# reworked Baroque - 'Recomposed' Vivaldi / Max Richter



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Recomposed by Max Richter:
Vivaldi - The Four Seasons
I imagine some will be entertained, others appalled.
What is your viewpoint on this sort of re-working?
















My take on these:
Richter composes mainly film music - much of which is ambient / minimalist beyond just a slight leaning toward. This shows / sounds in these arrangements. I found the outer movements of each movement entertaining. A little into the 1st movement of Winter I like that he just left off the 'unnecessary' last eighth note of 4/4 and instead cast it in 7/8.
The slow middle movements -- each of the four seasons -- I found far too redolent with the new-age'ish' ambient feel coupled with the most extreme of mawkish and cheap sentimentality, especially in the way the first violin rendered the slow long melodic lines of the solo violin - a cliché approach as found in many a film score and a quality with which much of his other works are marked: Vivaldi's slow melodies, completely outside of that sensibility, do not support the approach. If one eats enough sugar in one sitting, it will kill you. The mawkishness of the writing in the slow movements and the uber vibrato of the solo violinist -- exaggerated beyond even the late romantic practice as might be expected in a performance of the Tchaikovsky fiddle concerto -- killed each slow movement for me, as well as a few places in the outer movements where the solo violin had a more elongated line.
Overall, I found them fun and sometimes having an ingenious take on a work which has become for many of us, all too familiar: I do welcome the 'shake-up' when it comes to 'too familiar.' His 'roots' as ambient / film composer and that more superficial 'go for sentiment' are sitting under that Baroque Wig, and they show -- the whole set of four sound more like film score than 'classical' concert piece, especially in those middle movements.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Personally I wouldn't even bother listening to something like this. I don't know... re-composing a work like this seems somehow sacrilegious to me.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

tdc said:


> Personally I wouldn't even bother listening to something like this. I don't know... re-composing a work like this seems somehow sacrilegious to me.


Its basically the same sort of thing as Rachmaninoff composing a Rhapsody using a melody by Paganini, or Brahms composing variations of a tune by Haydn, or any number of composers quoting pieces by others. o3o


----------



## Mephistopheles (Sep 3, 2012)

BurningDesire said:


> Its basically the same sort of thing as Rachmaninoff composing a Rhapsody using a melody by Paganini, or Brahms composing variations of a tune by Haydn, or any number of composers quoting pieces by others. o3o


Only neither Brahms nor Rachmaninov would have had the gall to their works a "recomposition" meant to modernise the original.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

There's already a thread about this work someplace around here. As I said there the recomposition doesn't seem very interesting to me, just enough done to smooth off the edges and give it a more palatable sound for modern audiences. The making of documentary has someone saying "we have brought these works into the 21st century", but it sounds to me more like they over-romanticised them and brought them only into the early 20th. There is a little electronic manipulation and a few echoes of Glass or Adams style repeating minimalism, but mostly it seems like the pre-HIP readings of baroque, where people like Heifetz would turn the few known Vivaldi pieces into romantic showcases.

I'm certainly not against recomposing or re-imaginings and I thought the earlier albums in the recomposed series were quite good:















They seem to play with the music and do much more interesting things with it, they also took a range of music and not just the most obvious and famous classical work like the Seasons. Richter seems to turn it just into a pleasingly bland electronic mush.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Mephistopheles said:


> Only neither Brahms nor Rachmaninov would have had the gall to their works a "recomposition" meant to modernise the original.


"Re-Composition" is a stupid term. Its a new piece based on Vivaldi's piece.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

The fact that he chose to omit the famous spring theme impressed me greatly. I like the recording very much.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

These are arrangements. Composers throughtout history do that. As for these by Richter, I did not find them particularly appealing at all.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

^ Yes as some mentioned I think it is the term 'recomposition' I don't like. Its kind of an insulting term insinuating that there is something wrong with the original composition. An 'arrangement' or 'rhapsody' I would be fine with. But not this, and I still won't bother listening to it for that reason.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

tdc said:


> ^ Yes as some mentioned I think it is the term 'recomposition' I don't like. Its kind of an insulting term insinuating that there is something wrong with the original composition. An 'arrangement' or 'rhapsody' I would be fine with. But not this, and I still won't bother listening to it for that reason.


You aren't missing anything btw.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

I'm not entirely fond of arrangement, since that implies this is just a different version of Vivaldi's piece. This is a new composition.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

tdc said:


> I still won't bother listening to it for that reason.


This piece isn't amazing, but that is a terrible reason to not listen to something, over something so superficial, that really doesn't have much to do with the music itself. It would be like me saying "I refuse to listen to the music of Wagner, because he was a bigot" or "I won't listen to the music of Xenakis because he used mathematics in his composition process, and I think math inherently takes the soul out of music"


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> I'm not entirely fond of arrangement, since that implies this is just a different version of Vivaldi's piece. This is a new composition.


How are the music presented in the clips above "new composition"? Do explain, please.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> This piece isn't amazing, but that is a terrible reason to not listen to something, over something so superficial, that really doesn't have much to do with the music itself. It would be like me saying "I refuse to listen to the music of Wagner, because he was a bigot" or "I won't listen to the music of Xenakis because he used mathematics in his composition process, and I think math inherently takes the soul out of music"


I don't think it is the same as those examples at all, because those are both cases of an artist's original music. In this case someone is taking a composition already composed by someone else and basically suggesting they are 'fixing it'. In this case I don't believe there is anything in this original composition that needs changing or fixing and so I am not interested in listening to the result. One only has so much time to listen to music they haven't heard before. I personally feel my time is better spent exploring other pieces. Sometimes we just have to make choices of what or what not to listen to based on our own beliefs and preferences and what peaks our interest. The entire concept of this piece does not peak my interest, and I also find the idea disrespectful, so I feel those are valid reasons to justify my not listening to the music.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> How are the music presented in the clips above "new composition"? Do explain, please.


Its four different pieces than those composed originally by Vivaldi. o3o Do you not hear all the things excised from the original? All the new things added by this other composer? The ways he alters the material from the original that he kept?


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

tdc said:


> I don't think it is the same as those examples at all, because those are both cases of an artist's original music. In this case someone is taking a composition already composed by someone else and basically suggesting they are 'fixing it'. In this case I don't believe there is anything in this original composition that needs changing or fixing and so I am not interested in listening to the result. One only has so much time to listen to music they haven't heard before. I personally feel my time is better spent exploring other pieces. Sometimes we just have to make choices of what or what not to listen to based on our own beliefs and preferences and what peaks our interest. The entire concept of this piece does not peak my interest, and I also find the idea disrespectful, so I feel those are valid reasons to justify my not listening to the music.


Its not "fixing". Its using the material to create something new. The composer never said he was "fixing" nor "improving" Vivaldi's work.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> Its four different pieces than those composed originally by Vivaldi. o3o Do you not hear all the things excised from the original? All the new things added by this other composer? The ways he alters the material from the original that he kept?


More like cut & paste. If cute & paste = new, then we can all be composers of "new music". No wonder it is so easy to be a composer of "new music" these days.

It is not new music. It is an arrangement.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> Its not "fixing". Its using the material to create something new. The composer never said he was "fixing" nor "improving" Vivaldi's work.


It is not new music. It is an arrangement.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Its not "fixing". Its using the material to create something new. The composer never said he was "fixing" nor "improving" Vivaldi's work.


Fine, re-composing then. The idea of 're-composing' this piece doesn't interest me, and I also feel the term 're-composition' is distasteful. I feel those are valid enough reasons to spend what time I have listening to new music on other things.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

tdc said:


> Fine, re-composing then. The idea of 're-composing' this piece doesn't interest me, and I also feel the term 're-composition' is distasteful. I feel those are valid enough reasons to spend what time I have listening to new music on other things.


That's right. What's the point of "re-composing" something as perfect as the _Four Seasons_? Couldn't Richter compose genuine new music instead with the time spent?


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> More like cut & paste. If cute & paste = new, then we can all be composers of "new music". No wonder it is so easy to be a composer of "new music" these days.
> 
> It is not new music. It is an arrangement.


More like not JUST cut and paste. How could you say something so ignorant of the process and difficulties of composing music?


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> More like not JUST cut and paste. How could you say something so ignorant of the process and difficulties of composing music?


I was not referring to composing new music, which Richter did not do.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> I was not referring to composing new music, which Richter did not do.


You are wrong.


----------



## oogabooha (Nov 22, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> I was not referring to composing new music, which Richter did not do.


He took out a majority of the notes, and it's practically the same thing as using themes or parts of pieces that the composer didn't write, which _many_ composers have done in the past. It just has a different name.

Unfortunately I've only heard part of Spring, and UMG got to the videos because I could listen, so I'm going to have to listen some other way. I'm really excited, though!


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> You are wrong.


Teenager's final line of reasoning.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Teenager's final line of reasoning.


Personal attacks, final move of somebody who has lost.


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Personal attacks, final move of somebody who has lost.


I'm starting to like you.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> Personal attacks, final move of somebody who has lost.


I like to spot what kids do. This is fun. Your turn.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

I think in the case of Richter/Vivaldi, the term "re-composed," though inelegant, is more appropriate than "arranged" or "transcribed". But perhaps the most appropriate term would be "after". As in "after Vivaldi's Four Seasons".

Schoenberg did a lot of actual arrangements (Brahms, Bach), but he also wrote a concerto after Händel's concerto grosso op. 6 no. 7. I think this comes quite close to Richter's case. In Schoenberg's concerto, you can clearly recognize the original piece, but it is also much transformed. It occupies the middle ground between a "mere" arrangement and a completely original composition - as with Richter's Vivaldi, in my opinion.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

I just heard this for the first time.

Whilst I enjoyed much of the work, in most places it didn't feel like he'd done much 're-composition' with the material he had taken from the Vivaldi.

I am a huge fan of the Summer 1, it has to be said.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Funny, I was thinking about this piece only yesterday, but in a different context - that of the new release of a recording of Michael Gordon's extraordinary "Rewriting Beethoven's Seventh Symphony". 




This is a much more original treatment than Richter's Vivaldi (which I like too). Gordon just uses basic ideas from Beethoven to create something new, while also constantly reminding you of the original.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Awesome, I really love Richter's reworking of the Four Seasons... I wish that more of these classical music remixes occurred honestly.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I'm not a fan of folks screwing around with the music of others, even when the original music is not particularly attractive to me.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> I'm not a fan of folks screwing around with the music of others, even when the original music is not particularly attractive to me.


Why not? (I don't want that to sound aggressive. I was just struck by the fact that you seem to have a principled objection to a practice which is becoming more widespread I think. And I was curious about what the priciple is.)


----------



## Guest (Mar 6, 2015)

@ *Bulldog & Mandryka*:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/25/arts/rewriting-bach-as-bach-rewrote-others.html


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> Why not? (I don't want that to sound aggressive. I was just struck by the fact that you seem to have a principled objection to a practice which is becoming more widespread I think. And I was curious about what the priciple is.)


Re-invention is at the heart for classical music if it is continually transform into something which is meaningful for the future. Keeping it current isn't such a bad thing. I really do relish new versions of old classics because it lends us new insights that we wouldn't have seen before.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Here is another fine example of pop music reworking a Swingle Sister's cover of a Bach piece. It shows how inventive and clever Baroque appropriation is.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Mandryka said:


> Why not? (I don't want that to sound aggressive. I was just struck by the fact that you seem to have a principled objection to a practice which is becoming more widespread I think. And I was curious about what the priciple is.)


Fair enough. Simply put, if you have what it takes to compose music, compose your own from scratch.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Bulldog said:


> Fair enough. Simply put, if you have what it takes to compose music, compose your own from scratch.


Actually I'm a huge fan of sampling as a valid form of composition!


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> Fair enough. Simply put, if you have what it takes to compose music, compose your own from scratch.


When I read that the thing that occured to me straight away, as a sort of counterexample to the general principle, is Webern's orchestration of Bach's recercare from Opfer. There's clearly borrowing from Bach, and the pointelist aesthetic I think produces music, poetry, which transcends Bach's.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> Fair enough. Simply put, *if you have what it takes to compose music, compose your own from scratch.*


But Richter does that -- the Vivaldi 'work' is simply something different, an aside to his own compositions.


----------



## DuncanW (Aug 19, 2018)

Sorry to be a latecomer to this thread (only just joined talk classical) but I thoroughly enjoy Richter's Recomposed


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

I don't mind Richter's work, it has its place, but even though I am content not to hear the original again any time soon, Richter adds nothing meaningful. To my ears, it is rather akin to drawing a moustache on an old master, or daubing it with cream.


----------

