Living Composers

[rojo]

Hi y'all,

We have a thread for new works; how about a thread for living composers, just in general? Post here any works by composers who are presently still alive that you have heard, and especially ones you enjoy in particular.

I'm currently listening to Cloudsplitter (2004) by Paul Riker. Scored for flute, clarinet, marimba, piano, violin and cello. Quite nice. Not particularly groundbreaking, but pleasant listening for sure.

[Corno Dolce]

*Christus* - An Organ Symphony by Francis Potter.

[rojo]

Currently listening to sink (2006) by Brian Harman; a nonet, played by the Nouvel Ensemble Moderne.

Like the title suggests, there's use of 'pitch sagging'. Also, use of whole tone scale, ascending and descending fourths, and tone clusters in upper registers. Interesting use of percussion; short punctuated notes that are imitated by the other instruments.

Rather gentle work, with a slow build-up; not much tension (or release for that matter.)

I enjoyed it.

[Tûrwethiel]

I really like Peter Sculthorpe. He's made some stunning music and is officially listed as a National Living Treasure - http://www.nsw.nationaltrust.org.au/treasureslist.html . Here's some more - http://www.petersculthorpe.com.au/

Cheers

Vicki

[jawoodruff]

I was recently looking for contemporary choral works and came across, via our favorite friend YouTube, Rutter's Requiem. I had passing familiarity with his works in the past - HOWEVER - this piece was a pleasant surprise.

[Robert Newman]

Hi there jawoodruff,

John Rutter is certainly given lots of air time here in the UK. He writes some interesting things, for sure. I've heard four or five of his works lately. For choral works he is today as popular as, say, Philip Glass for instrumental minimalism. I see from the Wikipedia article on John Rutter that -

'' Rutter's music is very popular, particularly in the USA. NBC's 'Today Show' called him 'the world's greatest living composer and conductor of choral music"); though in the UK it receives a more mixed reception. Some from the Anglican choral tradition do not regard him as a sufficiently "serious" composer. There is still great appreciation for his work in many parts of the UK, however, as illustrated by the following quotation from a review in the London 'Evening Standard' (25/09/2005). "For the infectiousness of his melodic invention and consummate craftsmanship, Rutter has few peers." In terms of performances he is probably the most successful choral composer of his generation. For example, his 'Shepherd's Pipe Carol', written while he was still at school, is reputed to have sold well over one million copies in sheet music alone'.

Speaking for myself, my honest impressions on hearing his work are rather mixed. His music is inoffensive, often sweet, direct, attractive etc. for sure. What is not to like about Rutter's vocal music ? But I admit that I often wonder if he will ever do anything 'organic' in his works. Anything which speaks from within the parts ? I don't mean to be too critical but, honestly, much of this stuff is, to me, 'musical candyfloss'.

It may of course be that we in our times want such things - that we deliberately choose lighter textures and avoid denser, more passionate music. That we want shallowness, for its own sake. Or, at least, pastel colours. And, for sure, he is very successful. He is also, I am sure, true to himself.

However, I more highly rate vocal composers such as John Tavener. Some of his things are really marvellous. The balance between past and present is obvious in many of his works and I have heard some superb works of his. But I admit that I always want to hear, in music, things which simply could not have been written in any other time but our very own, and these associated with what has already existed.

Regards

Robert

[Robert Newman]

I really like Peter Sculthorpe. He's made some stunning music and is officially listed as a National Living Treasure - http://www.nsw.nationaltrust.org.au/treasureslist.html . Here's some more - http://www.petersculthorpe.com.au/

Cheers

Vicki

Hi Vicki,

I am hoping (next week) to hear a recording of a work by Peter Sculthorpe (though I don't know it) -

'Norlangie'

Regards

Robert

[jawoodruff]

"The balance between past and present is obvious in many of his works and I have heard some superb works of his. But I admit that I always want to hear, in music, things which simply could not have been written in any other time but our very own, and these associated with what has already existed."

I agree fully on that. I think a lot of today's music strives too much to be modern. Almost as if others take melodic and harmonic material and make it intentionally dissonant. Or they will take overly suspend everything creating harmonic 'atmospheric' effects. And others will take melodic material and have the instrumentalist jump, illogically, across its range.

There is also no real association among today's music and that of the past - at least from the works I've reviewed.

That is why Rutter's requiem caught me off guard. Other composers, of recent, who's more recent works have surprised me include Phillip Glass. I've been listening to him a little more of late.

Jason

[Robert Newman]

"The balance between past and present is obvious in many of his works and I have heard some superb works of his. But I admit that I always want to hear, in music, things which simply could not have been written in any other time but our very own, and these associated with what has already existed."

I agree fully on that. I think a lot of today's music strives too much to be modern. Almost as if others take melodic and harmonic material and make it intentionally dissonant. Or they will take overly suspend everything creating harmonic 'atmospheric' effects. And others will take melodic material and have the instrumentalist jump, illogically, across its range.

There is also no real association among today's music and that of the past - at least from the works I've reviewed.

That is why Rutter's requiem caught me off guard. Other composers, of recent, who's more recent works have surprised me include Phillip Glass. I've been listening to him a little more of late.

Jason

I completely agree with you on this. Striving to be 'modern', for the sake of it. That's so perceptive. It's the most striking feature of music in our times. If there is to be 'new' music it will surely emerge, almost organically, from that which has already been achieved. It will place emphasis on an aspect of music which, till now, has perhaps not been exploited. And it will do so economically and even with great simplicity.

Regards

Robert

[some guy]

I think a lot of today's music strives too much to be modern.

You say that as if it were a bad thing. (And your delight with Rutter's Requiem makes me think that maybe what you want is for today's music to strive to be like music of the past, music, it may be, that you, jawoodruff, already understand and enjoy.)

You are of course free to like any old thing you want, but if you make sweeping generalizations about musics that other people like, you should probably expect a certain reaction against your assertions! Even if your conclusions are valid, they will only seem so to those who already agree with you. At least give some details when you assert--who strives too much to be modern? What does striving to be modern mean? Why is that bad? Why is striving to be retro a good thing? You know, stuff like that!)

Otherwise, here are a few living composers who have always striven to write interesting, provocative, forward-looking music:

Iancu Dumitrescu
Christina Kubisch
Ludger Brümmer
Lyn Goeringer
eRikm

It's a big world out there, full of music by living composers. My advice is to get out there and listen to some of it!!

[jawoodruff]

I will admit, I have strong views on music - and in particularly where I'd like to see music go (and, for that matter, currently be). Modernism in its right is good - always has been in each epoch. However, there has to come a time where you take the advances done from the experimentation and 'apply' them into the musical fabric. This has yet to be done in any cognitive way (my opinion). And there are composers who do strive to be modern and plenty of teachers of composition who encourage it above all us (Stacy Garrup is the first to come to my mind). This approach is not wrong by any means - it teaches the composer to experiment and test the limits of what they can do.

[some guy]

I will admit, I have strong views on music - and in particularly where I'd like to see music go

What are those views, and how were they formed? (How much music do you listen to, how much of it from the past fifty or sixty years, and how well do you understand and enjoy it?)

there has to come a time where you take the advances done from the experimentation and 'apply' them into the musical fabric.

Could you elaborate? How is composition like weaving? (How is music like thread, for that matter?!) How is an "advance," which you have here as something separate from normal, day-to-day musical activity, then applied to that large piece of cloth? (And when, one has to ask, is anyone going to actually make some clothing out of that fabric??)

[jawoodruff]

Composition is very much like weaving - in that you take small 'threads' (motives, harmony, seeds, etc - whatever you wish to call it) and create something larger. In each epoch of classical music - and I think history attests to this - you've seen composers experiment profusely (whether it was the experimentation with dissonance in the renaissance, structure in the classical period, advanced chromatic progression in the romantic, etc) and then take the results and utilize them as tools for their art.
My views are based on my outlook, I have a strong tendency to look from the big picture down. SO in this instance, I look at the larger timeline and gauge where things are by whats been.
How much music do you listen to, how much of it from the past fifty or sixty years, and how well do you understand and enjoy it?

I listen to quite a bit of music and have a familiarity with music over the past fifty or sixty years. Do I understand? Yes, I feel I do. There are some I enjoy and many that I don't (regrettably alot of the serial music, i fully can see the plan of the work but find it painful to my ears). I love quite a few works by John Adams, Phillip Glass, Michael Torke (have heard a few premieres at the symphony here in Indy - very nice!), Gorecki, and others.

[Art Rock]

Sculthorpe is an excellent composer IMO.

Others not mentioned yet are those two great contemporary Finns, Rautavaara and Sallinen.

[Montefalco]

Sculthorpe and Rautavaara are two great living composers. Another one is Magnus Linberg, whose Clarinet Concerto, and the choral work Graffiti, are very beatiful and stunning in my opinion.