Re: [JR] Partch in the New Age, with caveats

Johnny wrote:

--- In tuning@y..., Afmmjr@a... wrote:
> Why U.S. Highball is a part of this, I am not sure.

Because you extol the virtues of a travelling kithara that cost all of $1000 and I pointed out at least one recording that it was either misplayed or misdesigned.

> I guess Jon wants to tie in every last detail to sure up his points.

So being thorough is *bad* thing? I just don't want anyone to think I'm just pulling this out of thin air, but am actually basing statements *on* something.

> Frankly, to me it shows that I did in fact tell him that I would "circulate" his
> comments "to the players involved, and did.

I realize that; I just never heard back from you, which I took to mean you didn't care, thought me totally wrong, or something else. But that I took plenty of time and care to listen and comment, in very deferential words, without the favor of a reply -- _that_ said something to me.

> Unfortunately, Jon admitted he didn't have a score in his possession and so
> he thought we took cuts that we didn't. We didn't cut anything from the
> early quartet version.

Which is why I *asked* about the cuts, with question marks, and wondered if the Partch versions I had heard (four different ones) were from different scores or with different cuts than the one you used. I said I 'thought', I didn't state it as fact.

> To Jon's credit, I did develop my vocal skills along the
> lines he suggested. Frankly, the Barbicon gig broke new ground for me in
> doing the music. It is memorized now, which lends to more powerful
> characterizations.

This is swell.

> Re my memory of a comment by Jon about my voice being too gay, I knew it
> wasn't in the first letter, and I can't remember in which fashion I heard it,
> so I will withdraw the comment at this time (since Jon disavows it).

No thanks for the non-apology. I didn't disavow it, I showed you it never happened. I hope someday someone puts really offensive words in your mouth, Johnny.

> Danlee's impression of the earlier works as being compositionally inferior to
> his later works was said to me by him over the phone. I don't believe I've
> ever seen or spoken to Jon Szanto by phone, or did we?

Not to my knowledge, and your conversation with Danlee makes me all the more sure that you have completely mistrued his words as well. And he was only Partch's main assistant for nearly 25 years.

> Memory is not a sure thing and we are getting older, but I remember chalking
> up Danlee's views on Partch's composition qualities to his being a
> percussionist.

Fool. He is a extremely well-rounded musician, grounded in materials and concerns far greater than (his and mine) sometimes-occupation of banging on things. I wonder if I attributed comments to you because "you are just a bassoonist", with all the baggage that might carry, if you would understand the flatness of your own concept.

> The final percussion version of "U.S. Highball" is half the
> length of the earlier quartet version recorded by Swiss Radio in Zurich which
> would lighten the blow of AFMM performances (or so I believe).

I have no idea what you mean or what these references are.

> As to the Bass Marimba substitution we use (please bare in mind that at no
> time has it been possible for the AFMM to utilize Partch instruments) is
> visually stimulating on stage (with 9 long tubes placed on a long table
> facing the audience).

Placed on a long table. No integrated stand or anything. Tubes on a table. Well, to each his own about what constitutes "visual beauty".

> I've played percussion since I was the section leader in the John Dewey High
> School Concert Band and Orchestra.

I played trumpet in the Castle Park High School Concert Band. I'd never have enough hubris to use that as some sort of qualification, because it would insult trumpet players everywhere.

> When I hear the recording I have of "Dark Brother" I hear what sounds to me
> like a bass drum.

If you have the "Enclosures" recording, it lists it as Indian Drum. If you have a tape from the U of I archive, then you'd have to read Gilmore to know that.

> Maybe there is a reference that I don't have that states
> "Indian drum" (which Ives uses in the "Universe Symphony"), but it makes no
> difference to my point.

Yes, you seem to decide that some matters are of critical value and others may be tossed aside.

> The non-pitched indefinite sound of the drum is far
> less than the added part of a marimba, tubed or otherwise. The drum is not
> "just one example of an error, no matter small, that you not only skip over
> but use as a basis for your changes to Partch's material." Jon this is wrong
> and you should apologize.

No, in your postings you have shown continued ability to be wrong and not own up to it. One then can easily envision that kind of cavalier attitude expanding until entire arrangements are altered to suit.

> I have not made changes to Partch's musical
> material. Jon, unless you can prove otherwise, you should discontinue
> negative commentary regarding my honesty.

First you don't want me to "tie in every last detail", now you ask for proof. I don't imply that you are dishonest, but that in performing Partch the way you do does, at times, a disservice to his work.

> And please, don't bring in Brian
> McLaren now. (This is a sore point for me because you quote him on the
> Corporeal Meadows site in misinformation, yet refuse to make any changes or
> allow for a contrary view.

I'm sorry for that. I brought it up because of your erroneous and insulting remark attributed to me. What I have posted is public record (which people around here are salivating at the thought of having in an archive), and you were free to respond to Brian on the list, or place rebuttals on your site. If you ever place refutational material on the AFMM pages, I'll be happy to place a link to it.

> Regarding pioneers, I suggest to everyone that they are alive and well among
> us.

So do I. And we need them even more than ever.

> Skip LaPlante has been presenting original instruments with an
> ecological bent since the '70s. His philosophy is to make music of the
> things we have left behind as refuse.

To be clear: I appreciate Skip LaPlante's efforts, from what I read his music may very well be engaging and enlightening, and by making instruments from easily affordable and accessible materials, he can spread music making in bigger circles.

That does not mean that his stated aesthetics match those of Partch, or that some (not all) of the possible instrumental substitutions (and playing situations) are the optimal match for a Partch production.

> Yes, I think of him as a pioneer, based on
> his influence, and the generations that have picked up from him to follow in
> his footsteps. He sees himself as first generation post-Partch. And Jon,
> you are dismembering him, out of hand.

I am not. I just find him at variance with Partch's own goals, and therefore not a particularly swell bedfellow. I have no problem *whatsoever* with Skip's own music making, and wish him continued and great success.

I guess that wasn't clear enough, so I hope it is clear now.

> As for Bitter Music, why didn't the Partch Foundation supply some
> instruments?

"Bitter Music" is for piano, Johnny. They had one at Pomona College. But Schneider did use Partch's original Kithara I.

> If you create an environment of a monopoly on the instruments, future
> instruments will be different. The Boo is now made of plastic, yes? Should
> a Partch aficionado be offended by this? Even if it sounds good and is,
> heavens forbid, practical, why not?

Once again you are incorrect in your assumptions: Partch had experimented with the phenolic resin tubes, and thought that an entire instrument of that material would be great. He had gotten a short start on one before ill health aborted any more construction. Boo III was built from this material, according to Partch's specs, after his death. *And* it was made visually beautiful, which would make sense.

If a composer creates an "environment of monopoly" then maybe that is how he intended his music to be played, and not in some alternate fashion. It is for those who follow to decide "should I go to New York, or should I go to 'New York Hotel and Casino' in Las Vegas?". Future instruments are different only if performers think that their need to perform the music outweighs them performing it to the manner intended.

> "I've seen it done only rarely, only recently, and I don't think
> what you are doing matches it."

I've only seen one current attempt to recreate some of Partch's instruments with care and scholarship -- Schneider's Diamond Marimba is, for all practical purposes, a near exact copy, and sounds splendid -- as well as concern for concert presentation. It's not completely there yet, but they are on the right track. I hope they continue along those lines.

I *would* like to have the chance to see one of the AFMM performances, and I've tried to make clear my problems that are based on hearing the performance on recording, and from people who *have* seen the concerts.

> You are incorrect on this matter. I believe
> this is a case of bias

It's such a drag that my bias comes from my background of knowing this composer and his music, as well as being intimate with the instrumental resources.

> and I am confident that your estimation of the situation is flawed.

Of course you are.

Jon