Notes on the Brahms for Gene

On Tuesday 02 March 2004 07:21 am, tuning@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 04:19:43 -0800
> From: Carl Lumma <ekin@lumma.org>
> Subject: Re: Rubato Brahms
>
> >The Brahms second piano concerto, with ultra-heavy rubato to the
> >point of turning into jazz, is up on both my Brahms and Grail pages.
> >
> >http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/brahms.htm
>
> I finally got a chance to listen. What a smashing success!!
>
> For some reason the files seem bass-heavy, would be my only
> complaint.
>
> That, and the tuning sounds too fixed to be a real orchestra. It's
> something I didn't notice in the MIDI mockup from the Keyboard
> article. I wonder what some random detuning centered on grail would
> do to the sound?
>
> Oh, and Gene, what tool(s) did you use to add the rubato? Or was
> your source MIDI already performed that way?
>
> Also, I wonder if you use the attack-random-staggering tool of
> Nagler's. I find a nice subtle effect can be achieved with very
> small ms values, though even those can munge tuplets.

Gene-

I think the orchestra sounds pretty good for the equipment you're using. Of
course, all the things that Newton-Howard says in that article are good
points, and should be considered.

However, the piano sounds God-awful, like some kind of digitized nightmare
toy. Yuk! But we've been down this road before...you seem to like timbres
that I want to run away screaming from.

One more thing--sounds like you have no idea about how this piece is
interpreted tempo wise, by that I mean the 2nd mvt. is 'allegro appasionato'.
It's conducted in 1.....not 3. (I know this piece better than almost any
other classical work--I've listened to it at least 500 times, literally, and
I've learned the solo part, which is a bitch) Yours sounds like a dirge. I
had to turn it off, as it was painful to try and sit through a tempo that
slow for that most energetic and masculine of movements. Listen to a
recording of this piece by someone like Richter or Backhaus, please !!!!
I haven't heard the first or third movements...didn't have time yet.

Best,
Aaron.

At 07:55 AM 3/2/2004, you wrote:
>On Tuesday 02 March 2004 07:21 am, tuning@yahoogroups.com wrote:
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 04:19:43 -0800
>> From: Carl Lumma <ekin@lumma.org>
>> Subject: Re: Rubato Brahms
>>
>> >The Brahms second piano concerto, with ultra-heavy rubato to the
>> >point of turning into jazz, is up on both my Brahms and Grail pages.
>> >
>> >http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/brahms.htm
>>
>> I finally got a chance to listen. What a smashing success!!
>>
>> For some reason the files seem bass-heavy, would be my only
>> complaint.
>>
>> That, and the tuning sounds too fixed to be a real orchestra. It's
>> something I didn't notice in the MIDI mockup from the Keyboard
>> article. I wonder what some random detuning centered on grail would
>> do to the sound?
>>
>> Oh, and Gene, what tool(s) did you use to add the rubato? Or was
>> your source MIDI already performed that way?
>>
>> Also, I wonder if you use the attack-random-staggering tool of
>> Nagler's. I find a nice subtle effect can be achieved with very
>> small ms values, though even those can munge tuplets.
>
>Gene-
>
>One more thing--sounds like you have no idea about how this piece is
>interpreted tempo wise,

Aaron-

You must have missed the part where Gene told us rubato had been
applied to this almost to the point of being jazz.

-Carl

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

> However, the piano sounds God-awful, like some kind of digitized
nightmare
> toy. Yuk! But we've been down this road before...you seem to like
timbres
> that I want to run away screaming from.

A darker font, like a Steinway, would have been a possibility. The
font I want now is a recording of Harrison's one-string-per-note
piano, which might be a good way to drive you nuts.

> One more thing--sounds like you have no idea about how this piece is
> interpreted tempo wise, by that I mean the 2nd mvt. is 'allegro
appasionato'.
> It's conducted in 1.....not 3. (I know this piece better than almost
any
> other classical work--I've listened to it at least 500 times,
literally, and
> I've learned the solo part, which is a bitch) Yours sounds like a
dirge. I
> had to turn it off, as it was painful to try and sit through a tempo
that
> slow for that most energetic and masculine of movements. Listen to a
> recording of this piece by someone like Richter or Backhaus, please
!!!!

My timing for the movement is 7:58. Rather than dig out my CD from
whereever it is, I went on the net, and the first version I found with
timing information was this:

Bachauer/Skrowaczewski 16:17

> I haven't heard the first or third movements...didn't have time yet.

You havn't heard any of the movements, and you really should listen to
something before reviewing it. The second movement starts out very
slowly in the version I gave, but it doesn't stay that way, as the
timing information should tell you. By the way, the concerto has four
movements, not three.

On Wednesday 03 March 2004 07:28 am, tuning@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 23:50:07 -0000
> From: "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@svpal.org>
> Subject: Re: Notes on the Brahms for Gene
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson" <akjmicro@c...> wrote:
> > However, the piano sounds God-awful, like some kind of digitized
>
> nightmare
>
> > toy. Yuk! But we've been down this road before...you seem to like
>
> timbres
>
> > that I want to run away screaming from.
>
> A darker font, like a Steinway, would have been a possibility. The
> font I want now is a recording of Harrison's one-string-per-note
> piano, which might be a good way to drive you nuts.

I like single string piano for certain just tunings--honestly, I don't know
how I would respond unitl I heard it.

> > One more thing--sounds like you have no idea about how this piece is
> > interpreted tempo wise, by that I mean the 2nd mvt. is 'allegro
>
> appasionato'.
>
> > It's conducted in 1.....not 3. (I know this piece better than almost
>
> any
>
> > other classical work--I've listened to it at least 500 times,
>
> literally, and
>
> > I've learned the solo part, which is a bitch) Yours sounds like a
>
> dirge. I
>
> > had to turn it off, as it was painful to try and sit through a tempo
>
> that
>
> > slow for that most energetic and masculine of movements. Listen to a
> > recording of this piece by someone like Richter or Backhaus, please
>
> !!!!
>
> My timing for the movement is 7:58. Rather than dig out my CD from
> whereever it is, I went on the net, and the first version I found with
> timing information was this:
>
> Bachauer/Skrowaczewski 16:17

Yikes!!! Sounds wrong or bad or both.

And I stand corrected. Your version starts out slowly and gets to a correct
tempo. Might I ask why you did this? I had to dismiss it as misguided right
away based on this annoying tempo.

>
> > I haven't heard the first or third movements...didn't have time yet.
>
> You havn't heard any of the movements, and you really should listen to
> something before reviewing it.

Yes, forgive me for dismissing it all based on that one 2nd mvt tempo choice.

> The second movement starts out very
> slowly in the version I gave, but it doesn't stay that way, as the
> timing information should tell you. By the way, the concerto has four
> movements, not three.

You must have missed the part I wrote about having studied this piece myself,
and hearing it 500 or more times. Or you are just trying to annoy me by
painting me in a public forum as one who woudn't know these things?

BTW, in spite of what everyone is saying, I am impressed by the quality of the
orcehstral sound, which is good, if obviously synthetic, and not stellar.
Even though the piano sound is what it is (i.e. not very good). Maybe a
Kurzweil-quality piano modue would do the trick?

Best,
Aaron.

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

> And I stand corrected. Your version starts out slowly and gets to a
correct
> tempo. Might I ask why you did this? I had to dismiss it as
misguided right
> away based on this annoying tempo.

It's simply an exaggeration of what was already in the midi version I
was working from, which in turn is simply what is in Brahms. The piece
is rythmically complex, and this sort of took that ball and ran with it.

> > The second movement starts out very
> > slowly in the version I gave, but it doesn't stay that way, as the
> > timing information should tell you. By the way, the concerto has four
> > movements, not three.
>
> You must have missed the part I wrote about having studied this
piece myself,
> and hearing it 500 or more times. Or you are just trying to annoy me by
> painting me in a public forum as one who woudn't know these things?

I was annoying you to see what reaction I drew. If it turned out you
hadn't ever noticed this little fact, I would have been surprised but
I'd know what conclusion to draw then, wouldn't I? :)