# Ridiculous Recitals



## OboeKnight

I was just thinking back on my experience at the IDRS (International Double-Reed Society) last summer. I attended many of the recitals there and my gosh, were some of them nutty. The worst was probably when a man took out his iPhone and out a drone on, then began playing random whole notes over top of the drone. He did this for twenty minutes and took a bow....I was so confused. Another one I can remember was called "Cats in the Kitchen." It was a flute and oboe duet....they turned on a recording of breaking dishes and cats yowling while playing sixteenth note runs. Another bewildering performance.

So, what are the strangest recitals you've attended? What left you completely at a loss for words?


----------



## Sid James

I went to an experimental recital once. It had this piece played by a guy doing circular breathing on sax which went on for ages. Sounded like he was playing the one note. I found it very annoying. However that did not stop me from going to these sorts of things when I feel like it. I've still heard some great music at these types of recitals. But as I get older I'm finding its not my thing any more, or not as much as it was.


----------



## ptr

I don't understand why it is "ridiculous", it is just music that challenges the listeners perception of what music *can* be. This is not a new phenomenon, contemporary music of any era throughout history has been met with contempt and misunderstanding by it's contemporary audiences.

*You don't have to like it*, but without people who try to expand the possibilities of their instrument and/or music the musical universe will implode under the conservative historicist cultural-musical paradigm that the "average" music-lover prefer. We'd still be sitting in our stone age cultural cave knocking stones together, there would be no progress if the crazy buggers did not challenge our collective perceptions on what is good and possible!

/ptr


----------



## OboeKnight

ptr said:


> I don't understand why it is "ridiculous", it is just music that challenges the listeners perception of what music *can* be. This is not a new phenomenon, contemporary music of any era throughout history has been met with contempt and misunderstanding by it's contemporary audiences.
> 
> *You don't have to like it*, but without people who try to expand the possibilities of their instrument and/or music the musical universe will implode under the conservative historicist cultural-musical paradigm that the "average" music-lover prefer. We'd still be sitting in our stone age cultural cave knocking stones together, there would be no progress if the crazy buggers did not challenge our collective perceptions on what is good and possible!
> 
> /ptr


They don't have to be ridiculous to everyone, I just find the two I mentioned to be ridiculous. I appreciate efforts to expand the capabilities of instruments and music, but I don't embrace all of it. I enjoyed many of the contemporary recitals there, these two just left me disturbed lol. Perhaps the thread title could have been chosen with a less-harsh name but it was late and I was tired  oh well. It could be: *Mind Boggling Recitals*


----------



## Ukko

ptr said:


> I don't understand why it is "ridiculous", it is just music that challenges the listeners perception of what music *can* be. This is not a new phenomenon, contemporary music of any era throughout history has been met with contempt and misunderstanding by it's contemporary audiences.
> 
> *You don't have to like it*, but without people who try to expand the possibilities of their instrument and/or music the musical universe will implode under the conservative historicist cultural-musical paradigm that the "average" music-lover prefer. We'd still be sitting in our stone age cultural cave knocking stones together, there would be no progress if the crazy buggers did not challenge our collective perceptions on what is good and possible!
> 
> /ptr


Fortunately, my powers of intimidation are slight enough to allow me to state that the stuff _OK_ described ain't music, and almost certainly wasn't _intended_ to be music. That sort of goings-on is "Look at me, I'm clever and unique, and challenging your limits." Juvenile at any age.


----------



## hreichgott

Agreed. That sort of recital is more in the category of performance art. Playing around with the idea of what performance is.
A worthy pursuit I suppose, but not one I enjoy attending very often, and not to be confused with music performance.


----------



## Wood

Hilltroll72 said:


> That sort of goings-on is "Look at me, I'm clever and unique, and challenging your limits." Juvenile at any age.


I disagree that such behaviour should be described as juvenile. It could apply for example to Rollins, Monk & other jazz greats. Further back, Liszt could be accused of the same 'goings-on'.

Do you think that these artists are immature?


----------



## ptr

I believe that both Hilltroll72 and hreichgott are proving my point amply by defending conservative historicist cultural-musical paradigm! I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with loving history, but rather that the passion for music of the past is at best leaving us with Status Quo that most often only moves backwards!

I love history but I quite detest any thought of moving backwards!

/ptr


----------



## OboeKnight

There was no musical phrase, musical direction, or any emotion in either performance. It could hardly be called anything but "sound." If that appeals to some people, that's great. It just isn't for me. The topic is about strange, odd, or otherwise unusual recitals you have attended, whether you thought them "ridiculous" or not. Let's return to the topic. Deepest apologies for my use of the word *ridiculous.*


----------



## ptr

Try this:






I once attended a 6 hour performance of this man sound works in a large church... I'm not sure I'm a better person for it, but I survived and learnt something profound about myself! 

/ptr


----------



## moody

ptr said:


> I believe that both Hilltroll72 and hreichgott are proving my point amply by defending conservative historicist cultural-musical paradigm! I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with loving history, but rather that the passion for music of the past is at best leaving us with Status Quo that most often only moves backwards!
> 
> I love history but I quite detest any thought of moving backwards!
> 
> /ptr


Of course there is always the quaint idea that one should be allowed to listen to exactly what one wishes--to hell with the pig iron music! But you may listen to it day and night my friend.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

ptr said:


> I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with loving history, but rather that the passion for music of the past is at best leaving us with Status Quo that most often only moves backwards!


But we all, as classical listeners, are passionate for the music of the past, and most of the music discussed on this forum comes from the 18-19th century. The people who don't like the idea of listening to music that is a couple centuries old, listen to something different than classical.


----------



## deggial

the concept behind these bewildering recitals OK mentioned _might_ be to challenge the audience, however the idea seems rather underdeveloped and/or unimaginative. Is playing whole notes over a drone exploring the instrument's possibilities to the fullest? Sounds rather like what the people who first developed the instrument might have done.


----------



## Wood

SiegendesLicht said:


> But we all, as classical listeners, are passionate for the music of the past, and most of the music discussed on this forum comes from the 18-19th century. The people who don't like the idea of listening to music that is a couple centuries old, listen to something different than classical.


I agree that all of the music we listen to comes from the past.:lol:

However, much of the music discussed in this forum doesn't come from the 18th or 19th centuries.

Indeed, a large amount of classical music exists which is either significantly older or significantly younger than 'a couple of centuries old'.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

hayd said:


> I agree that all of the music we listen to comes from the past.:lol:
> 
> However, much of the music discussed in this forum doesn't come from the 18th or 19th centuries.
> 
> Indeed, a large amount of classical music exists which is either significantly older or significantly younger than 'a couple of centuries old'.


I did not say "all of it", I said "most". And is there anyone on this forum who listens exclusively to the modern classical music and does not enjoy any that was composed before the modern era?


----------



## Wood

SiegendesLicht; said:


> The people who don't like the idea of listening to music that is a couple centuries old, listen to something different than classical.





SiegendesLicht said:


> And is there anyone on this forum who listens exclusively to the modern classical music and does not enjoy any that was composed before the modern era?


What do you mean by 'modern classical music' and how does it relate to your first quote above?

What point are you seeking to make from your second quote?

Please explain.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

hayd said:


> What do you mean by 'modern classical music' and how does it relate to your first quote above?
> 
> What point are you seeking to make from your second quote?
> 
> Please explain.


OK. Ptr said this:



> I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with loving history, but rather that the passion for music of the past is at best leaving us with Status Quo that most often only moves backwards!


I answered him that pretty much all classical listeners seem to have a passion for music which was composed long in the past (17, 18, 19 century or even before that). Hardly anyone limits himself strictly to music that was composed a few years ago, even if it is "classical". And people to whom music which is a century or two old, is "outdated" or something like that, those people are hardly found among classical fans.


----------



## Wood

SiegendesLicht said:


> OK. Ptr said this:
> 
> I answered him that pretty much all classical listeners seem to have a passion for music which was composed long in the past (17, 18, 19 century or even before that). Hardly anyone limits himself strictly to music that was composed a few years ago, even if it is "classical". And people to whom music which is a century or two old, is "outdated" or something like that, those people are hardly found among classical fans.


Aha! Now I understand you. Thank you for clarifying.


----------



## Wood

SiegendesLicht said:


> OK. Ptr said this:
> 
> I answered him that pretty much all classical listeners seem to have a passion for music which was composed long in the past (17, 18, 19 century or even before that). Hardly anyone limits himself strictly to music that was composed a few years ago, even if it is "classical". And people to whom music which is a century or two old, is "outdated" or something like that, those people are hardly found among classical fans.


Would you have agreed with Ptr if he had said this...?

"I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with loving history, but rather that the * NEAR EXCLUSIVE* passion for music of the past is at best leaving us with Status Quo that most often only moves backwards!"


----------



## SiegendesLicht

hayd said:


> Would you have agreed with Ptr if he had said this...?
> 
> "I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with loving history, but rather that the * NEAR EXCLUSIVE* passion for music of the past is at best leaving us with Status Quo that most often only moves backwards!"


I really don't know enough about the current Status Quo to give an informed answer. My personal area of interest in classical music ends (for now) with the last Romantics: Sibelius and Richard Strauss, and I still have too much to learn about all that was before them to get to know the more modern music. Besides, in the later times a lot of artists in all high arts, including music, seem to prefer experimentation for the sake of experimentation and "pushing our limits" (like those recitals described in this thread) to the creation of beauty. Please correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## Sid James

ptr said:


> ...
> 
> *You don't have to like it*, but without people who try to expand the possibilities of their instrument ...


Well I agree, there are no 'shoulds' in music, I am firmly an advocate of that type of 'philosophy.'



OboeKnight said:


> They don't have to be ridiculous to everyone, I just find the two I mentioned to be ridiculous. I appreciate efforts to expand the capabilities of instruments and music, but I don't embrace all of it. I enjoyed many of the contemporary recitals there, these two just left me disturbed lol. Perhaps the thread title could have been chosen with a less-harsh name but it was late and I was tired  oh well. It could be: *Mind Boggling Recitals*


Well I'm the same with these types of concerts I've attended in the past. A typical program will have some more middle ground stuff interspersed with more challenging things. It can be challenging to be put far out of one's comfort zone, however on the whole I've found that I take away something positive from these concerts. I think the programmers do try to present a number of things on the night, unless its a concert focusing on one thing, with which I have the choice not to go if I think the published program is not for me. Simple as that, we got the choice, the buck stops with us as listeners. But I'm the same with some traditional things. I got no big urge now to hear Beethoven's 5th, I had a gutful of it, he did 8 other symphonies, so I want to hear those live too, not just that cos its most famous. So its the same with everything, I got a choice!


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

OboeKnight said:


> ... The worst was probably when a man took out his iPhone and out a drone on, then began playing random whole notes over top of the drone. He did this for twenty minutes and took a bow....I was so confused. Another one I can remember was called "Cats in the Kitchen." It was a flute and oboe duet....they turned on a recording of breaking dishes and cats yowling while playing sixteenth note runs. Another bewildering performance.
> 
> ....


It is just talentless muck, masquerading as "art".


----------



## Ravndal

This makes me laugh for a while. Then i get a bit bored.


----------

