to C-major,
> then uses that as the dominant to go into F-minor ... no
> big deal, that's just the relative minor of the Ab-major
> tonic.
>
> then he abruptly shifts back into Ab-major, only to suddenly
> modulate into C-major *again* in measure 22. then, using
> the Ab-B-D-F diminished-7th chord as two pivoting rootless
> dominant-7th chords, he modulates even more abruptly into
> A-major in measure 24!
>
> ah, then measure 25 ... 2 beats of A-major, then one beat
> of a B dominant-7th-flat-9 chord with the A (the 7th) still
> in the bass, then the magic happens on the fourth beat:
> he treats the D# and F# as enharmonically equivalent to
> Eb and Gb, and also holds over the C, and drops the A down
> a half-step to Ab to make an Ab dominant-7th chord, which
> resolves with indescribable beauty at measure 26 onto a
> Db major-6th chord which also contains the major-7th on
> the first beat. wow.
>
> and of course, during all these harmonic shenanigans, the
> sextuplet 16th note arpeggios have never stopped.
>
>
> IMO, there is absolutely no other piece of music for the
> piano which compares with this. and the only other stuff
> that comes close is ... all the rest of Chopin's work.
>

You're right. But then we have 23 other Etudes, 24 other preludes.....

Monz, you also picked the best moments in the Ab etude....a great description
of the goosebumps I feel listening to that, too....

On the other end of the chilling (surface) simplicity, heartbreaking beauty,
is the 'raindrop' preude in Db major....I'm in emotional pain and ecstasy
every time I hear that piece !!!

For near-utterly unanalysble harmony, we also have prelude #2 in a-minor, a
truly tortured gargoyle of a piece..

BTW, I am alos gaga about late Brahms' late piano music, like op. 117, 118,
and 119 intermezzi.....wow, are they sublime.

And Schumann-I like not all, but esp, the youthful sets: the Papillons, which
I just gave a kick ass performance of, if I do say so myself, the
Kinderszenen, the Davidsbündlertänze, Kresleriana, Carnival....

Other wise, I could live without Schumann. And oone little Chopin Prelude is
worth a whole Schumann cycle. (almost)

Best,
Aaron.

--
OCEAN, n. A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made
for man -- who has no gills. -Ambrose Bierce 'The Devils Dictionary'

[monz]
>my own personal favorite moment in all of Chopin is in the
>absolutely gorgeous Etude in Ab, op. 25 no. 1, measures 25-26.
//
>ah, then measure 25 ... 2 beats of A-major, then one beat
>of a B dominant-7th-flat-9 chord with the A (the 7th) still
>in the bass, then the magic happens on the fourth beat:
>he treats the D# and F# as enharmonically equivalent to
>Eb and Gb, and also holds over the C, and drops the A down
>a half-step to Ab to make an Ab dominant-7th chord, which
>resolves with indescribable beauty at measure 26 onto a
>Db major-6th chord which also contains the major-7th on
>the first beat. wow.
>
>and of course, during all these harmonic shenanigans, the
>sextuplet 16th note arpeggios have never stopped.

This piece is a perfect example of what I don't like about
Chopin. A dippy French lullaby accompanied by an obnoxious
ostinato which 'never stops'. Admittedly this is an etude
but it is not uncharacteristic of Chopin's other arrangements.
The reharmonization you refer to is awesome, but it's melody-
based substitution rather than structural chromaticism.

[Paul]
> P.S. A lot of prog-rock fans look to Chopin as the very
> first "progressive" composer.

On the contrary, I think he abandoned the experimentation
of his contemporaries and went pop. Arrangements of tunes,
pattern-based, melody repeats until it stops. Something
like Joplin, and though of course Joplin's music is less
complex there's something about it I like better.

Chopin's music is fun, scary, mind-blowing, dripping, but
it's monolithic and melody-driven, and for me unable to
evoke imagry any more inspiring than a Bugs Bunny cartoon,
for which it would make splendid accompaniment.

[monz]
>_Enclosure Two_, in the last track "Harry's Wake", has a
>snippet of a very drunk Partch trying to play a bit of
>Chopin.
>
>it could have been much more interesting than it is if
>Partch's coordination skills hadn't been so diminished
>by the alcohol.

Found it! Unforch, he never gets anything off the ground.
He does claim he never heard anyone play Chopin as well
as himself. But he says better than Chopin was John Field.
He says the Field piano concerto is the best piano concerto
ever written. He also says Mussorgsky is his favorite
Western composer, followed by Orff (yuk!).

On disc two, the "Quarter-Saw Section of Motivations and
Intonations" is f'ing awesome. It would be really cool
to have a web site with a transcription of the text, midi
and mp3 examples, tonality diamond graphics and 72-tET
notation. . .

-Carl

Carl,

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> On disc two, the "Quarter-Saw Section of Motivations and
> Intonations" is f'ing awesome. It would be really cool
> to have a web site with a transcription of the text, midi
> and mp3 examples, tonality diamond graphics and 72-tET
> notation. . .

You think that would have a general interest? If people were willing to help, I could certainly see producing that for the Partch Foundation site (Corporeal Meadows). I don't think I'd have to xscribe, I believe Harry's notes for those talks are in the archives here, as well as the master tapes.

But all this can't happen until later in the Spring. BTW, be on the lookout for the San Francisco Cinematique Society to show a screening of the film of "Delusion of the Fury" sometime in the first half of 2004. The copy we have in the archives turns out to be a wonderful-condition Kodachrome print with a good audio soundtrack.

Cheers,
Jon

> > On disc two, the "Quarter-Saw Section of Motivations and
> > Intonations" is f'ing awesome. It would be really cool
> > to have a web site with a transcription of the text, midi
> > and mp3 examples, tonality diamond graphics and 72-tET
> > notation. . .
>
> You think that would have a general interest? If people were
>willing to help, I could certainly see producing that for the
>Partch Foundation site (Corporeal Meadows). I don't think I'd
>have to xscribe, I believe Harry's notes for those talks are
>in the archives here, as well as the master tapes.

I don't know about general interest but it certainly seems
like one of the cooler theory demos I've heard.

I'm willing to make the tonality diamond diagrams, and maybe
monz would contribute HEWM-notation examples.

Animated tonality diamond diagrams that moved with the music
might be nice... hmm...

>But all this can't happen until later in the Spring. BTW,
>be on the lookout for the San Francisco Cinematique Society
>to show a screening of the film of "Delusion of the Fury"
>sometime in the first half of 2004. The copy we have in the
>archives turns out to be a wonderful-condition Kodachrome
>print with a good audio soundtrack.

Will keep eyes peeled. I've seen it on VHS, but of course
film would be great.

By the way, do you happen to remember the 'classical'
a capella quartet piece put on at SJ State, "...things I
wish I could forget..." or some such? Do you know if that
performance was recorded? What I wouldn't give for *that*!

-Carl

Carl,

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> By the way, do you happen to remember the 'classical'
> a capella quartet piece put on at SJ State, "...things I
> wish I could forget..." or some such? Do you know if that
> performance was recorded? What I wouldn't give for *that*!

The vocal work? That was "Polyphonic Recidivism on a Japanese Theme", a little throw-away that Partch wrote while in Madison at the UW School of Music. From Gilmore, p. 165:

"The piece was conceived as a parody of bel canto singing, transplanted to the context of a madrigal group with ludicrous results. It was probably never performed publicly, and he seems to have considered it as a private act of letting off steam, too insubstatial to include in his list of compositions."

The performance in SJ was pretty poor, and it was done better down at UCLA. But I've got a recording of it somewhere, and I'll write you privately about that when I locate it...

Cheers,
Jon

> The vocal work? That was "Polyphonic Recidivism on a Japanese
>Theme", a little throw-away that Partch wrote while in Madison
>at the UW School of Music.

That's the one!

>From Gilmore, p. 165:
>
> "The piece was conceived as a parody of bel canto singing,
>transplanted to the context of a madrigal group with ludicrous
>results. It was probably never performed publicly, and he seems
>to have considered it as a private act of letting off steam, too
>insubstatial to include in his list of compositions."

Yeah well I liked it. Although listening to Oedipus and
Revelation today I got my brain blown yet *again* by Partch's
reinvention of music, and comparatively it probably is a
minor work. Still, it demonstrates (unless memory is really
sweetening it) that he had total mastery of classical polyphony,
for the Partch-doubter.

> The performance in SJ was pretty poor, and it was done better
>down at UCLA. But I've got a recording of it somewhere, and
>I'll write you privately about that when I locate it...

Thanks Jon!

-Carl

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:

/metatuning/topicId_6306.html#6427

> Chopin's music is fun, scary, mind-blowing, dripping, but
> it's monolithic and melody-driven, and for me unable to
> evoke imagry any more inspiring than a Bugs Bunny cartoon,
> for which it would make splendid accompaniment.
>
>
***Well, certainly, Carl, Chopin is a far different composer than,
say, Beethoven, in terms of the depth and "seriousness of purpose" --
whatever that is. Face it, it's "drawing room music" to a degree,
but some of it is haunting and memorable and the _Etudes_ are
challenging to even a competent pianist.

You might want to focus in a bit on his use of *accidentals* and
chord spellings. Since you are interested in theory, it is legendary
that Chopin is exceptionally fastidious about his spellings during
complex modulations. On that, too, he is, of course, far different
than Beethoven, who makes spelling errors all the time and really
doesn't seem to care much about it. (I don't have specific examples
at the moment, but this is "general knowledge..")

J. Pehrson

> Face it, it's "drawing room music" to a degree,
> but some of it is haunting and memorable and the _Etudes_ are
> challenging to even a competent pianist.

Oh yeah, totally. I can't *believe* some of them. I've got
this guy playing them, Yukio Yokoyama, he's like a sewing
machine! I don't like the performances one bit, actually,
but he certainly highlights the technical aspects of these
pieces!

> You might want to focus in a bit on his use of *accidentals*
> and chord spellings. Since you are interested in theory, it
> is legendary that Chopin is exceptionally fastidious about his
> spellings during complex modulations. On that, too, he is,
> of course, far different than Beethoven, who makes spelling
> errors all the time and really doesn't seem to care much about
> it. (I don't have specific examples at the moment, but this
> is "general knowledge..")

Thanks for the tip. I've never played any Chopin myself.
I have played Beethoven, and never noticed any spelling errors,
though I've never looked, either.

-Carl

hi Joe and Carl,

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:

> > Face it, it's "drawing room music" to a degree,
> > but some of it is haunting and memorable and the _Etudes_ are
> > challenging to even a competent pianist.
>
> > You might want to focus in a bit on his use of *accidentals*
> > and chord spellings. Since you are interested in theory, it
> > is legendary that Chopin is exceptionally fastidious about his
> > spellings during complex modulations. On that, too, he is,
> > of course, far different than Beethoven, who makes spelling
> > errors all the time and really doesn't seem to care much about
> > it. (I don't have specific examples at the moment, but this
> > is "general knowledge..")
>
> Thanks for the tip. I've never played any Chopin myself.
> I have played Beethoven, and never noticed any spelling errors,
> though I've never looked, either.

Joe is right about Beethoven's spelling "errors" ... altho
i hesitate to label them as "errors". to me, it's simply
evidence that Beethoven was thinking in terms of 12edo
*outside* of its emulation of 1/11-comma meantone.

i haven't looked deeply enough into Chopin's spelling
of notes to notice his fastidiousness about that, but
i'll take your word for it.

hmmm ... so perhaps that is further evidence that Chopin
was more locked into a meantone/well-temperament way of
thinking.

i would certainly be willing to grant the possibility
that Beethoven was the more "progressive" between the two,
harmonically speaking. that was a composer who *definitely*
liked to "think outside the box".

-monz