# Ravel



## World Violist

If you've come here expecting to see a page wasted on Bolero, you're about to be either sorely disappointed or a new world in music is about to open up to you. Ravel himself hated Bolero anyway, why should we like it?

Now that I've gotten that out of my system, Ravel was one of the greatest users of instrumental color in his music. He was one of the greatest mimickers of music history. He is also one of the more demanding piano-composers to play pieces by.

My favorite music of Ravel's include The G major piano concerto and "Pavane pour une infante défunte." Tzigane is another Ravel classic, too, but I find that a little schmaltzy in comparison to his other stuff (...).

Great composer. LISTEN TO MORE THAN THE BOLERO AND ALL YOUR DREAMS WILL COME TRUE!!!


----------



## Rondo

Bolero is good, but it would also suffice to mention his masterful orchestrations, such as _Pictures at an Exhibition_. To mention others, two other "must hear's" for Ravel include _Daphnis et Chloe_, and _La Valse_.


----------



## ChamberNut

I cannot stand _Bolero_. And unfortunately, that being the first work of Ravel that I have heard, has made me a bit hesistant on getting to listen to more of Ravel's work, so things are slowly happening in that regard.

However, that being said, I enjoyed his Piano Concerto in G major earlier this year at a live performance by Louis Lortie. _Pavane pour un enfant defunt _ for harp and cello, _Introduction et Allegro _for harp, string quartet, clarinet and flute, and his string quartet I all enjoy alot.


----------



## BuddhaBandit

Rondo said:


> Bolero is good, but it would also suffice to mention his masterful orchestrations, such as _Pictures at an Exhibition_. To mention others, two other "must hear's" for Ravel include _Daphnis et Chloe_, and _La Valse_.


As much as I respect his orchestration of _Pictures_, I am an absolute fanatic about Mussorgsky's original piano suite (especially the Horowitz recording) and shall always remain faithful to the original. Ravel's use of the orchestra is, of course, highly impressive, but "The Great Gate at Kiev" is just more impacting in its piano form...

As for Ravel, the Bolero is not one of my favorites. That title would go to the wonderful _Miroirs_, one of the greatest piano suites ever written. Also, I really like the Piano Concerto for the Left Hand, mostly due to my continued awe at the pianists who can perform it.


----------



## EricIsAPolarBear

I have to disagree with your comment on the Great Gate of Kiev. I do not have Horowitz playing however, and everything I've heard played by him I've enjoyed. I have Karajan conducting the BPO for Pictures and that was my first favourite classical recording when I first got into it this summer. 

I really like the Piano Concerto in G as well as the Sonatine for solo piano.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*Ravel- Memories*

Takes me back to my earlier days on the board, when, in this thread, I made the semi-provocative statement that Ravel was my favorite French composer.

Rather than re-iterate the sentiments there, let me add something different...
1) The Phil Goulding book _Classical Music_ contains the following passage: The critics protested that Maurice Ravel was too artificial. "has it occurred to them, retorted the composer, "that one may be artificial by nature?"
2) My CD notes to Ravel's _Valses Nobles et Sentimentales_ states that they were... "prefaced with a quotation from the Symbolist poet Henri de Régnier which refers to 'the delightful and ever renewed pleasure of doing something which is utterly useless.'"*†

A request to our Francophone contingent... I would be interested in the original French rendering of the above-mentioned quotes. Can anyone help out?!

*Attribution- James Harding, from the Previn/RPO disc.
†I think many of us inveterate message-board posters can find some manner of empathetic resonance concerning this quote!


----------



## BuddhaBandit

EricIsAPolarBear said:


> I have to disagree with your comment on the Great Gate of Kiev. I do not have Horowitz playing however, and everything I've heard played by him I've enjoyed. I have Karajan conducting the BPO for Pictures and that was my first favourite classical recording when I first got into it this summer.


That's perfectly valid. Ravel's orchestration is, of course, the more well-known version of the suite, and, in some cases ("Samuel Goldenberg and Schmuyle", for example) is clearly better than the original. And, as a pianist, I am naturally biased towards the piano version (it helps, also, that the Horowitz recording is live, so at the ends of "Great Gate" there is a fairly powerful bit of audience applause and cheering).

Anyway, back to Ravel...


----------



## EricIsAPolarBear

I also have Stokowski's.....


----------



## Raphaël-A.

Chi_town/Philly said:


> Takes me back to my earlier days on the board, when, in this thread, I made the semi-provocative statement that Ravel was my favorite French composer.
> 
> Rather than re-iterate the sentiments there, let me add something different...
> 1) The Phil Goulding book _Classical Music_ contains the following passage: The critics protested that Maurice Ravel was too artificial. "has it occurred to them, retorted the composer, "that one may be artificial by nature?"
> 2) My CD notes to Ravel's _Valses Nobles et Sentimentales_ states that they were... "prefaced with a quotation from the Symbolist poet Henri de Régnier which refers to 'the delightful and ever renewed pleasure of doing something which is utterly useless.'"*†
> 
> A request to our Francophone contingent... I would be interested in the original French rendering of the above-mentioned quotes. Can anyone help out?!
> 
> *Attribution- James Harding, from the Previn/RPO disc.
> †I think many of us inveterate message-board posters can find some manner of empathetic resonance concerning this quote!


I'm really not sure where to find the original french version of these quotes hehe. However, if you would like I could translate them...


----------



## Edward Elgar

World Violist said:


> LISTEN TO MORE THAN THE BOLERO AND ALL YOUR DREAMS WILL COME TRUE!!!


I'm so glad someone has said this! Ravel was such a good composer, and yet all we hear of him is the tiresome and repetetive Bolero! I'm learning his sonatine and I have to say, the colours he can get out of the piano are soooo nice!


----------



## oisfetz

BuddhaBandit said:


> That's perfectly valid. Ravel's orchestration is, of course, the more well-known version of the suite, and, in some cases ("Samuel Goldenberg and Schmuyle", for example) is clearly better than the original. And, as a pianist, I am naturally biased towards the piano version (it helps, also, that the Horowitz recording is live, so at the ends of "Great Gate" there is a fairly powerful bit of audience applause and cheering).
> 
> Anyway, back to Ravel...


There were TWO Horowitz's Pictures. The best was the live one (1951), but before that
he recorded it on studio (1947)


----------



## World Violist

Rondo said:


> Bolero is good, but it would also suffice to mention his masterful orchestrations, such as _Pictures at an Exhibition_. To mention others, two other "must hear's" for Ravel include _Daphnis et Chloe_, and _La Valse_.


With _Daphnis et Chloe,_ though, you have to make sure of what you're getting. I'd recommend the whole ballet, as it has wordless voices in there, as opposed to the fully orchestral suites. Besides, you get a better feel for the story if you have it right in front of you; more immersed in what's going on. Besides, there are some great moments in the original that the choir is so integral in bringing to life. I haven't heard the orchestral suites, but I can't imagine them being as good.

I've heard the piano concerti... amazing, especially the left-hand one. I can't imagine a one-armed person doing that!

Heh, I read a funny story about Ravel today on Wikipedia to effect of the first recording of Bolero having taken place with Ravel supervising it. The day immediately after, Ravel conducted his own recording... apparently he didn't like the other guy's performance...


----------



## altiste

*Ravel's chamber music*

Ravel is one of my favourite composers. The Violin Sonata and the Piano Trio are both great works. The String Quartet is so well written that for me it's one of the highlights of the repertoire.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

BuddhaBandit said:


> I am an absolute fanatic about Mussorgsky's original piano suite (*especially the Horowitz recording*)


You are *confusing *two different things. Horowitz didn't play the original piano version, but an arrangement of his own, which shows he knew how to use the instrument in a way Mussorgsky could have only dreamed of.

The differences are easily audible, and if you are a pianist you will rapidly recognize Horowitz superior skills when reading the score.

Vladimir Ashkenazy, Benno Moiseiwitsch, Sviatoslav Richter... they play the original version.


----------



## tomokioh

Hi, I am a 15 year old composer from Australia

I've been composing for about 2 years.

I've recently made a website on composition, so check it out!

www.write-your-own-website.com

Ravel is fantastic in every way

the way he is using the piano is very astonishing


----------



## BuddhaBandit

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> You are *confusing *two different things. Horowitz didn't play the original piano version, but an arrangement of his own, which shows he knew how to use the instrument in a way Mussorgsky could have only dreamed of.
> 
> The differences are easily audible, and if you are a pianist you will rapidly recognize Horowitz superior skills when reading the score.
> 
> Vladimir Ashkenazy, Benno Moiseiwitsch, Sviatoslav Richter... they play the original version.


However, Horowitz's version is fairly close to the original (only a few notes were added for effect). For all intents and purposes, the music is very similar.


----------



## Kezza

I've never actually heard Bolero but I did Recently buy His violin Sonata in G and Piano Trio in A minor and i have Been Enjoying them Thouroughly.


----------



## JTech82

I find Ravel's "Bolero" to be his weakest composition. I find that his true heart wasn't in that work.

What I do enjoy by Ravel are many of his lesser known works that nobody seems to talk about like for example:

Ma mère l'oye
Rhapsodie espagnole
La Valse
Une barque sur l'océan
Menuet antique
Pavane pour une infante défunte
Piano Concertos

And of course, Daphnis et Chloé.


----------



## World Violist

Those works are actually the most popular after Bolero and the solo piano works, I think. For the record, I love those works also.


----------



## Lang

World Violist said:


> Ravel himself hated Bolero anyway, why should we like it?


Do you have a source for that statement?



JTech82 said:


> I find that his true heart wasn't in that work.


Does that translate to 'I don't like it?'

Personally I feel that Bolero is very unusual, in that it is far more interesting than any composer's popular works tend to be. The orchestration is masterly; the form is original - and manages to sustain the work through the 17 minutes it should take if it is played at the proper speed; it is very forward-looking, suggesting minimalism, and it has an encompassing humour, characteristic of the composer.

I like Ravel very much, including the Bolero. He was a masterly composer for the piano, was always willing to experiment, and produced much wonderful work, including several masterpieces.


----------



## JTech82

Lang said:


> Does that translate to 'I don't like it?'


No, it translates to it's not his best work. This is coming from someone who's heard all of his orchestral work and probably the biggest Ravel freak on this thread.

I find it interesting, Lang, that you rate Bolero so high and his other compositions so low or at least that is what it looked like you were doing in your full-blown description of the piece, which by the way was pointless considering how many times me and the rest of the forum members here have heard it.

Like I said, Ravel's true heart wasn't in that piece. Bolero is to Ravel what So What was to Miles Davis. While they may have been great compositions at that time, they ultimately became overkill, because people simply get tired of hearing them.

There are far better works by Ravel than Bolero.


----------



## Lang

JTech82 said:


> No, it translates to it's not his best work. This is coming from someone who's heard all of his orchestral work and probably the biggest Ravel freak on this thread.
> 
> I find it interesting, Lang, that you rate Bolero so high and his other compositions so low


Where on earth did you manage to get that from my posting? I hope you listen to Ravel with more attention. 


JTech82 said:


> Like I said, Ravel's true heart wasn't in that piece.


But doesn't that statement strike you as a little arrogant? It is certainly not something I would ever dream of saying, and I have a lifetime of experience of classical music.



JTech82 said:


> Bolero is to Ravel what So What was to Miles Davis. While they may have been great compositions at that time, they ultimately became overkill, because people simply get tired of hearing them.


I don't know who So What is, or was, and I have no interest in Miles Davis. But certainly, I agree with you that people do get tired of hearing pieces over and over again. However, we tend to hear debased versions of the Bolero, in the same way we tend to hear debased versions of Grainger's Country Gardens. I find that when I hear a good performance of Bolero, it sound very fresh to me, as does all of Ravel's music.


----------



## Bach

Ravel is an annoying composer. Technically very able, but equally annoying. People often compare him to Debussy, which is akin to comparing Beethoven to Hummel.


----------



## R-F

Bach said:


> Ravel is an annoying composer. Technically very able, but equally annoying. People often compare him to Debussy, which is akin to comparing Beethoven to Hummel.


Could you elaborate on why you find him annoying, I'm a little confused...

I've started to adore Ravel's works. Just yesterday a very good husband-and-wife piano duet came to my small town, and Ma mère l'oye was one of the pieces they played. It was stunning!

(Goldstone and Clemmow, by the way. I'm not sure if any of you have heard of them.  )


----------



## Bach

R-F said:


> Could you elaborate on why you find him annoying, I'm a little confused...


Because he is often compared to and judged as the equal of the vastly more original Debussy.


----------



## R-F

Bach said:


> Because he is often compared to and judged as the equal of the vastly more original Debussy.


Well, if that's the case, then surely that makes the judgers the annoying ones- poor Ravel hasn't done anything wrong!

Personally, I don't think Ravel and Debussy sound that similar. Sure, they both composed in an 'impressionist' style (although Debussy didn't like that title being given to his music) but the pieces I've heard by each composer have a distinctive style that's unique to them.


----------



## Bach

I don't think they sound similar either - Debussy's language is far less predictable and his structure is more governed by ratio and motivic development. (against Ravel's more classical structures)


----------



## JTech82

Lang said:


> Where on earth did you manage to get that from my posting? I hope you listen to Ravel with more attention.
> 
> But doesn't that statement strike you as a little arrogant? It is certainly not something I would ever dream of saying, and I have a lifetime of experience of classical music.
> 
> I don't know who So What is, or was, and I have no interest in Miles Davis. But certainly, I agree with you that people do get tired of hearing pieces over and over again. However, we tend to hear debased versions of the Bolero, in the same way we tend to hear debased versions of Grainger's Country Gardens. I find that when I hear a good performance of Bolero, it sound very fresh to me, as does all of Ravel's music.


Lighten up, buddy. Not everybody likes Bolero and I'm one of them. I think it's a weak composition and doesn't hold up very well to repeated listening. That's just my opinion.

You never heard "So What" by Miles Davis? Let me know when you crawl out of your cave.


----------



## World Violist

JTech82 said:


> Lighten up, buddy. Not everybody likes Bolero and I'm one of them. I think it's a weak composition and doesn't hold up very well to repeated listening. That's just my opinion.


I too think that Bolero is weak; I can stand to listen to it every once in a great while, but a bit more than that drives me insane. It's a fun piece though, yes.



> You never heard "So What" by Miles Davis? Let me know when you crawl out of your cave.


Well apparently I'm in this same cave...


----------



## JTech82

World Violist said:


> I too think that Bolero is weak; I can stand to listen to it every once in a great while, but a bit more than that drives me insane. It's a fun piece though, yes.
> 
> Well apparently I'm in this same cave...


I know this is a classical form, but I'm equally enthusiastic about jazz music, so excuse me for thinking that everybody has heard the album by Miles Davis - "Kind Of Blue." I realize that many people who are really into classical music don't listen to jazz all that much, but what's strange is jazz people listen to classical.

Anyway, I respect jazz as much as I do classical. Both genres are worlds apart from each other, but each has it's own great musical language.


----------



## World Violist

JTech82 said:


> I know this is a classical form, but I'm equally enthusiastic about jazz music, so excuse me for thinking that everybody has heard the album by Miles Davis - "Kind Of Blue." I realize that many people who are really into classical music don't listen to jazz all that much, but what's strange is jazz people listen to classical.
> 
> Anyway, I respect jazz as much as I do classical. Both genres are worlds apart from each other, but each has it's own great musical language.


I respect jazz very highly, actually. It's just a matter of me getting recordings/going to concerts, you know? But yes, I do like jazz, insofar as I can.


----------



## JTech82

World Violist said:


> I respect jazz very highly, actually. It's just a matter of me getting recordings/going to concerts, you know? But yes, I do like jazz, insofar as I can.


I understand and I'm glad you like jazz. I've got maybe around 5,000 jazz recordings. All of which are from around 1949-1965. For me, this is the best period of jazz.

I'm probably going to get to go see the New York Philharmonic pretty soon. I'm going in a couple of months. I'm going on the night they're playing one of Sibelius' symphonies. I forget which one, but I look forward to it. I'll be there around May.


----------



## World Violist

JTech82 said:


> I understand and I'm glad you like jazz. I've got maybe around 5,000 jazz recordings. All of which are from around 1949-1965. For me, this is the best period of jazz.
> 
> I'm probably going to get to go see the New York Philharmonic pretty soon. I'm going in a couple of months. I'm going on the night they're playing one of Sibelius' symphonies. I forget which one, but I look forward to it. I'll be there around May.


Coincidence: I'll be seeing the NYPO also! Thursday of next week. They'll be playing Schumann (4th symphony), Berlioz (one of those overtures, can't remember which), and some other piece I can't remember at all. No Sibelius or any other composer I really like, but it'll be good for me anyway.

Back to Ravel: it was interesting that jazz popped up in the conversation, since Ravel was very interested in jazz, and took an interest in George Gershwin. Some very famous quotes eventually came up in their conversations, which I think have been posted here...


----------



## Bach

Hey, JTech82 - you like Jazz! I like Jazz! Sumteng in common!


----------



## JTech82

Bach said:


> Hey, JTech82 - you like Jazz! I like Jazz! Sumteng in common!


Dig, dig daddy-o. 

The late, great Thelonious Monk


----------



## Herzeleide

I absolutely adore Ravel. The beauty of Le Tombeau de Couperin is breathtaking. Such exquisite Gallic elegance!


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> (against Ravel's more classical structures)


Yes, Ravel was not as innovative as Debussy.

This does not vitiate the supreme quality of his works.


----------



## Sid James

*Daphnis et Chloe*



World Violist said:


> With _Daphnis et Chloe,_ though, you have to make sure of what you're getting. I'd recommend the whole ballet, as it has wordless voices in there, as opposed to the fully orchestral suites. Besides, you get a better feel for the story if you have it right in front of you; more immersed in what's going on. Besides, there are some great moments in the original that the choir is so integral in bringing to life. I haven't heard the orchestral suites, but I can't imagine them being as good.


I agree that the wholte ballet version of Daphnis et Chloe, with choir, is better than the orchestral suites. I have recently acquired a Melodiya CD of this with the USSR Radio Symphony Orchestra & Chorus conducted by Rozdesventsky and it's a great piece of music. It's so sensuous, majestic and emotional. Classical music can sometimes be less emotional than say, jazz (which has been mentioned above as an influence on Ravel), but this piece is so emotional. I think it also influenced film scores in particular, and there are echoes of Ravel's use of wordless chorus in Vaughan Williams' Sinfonia Antartica (which was originally a film score).


----------



## Lang

JTech82 said:


> Lighten up, buddy. Not everybody likes Bolero and I'm one of them. I think it's a weak composition and doesn't hold up very well to repeated listening. That's just my opinion.


Now that is a reasonable statement (apart from the patronising 'Lighten up'). So why didn't you say that in the first place, rather than second-guessing what Ravel felt about it?


JTech82 said:


> You never heard "So What" by Miles Davis? Let me know when you crawl out of your cave.


No, I have no desire to. What I have heard of Miles Davis I haven't liked. Much the same way that you don't like the Bolero.

Why are you so aggressive?


----------



## World Violist

Lang said:


> Now that is a reasonable statement (apart from the patronising 'Lighten up'). So why didn't you say that in the first place, rather than second-guessing what Ravel felt about it?


In fact it is known that Ravel rather detested Bolero:



> It constitutes an experiment in a very special and limited direction, and should not be suspected of aiming at achieving anything different from, or anything more than, it actually does achieve. Before its first performance, I issued a warning to the effect that what I had written was a piece lasting seventeen minutes and consisting wholly of "orchestral tissue without music" - of one very long, gradual crescendo. There are no contrasts, and practically no invention except the plan and the manner of execution.


----------



## JTech82

Lang said:


> Now that is a reasonable statement (apart from the patronising 'Lighten up'). So why didn't you say that in the first place, rather than second-guessing what Ravel felt about it?
> 
> No, I have no desire to. What I have heard of Miles Davis I haven't liked. Much the same way that you don't like the Bolero.
> 
> Why are you so aggressive?


Like World Violist said, Ravel detested Bolero and I could see why he would, because his heart wasn't in that piece.

Just because you feel so strongly about Bolero doesn't mean that everyone else does. I'll go so far as call it a hack piece. Uninspired drivel is really what it is. There's not much to that piece at all.

He did so much better work than that. I despise that piece so much that everytime I hear it I hit skip on my CD player. That's how bad I hate it.


----------



## Lang

World Violist said:


> In fact it is known that Ravel rather detested Bolero:


Well, I have seen some translated quotes from Ravel which could be interpreted that way, but which had other interpretations, too.


----------



## Lang

JTech82 said:


> Just because you feel so strongly about Bolero doesn't mean that everyone else does.


You do tend to draw pretty sweeping inferences from what I write. I like the Bolero, but I don't feel any more strongly about it than any other of Ravel's works.

It is indeed true that because I like it, it doesn't follow that others will. That is a lesson I learned many years ago, indeed, when I was barely an adult. But there is a corollary. Just because you don't like something it doesn't mean that it is necessarily flawed (and I am thinking here particularly about your comments on Schoenberg). That is another lesson I learned during my teens.


----------



## JTech82

Lang said:


> You do tend to draw pretty sweeping inferences from what I write. I like the Bolero, but I don't feel any more strongly about it than any other of Ravel's works.
> 
> It is indeed true that because I like it, it doesn't follow that others will. That is a lesson I learned many years ago, indeed, when I was barely an adult. But there is a corollary. Just because you don't like something it doesn't mean that it is necessarily flawed (and I am thinking here particularly about your comments on Schoenberg). That is another lesson I learned during my teens.


All I know, Lang is that I either dig something or I don't. When I don't like something there's a good reason why I don't, because I don't connect with it. I give things several tries before I make a final judgement.

Like I said, Bolero was Ravel's weakest piece in my opinion and the fact that Ravel himself didn't care for it much speaks volumes, so it's not "composer approved" and I find that to be quite fascinating.

Don't even start talking about Schoenberg. If you want to talk about him, then go to the thread devoted to him.

I'm not right nor am I wrong in my analysis of Bolero, it's just my opinion. You may not like my opinion or agree with it, but you'll never change the fact that I despise that piece.

Anyway, moving on, hey World Violinist what Ravel piece deeply moves you?


----------



## xJuanx

Nobody mentioned the Spanish Rhapsody, which contains some very beautiful colours, especially in "Feria".


----------



## Lang

JTech82 said:


> All I know, Lang is that I either dig something or I don't.


As I have said, I have no problems with that at all. After all, that is at the basis of it all, no matter how we justify our preferences.


JTech82 said:


> Don't even start talking about Schoenberg. If you want to talk about him, then go to the thread devoted to him.


I only mentioned him in passing. But I will talk about him when and where I choose.


----------



## JTech82

Lang said:


> As I have said, I have no problems with that at all. After all, that is at the basis of it all, no matter how we justify our preferences.
> 
> I only mentioned him in passing. But I will talk about him when and where I choose.


Actually you won't, because this thread is dedicated to Ravel, not the radical, nonsense music of Schoenberg and his group of goons.

I guess when you're wrong like you are all the time you get pretty defensive don't you?

You're the typical pompous classical fan, so I'll just leave you to your little world of make believe. Good luck in your endeavors.


----------



## World Violist

JTech82 said:


> Anyway, moving on, hey World Violinist what Ravel piece deeply moves you?


Well, Daphnis et Chloe is probably my favorite piece of his, along with some of his piano music like Gaspard de la Nuit and the concerti. I love the washes of sound he sometimes makes with the instruments he employs.

Oh, and the string quartet. One of the masterpieces of the genre, I think.


----------



## Bach

The string quartet? I don't think Ravel ever wrote a string quartet.. oh..! You mean that piece lifted directly from the page of Debussy!


----------



## JTech82

Bach said:


> The string quartet? I don't think Ravel ever wrote a string quartet.. oh..! You mean that piece lifted directly from the page of Debussy!


Bach, I'm beginning to think that you don't even like classical music.

I mean seriously all you do is put down other people who don't like what you like and reply to people in a condescending tone.

If you don't like or respect Ravel, which you obviously don't, then get out of here. All you're doing bringing other people down and trying to create doubt. I have no doubt that people like Ravel or else there wouldn't be a thread dedicated to his music.

There's no doubt that Ravel was influenced by Debussy BUT he did his own thing. Debussy was also influenced by Ravel, so they had a common connection with each other. Despite what you think Ravel was an amazing composer.

All you seem like you know how to do is act like teenager when you don't agree with somebody.


----------



## Bach

I like Ravel, he's a composer of superb craftsmanship. I also happen to be a ghastly, arrogant, elitist British teenager.


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> The string quartet? I don't think Ravel ever wrote a string quartet.. oh..! You mean that piece lifted directly from the page of Debussy!


LOL

First you complain that Ravel isn't innovative like Debussy, next thing we know, Ravel is too much like Debussy. 

Pull the cloth out of your ears and try listening and understanding, rather than making puerile, glib and trite gibes.


----------



## Bach

> First you complain that Ravel isn't innovative like Debussy, next thing we know, Ravel is too much like Debussy.


What? - my point is he imitates Debussy. Debussy innovates, Ravel copies. The string quartet is a prime example of such a relationship. At no stage did I contradict myself.


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> What? - my point is he imitates Debussy. Debussy innovates, Ravel copies. The string quartet is a prime example of such a relationship. At no stage did I contradict myself.


Pull the cloth out of your ears and try listening and understanding, rather than making puerile, glib and trite gibes.


----------



## JTech82

Bach said:


> I like Ravel, he's a composer of superb craftsmanship. I also happen to be a ghastly, arrogant, elitist British teenager.


I knew you were a teenager. Only a kid would act the way you do. In time your tastes will change, then again maybe they won't if you keep having a condescending attitude about everything.

You seem to not want to enjoy this music instead what you choose to do is degrade composers like Ravel, Vaughan Williams, Tchaikovsky, Sibelius, etc. to justify your own insecurities and unwillingness to give these composers a chance, which seems to be based on some pre-conceived notions of what you feel music should or shouldn't be instead of just listening and enjoying the music for what it is.

I can no longer take what you say seriously. You're just a kid with a delusional outlook on this music. Teenagers aren't too hard to figure out and you certainly weren't hard to nail down. I had you pegged after the first couple of times you responded to people on here.


----------



## JTech82

Bach said:


> What? - my point is he imitates Debussy. Debussy innovates, Ravel copies. The string quartet is a prime example of such a relationship. At no stage did I contradict myself.


Ravel imitates? Oh so Debussy saying he was influenced by Ravel's music doesn't resonate with you? Both of these composers had tremendous respect for each, so in turn, influenced and inspired each other.

Such childish behavior. Read my post to you above. In fact, I would like everybody to read my post regarding this member.

Your credibility is completely shot at this point. Go listen to your Bach recordings and let the big boys talk classical music okay?


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

To list the Ravel works that I enjoy would be like listing the major, famous Ravel works (although, to add a couple of works to this thread, I want to call attention to _Alborada del Gracioso_ and _Valses Nobles et Sentimentales_). And, heaven help me, I don't mind _Bolero_, either.

One of my very earliest forays into classical music was via a set of 78rpm platters containing _Bolero_, recorded by Serge Koussevitzky & the Boston Symphony Orchestra. If they could be found intact, what do you suppose they'd be worth on the collectors' market?! [So maybe, there's some sentimentality to my appreciation of _Bolero_.]

Off-topic: Every now and then, a certain kind of poster known as a "wind-up-artist" materializes. One can usually tell the species- they make sweeping, intentionally provocative statements as a matter of course. Typically, it is best to deprive such attention-hounds of their food supply....


----------



## Sid James

I don't mind _Bolero_, but it's not my favourite work by him. Understandably it is a very precise and calculated piece of music, and I think someone's comparison above of it to minimalism is apt. Doesn't seem to be much emotion there. Similarly, I find _La Valse _too repetitive for it's own good.

But my favourite works by him have to be _Daphnis et Chloe_, _Rapsodie Espagnole_ and _Pavane pour une infante defunte_. These are some of the most emotional pieces of classical music I know. I remember in 1997, when Princess Diana died, they played _Pavane_ on the radio. It was so poignant and suitable, expressing something mere words could not.

As for the debate about who was the greatest - Debussy or Ravel, I think they were both great figures in the early modernist movement. They were both trying to break away from the German romantic tradition. This they both did successfully, and they established their own styles.


----------



## jhar26

Andre said:


> I don't mind _Bolero_, but it's not my favourite work by him. Understandably it is a very precise and calculated piece of music, and I think someone's comparison above of it to minimalism is apt.


Yes, and many of the minimalists would have killed to come up with a tune like that. It's brilliantly orchestrated too. I see nothing wrong with it - it's quite hypnotic in fact. Not his best work maybe, but very good in it's own way.


----------



## JTech82

The thing I love about Ravel was his music was very different than anyone else's. Like Andre said above, he took a very different approach to music. His music was textural and on the surface it doesn't seem like there's much to these pieces, but a closer listen will reveal the beauty behind these pieces. They do have deep emotion, but it doesn't impact you immediately, but when you go back and listen it reveals it's beauty to you.

He was also a master orchestrator. I would go as far and say probably one of the best in history. The sonic tapestry he pulls from his compositions are just in a word....awesome.

All of this talk about Ravel has made me want to go listen to Jean Martinon and Orchestre de Paris. I love Ravel. He has been a very deep influence on me.

By the way, perhaps I was unfair in my analysis of Bolero, it's not that bad of a composition, but it is way too long for what it is in my opinion. I guess after you hear it for the 5,000 time you get tired of it, but thank goodness he composed a variety of music that everybody can find enjoyment in.


----------



## Lang

JTech82 said:


> Actually you won't, because this thread is dedicated to Ravel, not the radical, nonsense music of Schoenberg and his group of goons.
> 
> I guess when you're wrong like you are all the time you get pretty defensive don't you?
> 
> You're the typical pompous classical fan, so I'll just leave you to your little world of make believe. Good luck in your endeavors.


And you are a very rude and aggressive individual.


----------



## JTech82

Lang said:


> And you are a very rude and aggressive individual.


Lang, sorry for being nasty to you. I meant nothing by it. I was just a little agitated as we all have been. Please accept my apologies.


----------



## JTech82

The 18 minutes of "Le Tombeau de Couperin" is about as close to perfection as I've heard. This is such a beautiful piece.


----------



## xJuanx

> The 18 minutes of "Le Tombeau de Couperin" is about as close to perfection as I've heard. This is such a beautiful piece.


I absolutely agree! And it's not that popular I don't know why. Which version are you listening to? I have the complete orchestal works by Abbado and I think it sounds really good, although I would prefer someone like Boulez conducting Ravel.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

xJuanx said:


> And it's not that popular I don't know why.


If you do not know _why _it is not popular, how do you actually know it is not popular?


----------



## xJuanx

When you talk about Ravel orchestal works most likely to be mentioned are Bolero, Daphnis et Chloè, Pavanne pour une infante defunte,.. But no Tombeau de Couperin. Am I wrong?


----------



## JTech82

xJuanx said:


> I absolutely agree! And it's not that popular I don't know why. Which version are you listening to? I have the complete orchestal works by Abbado and I think it sounds really good, although I would prefer someone like Boulez conducting Ravel.


Since Ravel is one of my favorite composers, I own several different versions of his orchestral works, but my absolute favorite are the Jean Martinon with the Orchestre de Paris. I went ahead and bought the Debussy/Ravel/Martinon EMI 8-disc box set a couple of weeks ago and I've been really impressed with it.

I'm not sure if Le tombeau de Couperin is popular or unpopular. All I know is it's a beautiful piece of music.


----------



## xJuanx

Wow, that box set must be very interesting! I'll try to check that version out.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

xJuanx said:


> Am I wrong?





Wikipedia said:


> In 1919 Ravel orchestrated four movements of the work (Prélude, Forlane, Menuet and Rigaudon);[1] this version was first performed in 1920, and has remained one of his more popular works.


You can find many cd's at Amazon.com


----------



## xJuanx

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> You can find many cd's at Amazon.com


I don't care about what wikipedia says, I don't think you can put Le Tombeau de Couperin at the same level of popularity of _Boléro _or _Daphnis et Chloé_. I have to disagree sorry!


----------



## JTech82

xJuanx said:


> I don't care about what wikipedia says, I don't think you can put Le Tombeau de Couperin at the same level of popularity of _Boléro _or _Daphnis et Chloé_. I have to disagree sorry!


I have to agree with xJuanx's assessment here on Tombeau de Couperin. While it's an amazing piece, it's not as widely recorded as Bolero or Daphnis et Chloe.


----------



## JTech82

xJuanx said:


> Wow, that box set must be very interesting! I'll try to check that version out.


Yes, xJuanx, it's an incredible box set. Probably some of the best Debussy and Ravel I ever heard. Martinon seems to really nail all the aspects of both of these composers music that nobody else seems to, but of course, you can go with Boulez, but I find Martinon has really nailed these works better than anyone before or after him. Charles Munch only wishes his Ravel could have sounded this good!


----------



## xJuanx

Yes I definetely have to check his version. I'm familiar with the Boulez recording of _La Mer_,etc and really like it.
I'm gald you agree with me on _Le Tombeau de Couperin_!


----------



## JoeGreen

I'm surprised no one has mentioned his 1 act opera_ L'enfant et les sortileges_, the orchestration is just very "breahtaking".


----------



## JTech82

JoeGreen said:


> I'm surprised no one has mentioned his 1 act opera_ L'enfant et les sortileges_, the orchestration is just very "breahtaking".


Since I don't listen to opera, I wouldn't know.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

xJuanx said:


> I don't care about what wikipedia says, I don't think you can put Le Tombeau de Couperin at the same level of popularity of _Boléro _or _Daphnis et Chloé_. I have to disagree sorry!


Don't be sorry, you are not the first one that prefers unsupported half-baked thoughts to the real world thing.


----------



## xJuanx

I'm so sorry if you think according to whatever wikipedia says. It's not the first time I discuss Ravel works, and a piece like Tombeau never came across any discussion. And if you think that it's as popular as Boléro ... then you're delusional.


----------



## JoeGreen

JTech82 said:


> Since I don't listen to opera, I wouldn't know.


well you should give this one a try.


----------



## JTech82

JoeGreen said:


> well you should give this one a try.


I guess you didn't read the part where I said I don't listen to opera.


----------



## 1810to1848

hi - from canada. i just found out Ravel played here in 1928 and I am pretty excited. he toured with a vocalist. (the concert did not go well!) I'm working on Miroirs and it's a battle. But i love Ravel so much, the qualities of his harmony and classical sense of form seem to hit me right here it counts. Cheers!

dave


----------



## 1810to1848

new member here! why argue the popularity of something? we all know popularity is just public perception - the best work may not be the most popular. I for one love bolero, as an exercise in minimal melody - harmony, and maximum impact. cheers! dave


----------



## JTech82

1810to1848 said:


> new member here! why argue the popularity of something? we all know popularity is just public perception - the best work may not be the most popular. I for one love bolero, as an exercise in minimal melody - harmony, and maximum impact. cheers! dave


I don't like Bolero and quite frankly I'm tired of hearing about it. It's not that great of a piece. It's also a piece Ravel detested himself, so I don't blame him.

There are too many other worthy Ravel pieces to talk about. Like the discussion that is going on about "Le tombeau de Couperin," which I consider to be 18 minutes of musical bliss as is "Shéhérazade." Both of these pieces are wonderful works that don't get discussed that often.

His Mother Goose Suite is also really good that I see hasn't been mentioned yet.


----------



## jhar26

Hi Dave, welcome to the forum.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

JTech82 said:


> "Le tombeau de Couperin," which I consider to be 18 minutes of musical bliss


Zoltan Kocsis orchestrated the whole set. That would extend your musical delight for other 5 minutes.


----------



## JTech82

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> Zoltan Kocsis orchestrated the whole set. That would extend your musical delight for other 5 minutes.


No 18 minutes is good enough, especially when it's coming from Jean Martinon and the Orchestre de Paris. I don't except any other versions, but thanks for the heads up on the Kocsis.


----------



## Herzeleide

JoeGreen said:


> well you should give this one a try.


It is indeed wonderful. As is _L'heure espagnole_.


----------



## 1810to1848

It sounds to me that the dada-ist influence and Satie's style of mental quirkiness was 'en vogue' - but I am sure Ravel did not see himself as frivolous - a meticulous craftsman, and very affected when a premiere did not go well.


----------



## JTech82

1810to1848 said:


> It sounds to me that the dada-ist influence and Satie's style of mental quirkiness was 'en vogue' - but I am sure Ravel did not see himself as frivolous - a meticulous craftsman, and very affected when a premiere did not go well.


Ravel viewed himself as a classicist, though as we all know, his work reaches well beyond that frame of mind. Ravel was a composer of a different breed. He's work is almost dare I say "alternative" classical. It seemed to not follow anything. Listening to Ravel one is taken into a completely different sound world then that of Stravinsky, Bruckner, Tchaikovsky, etc. Ravel's orchestrations and attention to the textural aspects of music really made him the unique composer that he is regarded as today.


----------



## nickgray

Can someone introduce me to Ravel, please? All I have is his piano music played by Tharaud (Harmonia Mundi's cd). Didn't really like it, to be honest. I also got Bolero and his arrangement of "Pictures" (both Celibidache's), but I don't think these two should be counted. So, opinions, anyone?


----------



## JTech82

nickgray said:


> Can someone introduce me to Ravel, please? All I have is his piano music played by Tharaud (Harmonia Mundi's cd). Didn't really like it, to be honest. I also got Bolero and his arrangement of "Pictures" (both Celibidache's), but I don't think these two should be counted. So, opinions, anyone?


Nick Gray I can help. Buy Ravel: Orchestral Works with Jean Martinon and the Orchestre de Paris on EMI and your Ravel will be complete. Seriously, it's that good.


----------



## World Violist

JTech82 said:


> Nick Gray I can help. Buy Ravel: Orchestral Works with Jean Martinon and the Orchestre de Paris on EMI and your Ravel will be complete. Seriously, it's that good.


That I can back up also. I have misplaced mine, but every item in that set is utterly priceless, especially the recording of Daphnis et Chloe. That really is something.


----------



## JTech82

World Violist said:


> That I can back up also. I have misplaced mine, but every item in that set is utterly priceless, especially the recording of Daphnis et Chloe. That really is something.


Yes, it's hard to beat Martinon and I still haven't found anyone that trumps his readings.

To Nick Gray:

Just go ahead and buy the 8-disc box set on EMI called "Debussy, Ravel: Orchestral Works" with Jean Martinon. You will not find better Debussy or Ravel: 4 discs of Ravel and 4 discs of Debussy.


----------



## Sid James

Just heard his _Piece en forme de Habanera_ last night. It also is a lesser known, but magical piece (he would later use some of that material in _Rapsodie Espagnole_).



JTech82 said:


> Yes, it's hard to beat Martinon and I still haven't found anyone that trumps his readings.


I don't doubt that Martinon made an excellent interpretation musically, but the recording must be analogue, not digital. There are also some great digital recordings of this music out there, like I have a 2 CD set on Decca of Debussy's music with the Montreal SO & Chorus conducted by Charles Dutoit, if my memory serves me correctly. I think it also contains some good readings, with the added bonus of a modern fully digital recording. I always go for digital if I can, the sound is fuller and clearer.


----------



## 1810to1848

*Ravel piano collection*

Hi - please give the piano music another try! - - the Canadian pianist Louis Lortie (whom I met, hey! whoopeee!) has an excellent collection of all the solo piano music. give a quick listen to his Toccata from LE TOMBEAU DE COUPERIN - absolutely jaw-grindingly, sweat on the brow, leaping on your feet heart thumpingly MAGNIFICENT! and I am not Lortie's publicist by the way ;-)


----------



## 1810to1848

*introduction and allegro for harp str 4tet flute and clarinet-*

this is a charming piece, introspective and electrifying and effervescent by turns. - regards,

dave


----------



## nickgray

JTech82 said:


> "Debussy, Ravel: Orchestral Works" with Jean Martinon


Thanks for the suggestion, I listened (well, most of it) to Daphnis et Chloe and... it seems that I don't get the impressionism at all  At least as of now. Perhaps it's not the time yet, I'll give it another shot in a month or two, maybe then I'll understand it.


----------



## JTech82

nickgray said:


> Thanks for the suggestion, I listened (well, most of it) to Daphnis et Chloe and... it seems that I don't get the impressionism at all  At least as of now. Perhaps it's not the time yet, I'll give it another shot in a month or two, maybe then I'll understand it.


If you listen to Ravel's music on it's own terms, then it's quite enjoyable, but if you're trying to figure it out and over-intellectualize it, then you find any enjoyment in it at all.

Trust me, Martinon is the key to Ravel.


----------



## Herzeleide

nickgray said:


> Thanks for the suggestion, I listened (well, most of it) to Daphnis et Chloe and... it seems that I don't get the impressionism at all  At least as of now. Perhaps it's not the time yet, I'll give it another shot in a month or two, maybe then I'll understand it.


Ravel wasn't really an Impressionist.


----------



## JTech82

Herzeleide said:


> Ravel wasn't really an Impressionist.


I can agree with this. Ravel was more influenced by impressionism more than anything. I still don't understand the pairing of Debussy and Ravel together anyway. They were two very different composers.


----------



## Sid James

JTech82 said:


> I can agree with this. Ravel was more influenced by impressionism more than anything. I still don't understand the pairing of Debussy and Ravel together anyway. They were two very different composers.


I agree with this, they are two very different composers. Debussy seemed more free, flowing and rhapsodic, whilst Ravel was more precise and concise in his expression. They do have things in common though, particularly the images they paint in their piano pieces (like Debussy's _Preludes_ and Ravel's _Miroirs_). I think a thing in common was that they were both trying to get away from the Germanic tradition, and establish new forms of expression.

I think it's more accurate to call both of them early modernists rather than impressionists. I'm sure people understand why I'm saying this - many of their works have a modern edge which was to influence composers as diverse as Stravinsky, Vaughan Williams and Gershwin. So calling them impressionists is somewhat limited, and to a degree, a misnomer. They achieved so much more than merely establish impressionism. Same could be said of the painters of the time, like Manet and Monet. Their art was responding to, and influenced by, technological trends in the modern world, like photography.


----------



## 1810to1848

*Impressionists - Rav and Deb*

Hi - the mutual friend and critic of both, Laloy, reports accusations of plagiarism back and forth - their harmonic language especially was new and remarkably similar - Ravel pushing the Wagnerian dominant 7th and its extensions to the limit, and Debussy (older and slightly less conservative) more or less inventing whole tone melody-harmony, and chord streaming. Ravel and Debussy - who were friends, backed off their relationship (sadly) in response to that criticism. I think they are amazingly similar, and yet I'd be loath to do without either.


----------



## JTech82

1810to1848 said:


> Hi - the mutual friend and critic of both, Laloy, reports accusations of plagiarism back and forth - their harmonic language especially was new and remarkably similar - Ravel pushing the Wagnerian dominant 7th and its extensions to the limit, and Debussy (older and slightly less conservative) more or less inventing whole tone melody-harmony, and chord streaming. Ravel and Debussy - who were friends, backed off their relationship (sadly) in response to that criticism. I think they are amazingly similar, and yet I'd be loath to do without either.


I still don't understand the pairing of these two composers regardless of what a critic says. I do, however, like Ravel better than Debussy. Ravel's music touches me more.

I also liked Ravel's melodies and approach to harmony better, because it was so precise and the orchestrations of his pieces are a sonic marvel. Such wonderful textures.


----------



## JTech82

I have now gone back and listened to Debussy a lot and I'm slowly coming around to him quite a bit. He certainly is a remarkable composer. He was doing some very different things at the time. Almost expanding the form of classical music and making it less about structure and more about texture.

I received a recording of "La Mer" today with Pierre Boulez and the Cleveland Orch. and I KNOW it's going to be good.


----------



## Sid James

JTech82 said:


> I have now gone back and listened to Debussy a lot and I'm slowly coming around to him quite a bit. He certainly is a remarkable composer. He was doing some very different things at the time. Almost expanding the form of classical music and making it less about structure and more about texture.
> 
> I received a recording of "La Mer" today with Pierre Boulez and the Cleveland Orch. and I KNOW it's going to be good.


Well I suppose we're meandering a bit, as this is a thread about Ravel, but I agree with what you say about Debussy. He not only revolutionised composition for the piano with his _Preludes_ especially, he also opened up a whole new sound world with his orchestral pieces.

I agree that Boulez is a good interpreter of Debussy. I have him on vinyl conducting _La Mer_ among other things, I think its with the New Philharmonia Orchestra, if my memory is correct. Although I also like the Charles Dutoit I have on CD, I think that the Boulez interpretation is probably one of the finest of the past.


----------



## JTech82

Andre said:


> Well I suppose we're meandering a bit, as this is a thread about Ravel, but I agree with what you say about Debussy. He not only revolutionised composition for the piano with his _Preludes_ especially, he also opened up a whole new sound world with his orchestral pieces.
> 
> I agree that Boulez is a good interpreter of Debussy. I have him on vinyl conducting _La Mer_ among other things, I think its with the New Philharmonia Orchestra, if my memory is correct. Although I also like the Charles Dutoit I have on CD, I think that the Boulez interpretation is probably one of the finest of the past.


In terms of Ravel, the best conductors, in my opinion, are Jean Martinon, Pierre Boulez, and Yan Pascal Tortelier. These three conductors got inside of this music better than any conductor before or after them.

I find Charles Munch and Charles Dutoit's interpretations of Ravel, and Debussy as well, to be not up to my standard. Munch was good at what he did at that time, but I don't think he was that convincing as a interpreter of the Impressionist style of composition. Dutoit's problem, however, has more to do with his own personal way of conducting. His tempi are at times way too rushed and his overall approach isn't that focused. He may be regarded by some as a good conductor, but he's never really impressed me that much. To be quite blunt, Claudio Abbado was better Ravel conductor than Munch or Dutoit and that's not saying much!


----------



## ecg_fa

I like Debussy and Ravel about equally-- and particularly like their piano work (esp. SOLO piano work). In fact, I came to appreciate more their orchestral & other work from listening to the piano pieces-- but that's just me. I agree they're lumped together a bit too often, probably as they're near contemporaries, and 'Impressionist' isn't quite adequate to describe them, though if you take that to mean 'employing light and color in musical terms,' maybe. As for conductors, well I DO enjoy Dutoit and for earlier generation, Munch, in 
approaching French music in general. I think Dutoit's 'tighter' near 'chamber' approach and 
yes even the quicker pacing brings out different colors and elements. And Munch for his time I feel took French music seriously when it was generally I think found
very inferior to the German pantheon of say Brahms/Beethoven. On reflection, I don't know 
that I've heard Abbado conducting French work enough to comment-- though I like him
a lot as a conductor generally.

Ed


----------



## JTech82

ecg_fa said:


> I like Debussy and Ravel about equally-- and particularly like their piano work (esp. SOLO piano work). In fact, I came to appreciate more their orchestral & other work from listening to the piano pieces-- but that's just me. I agree they're lumped together a bit too often, probably as they're near contemporaries, and 'Impressionist' isn't quite adequate to describe them, though if you take that to mean 'employing light and color in musical terms,' maybe. As for conductors, well I DO enjoy Dutoit and for earlier generation, Munch, in
> approaching French music in general. I think Dutoit's 'tighter' near 'chamber' approach and
> yes even the quicker pacing brings out different colors and elements. And Munch for his time I feel took French music seriously when it was generally I think found
> very inferior to the German pantheon of say Brahms/Beethoven. On reflection, I don't know
> that I've heard Abbado conducting French work enough to comment-- though I like him
> a lot as a conductor generally.
> 
> Ed


I despise Dutoit, in fact, I make it a conscious effort to avoid everything he's conducted. Munch, on the other hand, is a very fine conductor, but as I said he wasn't a Debussy or Ravel conductor. He certainly, like you said, made cool for people to play them again, but doesn't mean it's approached at a standard that I'm overall happy with. Now, Munch's Berlioz, on the other hand, is a totally different matter. Munch, Davis, and Muti are probably some of the best Berlioz conductors I've heard.

Abbado is a decent conductor. He's not on my top 10 nor is he probably even on my top 30 conductors, but he did a few good things and that's about it. He angered me with his approach to Mendelssohn. Dreadful....just dreadful. Give me Flor and Karajan for Mendelssohn.


----------



## JTech82

This is what happens when you rush to judgement ladies and gentlemen you end up making a fool of yourself, which I seem to do quite a lot around here.

I recently acquired Charles Dutoit's Ravel and let me just say...it's GREAT. As much as I love Martinon, Boulez, and Tortelier, Dutoit really brought home the bacon on these recordings with the Montreal Symphony Orchestra. Man, this is just great.

I just bought tonight the Abbado set of Ravel, so I'm anxious to hear how he does. I don't know I think he's a good conductor I just wasn't sure how to take him at first.


----------



## JTech82

To Lang:

I made the comment about a month or so ago stating that Ravel disliked the piece "Bolero". You asked me what is my source. I have many sources. You can look up on Wikipedia and search the Internet and come up with many sources. That's what is great about the Internet.

Have you read the story behind Bolero?

Ravel was approached by a dancer and asked if he would transcribe a set of Albeniz piano pieces called "Iberia." Ravel was working on arranging them for an orchestra, but he was made aware that another person has already transcribed them for orchestra at that time and he couldn't use them due to copyright laws, so Ravel scrapped the whole idea altogether and started working writing "Fandango," which was the original title of "Bolero."

Ravel was very critical of his own work and said this in an interview with a newspaper:


"It (Bolero) constitutes an experiment in a very special and limited direction, and should not be suspected of aiming at achieving anything different from, or anything more than, it actually does achieve. Before its first performance, I issued a warning to the effect that what I had written was a piece lasting seventeen minutes and consisting wholly of "orchestral tissue without music" — of one very long, gradual crescendo. There are no contrasts, and practically no invention except the plan and the manner of execution."


My honest assessment on this composition is simple I believe Ravel wrote it begrudgingly for his friend, which makes me think his true heart wasn't in it, in fact "Bolero" was one of the last pieces he wrote. Another one of the last pieces he wrote was his acclaimed, and rightfully so, "Piano Concerto in G major."

Anyway, I thought this might be useful to this thread and hopefully will shed some light on topic of "Bolero."


----------



## Lang

JTech82 said:


> "It (Bolero) constitutes an experiment in a very special and limited direction, and should not be suspected of aiming at achieving anything different from, or anything more than, it actually does achieve. Before its first performance, I issued a warning to the effect that what I had written was a piece lasting seventeen minutes and consisting wholly of "orchestral tissue without music" - of one very long, gradual crescendo. There are no contrasts, and practically no invention except the plan and the manner of execution."


Yes, I am familiar with the quote. The meaning is quite clear from the context.


----------



## JTech82

Lang said:


> Yes, I am familiar with the quote. The meaning is quite clear from the context.


What is also very clear is how I just *SCHOOLED* you about "Bolero."


----------



## Lang

JTech82 said:


> What is also very clear is how I just *SCHOOLED* you about "Bolero."


I don't even understand that. What are you talking about?


----------



## JTech82

Lang said:


> I don't even understand that. What are you talking about?


Where are you from Lang?


----------



## Aramis

Yesterday, I saw live performance of Ravel's piano concerto G-dur and "Mother Goose" suite. Quite interesting, but I'm not hungry for more.


----------



## JTech82

Aramis said:


> Yesterday, I saw live performance of Ravel's piano concerto G-dur and "Mother Goose" suite. Quite interesting, but I'm not hungry for more.


Ravel isn't for everyone. Who was the conductor, orchestra, and pianist that played his "Piano Concerto in G major" and "Ma Mère l'Oye"?


----------



## Aramis

JTech82 said:


> Ravel isn't for everyone. Who was the conductor, orchestra, and pianist that played his "Piano Concerto in G major" and "Ma Mère l'Oye"?


It was my local philharmonic orchestra, conducted by french guest - Nicolas Krauze. He had very cool hair, something like young Berlioz (which was performed just after Ravel). Pianist's name is Rafał Łuszczewski.


----------



## R-F

Ivo Pogorelich is coming to Edinburgh this year, and I'm thinking of buying a ticket for the concert he's giving. Among some Chopin, Sibelius and Liszt, he's also playing Ravel's _Gaspard de la Nuit_. I love this piece!

I may need some advice from you guys later on which seat to buy. I'd like to get the best possible balance between what I can hear and what I can see.


----------



## JTech82

R-F said:


> I may need some advice from you guys later on which seat to buy. I'd like to get the best possible balance between what I can hear and what I can see.


How about a good chair at your home with some nice stereo equipment with a great bottle of your favorite wine and a CD of Gunter Wand conducting Bruckner. I think that's all you need. Forget the dreadful crowds and the insistent smell of plastic, by the way, that's what these "society" types of people smell like all the time. Every time one of them walks by me I smell plastic for some reason. I guess it has to do with the fake; plastic lives they live.

But hey don't let these people bring you down, enjoy the show!


----------



## bassClef

Saw this on TV today and this bit was impressive!






Not quite the same quality on youtube but still ...


----------



## Mirror Image

jezbo said:


> Saw this on TV today and this bit was impressive!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not quite the same quality on youtube but still ...


I never been too impressed with Bernstein's Ravel. His interpretations are way too overboard and bombastic. Ravel is more of an introspective composer. His melodies, harmonies, and rhythms are much more delicate and from what I've read about Ravel they are meant to be taken that way.

Ravel has wrote some very bombastic pieces like "La Valse" for example.

For the Piano Concerto in G major, I prefer concert pianists who aren't trying to be conductors like Kyrstian Zimerman, Martha Argerich, and Pascal Roge.

I'm not a big Bernstein fan anyway. About the only Bernstein I can stomach is his Mahler, but that's it.


----------



## bassClef

I like a little exuberance myself - he seemed to really enjoy playing this piece. I'm not a huge Ravel fan though, so I can't really tell if it was played within the spirit that it was intended.


----------



## Mirror Image

jezbo said:


> I like a little exuberance myself - he seemed to really enjoy playing this piece. I'm not a huge Ravel fan though, so I can't really tell if it was played within the spirit that it was intended.


I'm not badgering Bernstein just the way he interprets impressionistic works by Debussy and Ravel. He plays them too hard. Does that make sense?

I mean in my assessment he totally butchered the "Piano Concerto in G major." He seems to not understand that Ravel and Debussy aren't over-the-top composers. They are more inward; introspective; coloristic. They're more concerned with nuance and delicacy than an overt emotional bend in the music.

It's like I said though that's not to say that I would mind more bombast in a piece like "La Valse," because that's a very sinister sounding, pounding composition. I think that's the only piece I have heard by Bernstein doing Ravel which he doesn't butcher.


----------



## R-F

Wierd, I'm actually currently watching that concert after Sky Plussing it from Sky Arts. I didn't really enjoy the Piano Concerto in G. Sure, it was energetic, but it lacked the delicacy and precision that I think that piece needs. My favourite performance just now is:










Ooh, here comes La Valse...


----------



## Weston

I listened to the Piano Concerto in G major today at work. I wouldn't call it entirely void of a little bombast, at least in the version I was hearing, Geoffrey Simon / The Philharmonia with Gwendolyn Mok, piano.

What is that startling clap of thunder or explosion almost exactly halfway through the first movment - in the section that sounds ever so slightly like Copeland's _Hoedown_ (or vice versa)? I assumed it was a timpani tuned way down low, but it really startled me. It sounded like a cannon. It appears again in various other parts but not so alarmingly as right at the mid point.

Oh - I really enjoyed the piece and don't think I gave it much focus before today.


----------



## Mirror Image

Weston said:


> I listened to the Piano Concerto in G major today at work. I wouldn't call it entirely void of a little bombast, at least in the version I was hearing, Geoffrey Simon / The Philharmonia with Gwendolyn Mok, piano.
> 
> What is that startling clap of thunder or explosion almost exactly halfway through the first movment - in the section that sounds ever so slightly like Copeland's _Hoedown_ (or vice versa)? I assumed it was a timpani tuned way down low, but it really startled me. It sounded like a cannon. It appears again in various other parts but not so alarmingly as right at the mid point.
> 
> Oh - I really enjoyed the piece and don't think I gave it much focus before today.


I'm not sure, but I pulled the instrumentation from Wikipedia and here it is:

The orchestra for this concerto is made up of the following instruments: piccolo, flute, oboe, cor anglais, E-flat clarinet, Soprano clarinet in B-flat and A, 2 bassoons, 2 horns in F, trumpet in C, trombone, timpani, triangle, snare drum, cymbals, bass drum, tamtam, wood block, whip, harp, piano, 16 violins, 6 violas, 6 cellos, 4 double basses.

The piece does have a little bombast, but it does drown out the piece like in Leonard Bernstein's reading of it.

Two of the best versions I've heard of this concerto is Krystian Zimerman with Pierre Boulez/Cleveland Orchestra and Pascal Roge with Charles Dutoit/Montreal Symphony Orchestra. I also recommend both of these of pianists for the Piano Concerto for the left-hand.


----------



## Weston

I just listened to another version of it on Rhapsody, and the "explosion" I was hearing is much less pronounced. It must be the bass drum. What a difference interpretation makes! Even the recording engineer has a big effect on the interpretation it seems. 

Anyway this piece is growing on me with repeated listens. I'm glad this thread prompted me to take it to work.


----------



## Air

Weston said:


> I just listened to another version of it on Rhapsody, and the "explosion" I was hearing is much less pronounced. It must be the bass drum. What a difference interpretation makes! Even the recording engineer has a big effect on the interpretation it seems.
> 
> Anyway this piece is growing on me with repeated listens. I'm glad this thread prompted me to take it to work.


It grows and shrinks on me every two weeks it seems. By the way, which version did you hear? My favorite is the Argerich/Abbado. I also love watching her playing with Dutoit on youtube, so beautiful. (Could refer to either her playing or her goddessness! )


----------



## Mirror Image

I actually like the Piano Concerto for the Left-hand a lot better than his Concerto in G major, but both are major works that are revered by every classical pianists all over the world.


----------



## World Violist

Mirror Image said:


> I actually like the Piano Concerto for the Left-hand a lot better than his Concerto in G major, but both are major works that are revered by every classical pianists all over the world.


I never could get into the G major as much as I could the left-hand concerto. I suppose the left-hand is more impactful and engaging overall, I suppose... as witness the piano's first entrace.


----------



## Weston

airad2 said:


> It grows and shrinks on me every two weeks it seems. By the way, which version did you hear? My favorite is the Argerich/Abbado. I also love watching her playing with Dutoit on youtube, so beautiful. (Could refer to either her playing or her goddessness! )


Mine is on a CD by Geoffrey Simon / The Philharmonia with Gwendolyn Mok. These are not exactly household names I guess, but I found the playing enthusiastic and the recording clear if a bit startling in places 



World Violist said:


> I never could get into the G major as much as I could the left-hand concerto. I suppose the left-hand is more impactful and engaging overall, I suppose... as witness the piano's first entrace


I must find a recording of this now with so many advocates. Perhaps I'll go on a Ravel binge now.


----------



## World Violist

Weston said:


> I must find a recording of this now with so many advocates. Perhaps I'll go on a Ravel binge now.


There is a wonderful box from EMI that contains the complete orchestral output of both Debussy and Ravel that I believe contains the left hand concerto; Mirror Image has been preaching that box for some time now, and for good reason. Great, luscious recordings, some of the best interpretations imaginable, especially for someone who doesn't know the works so well, and at one heck of a price to boot. Nothing to lose.


----------



## Mirror Image

World Violist said:


> There is a wonderful box from EMI that contains the complete orchestral output of both Debussy and Ravel that I believe contains the left hand concerto; Mirror Image has been preaching that box for some time now, and for good reason. Great, luscious recordings, some of the best interpretations imaginable, especially for someone who doesn't know the works so well, and at one heck of a price to boot. Nothing to lose.


Hopefully, he'll be able to find that set WV, unfortunately it's out-of-print now.

May I enthusiastically suggest the following:

Ravel - Orchestral Works - Charles Dutoit - Montreal Symphony Orchestra - 4-CD set - Decca









Ravel - Piano Concertos - Pierre Boulez - Cleveland Orchestra - Piano: Krystian Zimerman - Deutsche Grammophon









For a more modern recording of Ravel's orchestral works check out Yan Pascal Tortelier and the Ulster Orchestra's set on Chandos:


----------



## World Violist

Mirror Image said:


> Hopefully, he'll be able to find that set WV, unfortunately it's out-of-print now.


Oh, no way... I believe I have what evidence I need to come to the conclusion that everything good goes out of print within about a year of its release. The recording industry is so stupid like that... ugh.

If I'm not mistaken, though, EMI France has each of those sets available separately (one box of Ravel, one of Debussy; same conductors/orchestras/etc). I'll have to check on those now too...

EDIT: They are not, however, available from Amazon U.S. Nor are they readily available from Amazon France either... why do they do this to us???


----------



## Mirror Image

Actually, you can purchase a 3-CD set of Martinon's Ravel on EMI here, BUT it does NOT contain the Piano Concertos nor does it contain "Tzigane." I'll have to look later and compare the two:

http://www.amazon.com/Ravel-Orchest...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1241654754&sr=1-1


----------



## Mirror Image

World Violist said:


> Oh, no way... I believe I have what evidence I need to come to the conclusion that everything good goes out of print within about a year of its release. The recording industry is so stupid like that... ugh.
> 
> If I'm not mistaken, though, EMI France has each of those sets available separately (one box of Ravel, one of Debussy; same conductors/orchestras/etc). I'll have to check on those now too...
> 
> EDIT: They are not, however, available from Amazon U.S. Nor are they readily available from Amazon France either... why do they do this to us???


Actually, the Debussy is available in two 2-CD sets with Martinon on EMI and still widely available at least here in the US:

http://www.amazon.com/Debussy-Orchestral-Works-Vol-1/dp/B000HWZAN8/ref=pd_bxgy_m_text_b

http://www.amazon.com/Debussy-Orchestral-Works-Guy-Dangain/dp/B000HWZANI/ref=pd_bxgy_m_img_b

I'll never understand why companies like EMI, Decca, Deutsche Grammophon, etc. continue to let things go out-of-print. I guess they think it creates demand, but in reality it creates angry customers.


----------



## Mirror Image

I just had to revive this thread, because Ravel was an important composer for me (still is) in understanding classical music better.

Anyone here have any experience playing Ravel's music? I'm just curious, especially if you're a woodwind player, because he wrote some of the most extravagant woodwind parts I've ever heard.


----------



## Bach

I've played all five Miroirs, Pavane pour une infante défunte and Jeux d'eau. Lovely to play, all of them - wonderfully constructed.


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> I've played all five Miroirs, Pavane pour une infante défunte and Jeux d'eau. Lovely to play, all of them - wonderfully constructed.


Yes that are. Have you tried "Le Tombeau de Couperin" yet? I imagine this would a tough piece to play.


----------



## Bach

Oh heck, of course - completely forgot about it. Yes - I've performed the entire thing. Nowhere near as hard as Miroirs, actually..


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> Oh heck, of course - completely forgot about it. Yes - I've performed the entire thing. Nowhere near as hard as Miroirs, actually..


What about "Gaspard de la nuit"? Have you played that one?


----------



## Bach

No, but I'd love to - that really is difficult. I'll look into it over the summer perhaps - after my recital tomorrow..


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> No, but I'd love to - that really is difficult. I'll look into it over the summer perhaps - after my recital tomorrow..


What are you playing at your recital?


----------



## Bach

Bach's Prelude and Fugue No. 22 which is rich and beautiful.

Scarlatti's Sonata K. 27 - fab piece: 




Beethoven's APPASSIONATA! (be scared for me - this piece is a f-cking mission)

Debussy's Minstrels and La Cathedrale Engloutie (which being an impressionist aficionado you should know quite well)


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> Bach's Prelude and Fugue No. 22 which is rich and beautiful.
> 
> Scarlatti's Sonata K. 27 - fab piece:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beethoven's APPASSIONATA! (be scared for me - this piece is a f-cking mission)
> 
> Debussy's Minstrels and La Cathedrale Engloutie (which being an impressionist aficionado you should know quite well)


Some very good pieces. I haven't heard the Scarlatti or Beethoven, but those are some beautiful Debussy pieces if I remember correctly.


----------



## Bach

Listen to the scarlatti link on youtube - it's an inspirational performance.


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> Listen to the scarlatti link on youtube - it's an inspirational performance.


Yeah, it's a pretty good piece. Is this Daddy Scarlatti or the Son?


----------



## Bach

Domenico, the son. He wrote all the keyboard music (555 harpsichord sonatas and not much else). Alessandro wrote the orchestral concerti and sacred choral stuff.


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> Domenico, the son. He wrote all the keyboard music (555 harpsichord sonatas and not much else). Alessandro wrote the orchestral concerti and sacred choral stuff.


Ah...I've got one recording of Alessandro's orchestral concerti. Good stuff, that is, if played with passion, authority, virtuosity, and fire.


----------



## Air

Bach said:


> Beethoven's APPASSIONATA! (be scared for me - this piece is a f-cking mission)


Yep, the Appassionata's a deceiving one, far to easy to sightread, much to hard to play right. I've stayed away from performing it for many years now because I've seen so many confident pianists butcher it. Instead, I'm playing some of the Hammerklavier. 

No worries, Bach. I'll remember you (of all people) in my prayers tonight.


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach, 

Air and I were talking about how he has trouble playing Impressionist music. Do you find it difficult to play?


----------



## Bach

I find Ravel a lot harder than Debussy. Debussy comes very naturally to me - as a classical/jazz pianist. Ravel was far more meticulous with his directions and markings and often requires great control to perform as intended. (which I find quite difficult) Debussy is free and expressive which I find quite easy. Others might prefer the slightly more demanding nature of Ravel's markings as they require less artistic interpretation from the pianist.


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> I find Ravel a lot harder than Debussy. Debussy comes very naturally to me - as a classical/jazz pianist. Ravel was far more meticulous with his directions and markings and often requires great control to perform as intended. (which I find quite difficult) Debussy is free and expressive which I find quite easy. Others might prefer the slightly more demanding nature of Ravel's markings as they require less artistic interpretation from the pianist.


You see, there you go, that's another major difference between Ravel and Debussy. I too have said that Debussy's pieces are much freer and probably fall under than hands a little bit better, especially for someone who also plays jazz. Ravel, on the hand, must be played very concisely. Debussy is much freer and Ravel was direct and to-the-point with his compositions.

Have you tried Debussy's "Children's Corner" yet, Bach? The first movement "Doctor Gradus ad Parnassum" sounds like it is quite difficult as does "The Snow is Dancing."


----------



## Bach

It's deceptively easy  I played Dr Gradus when I was about 8 or 9. It sounds far harder than it is. Slow practice, my friend.


----------



## Dim7

Bach said:


> It's deceptively easy  I played Dr Gradus when I was about 8 or 9. It sounds far harder than it is. Slow practice, my friend.


When did you start playing piano?


----------



## Bach

Age three. Suzuki method - it's a prerequisite.


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> Age three. Suzuki method - it's a prerequisite.


Wow, that's great, Bach. I wish I lived in England we could form a jazz group.


----------



## Bach

God that would be fantastic - I really want to form a free jazz trio or quartet or something. Piano, drums, bass and a guest soloist (anything welcome - from oboe to guitar (that would be you  ))


----------



## bdelykleon

Bach said:


> It's deceptively easy  I played Dr Gradus when I was about 8 or 9. It sounds far harder than it is. Slow practice, my friend.


I'm studying this piece right now (sorry, amateur here), it really sounds way harder than it is. Debussy, like Chopin, is very pianistic, conceived to the instrument, so it fits well the hand. Beethoven, for instance, may sound easier but it is hard to control sound, tempi, and dynamics and sound as music...


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> God that would be fantastic - I really want to form a free jazz trio or quartet or something. Piano, drums, bass and a guest soloist (anything welcome - from oboe to guitar (that would be you  ))


That would be awesome. I played some free jazz when I was in Boston at the Berklee College of Music but that was many years ago in my younger, more experimental days.


----------



## Bach

bdelykleon said:


> I'm studying this piece right now (sorry, amateur here), it really sounds way harder than it is. Debussy, like Chopin, is very pianistic, conceived to the instrument, so it fits well the hand. Beethoven, for instance, may sound easier but it is hard to control sound, tempi, and dynamics and sound as music...


Quite so, brother. Quite so. Beethoven does not write well for instruments. (of course his music is divinity itself, but one only needs to look at the Grosse Fuge to realise that he was not thinking violinny or celloey thoughts when he wrote that.)

Debussy writes wonderfully for instruments - from his beautiful orchestration to his christly piano works.


----------



## Bach

Mirror Image said:


> That would be awesome. I played some free jazz when I was in Boston at the Berklee College of Music but that was many years ago in my younger, more experimental days.


I'm talking 'love supreme' free jazz not 'ascension' free jazz hehe


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> I'm talking 'love supreme' free jazz not 'ascension' free jazz hehe


Well I can play that too. I've spent many, and I do mean many, hours playing Coltrane tunes with other musicians. I remember mastering "Giant Steps" on the guitar for the first time. It seemed like a major step in my development as an improvisor.


----------



## Bach

Obviously it wouldn't be Coltrane's tunes we play .. just in that hard bop/free style. I play with certain Evansesque inflections - but a little more dissonantly with occasional moments of Gershwinesque melodiousness. S'all good bro - how do you play the guitar?


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> Obviously it wouldn't be Coltrane's tunes we play .. just in that hard bop/free style. I play with certain Evansesque inflections - but a little more dissonantly with occasional moments of Gershwinesque melodiousness. S'all good bro - how do you play the guitar?


Well that's very cool, you know how much I love Bill Evans, he's one of my favorite jazz pianists.

I would say that I play in a style that's a cross between Ed Bickert, Jim Hall, Bill Frisell, John Abercrombie, Metheny, and Ben Monder. I'm big into harmony, so most of the time I don't play with pianists, because I like having control of where the harmony goes.

I used to be big into effects: chorus, delays, reverb, compression, different distortions, etc., but now I just use a little reverb and delay and that's it. I have a very pure jazz tone.


----------



## Bach

Mirror Image said:


> Well that's very cool, you know how much I love Bill Evans, he's one of my favorite jazz pianists.
> 
> I would say that I play in a style that's a cross between Ed Bickert, Jim Hall, Bill Frisell, John Abercrombie, Metheny, and Ben Monder. I'm big into harmony, so most of the time I don't play with pianists, because I like having control of where the harmony goes.
> 
> I used to be big into effects: chorus, delays, reverb, compression, different distortions, etc., but now I just use a little reverb and delay and that's it. I have a very pure jazz tone.


Sounds too good to be true - trouble is buddy, I'm even more into harmony than you - and I have the piano - so you'd better start practicing your melodic improv asap!


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> Sounds too good to be true - trouble is buddy, I'm even more into harmony than you - and I have the piano - so you'd better start practicing your melodic improv asap!


In that case, I'll work on my single-note chops.


----------



## Bach

I've always wanted to play Jazz on my oboe - it doesn't really work though. No matter how hard you try the improv always sounds like folk music or baroque  . 

I recently purchased a Persian zurna (a shawm like instrument) and that is slightly better for improv but still quite limited in range..


----------



## Bach

This is the very instrument I play:


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> This is the very instrument I play:


That's a cool instrument. I want to get one.


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> I've always wanted to play Jazz on my oboe - it doesn't really work though. No matter how hard you try the improv always sounds like folk music or baroque
> 
> I recently purchased a Persian zurna (a shawm like instrument) and that is slightly better for improv but still quite limited in range..


Yeah, jazz on an oboe doesn't really work. Even when someone like Yusef Lateef plays one it just doesn't sound right and Lateef could play anything that had a reed.


----------



## Bach

Mirror Image said:


> That's a cool instrument. I want to get one.


Are you wind man too?


----------



## Mirror Image

Bach said:


> Are you wind man too?


No, I don't play any wind instruments. I want to learn alto saxophone. I'm thinking about getting a mid-level model and taking some lessons.

I would like to achieve a tone similar to Paul Desmond's or Gigi Gryce's --- two of my alto saxophone heroes.

Paul Desmond









Gigi Gryce


----------



## Bach

I'll have Coltrane, Brecker and Parker any way..


----------



## emiellucifuge

OMG I love Ravel the Bolero is amazing


----------



## emiellucifuge

Now seriously, I saw a concert of his Tzigane yesterday - fabulous piece!


----------



## Mirror Image

emiellucifuge said:


> Now seriously, I saw a concert of his Tzigane yesterday - fabulous piece!


Believe it or not "Tzigane" is one of my least favorite Ravel pieces. I haven't heard it in a while, so perhaps my opinion could change, but if I remember correctly, it didn't seem to stick in my mind or do much for me.

Now "Sherherazade" on the other hand, that's a different story altogether.


----------



## JAKE WYB

Mirror Image said:


> Believe it or not "Tzigane" is one of my least favorite Ravel pieces. I haven't heard it in a while, so perhaps my opinion could change, but if I remember correctly, it didn't seem to stick in my mind or do much for me.
> 
> Now "Sherherazade" on the other hand, that's a different story altogether.


Iwould rather say
Tzigane is apiece that i seem to think gives instant and catchy novelty appeal for 1st time or two then becomes annoying and insincere and like bolero Id begin to hate it.

whereas Scheherazade Ive listened to seems sort of uninspired and like a faded ravellian type warble - which given ive been through this scenario with sibelius a thoysdand times before i came to worship him, means I need to listen to scheherazade more often....

what i do love by ravel is his barque surlocean and his trio


----------



## Mirror Image

JAKE WYB said:


> Iwould rather say
> Tzigane is apiece that i seem to think gives instant and catchy novelty appeal for 1st time or two then becomes annoying and insincere and like bolero Id begin to hate it.
> 
> whereas Scheherazade Ive listened to seems sort of uninspired and like a faded ravellian type warble - which given ive been through this scenario with sibelius a thoysdand times before i came to worship him, means I need to listen to scheherazade more often....
> 
> what i do love by ravel is his barque surlocean and his trio


Nah..."Sheherazade" is a great piece of music. Nothing uninspired about it. Perhaps I hear things in it that you do not, then again, I'm the Ravel man around here anyway.


----------



## Sid James

Ravel arranged Mussorgsky's _Pictures at an Exhibition_, and paid homage to Couperin in _Le Tombeau de Couperin_. Did he compose any other such works, that was based on the music of other composers? I'm asking this because I know someone who says Ravel had a knack for doing this, but I'm not aware of any other works than those above, that show any evidence of it...


----------



## Mirror Image

Andre said:


> Ravel arranged Mussorgsky's _Pictures at an Exhibition_, and paid homage to Couperin in _Le Tombeau de Couperin_. Did he compose any other such works, that was based on the music of other composers? I'm asking this because I know someone who says Ravel had a knack for doing this, but I'm not aware of any other works than those above, that show any evidence of it...


Actually, Andre "Le Tombeau de Couperin" is a dedication to all the soldiers that died during WWI that were his friends. Ravel has actually not specified that "Le Tombeau" is an homage to Couperin or that I'm aware of. Please read this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Tombeau_de_Couperin

I'm not too sure about specific homages in terms of playing in the style of the specified composer, but he has had many pieces dedicated to other composers like Faure, Debussy, etc.


----------



## Sid James

It seemed that French Baroque period music was in vogue in Ravel's day, eg. I know Debussy had a movement in one of his works titled _Homage to Rameau_. But I think it's a pity that some classical listeners only hear say _Bolero_ or _Pictures at an Exhibition_, and they aren't familiar with Ravel's other orchestral works, let alone instrumental or chamber. I mean, works like the _String Quartet _ or _Miroirs _are quite good but not as popular as the two I mentioned...


----------



## Mirror Image

Andre said:


> It seemed that French Baroque period music was in vogue in Ravel's day, eg. I know Debussy had a movement in one of his works titled _Homage to Rameau_. But I think it's a pity that some classical listeners only hear say _Bolero_ or _Pictures at an Exhibition_, and they aren't familiar with Ravel's other orchestral works, let alone instrumental or chamber. I mean, works like the _String Quartet _ or _Miroirs _are quite good but not as popular as the two I mentioned...


Well, I'm thankful that we know there's a lot more to Ravel than "Bolero." You would be surprised by how many people haven't even heard "La Valse."

As you know, Ravel is my favorite composer. It's a shame that not many people get past the popular works. There's a lot of great music to explore from Ravel.


----------



## Eutow

Ravel's next on my list of music to acquire. Has anyone listened to the complete piano works played by Bavouzet, and is it any good?


----------



## Mirror Image

Eutow said:


> Ravel's next on my list of music to acquire. Has anyone listened to the complete piano works played by Bavouzet, and is it any good?


Being such a Ravel fan, I'm ashamed to admit that I don't even own any recordings of his solo piano works. I just have a hard time listening to something solo for some reason.


----------



## Bach

I have the complete solo piano works of Ravel played by Jean-Yves Thibaudet. Highly recommended!


----------



## Argus

Apparently, Ravel was only 5' tall. He looks deceptively taller in photographs. I think this makes him the greatest composer shorter than Ronnie Corbett.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Ravel's next on my list of music to acquire. Has anyone listened to the complete piano works played by Bavouzet, and is it any good?

Bavouzet's set is highly acclaimed. From what I've heard of his recordings of Debussy (exquisite!) I would be surprised if they were anything but fabulous. I already have the complete works in the archival Gieseking recordings. Bavouzet will be my first choice for a contemporary recording of these works.


----------



## World Violist

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Ravel's next on my list of music to acquire. Has anyone listened to the complete piano works played by Bavouzet, and is it any good?
> 
> Bavouzet's set is highly acclaimed. From what I've heard of his recordings of Debussy (exquisite!) I would be surprised if they were anything but fabulous. I already have the complete works in the archival Gieseking recordings. Bavouzet will be my first choice for a contemporary recording of these works.


Actually, some people theorize that, at least among the interpreters of Ravel and Debussy's orchestral works, a conductor great in one is usually not so great in the other. Not sure about pianists, but it's an interesting concept.

Among the pianists, I have Jean-Yves Thibaudet, and he's pretty darn good at it. My only quip is within some bits of Gaspard de la Nuit--I tend to prefer Martha Argerich for that particular piece for the vividness of the whole thing.


----------



## Air

World Violist said:


> Actually, some people theorize that, at least among the interpreters of Ravel and Debussy's orchestral works, a conductor great in one is usually not so great in the other. Not sure about pianists, but it's an interesting concept.
> 
> Among the pianists, I have Jean-Yves Thibaudet, and he's pretty darn good at it. My only quip is within some bits of Gaspard de la Nuit--I tend to prefer Martha Argerich for that particular piece for the vividness of the whole thing.


I'd say that this theory is false with the pianists. Gieseking, Francois, Bavouzet, Michelangeli.. . I could go on. But it certainly isn't true that if you are good at one then you are good at the other: Jacobs played great Debussy and horrid Ravel while Hewitt, who recorded one of the best Ravel sets on the market, didn't even play any Debussy at all (as far as I know of).

Ah Gaspard! 

I'm not sure you could ever say there is any definitive recording of this work, there are just so many I like: Michelangeli's (Helsinki, Prague, Vatican), Francois (Scarbo), Perlemuter, Argerich, Pogolerich, Gieseking and even Bavouzet. Nojima's I haven't heard yet but I'm sure it's good as well.

If I had to go with one, it'd probably be Michelangeli. In the Ondine, his finger control is just incredible: there's this subtle coloring that just hypnotizes you the moment you hear it. Pianism to die for.


----------



## Rasa

I'll just leave this here. (speaking of jazz)


----------



## violadude

Maurice Ravel-

Pieces I have by Ravel:

Daphnis et Chloe (full ballet)
String quartet
Gaspard de la Nuit
Valses Nobles Et Sentimentales (piano version)
Jeux D'Eau
Miroirs
Sonatine for piano
Le Tombeau De Couperin (piano version)
Prelude for piano
Minuet sur la nom de Haydn
A La Maniere De Borodine
Minuet Antique
Pavane Pour Unde Infante Defunte (piano version)
A La Maniere De Chabrier
Ma Mere L'oye (piano version)

What a beautiful composer. I make a special connection with Ravel's music. I don't know how to explain it, but the harmonies, the colors, the sound, all make such a deep and un-rational emotional connection with me. The string quartet was the first piece I heard by him, and I heard it live, and it amazed me so much! Beautiful melodies, amazing colors on the strings that I didnt know existed at the time, moments of intense vigor. And of course, those Ravel harmonies get me every single time. The same things could be said about Daphnis et Chloe. It is one of my favorite ballets and one of the most beautifully exotic and sensual pieces of music I know. Miroirs is another one of my favorite compositions by Ravel. To me it contains some of the most poetic music in the world, especially my favorite movement, the "sad birds" movement. Oh man! It is so full of poetic and touching sadness and loneliness in a very tactful, not overblown kind of way (not that I don't like overblown music too ). The Sonatine is really beautiful too. For some reason the first movement reminds me of my childhood. It sounds very pure and innocent to me. Anyway, ya, GO RAVEL.


----------



## aleazk

Ravel, Ravel, Ravel,..., what can I say?. I am completely obsessed with him. He is by far my favorite composer. I'm surprised, violadude, I have exactly, but exactly, the same feelings. And "Sad Birds", as you say, musical poetry, even the title is poetry, "sad birds", what a beautiful contradiction... I dream that sometime I could visit his house in Montfort l'Amaury. Check out this wonderful video that I found:






(In Ravel's piano!!!, we are actually hearing what Ravel heard!!!)


----------



## aleazk

Argus said:


> Apparently, Ravel was only 5' tall. He looks deceptively taller in photographs. I think this makes him the greatest composer shorter than Ronnie Corbett.












indeed, he wasn't tall at all!


----------



## aleazk

i found this beautiful picture of our beloved Maurice...










i love the contrasting illumination


----------



## teccomin

Just encountered a 2 piano transcription of Daphnis and Chloe part 3!! Check it out!


----------



## aleazk

I found this fantastic ballet version of L'Enfant et les sortilèges on YT:




















(man, i love the section that starts at 3:05)


----------



## Taneyev

Ravel was one of the very few composers that didn't write anything cheep, vulgar or of inferior taste. Can't think of any of his works that isn't from good to extraordinary.


----------



## violadude

Odnoposoff said:


> Ravel was one of the very few composers that didn't write anything cheep, vulgar or of inferior taste. Can't think of any of his works that isn't from good to extraordinary.


http://www.sheetmusicplus.com/title/Piano-Masterpieces-of-Maurice-Ravel/3493363

Are you sure??? 10 dollars seems pretty cheap to me


----------



## aleazk

has anyone read the biographical novel "Ravel", by the french novelist Jean Echenoz?

http://www.amazon.com/Ravel-Novel-Jean-Echenoz/dp/1595581154

it seems very interesting for us, the Ravel maniacs, who want to know every detail of his life


----------



## aleazk

man, the "Danse des rainettes" (Dance of the Frogs), that starts at 5:12, is so beautiful. I can imagine the frogs dancing and jumping in the water by only listening to the music...


----------



## Crudblud

The opposite of prolific, his body of work stands as probably the most consistent I can think of in the whole repertoire. And when he wasn't being consistently good, he was outdoing himself with pieces like _Daphnis et Chloe_, _La valse_ and _Sheherazade_.


----------



## violadude

Crudblud said:


> The opposite of prolific, his body of work stands as probably the most consistent I can think of in the whole repertoire. And when he wasn't being consistently good, he was outdoing himself with pieces like _Daphnis et Chloe_, _La valse_ and _Sheherazade_.


You don't htink D et C is a good piece?


----------



## tdc

violadude said:


> You don't htink D et C is a good piece?


By saying Ravel 'out did himself' I think Crudblud was suggesting D et C is an _exceptional_ piece.


----------



## violadude

tdc said:


> By saying Ravel 'out did himself' I think Crudblud was suggesting D et C is an _exceptional_ piece.


oh, my mistake...I momentarily forgot what that term meant lol


----------



## Crudblud

Yeah, Daphnis is one of my all time favourites. Recently heard Monteux's recording and it was as though I was hearing it for the first time again.

P.S.: Late replies are all the rage right now, don't ya know.


----------



## frankentomato

Favorite composer of all time. My favorite pieces of his are _Le Tombeau de Couperin_, _Gaspard de la Nuit_, and _Tzigane._ I just began working on the prelude from Le Tombeau.


----------



## starthrower

Le Tombeau is one of my favorites as well.


----------



## aleazk

L'enfant et les sortilèges, La valse, Violin Sonata No. 2, Chansons madécasses, Boléro, Piano Concerto in D for the Left Hand, Piano Concerto in G... all composed on this piano...


----------



## aleazk

^^^and what a fantastic sound it has!






(I have already posted this video, but I'm so proud of having found it )


----------



## aleazk

I'm so moved by this piece right now:






I love the section that starts at 2:55, it sounds so graceful and sensual at the same time, man, that steady rhythm in the piano...and then the flute at 3:23 is just ecstatic...









Master: :tiphat:...


----------



## scarbo

Ravel is the composer I have used the most time and effort studying (and performing)... He is the elegantier of composers, writing for his instruments in a way that, while difficult, makes impossibly virtuoisc passages possible to perform. He seems to have an inner rapport with all instruments and vocals, making his compositions seem easy to grasp, having that certain élan that makes you feel like entering a whole new world of nobility... Every musician should attempt to grapple with his compositions - they are the ultimate in relaxed virtuosity.


----------



## neoshredder

scarbo said:


> Ravel is the composer I have used the most time and effort studying (and performing)... He is the elegantier of composers, writing for his instruments in a way that, while difficult, makes impossibly virtuoisc passages possible to perform. He seems to have an inner rapport with all instruments and vocals, making his compositions seem easy to grasp, having that certain élan that makes you feel like entering a whole new world of nobility... Every musician should attempt to grapple with his compositions - they are the ultimate in relaxed virtuosity.


Just bought his Piano Works and Orchestral Works. Looking forward to listening to his sound.


----------



## PetrB

aleazk said:


> I found this fantastic ballet version of L'Enfant et les sortilèges on YT:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (man, i love the section that starts at 3:05)


This ballet uses THE recording of 'L'enfant' - still available and imo still the best, On DGG, conducted by Loren Maazel. Absolutely - and literally - fantastic. The libretto is by Colette - not a bad collaborator if one is looking for an auteur-librettist!


----------



## scarbo

Stunning, indeed.


----------



## chalkpie

My take on Ravel.........F****** amazing. One of my fav's ever.

Also, I love Le Tombeau more than I can express in words. A great version for orch that seems to be a sleeper is Neville Mariner/Academy St, martins (on hannsler). The crescendo in Menuet is the best I have ever heard. The Martinon performance is also great. The Boulez DG falls flat for me, and I love Boulez - he is one of my favorite conductors.


----------



## aleazk

What do you people think of this orchestration of the Fugue and the Toccata from Le Tombeau de Couperin:


----------



## aleazk

I absolutely love this man...:






I'm always returning to his music... he's the canon for me, in every musical sense.
Recently I have seen a live performance of the left hand concerto, I was shaking of the emotion.


----------



## DeepR

^ This orchestrated Toccata is even better, more exciting and better sounding.


----------



## aleazk

It's known that Ravel sometimes favored melody especially. What I like is that his melodies, although very "likeable" and lyrical, are never "honeyed" ("a la Tchaikovsky" for example). They are very prudent always.


----------



## neoshredder

Dang this thread fell off the map. A lot of stuff going on in his Orchestral Works. Enjoying those.


----------



## aleazk

neoshredder said:


> Dang this thread fell off the map. A lot of stuff going on in his Orchestral Works. Enjoying those.


Of course. :tiphat:


----------



## etkearne

I love Ravel's piano works. My favorites are "Piano Concerto, Mvt. II (the one for BOTH hands haha) and Mirros (which is what i call the work - i forget the French name) for solo piano. His extended harmonies are incredible. Seventh and ninth chords full of masterful alterations abound in those two works. I think I fell in love with the 7#9 chord because of Ravel actually...


----------



## Lunasong

TIL Ravel was known for being an elegant dresser, and was allegedly the first man in France to wear pastel-hued shirts.


----------



## Ravndal

Listening to the second movement from his piano concerto in G. Just brilliant.


----------



## etkearne

I was listening to "Gaspard de la Nuit, Mvt. II" last night under a slightly questionable state of mind, and it really overpowered me. The piece is artificially simple on first "glance", but the repetitions allow the listener to really dive deep into the crevices of the work and to find small tokens of joy in nearly every four bars. What an exciting piece of music!


----------



## Norse

The Forlane from Le Tombeau (I prefer the piano version) is also harmonically exquisite. The form, rhythms etc is lifted directly from a forlane by Couperin, but most of the time I think this is 'masked' nicely by the modern touches.


----------



## DrKilroy

The Forlane was the piece that made me interested in Ravel's music - the first version I heard was the orchestration, but I also like the original one more. 

Best regards, Dr


----------



## Wandering

This is the complete Daphnes et Chloe I know, not even realizing Chailly extended that far back to my ears. This was my first rec. of this ballet from way back, no longer have, tisk tisk. It also has a lesser known work of Debussy, I remember the booklet said it was orchestrated by a trusted student. This work of Debussy compliment the ballet to a 't'.

_Nostalgia_


----------



## Vaneyes

Ravel orchestral recs. I enjoy.

View attachment 9716
View attachment 9717
View attachment 9718


----------



## Ravndal

Been listening to the same aswell, Vaneyes. At the moment I'm enjoying both the Piano Concertos. Played by Krystian Zimerman + Pierre Boulez & Cleveland Orchestra. Great recordings. I also like the Argerich version, mostly because of the warm and fuzzy quality. But Zimerman is a better pianist in my opinion.


----------



## elgar's ghost

For me a lot of Ravel's music matches the proportions of his output as a whole - not too much of this and not too little of that. And yes, I DO like Bolero - Ravel can't be blamed for it being used either in the Winter Olympics by a combo who gave the UK its only medal or as a piece of music favoured by a braided amazon who wants to do naughties on the beach with a shortarse from Essex.


----------



## tdc

^ Nice post elgars ghost, (and it was made on 11/11 at 1:11. )

I recently found this very interesting little video clip 'The Making of L'enfant et les sortileges' - Simon Rattle shares his thoughts on this brilliant work, as well as some thoughts on _Ma Mere L'oye_.

Can be viewed on youtube here:






And here with additional information at this website:

http://www.rattleravel.com/


----------



## Ravndal

If someone wants to check out an extremely good version of Gaspard De La Nuit, hear the one by Sigurd Slåttebrekk.


----------



## aleazk

Ravndal said:


> I also like the Argerich version, mostly because of the warm and fuzzy quality. But Zimerman is a better pianist in my opinion.


.................................................................................................................................

..............and..........................


----------



## Ravndal

Oh, you agree? Great


----------



## Vaneyes

Re PCs, I like ABM and Martha for G, and de Larrocha for left-hand. For "Gaspard", Martha and Pogo. :tiphat:


----------



## Crudblud

For my money, the best take on _Miroirs_ is that of Samson François.


----------



## Vaneyes

Andrew Clark's (ft.com) suggested *Ravel* recs...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/07a830e6-5fe1-11e2-8d8d-00144feab49a.html#axzz2IGYtJgKK


----------



## oogabooha

His string quartet is still my favorite string quartet. Every time I listen to it feels like a warm hug and a cup of tea. The coloring throughout the piece is magnificent, everything is well balanced, and I constantly find myself astounded by the interaction and ranges of each instrument. My favorite recording is by the Danisches Streichquartett (bought it in a $1 record bin a long time ago...doesn't seem to be well-known) and that is simply the "warmest" record I have; truly exquisite. however, when i'm not listening to that one I tend to prefer the emerson quartet


----------



## Ravndal

I wonder if his variations upon a theme of Grieg (Death of Aase) for solo piano has been recorded? I sure can't find it, and i don't know anything about it, except that I'm madly intrigued by it's existence.


----------



## DrKilroy

I think that even the score have not been published. It was written when Ravel was only 13, so I do not think we should expect much from this piece.  On the other hand, however, it is of much historical interest. By the way, what do you think about the arguably least known Ravel's piano work - La parade?

Best regards, Dr


----------



## Ravndal

Perhaps! But the first thing that popped in to my mind was his Fugue In F Major






and D major






I can't say it's one of my favorites, but a little rarity 



> I think that even the score have not been published. It was written when Ravel was only 13, so I do not think we should expect much from this piece.


Ah, i didn't know. Thanks.


----------



## DrKilroy

I have heard them.  These are very academical works. I prefer the fugue from Le tombeau de Couperin. 

La parade, though very unravelian, is quite enjoyable. 






Best regards, Dr


----------



## Norse

Those fugues are part of his four attempts to win Prix de Rome. They are probably so academical because that was what the judges wanted to hear.

Speaking of rare piano pieces, there's also a Menuet in C-sharp minor written around 1904, but published posthumously. A short and simple thing, but definitely pretty ravelian. I've seen it recorded twice, both on "complete piano music" sets. Even most of those seem to skip it.


----------



## DrKilroy

I knew this too, as I had a plan to learn to play all Ravel's menuets.

Best regards, Dr


----------



## userfume

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2001/apr/25/arts.highereducation
has this been mentioned before? It makes me incredibly angry


----------



## DrKilroy

Is is quite a pity, but Ravel is dead, so he probably doesn't care. 

Best regards, Dr


----------



## aleazk

userfume said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2001/apr/25/arts.highereducation
> has this been mentioned before? It makes me incredibly angry


That article is from 2001. Fortunately, the house has been restored now, in 2003 I think. Check this amazing video, from 2011:


----------



## Turangalîla

^ My French is unfortunately not good enough to fully appreciate this video...what a shame


----------



## science

This is one heck of a thread! 

What are the most highly recommended recordings of Ravel's piano trio?


----------



## ptr

science said:


> What are the most highly recommended recordings of Ravel's piano trio?


Haven't ploughed throuh the whole tread yet, but I quite like The Florestan Trio on Hyperion and it does not hurt to have the Classic version with the Beau Arts Trio on Philips for "reference."

/ptr


----------



## Vaneyes

science said:


> This is one heck of a thread!
> 
> What are the most highly recommended recordings of Ravel's piano trio?


There's only one for me, and it's cw equally enchanting performances of Debussy and Faure PTs.
:tiphat:
View attachment 13213


----------



## tdc

I like the Beau Arts Trio version a lot, I'll have to check out that Florestan Trio recording. My favorite version of the work at the moment (I almost feel guilty for saying this) is a re-orchestrated full orchestra version by Tortelier and the Ulster Orchestra.


----------



## Ravndal

Just started listening to his piano trio. Never liked chamber music, but this seems like a good entry point. Liking it more and more for each listen


----------



## tdc

Ravndal said:


> Just started listening to his piano trio. Never liked chamber music, but this seems like a good entry point. *Liking it more and more for each listen :*)


That is exactly the effect Ravel's Piano Trio has had on me. I find it one of those magical works I never grow tired of, and never cease to discover new aspects of.

On a side note, as a potential point of interest, the opening theme to the Piano Trio was found sketched out in a rough draft of Ravel's_ Forlane_ from *Le Tombeau De Couperin*, so the idea was presumably originally intended to be part of the _Forlane_.


----------



## Crudblud

science said:


> This is one heck of a thread!
> 
> What are the most highly recommended recordings of Ravel's piano trio?


Richter/Kagan/Guttman is a good one, I also like Rubinstein/Heifetz/Piatigorsky.


----------



## Ravndal

Not a big fan of vocal music, but Ravel's "Sherherazade" is marvelous. Especially the Pierre Boulez version with Anne Sofie Von Otter. When i try to describe this work, only words that comes to mind is "fairy tale", "dream". Something really magical about his works.


----------



## DrKilroy

I'll have to try it, then! Thanks.  

Best regards, Dr


----------



## Ravndal

DrKilroy said:


> I'll have to try it, then! Thanks.
> 
> Best regards, Dr


Let me know your thoughts when you have heard it. The first movement is very memorable for me.


----------



## etkearne

I should have purchased a recording of "La Valse" earlier in my Ravel journey. About a month and a half ago I got a recording of the work, packaged with some other great Ravel orchestrations (of high quality too - not the greatest but very good), and "La Valse" stuck out to me like a diamond (not in "the rough" however - perhaps a diamond amongst semi-precious jewels like "Bolero" ha!) upon first listen.

I read somewhere that a critic said of the work "La Valse introduces us to a world to which Ravel has only rarely introduced us" and I think that sums it up well. 

I have read many competing interpretations of the work (the parody, the post-WWI thing, etc.) and since no one knows for sure, I try to not get too interested in these ideas. But Ravel was clearly on a mission to do something BIG and something DIFFERENT in "La Valse". 

Some of my favorite aspects include:

1. The rhythmic shifting including rubato to die for
2. The dreamy, altered-state-of-mind, portrayal of the Waltz itself
3. The bombastic nature of both the legitimate waltzes and the "strange versions" in the 2nd half
4. The last 30 seconds!

Does anyone have any suggestions as to the definitive group of recordings of "La Valse". This Boston Symphony Orchestra (DG) version is very good, but I have a feeling there are better ones out there.


----------



## Vaneyes




----------



## DrKilroy

Ravndal said:


> Let me know your thoughts when you have heard it. The first movement is very memorable for me.


I've listened to it a while before. Of course, it was great.  There is a peculiar quality of French singing - I like it very much - and Ravel used it very well here, composing appropriate melodies. Not to mention the superb orchestration. 

Best regards, Dr


----------



## Ravndal

I must admit that i focus more orchestration, than the singing. There is some beautiful melodies between the singing, but they cooperate with the vocals in a way that the melodies wouldn't be as outstanding without the singing. sorry for the messy explaining, you probably dont understand what i mean. But short: I like the orchestration better than the singing, but i don't know if the piece would be as good without the singing.


----------



## DrKilroy

Orchestration is excellent, as always in Ravel's works. I am not an expert when it comes to vocal music, I listen to it really rarely, and when I do - it is mainly choral. However, there is something in French language that makes it sound good in singing.  

I think I know what you mean - Ravel composed the works for voice and orchestra, so he made them complement each other.

Best regards, Dr


----------



## Avey

@etkearne What's this "parody" you speak of?


----------



## oogabooha

his piano concerto is absolutely fantastic. Bernstein conducting while performing is so great; I've listened to it multiple times in the last 24 hours


----------



## Ravndal

Listening to Ondine being played by Ravel himself. It's so fast!!! I can't believe it. What a tempo!!

And Jeux D'eau! so fast. seems rushed!


----------



## aleazk

Ravndal said:


> Listening to Ondine being played by Ravel himself. It's so fast!!! I can't believe it. What a tempo!!
> 
> And Jeux D'eau! so fast. seems rushed!


I have read that those piano rolls probably don't correspond to Ravel's playing, but to that of his friend and acomplished pianist, Robert Casadesus (nevertheless, with Ravel's close supervision).
Ravel's true playing can be heard in the piano rolls of the "Valses Nobles et Sentimentales", "Oiseaux tristes", "La vallée des cloches", and "Sonatine" (first two movements): 



, 



, 



, 




Oh, and also the "Pavane".


----------



## aleazk

aleazk said:


> I have read that those piano rolls probably don't correspond to Ravel's playing, but to that of his friend and acomplished pianist, Robert Casadesus (nevertheless, with Ravel's close supervision).
> Ravel's true playing can be heard in the piano rolls of the "Valses Nobles et Sentimentales", "Oiseaux tristes", "La vallée des cloches", and "Sonatine" (first two movements):
> 
> 
> 
> ,
> 
> 
> 
> ,
> 
> 
> 
> ,


The intepretation of "Oiseaux tristes" is really and absolutely amazing to me. Few times I have heard such powerful and deep emotive interpretations in music.


----------



## Turangalîla

oogabooha said:


> his piano concerto is absolutely fantastic. Bernstein conducting while performing is so great; I've listened to it multiple times in the last 24 hours


Bernstein does an overall great job of the concerto, but I think that his third movement, in particular, is the best in the business. What amazing rhythmic drive and intensity buildup.


----------



## Neo Romanza

oogabooha said:


> his piano concerto is absolutely fantastic. Bernstein conducting while performing is so great; I've listened to it multiple times in the last 24 hours


I like Bernstein's 'okay.' It doesn't match the skill and grace of Bavouzet or Zimerman IMHO.


----------



## moody

aleazk said:


> I have read that those piano rolls probably don't correspond to Ravel's playing, but to that of his friend and acomplished pianist, Robert Casadesus (nevertheless, with Ravel's close supervision).
> Ravel's true playing can be heard in the piano rolls of the "Valses Nobles et Sentimentales", "Oiseaux tristes", "La vallée des cloches", and "Sonatine" (first two movements):
> 
> 
> 
> ,
> 
> 
> 
> ,
> 
> 
> 
> ,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and also the "Pavane".


I don't understand your meaning here,was it Ravel or was it not ?
Casadesus most certainly made no piano rolls so it was not him.
I have not got this piano roll recording,but as I've said before the machinery must be set up correctly to get a true result.
But it is interesting to note huge discrepancies in performances by composers compared with what is heard now.


----------



## aleazk

moody said:


> I don't understand your meaning here,was it Ravel or was it not ?
> Casadesus most certainly made no piano rolls so it was not him.
> I have not got this piano roll recording,but as I've said before the machinery must be set up correctly to get a true result.
> But it is interesting to note huge discrepancies in performances by composers compared with what is heard now.


http://www.maurice-ravel.net/pianorolls.htm


----------



## moody

aleazk said:


> http://www.maurice-ravel.net/pianorolls.htm


Certainly the reproduction and set up should have been OK by the look of things ,but I note that Ravel is said to have been no more than competent as a pianist,
Certainly Casadesus' performance of the complete piano music is a classic and is available on two CDs,the concerti are included.
How does this compare with the tempi on the roll ?


----------



## moody

CarterJohnsonPiano said:


> Bernstein does an overall great job of the concerto, but I think that his third movement, in particular, is the best in the business. What amazing rhythmic drive and intensity buildup.


The best performance of the concerto is probably Michelangeli's on EMI's Great Recordings Of the Century.
Casadesus recorded all the piano music along with the concerti and some would say this is the definitive Ravel.


----------



## schuberkovich

Pascal Rogé's recordings of both with charles dutuoit are excellent


----------



## Ravndal

I made a Ravel list on spotify. You can find everything except the songs there. I will include those later.

Enjoy: 




From top:

Orchestral
Chamber
Concerto
Solo

I have not included orchestrated piano pieces such as Pavane, Menuet antique etc.


----------



## Neo Romanza

schuberkovich said:


> Pascal Rogé's recordings of both with charles dutuoit are excellent


They're very good but not as good as Bavouzet's performances IMHO. Have you heard the Bavouzet?


----------



## Crudblud

Bavouzet is fine, but I have yet to find better than Martinon. The same is true of the pure orchestral music across the board, save Daphnis.


----------



## Neo Romanza

Crudblud said:


> Bavouzet is fine, but I have yet to find better than Martinon. The same is true of the pure orchestral music across the board, save Daphnis.


Martinon was a fine Ravel conductor no doubt. His Debussy is even better, but I know you're not much for his music.


----------



## Crudblud

Neo Romanza said:


> Martinon was a fine Ravel conductor no doubt. His Debussy is even better, but I know you're not much for his music.


Actually, Debussy's orchestral music is practically all I like of his, and I much prefer Haitink over Martinon there.


----------



## Neo Romanza

Crudblud said:


> Actually, Debussy's orchestral music is practically all I like of his, and I much prefer Haitink over Martinon there.


Why do you like Haitink's performances more? It's always good to hear different opinions. Boulez is my favorite Debussy conductor. I love his earlier performances with the New Philharmonia and Cleveland Orchestra. I like the clarity he brings to the textures. But I do like Haitink's performances a lot as well as Martinon and Abbado (his _Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune_ performance with the Berliners made me finally appreciate the work).


----------



## Crudblud

Neo Romanza said:


> Why do you like Haitink's performances more? It's always good to hear different opinions. Boulez is my favorite Debussy conductor. I love his earlier performances with the New Philharmonia and Cleveland Orchestra. I like the clarity he brings to the textures. But I do like Haitink's performances a lot as well as Martinon and Abbado (his _Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune_ performance with the Berliners made me finally appreciate the work).


Martinon's Debussy just seems kind of sparse and uninviting to me. I don't know Abbado or Boulez here but not really interested enough to find out. Shifting back on-topic, I've heard both of their Ravel orchestra recordings: Abbado's is kind of mediocre, I think, although he does turn in good accounts of Daphnis and Valses, Boulez is superb as usual, I think he really is the finest conductor of our time. Dutoit does a pretty good Ravel, too.

By the way, my personal favourite Daphnis is that of Pierre Monteux.

Edit: For some reason I typed "Ravel" instead of "Boulez."


----------



## Neo Romanza

Crudblud said:


> Martinon's Debussy just seems kind of sparse and uninviting to me. I don't know Abbado or Boulez here but not really interested enough to find out. Shifting back on-topic, I've heard both of their Ravel orchestra recordings: Abbado's is kind of mediocre, I think, although he does turn in good accounts of Daphnis and Valses, Ravel is superb as usual, I think he really is the finest conductor of our time. Dutoit does a pretty good Ravel, too.
> 
> By the way, my personal favourite Daphnis is that of Pierre Monteux.


I've never been impressed with Abbado's Ravel performances. Quite lackluster performances. I do like Pierre Monteux's _Daphnis_ a lot, but my favorite is the Dutoit/MSO. It doesn't get more erotic and sumptuous than the Dutoit IMHO.


----------



## schuberkovich

Neo Romanza said:


> They're very good but not as good as Bavouzet's performances IMHO. Have you heard the Bavouzet?


I watched him perform the left hand concerto on youtube. It was very good (despite a few wrong notes). I still prefer Rogé for the way he differentiates between the percussive opening and the lyrical middle section


----------



## poptart

Coming late to this thread, I just want to add my voice to the many Ravel fans here. I've loved his music for a long time, and I'd have to say my favourite is Ma Mere L'oye.

I recently discovered his piano concerto in G major, the second movement of which is pure bliss, the most movingly tender piece I've heard in years.


----------



## niv

That Piano Concerto is one of the major pieces that drew me into classical music.


----------



## ptr

I do not have the stamina to eagle-eye the whole thread tonight! Can some one please make a solid recording recommendation for the "Sonate pour violon et violoncell" (Sonata for Violin and Cello; 1920)!

Heard it tonight at a concert in a local church and it was the high light of the evening and as it turns out I don't seem to have it in my music collection!

/ptr


----------



## Vaneyes

ptr said:


> I do not have the stamina to eagle-eye the whole thread tonight! Can some one please make a solid recording recommendation for the "Sonate pour violon et violoncell" (Sonata for Violin and Cello; 1920)!
> 
> Heard it tonight at a concert in a local church and it was the high light of the evening and as it turns out I don't seem to have it in my music collection!
> 
> /ptr


Vlachova & Ericsson (Members of Vlach Quartet Prague), Panton/rec.1994. :tiphat:

View attachment 27348


----------



## ShropshireMoose

I loved "Bolero" as a child. We had a 12 LP set, "Festival of Light Classical Music", that the Reader's Digest put out and "Bolero" became a favourite, the Orchestra of the Symphony Concerts Society of Paris/Rene Leibowitz was the performance in that set. My dad couldn't stand it! But he did say that it was one of my granddad's favourite pieces (he died when I was five). Then he told me that my grandma (who died before I was born) had bought my granddad a set of records of "Bolero" for his birthday. She'd gone into Birmingham, from Walsall, where they lived, bought the two 78s that comprised the set, then gone for tea and cake in a Lyon's Corner House. She'd got the bus back to Walsall, then upon getting home, realised she'd left the records at Lyon's! She caught the bus back, and fortunately, they were still there! So all ended happily- and I still have those 78s- in fact they play as I write this, two HMV 78s, the Boston Symphony Orchestra/Serge Koussevitsky. "Bolero" on three sides, with Debussy's orchestration of Satie's first Gymnopedie as the fourth side. Good performances and still enjoyable 70 odd years on.


----------



## senza sordino

I think many come to classical music via Ravel's Bolero. I think it has over stayed its welcome, and I don't go out of my way to listen to it. But I would never discourage others from listening, and if it brings more to the world of classical music, perhaps that's Bolero's value, more than the music itself.

I love the rest of Ravel's music. 
I played Tombeau de Couperin last year with our local amateur orchestra.
The G maj piano concerto is great.
The piano trio I do make a habit of listening to. 
And then there's Tzigane.


----------



## chalkpie

Every once in a while it doesn't hurt to say I LOVE YOU RAVEL!!! :cheers:


----------



## hpowders

I like Ravel much much better than Debussy. Mother Goose, Piano Concerto in G, String Quartet, Le Tombeau de Couperin, all quality stuff.


----------



## Avey

So, I don't know if ya'll realized, but Ravel actually never wrote a Piano Trio.

The supernatural being, really of a celestial nature, that possessed Maurice Ravel's physical form during 1914 actually penned the piece. Ravel was merely the channel by which this message was pronounced.


----------



## tdc

Avey said:


> So, I don't know if ya'll realized, but Ravel actually never wrote a Piano Trio.
> 
> The supernatural being, really of a celestial nature, that possessed Maurice Ravel's physical form during 1914 actually penned the piece. Ravel was merely the channel by which this message was pronounced.


One thing that was different about Ravel's composition of the Piano Trio was that compared to his other works it was quite rushed due to the outbreak of WWI. He claimed that he did 5 months of work on it in just 5 weeks. Considering the result it makes one wonder if perhaps Ravel should have hurried along more of his compositions! We would also then probably have more Ravel works to enjoy if he did more of this type of thing.


----------



## shangoyal

Great modernish romantic sentimental piano music.


----------



## chalkpie

On most days, Ravel is top 10 for me, but he hovers in that 8th or 9th spot.


----------



## aleazk

shangoyal said:


> Great modernish romantic sentimental piano music.


Ravel is certainly emotive and expressive, but the emotions he express, and the way in which they are expressed, have nothing to do with hard core romanticism if you ask me. Late romanticism tends to be all about life and death, love, etc., and with gigantism of means. And quite to the point in all of that.

Ravel is all about subtlety, color, deliberate artificiality and sophisticated emotions, and in most cases classical in form, gesture and affection.

Both styles can be very intense in terms of emotion, but the analogy ends there. Although Ravel saw himself as extending naturally the romantic piano technique in pieces like Gaspard de la nuit. I can accept that. Also, you could say that certain poetic element present in, say, Chopin, is also present in Ravel. I can also accept that. Certainly a complex composer, with influences ranging from Couperin and Mozart to Wagner to Satie, Debussy and Schoenberg!


----------



## QuietGuy

World Violist said:


> Great composer. LISTEN TO MORE THAN THE BOLERO AND ALL YOUR DREAMS WILL COME TRUE!!!


I wholeheartedly agree! He's a fantastic craftsman. I've said this on numerous posts here on TC: I admire his adherence to classical form, and his complete mastery of orchestration. Ma Mere L'Oye was the first piece of his I ever heard, and it was what led me into composition. Daphnis et Chloe is what heaven must sound like...

Enough said! I like Ravel


----------



## hpowders

Can anyone imagine associating Ravel with just the Bolero.

That would be absolutely tragic!!


----------



## chalkpie

hpowders said:


> Can anyone imagine associating Ravel with just the Bolero.
> 
> That would be absolutely tragic!!


IMO every single work he wrote is a gem of some variety - maybe not always a diamond perhaps - but some rubies, emeralds, sapphires, etc. I truly think his works are that good.


----------



## hpowders

chalkpie said:


> IMO every single work he wrote is a gem of some variety - maybe not always a diamond perhaps - but some rubies, emeralds, sapphires, etc. I truly think his works are that good.


As a child, I remember the wonder I felt listening to the Ma mére l'oye suite on scratchy vinyl.

So many millions of people will go through life and never hear this awesome score, believing classical music is boring.
It's really a shame.


----------



## shangoyal

aleazk said:


> Ravel is certainly emotive and expressive, but the emotions he express, and the way in which they are expressed, have nothing to do with hard core romanticism if you ask me. Late romanticism tends to be all about life and death, love, etc., and with gigantism of means. And quite to the point in all of that.
> 
> Ravel is all about subtlety, color, deliberate artificiality and sophisticated emotions, and in most cases classical in form, gesture and affection.
> 
> Both styles can be very intense in terms of emotion, but the analogy ends there. Although Ravel saw himself as extending naturally the romantic piano technique in pieces like Gaspard de la nuit. I can accept that. Also, you could say that certain poetic element present in, say, Chopin, is also present in Ravel. I can also accept that. Certainly a complex composer, with influences ranging from Couperin and Mozart to Wagner to Satie, Debussy and Schoenberg!


You know what? I agree with you to the 'T'. I know what you are saying when you say 'subtlety, color, deliberate artificiality and sophisticated emotions'. I wrote that sentence to provoke such a response from a member who has better facility over language than me, and you have provided with a nice little description.

But I would disagree with you that one cannot use the word 'romantic' for Ravel's music. I think it is romantic in its wistfulness and its 'sophisticated emotions' as much as Wagner is romantic because it's about man fighting some gigantic battle with the universe. These classifications are at the very best convenient roadmaps for the guidance of the new listener.

:tiphat:


----------



## Cheyenne

Would some people mind giving me a few recommendations? I've never truly listened to Ravel -- only occasionally in passing. I listened to his String Quartet in F yesterday and loved it! The only thing I own of him, unfortunately, is Miroirs. Where to start listening?


----------



## Alypius

Cheyenne said:


> Would some people mind giving me a few recommendations? I've never truly listened to Ravel -- only occasionally in passing. I listened to his String Quartet in F yesterday and loved it! The only thing I own of him, unfortunately, is Miroirs. Where to start listening?


Cheyenne, I think that you will come to enjoy the richness of Ravel's music. It is extraordinarily beautiful and is beautifully crafted. Stravinsky once quipped about Ravel as "that Swiss watchmaker." That's partially true. Ravel was an unusually careful craftsman, and thus has a rather small body of works, but almost all those works are gem-like masterworks. You started where I would start, namely, with his *String Quartet*. I don't know what performance you listened to. My favorite is the _Quatuor Ébène_ (Virgin Classical, 2008)--which won Gramophone's prestigious "Record of the Year" in 2009. Here's some more:

*Piano Trio in A* (1914). Favorite performances: Renaud Capucon / Gautier Capucon / Frank Braley, _Ravel: Sonates & Trios_ (Virgin Classics, 2002). That same record has two wonderful chamber works by Ravel: his Sonata for Violin and Piano in G (1927) and his Sonata for Violin and Cello (1922), as well as early work, _Sonate posthume_ (1898). There is another fine performance of the Piano Trio in A by Florestan Trio, _French Piano Trios_ (Hyperion, 1999; reissue, "Hyperion 30" series, 2010).










*Piano Concerto in G* (1931). One of the great piano concertos in the whole repertoire. Ravel had absorbed elements of jazz (which had made their way to Paris; he also had met George Gershwin). Many, many great performances. One of the most famous is by Martha Argerich with Claudio Abbado and the Berliner Philharmoniker (Deutsche Grammophon). I also enjoy the recent performance by Jean-Efflam Bavouzet with Yan Pascal Tortelier and the BBC Symphony (Chandos, 2010).










*Piano Concerto for the Left Hand in D* (1930). This was composed for Paul Wittgenstein, a concert pianist who lost his right arm in World War I (Prokofiev and others also wrote works for him). Once again, try the performance listed above by Jean-Efflam Bavouzet. Also striking is Krystian Zimerman with Pierre Boulez and the Cleveland (Deutsche Grammophon, 1999), still available as a single CD or in the box set _Pierre Boulez Conducts Debussy and Ravel_.

*Le tombeau de Couperin* (1917). There is a version for solo piano and an orchestral version. Get both. Ravel was a master orchestrator. And this piece shows his skills both as composer for piano and a master of orchestration. For the piano version, there are many fine version. I would recommend Steven Osborne's version on _Ravel: The Complete Solo Piano Music_ (2 CDs) (Hyperion, 2009). Jean-Efflam Bavouzet has a similarly excellent cycle of Ravel's complete piano works. And there is a famous older set by Samson Francois, recently remastered and boxed up.

*Daphnis et Chloe*. If you enjoy 19th-century romantic, one of Ravel's most lushly orchestrated works is the ballet _Daphnis et Chloe_. It is one of the most sensual scores in the repertoire (Prokofiev's _Romeo and Juliet_ is the closest to this, or perhaps some of Tchaikovsky's). Some advocate for hearing the ballet in its entirety, but I would recommend starting with the briefer _Daphnis et Chloe, Suite no. 2_. The best performance of it that I know is by Yannick Nezet-Seguin and the Rotterdam Philharmonic (EMI, 2009).

*Pavane pour une infante defunte* ("Pavane for a deceased princess") (1899). Here again there is a piano version and an orchestral. You'll recognize it immediately. For a piano version, see the performances recommended earlier by Bavouzet, Osborne, and Francois. For the orchestral version, see Boulez and the Clevelanders (in the box set recommended above) or in Ravel's collected orchestral works by Jean Martinon and the Orchestre de Paris (Warner Bros / EMI).










I have skipped one of his most famous piano works, _Gaspard de la nuit_, figuring that if you didn't enjoy _Miroirs_ (which I presume that you have in a piano version), this might not appeal to you as readily. _Gaspard_ is a favorite of mine -- and is one of the great works in the whole piano repertoire. Also wonderful are some of the movements of _Miroirs_, which you said that you didn't enjoy. Perhaps skip to movement #3, "Une barque sur l'ocean" and #4 "Alborada del gracioso" (which are found in both a piano solo version and an orchestral version). Perhaps once you get used to the earlier recommendations, _Miroirs_ as a whole may begin to make some sense.


----------



## QuietGuy

Cheyenne said:


> Would some people mind giving me a few recommendations? I've never truly listened to Ravel -- only occasionally in passing. I listened to his String Quartet in F yesterday and loved it! The only thing I own of him, unfortunately, is Miroirs. Where to start listening?


Hard to tell you where to begin because almost everything he wrote is sheer perfection. Piano Trio, Introduction and Allegro, L'Heure Espagnole, L'Enfant et les Sortilege, Rhapsodie Espagnole, La Valse, his songs, Daphnis et Chloe (full ballet) Ma Mere l'Oye, Violin Sonata, Tzigane, Sheherezade Songs, Don Quixote a Dulcinee, The 2 Piano Concerti, Tombeau de Couperin ... Everything! Lucky they have a boxed set of his entire output for sale.


----------



## Cheyenne

Thank you so much for the recommendations! I'll start listening right away.


----------



## Avey

Cheyenne said:


> Would some people mind giving me a few recommendations? I've never truly listened to Ravel -- only occasionally in passing. I listened to his String Quartet in F yesterday and loved it! The only thing I own of him, unfortunately, is Miroirs. Where to start listening?


The Decca "classic" recording of _Daphnis et Chloe_ is fantastic. One of Ravel's masterpieces, along with the _Piano Trio_ (so many great recordings) and obviously, the quartet.


----------



## deprofundis

I had an argument whit my dad stating my version of the bolero was better than his Karajan, he look flabbergeist when he heard my version of ravel's boléro, new York philharmonic conduct by kurt masur.Than he arrive at my home the next day whit a french orchestra doeing a ravel rendition he than says it's better than Karajan, this time it's Maurice le roux and l'orchestre national de O.R.F.T.

So i says to him his it better than my version , than he said sure of course hehe, i did not had the time to hear it yet but it's a french orchestra it most be rad, beside this version i have a version by Pierre Davreaux and its one of the best.Whit so many version it make me Wonder what is your favorite conductor for Ravel?


----------



## JACE

deprofundis said:


> So i says to him his it better than my version , than he said sure of course hehe, i did not had the time to hear it yet but it's a french orchestra it most be rad, beside this version i have a version by Pierre Davreaux and its one of the best.Whit so many version it make me Wonder *what is your favorite conductor for Ravel?*


My favorites are André Cluytens, Charles Munch, and Stanisław Skrowaczewski.


----------



## Celesta

My favorite is Dutoit. But I don't care for his Daphnis & Chloe. Myung Whun Chung and Orchestre Philharmonique de Radio France's performance of it is gorgeous.


----------



## hpowders

Charles Munch was not only great in Ravel and Berlioz, but was also very fine as a Brahms conductor.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit

Since I took the opportunity to read through some of this thread, I'll add my voice to the choir of fervent Ravel admirers, but I would also go a step further and say that, contrary to popular dogma that offers a wildly exaggerated privilege to the austro-german masters, Ravel achieved a higher and more intense beauty than any of they did (excluding Wagner) with greater frequency. 

Sorry if this offends some people, but now you can imagine how I feel being told as though it were objective fact that Beethoven's music is the greatest and that his and other, ultimately very similar composers are the standard by which other music should be measured.

Ravel creates a beauty that is entirely different from the aforementioned platoon of artists; instead of trying to tug at the heart-strings the way a scene of great tragedy or nobility would, he creates the sonic equivalent of sapphires, rubies or emeralds, inherently mesmerizing in a way that is ultimately visceral and bypasses the intellect (which any great work of art will to an extent), appealing to a completely different sensibility than that of the artistic elite of Western Classical music.


----------



## chalkpie

Apologies if I posted this somewhere on this thread (too lazy to back-thread), but this recording has my favorite version of "Le Tombeau" orchestral version that I know of. It is utter perfection IMO. And played by an Englishman with an English orchestra? Heresy perhaps, but it works


----------



## hpowders

chalkpie said:


> View attachment 62818
> 
> 
> Apologies if I posted this somewhere on this thread (too lazy to back-thread), but this recording has my favorite version of "Le Tombeau" orchestral version that I know of. It is utter perfection IMO. And played by an Englishman with an English orchestra? Heresy perhaps, but it works


Le Tombeau de Couperin is my favorite Ravel piece. What a beguilingly charming composition!!


----------



## PetrB

chalkpie said:


> IMO every single work he wrote is a gem of some variety - maybe not always a diamond perhaps - but some rubies, emeralds, sapphires, etc. I truly think his works are that good.


Another composer who, though it is just a technical comment which cannot 'evaluate' the music itself, whose scores were all of immaculate craftsmanship. In that way, at least, a true master. That so much of his orchestral music (most of it) started out as a piano piece and was later orchestrated, yet none of those sound like they were 'transferred from piano,' but are complete and brilliantly orchestrated entities which sound _as if they were directly conceived for orchestra_ is another proof of the completeness of his skills. Everything is at least outwardly quite beautiful, with a handful of true masterworks.


----------



## Avey

Heard _Tzigane_ -- violin and piano -- for the first time today.

Woah.


----------



## Haydnn

He was going to score Iberia by Albeniz. A friend stopped him suggesting that he could get sued because someone was already doing it. I wonder how it would have sounded.


----------



## Becca

Avey said:


> Heard _Tzigane_ -- violin and piano -- for the first time today.
> 
> Woah.


If you have any interest at all in dance, go to YouTube and look up Balanchine's ballet using Tzigane with Suzanne Farrell & Peter Martins


----------



## Dave Whitmore

I have to confess I haven't heard much of Ravel's music other than Bolero. Though I have heard his piano concerto and loved it. I know a lot of people regard Bolero with disdain but I love that piece of music. Reading through the posts on this thread has made me realise I'm missing out so March will be the month I start to explore more of Ravel's music. I've seen quite a few recommendations so I have plenty to listen to.


----------



## hpowders

Dave Whitmore said:


> I have to confess I haven't heard much of Ravel's music other than Bolero. Though I have heard his piano concerto and loved it. I know a lot of people regard Bolero with disdain but I love that piece of music. Reading through the posts on this thread has made me realise I'm missing out so March will be the month I start to explore more of Ravel's music. I've seen quite a few recommendations so I have plenty to listen to.


I recommend Le Tombeau de Couperin to you. Ravel at his most beguiling.


----------



## mcaparula

Ravel is my favorite composer. I own at least one recording of every composition he ever published and I would like to comment on a few things. His music pairs greatly with Debussy (Miroirs, Daphnis et Chloe, Une Barque sur L'Ocean,..) with Mozart (Valses Nobles Sentimentales, Minuet Antique, Le Tombeau de Couperin..) and with De Falla (Bolero, Rhapsodie Espagnole, L'Heure Espagnole). What other composer has so many distinctive sounds?

I recently saw Esa-Pekka Salonen conduct L'Enfant et Les Sortileges with the Chicago Symphony and it was absolutely brilliant. The sonorities he achieves brings out the child in all of us. The audience was filled with smiles and laughter. Ravel would have been proud!

That said, and this is what I would like to hear others comment on: I am not a fan of his piano concertos (especially the concerto in G). I know Ravel said that his piano concertos were his most important works, but I find that he tried to be more of an impersonator than an originator with these works.

Sometime late in his life, Ravel made a trip to the U.S. to make a speech at Rice University in Houston. On his trip, he stopped in NYC to hear a performance of Rhapsody in Blue. He absolutely loved it and believed this was the new music of the future (it was!). He wrote his 2 piano concerti after this. Some say Ravel integrated his voice with Gershwin's so well that the two concerti are masterpieces. I hear too much Gershwin....What are your thoughts?


----------



## tdc

mcaparula said:


> That said, and this is what I would like to hear others comment on: I am not a fan of his piano concertos (especially the concerto in G). I know Ravel said that his piano concertos were his most important works, but I find that he tried to be more of an impersonator than an originator with these works.


First off, can you tell me where you read that Ravel felt that his Piano Concertos were his most important works? I have not heard that before.

I do know one prolific poster that used to post here (who did know a thing or two about music), felt that in all of Ravel's oeuvre he had four true masterpieces - L'Enfant et Les Sortileges, Daphnis et Chloe, and the two Piano Concertos.

I tend to think the majority of Ravel's works are essentially masterpieces but I guess I am a bit biased as he is also one of my very favorite composers (second only to Bach). My personal favorite Ravel work is his Piano Trio.

As far as the Piano Concertos I am surprised you are not impressed by them. I don't think I've ever come across someone who is a great fan of Ravel that doesn't like the PC's. I consider them - along with Bartok's PC's to be the best Piano Concertos of the 20th century. I find the adagio from the PC in G particularly brilliant.

But hey to each their own, as you said Ravel was a multi-faceted composer, so if the Piano Concertos don't have the attributes in them you enjoy, he has plenty of other good pieces to listen to.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit

tdc said:


> First off, can you tell me where you read that Ravel felt that his Piano Concertos were his most important works? I have not heard that before.
> 
> I do know one prolific poster that used to post here (who did know a thing or two about music), felt that in all of Ravel's oeuvre he had four true masterpieces - L'Enfant et Les Sortileges, Daphnis et Chloe, and the two Piano Concertos.
> 
> I tend to think the majority of Ravel's works are essentially masterpieces but I guess I am a bit biased as he is also one of my very favorite composers (second only to Bach). My personal favorite Ravel work is his Piano Trio.
> 
> As far as the Piano Concertos I am surprised you are not impressed by them. I don't think I've ever come across someone who is a great fan of Ravel that doesn't like the PC's. I consider them - along with Bartok's PC's to be the best Piano Concertos of the 20th century. I find the adagio from the PC in G particularly brilliant.
> 
> But hey to each their own, as you said Ravel was a multi-faceted composer, so if the Piano Concertos don't have the attributes in them you enjoy, he has plenty of other good pieces to listen to.





mcaparula said:


> That said, and this is what I would like to hear others comment on: I am not a fan of his piano concertos (especially the concerto in G). I know Ravel said that his piano concertos were his most important works, but I find that he tried to be more of an impersonator than an originator with these works.
> 
> Sometime late in his life, Ravel made a trip to the U.S. to make a speech at Rice University in Houston. On his trip, he stopped in NYC to hear a performance of Rhapsody in Blue. He absolutely loved it and believed this was the new music of the future (it was!). He wrote his 2 piano concerti after this. Some say Ravel integrated his voice with Gershwin's so well that the two concerti are masterpieces. I hear too much Gershwin....What are your thoughts?


I actually do not really like the PC's much as well......they're just too jazzy, as mcaparula implies, too "Gershwin-y", but they still have such incredible brilliant moments that I wish Ravel had composed piano concerti in a somewhat different style, because he was obviously good at the genre.

And I agree, Ravel is a composer who nearly all of his works are masterpieces, even though we tend to celebrate composers who wrote a TON of music, and try to act like each piece is equally astonishing when in reality there is only a percentage that is truly inspired.

I think Daphnis and Chloe is probably the highest beauty achieved by a western or western-style composer, and my favorite Ravel pieces are the ones that have that lavish opulence.


----------



## hpowders

hpowders said:


> I recommend Le Tombeau de Couperin to you. Ravel at his most beguiling.


I went "Oh yes!!" and was preparing to like this post when I discovered it was my own!!

Anyhow, the endorsement still stands!


----------



## calvinpv

Moving in a different direction from what's been said on this thread, can anyone recommend a CD of Ravel's complete mélodies? A few months ago, I purchased them on a Naxos disc (because at the time, I had the strange impression this was the only available complete set), and, I must say, I'm kinda disappointed. I'm in no position to judge the quality of the singing, but I find the sound of the piano to be quite irritable. It sounds like a low-grade upright off in the distance, even if that's not the case. I also don't find the piano playing itself to be sharp and focused, which for me is a prerequisite for playing Ravel. Anyways, have any of you bought a complete set of the mélodies that gave you a positive experience? Thanks.


----------



## mcaparula

tdc said:


> First off, can you tell me where you read that Ravel felt that his Piano Concertos were his most important works? I have not heard that before.
> 
> I do know one prolific poster that used to post here (who did know a thing or two about music), felt that in all of Ravel's oeuvre he had four true masterpieces - L'Enfant et Les Sortileges, Daphnis et Chloe, and the two Piano Concertos.
> 
> I tend to think the majority of Ravel's works are essentially masterpieces but I guess I am a bit biased as he is also one of my very favorite composers (second only to Bach). My personal favorite Ravel work is his Piano Trio.
> 
> As far as the Piano Concertos I am surprised you are not impressed by them. I don't think I've ever come across someone who is a great fan of Ravel that doesn't like the PC's. I consider them - along with Bartok's PC's to be the best Piano Concertos of the 20th century. I find the adagio from the PC in G particularly brilliant.
> 
> But hey to each their own, as you said Ravel was a multi-faceted composer, so if the Piano Concertos don't have the attributes in them you enjoy, he has plenty of other good pieces to listen to.


First off, the text that says that Ravel considered his PCs his most important works was "Milton Cross' Encyclopedia of the Great Composers and Their Music." He lists three texts in his bibliography for Ravel: The great Roland Manuel text, a book by Norman Demuth, and a text by Victor Seroff.

I still enjoy the PCs, they are just far down my favorites list (still ahead of his awful Prix de Rome cantatas). I consider the Bartok and the Prokofiev PCs to be the "juggernauts" of the twentieth-century repertoire.


----------



## mcaparula

calvinpv said:


> Moving in a different direction from what's been said on this thread, can anyone recommend a CD of Ravel's complete mélodies? A few months ago, I purchased them on a Naxos disc (because at the time, I had the strange impression this was the only available complete set), and, I must say, I'm kinda disappointed. I'm in no position to judge the quality of the singing, but I find the sound of the piano to be quite irritable. It sounds like a low-grade upright off in the distance, even if that's not the case. I also don't find the piano playing itself to be sharp and focused, which for me is a prerequisite for playing Ravel. Anyways, have any of you bought a complete set of the mélodies that gave you a positive experience? Thanks.


I'm always hesitant with Naxos recordings...EMI came out with a 2-cd set a number of years ago that was a compilation of all their piano/vocal recordings from the past. I do not believe it is in print anymore, but you may be able to find it used.


----------



## mcaparula

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> I actually do not really like the PC's much as well......they're just too jazzy, as mcaparula implies, too "Gershwin-y", but they still have such incredible brilliant moments that I wish Ravel had composed piano concerti in a somewhat different style, because he was obviously good at the genre.
> 
> And I agree, Ravel is a composer who nearly all of his works are masterpieces, even though we tend to celebrate composers who wrote a TON of music, and try to act like each piece is equally astonishing when in reality there is only a percentage that is truly inspired.
> 
> I think Daphnis and Chloe is probably the highest beauty achieved by a western or western-style composer, and my favorite Ravel pieces are the ones that have that lavish opulence.


Right on! I completely agree with you. If you want to hear what a Ravel PC would sound like in a "different style," try the Poulenc PCs. I find both of them excellent. Daphnis is also my favorite Ravel. The suites don't do it justice. Has to be complete ballet with offstage chorus. I tend to fall for the more impressionistic veign as well, especially some of his smaller works like his 3 poems of Stephane Mellarme and the Miroirs.


----------



## joen_cph

*Norman Demuth*: _Ravel _

Allegedly the first book in English about the composer (1947). It´s an unremarkable, but probably okayish, short survey of Ravel´s life and work. There are some quite doubtful, patronising and conservative utterances mainly reflecting the taste of the author, but Demuth rarely goes into details with anything, and attempts at cultural analysis remain sparse, likewise any psychological portrayal of the composer.

He often points to the "Spanish heritage" in Ravel (via the mother), also the "Frenchness", but I´d really have liked him to analyze the mentioned fascination of toys and mechanical movements in the oeuvre much more than he does.

A few passages caught my attention:

- that Ravel orchestrated *Schumann*´s _Carnival_; I had to check this, and there´s a recent BIS CD containing the preserved fragments http://www.naxos.com/catalogue/item.asp?item_code=BIS-CD-1055
- that he orchestrated *Satie*´s "_Prelude les Fils d´Etoiles_";

(confirmed by the *French Wikipedia *article 
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Ravel#Orchestrations_et_arrangements )

- that the song_ Manteau des Fleurs _ exists in an orchestrated version (p.196)
- that 4 of the _Chants Populaires _ (1910) exist in orchestrated versions, and that there should be 7 of them (p.95).

(This is however not confimed by the *French or English Wikipedia *list of works
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Maurice_Ravel)

but the English one also mentions some further, lesser known orchestral songs:

_- Callirhoe, cantata (1900), partially lost
- Les Bayadères for soprano, mixed choir, and orchestra (1900)
- Tout est lumière for soprano, mixed choir, and orchestra (1900)
- Semiramis, cantata (1902), partially lost
- La nuit for soprano, mixed choir, and orchestra (1902)
- Matinée en Provence for soprano, mixed choir, and orchestra (1903)
- L'aurore, for tenor, mixed choir, and orchestra (1905)
- Noël des jouets, song with orchestra (1906)
- Saint François d'Assise for soloists, choir, and orchestra (1909-10), lost
_


----------



## Norse

I recognize some of those obscure orchestral songs as his four cantata submissions for the Prix du Rome competition. I remember hearing them on a Marco Polo disc years ago and believe I enjoyed the one called L'aurore quite a bit back then.


----------



## joen_cph

Checking your information, there is indeed this release:
http://www.naxos.com/catalogue/item.asp?item_code=8.223755


----------



## Norse

That's the one!


----------



## Ilarion

Lately, I have arrived at an observation that compels my thoughts about Ravel:

Ravel's Trio in a-minor sums up musically, what Ravel has written throughout his compositional life.

-Just an observational thought, ok?-


----------



## Guest

I blame...ice skating. 

Ravel means Bolero means ice skating means boring.

I heard La vallée des cloches today on the radio. Damn fine fayre. So my gaze has now turned to Ravel. Any suggestions?


----------



## Vaneyes

Agree, Ravel's decimated. "Pictures", "Daphnis", "Ma Goose", "Tombeau", "Pavane" receive ice time, also. Guess I'm watchin' too much figure skating.


----------



## Dr Johnson

dogen said:


> I blame...ice skating.
> 
> Ravel means Bolero means ice skating means boring.
> 
> I heard La vallée des cloches today on the radio. Damn fine fayre. So my gaze has now turned to Ravel. *Any suggestions?*


Piano Concerto in G major

Daphnis and Chloé

Sonata for Violin and Piano in G major.


----------



## Guest

Dr Johnson said:


> Piano Concerto in G major
> 
> Daphnis and Chloé
> 
> Sonata for Violin and Piano in G major.


Cheers ducko. I'll interrogate Spotify.


----------



## Dim7

Dr Johnson said:


> Piano Concerto in G major
> 
> Daphnis and Chloé
> 
> Sonata for Violin and Piano in G major.


Nah - Jeux d'eau, Miroirs, Sonatine, Gaspard de la nuit.............


----------



## Guest

Holy moly, how could you keep this from me????

Right, his solo piano works. Make your pitch for pianist...


----------



## Figleaf

dogen said:


> Holy moly, how could you keep this from me????
> 
> Right, his solo piano works. Make your pitch for pianist...


Just watch out for the bit that starts off like nice mellow impressionist piano stuff, then morphs hideously into God Save The Queen. That had me sprinting across the room to turn it off!

This is the set I have. I know little about piano, but I think it's good. The pianist is Paul Crossley and it's on Brilliant Classics.


----------



## tdc

dogen said:


> Holy moly, how could you keep this from me????
> 
> Right, his solo piano works. Make your pitch for pianist...


This Pascal Rogé set is excellent - highly recommended.


----------



## tdc

Figleaf said:


> Just watch out for the bit that starts off like nice mellow impressionist piano stuff, then morphs hideously into God Save The Queen. That had me sprinting across the room to turn it off!


Are you sure that was Ravel? I'm trying to figure out what piece you are referring to here?


----------



## Crudblud

dogen said:


> Holy moly, how could you keep this from me????
> 
> Right, his solo piano works. Make your pitch for pianist...


Samson François.


----------



## Mahlerian

tdc said:


> Are you sure that was Ravel? I'm trying to figure out what piece you are referring to here?


I'm pretty sure she's talking about Debussy's Preludes Book II.


----------



## Figleaf

Mahlerian said:


> I'm pretty sure she's talking about Debussy's Preludes Book II.


Oops. That probably is the one, thanks!


----------



## tdc

Crudblud said:


> Samson François.


Probably a good recommendation since many rate his Ravel highly. I think he was an excellent pianist but idiosyncratic. François is to Ravel what Gould is to Bach.


----------



## Pugg

tdc said:


> This Pascal Rogé set is excellent - highly recommended.


I second this :tiphat:

Not to be missed: Gaspard de la Nuit , played by Ivo the Great


----------



## Guest

Thanks folks. I listened to quite a lot of various works last night, not just piano. I need to open up a space in my R section of my CDs!


----------



## Guest

Figleaf said:


> Oops. That probably is the one, thanks!


I always stand up and salute at that point!


----------



## chesapeake bay

dogen said:


> I always stand up and salute at that point!


Hehe, it is rather disconcerting, but glad you found Ravel,he really is worth listening to. Check out Lucas Debague's rendition of Gaspard de la nuit from last years Tchaikovsky competition, it is amazing.


----------



## Figleaf

dogen said:


> I always stand up and salute at that point!


:lol:

All the same, I'm disappointed that you misattributed that piece to Ravel. It's lucky I was on hand to point out that it was from Debussy's Preludes, Book 2. 

One thing Ravel did that I really find beautiful is the Don Quixote songs. It might not be your thing (vocal music) but this is such an attractively sung performance by the gorgeous Gerard Souzay that I'll leave it here in case anyone else is interested:


----------



## Guest

Figleaf said:


> :lol:
> 
> All the same, I'm disappointed that you misattributed that piece to Ravel. It's lucky I was on hand to point out that it was from Debussy's Preludes, Book 2.
> 
> One thing Ravel did that I really find beautiful is the Don Quixote songs. It might not be your thing (vocal music) but this is such an attractively sung performance by the gorgeous Gerard Souzay that I'll leave it here in case anyone else is interested:


Hmmmm...I stand up when I have that Debussy CD on....


----------



## Wood

That Souzay Ravel sounds good, I'll have to check out some more.
It is now over 30 years since T&D, you guys should cut Bolero some slack, it is a good piece of music. :tiphat:

Some of my favorite Ravel:

Violin Sonata in G (Grumiaux, Hajdu)

Jeux d'Eau, Piano Concerto in G (Argerich)

Piano Trio in A min (Beaux Arts Trio)


----------



## Chronochromie

tdc said:


> François is to Ravel what Gould is to Bach.


Perfect way to make me avoid a pianist!


----------



## tdc

Chronochromie said:


> Perfect way to make me avoid a pianist!


Its a rough analogy meaning you will hear a lot of the pianists personality in the performances, but not intending to suggest that François sounds like Gould.

While he wouldn't be my first choice for a newbie, I like some of his interpretations and I think all Ravel aficionados should try listening to him, his recordings are generally rated highly.

All Ravel aficionados should also listen to Michelangeli.


----------



## Chronochromie

tdc said:


> Its a rough analogy meaning you will hear a lot of the pianists personality in the performances, but not intending to suggest that François sounds like Gould.


Yes, I got that.



tdc said:


> All Ravel aficionados should also listen to Michelangeli.


Not a fan of his Debussy. Maybe his Ravel is better.


----------



## Lukecash12

tdc said:


> All Ravel aficionados should also listen to Michelangeli.


Heartily seconded. I've been trying to broaden my Ravel horizons a bit more, and would like to hear some TC recommendations for the best chamber music of his to look into? As I've been slowly easing out of my early music craze, chamber music has really been doing it for me lately.


----------



## tdc

Lukecash12 said:


> Heartily seconded. I've been trying to broaden my Ravel horizons a bit more, and would like to hear some TC recommendations for the best chamber music of his to look into? As I've been slowly easing out of my early music craze, chamber music has really been doing it for me lately.


Maybe start with these:

Piano Trio (Beaux Arts Trio)
String Quartet (Alban Berg Quartett) 
Violin Sonata in G (Roge, Juillet)

I'm sure there are many other good versions. I haven't explored that many different recordings of these works yet to be honest, maybe 3 or so of each. Those have stood out so far.


----------



## dgee

Ravel chamber music recommendations wouldn't be complete without the stunning 3 Mallarme poems for voice and ensemble - I can never tire of it

And while I'm at it, pianist Monique Haas is a wonderful Ravel interpreter


----------



## juliante

Quick query for folks if u can help: I have a cd of daphne and Chloe, Boulez and Berlin Phil. It is in 3 parts totalling about 56 minutes. Is this the full version and not the one normally recorded?? My book talks about a suite no 2 as being the main 'version' ... Just want to know what I have. Cheers. (Any thoughts re versions also appreciated)


----------



## Mahlerian

juliante said:


> Quick query for folks if u can help: I have a cd of daphne and Chloe, Boulez and Berlin Phil. It is in 3 parts totalling about 56 minutes. Is this the full version and not the one normally recorded?? My book talks about a suite no 2 as being the main 'version' ... Just want to know what I have. Cheers. (Any thoughts re versions also appreciated)


Yes, that would be the full ballet rather than one of the suites. The major difference is the addition of chorus, and I think it changes the sound significantly.


----------



## chalkpie

Riding a huge Ravel wave. I have listened to Ma mere (all versions) more times in the past week or so than any human in history, including Ravel himself. No joke, its been getting played upwards of 10 times per day. I prefer the complete ballet as the suite misses out on some exquisite movements, so it seems pointless to be honest. I have been also delving into his piano works more this time - he is simply one of my favorite composers for piano, period. 

What to say? Virtually every piece is amazing or close to it. The thrashing 9/8 measures in Alborada del gracioso rips my head off (in a good way). I think I'm going to buy a book on him - its time.


----------



## hpowders

chalkpie said:


> Riding a huge Ravel wave. I have listened to Ma mere (all versions) more times in the past week or so than any human in history, including Ravel himself. No joke, its been getting played upwards of 10 times per day. I prefer the complete ballet as the suite misses out on some exquisite movements, so it seems pointless to be honest. I have been also delving into his piano works more this time - he is simply one of my favorite composers for piano, period.
> 
> What to say? Virtually every piece is amazing or close to it. The thrashing 9/8 measures in Alborada del gracioso rips my head off (in a good way). I think I'm going to buy a book on him - its time.


When I was around 6, my dad had a recording of the Mother Goose Suite. I remember it was so magical. Got me hooked on CM.


----------



## Bettina

chalkpie said:


> Riding a huge Ravel wave....I think I'm going to buy a book on him - its time.


I recommend Roger Nichols' biography of Ravel. He does a great job delving into Ravel's life, music, and cultural milieu. I enjoy his prose style--his writing is eloquent without ever sounding pretentious (unlike many musicological studies!) :lol:


----------



## starthrower

I have to get digging into my Ravel Edition more often. I haven't really explored everything. I do love all of the piano music, the string quartet, and Le Tombeau de Couperin. The prelude to that piece contains one of the most beautiful melodies I've ever encountered. I literally get this warm rush followed by goose bumps everytime I listen to it.


----------



## starthrower

chalkpie said:


> Riding a huge Ravel wave. I have listened to Ma mere (all versions) more times in the past week or so than any human in history, including Ravel himself.


I listened the Boulez/Berliner Phil disc yesterday. Some greating writing for bassoon in some of those pieces.

Anybody have the Sony Boulez remastered set? I hear it sounds very good.


----------



## Vaneyes

Troubling closure of Ravel Museum. 

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...um-le-belvedere-montfort-lamaury-france-music


----------



## Strange Magic

Vaneyes said:


> Troubling closure of Ravel Museum.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...um-le-belvedere-montfort-lamaury-france-music


An absolute tragedy! France has much to answer for if Ravel's home and heritage are thus mismanaged.

A performance of Ma mere from eons ago that struck me was that of Ataulfo Argenta and the Orchestre des Cento Soli on vinyl. Again, gooseflesh.


----------



## starthrower

What the hell does "the recent possible disappearance of objects and archives" supposed to imply? If anyhing is missing, it's probably an inside job. Shame they had to show disrespect to the CSO, and Dutoit and Argerich.


----------



## chalkpie

That is total rubbish. What a shame. It just goes to show you in life how the arts are still undervalued, yet so much money is wasted on garbage that is deemed more important. Dutoit and Argerich "trespassing"? Unbelievable.


----------



## starthrower

chalkpie said:


> That is total rubbish. What a shame. It just goes to show you in life how the arts are still undervalued, yet so much money is wasted on garbage that is deemed more important.


The wrong people are in charge. Autocrats and Philistines with no sense of aesthetics, and indifferent to the things in life possessing intrinsic value.


----------



## tdc

"_the millions of Euros' worth of royalties paid to the Ravel estate - by far the most lucrative of any French composer's, thanks to the Boléro - ended up siphoned off through a network of companies sheltered in various tax havens across several countries. No one knows exactly how much was paid or to whom; only that none of it has gone towards supporting Ravel's musical heritage_."

How long are people going to stand for this kind of thing? I think its time the police and military started waking up and arresting the real criminals in this world - the bankers and the heads of the corporations and anyone else that might be hiding in the shadows behind them.


----------



## starthrower

The police and military have their own problems with corruption. Good luck trying to get bankers behind bars. They've been caught (HSBC) laundering money for the world's most notorious criminal organizations, but nobody goes to jail. The ever increasing indifference concerning the common good is rather disturbing. It's a slap on the wrist, and back to business as usual.


----------



## KenOC

starthrower said:


> The wrong people are in charge. Autocrats and Philistines with no sense of aesthetics, and indifferent to the things in life possessing intrinsic value.


Yes! I, and only I, possessing a formidable expertise in aesthetics and true values, should be in charge! No others need apply, obviously.  My first act will be to restore the Liberace Museum in Las Vegas. It was forced to close by pencil-necked beancounters who knew no God but Mammon.


----------



## starthrower

Your sarcasm is all in good fun, Ken. But there are politicians at work that would like to defund any and all programs benefiting the arts.


----------



## KenOC

Where I live, municipal orchestras are almost entirely funded by donations and ticket sales No tax money is involved. And that's fine. I don't believe that the taxpayers, whose tastes are in aggregate far different from mine, should have to foot the bill for my enjoyments.


----------



## Gordontrek

> A few days earlier, on 27 January, conductor Charles Dutoit and pianist Martha Argerich visited the museum, only to find themselves escorted from the premises by the local police. According to Le Figaro, a council official objected to their taking photographs inside the museum - though this is not prohibited - and had informed the police that the museum was being burgled.


If you kick two of the greatest musicians walking this earth out of your museum you better have a DARN good reason. This sounds utterly insulting.


----------



## Pugg

starthrower said:


> The wrong people are in charge. Autocrats and Philistines with no sense of aesthetics, and indifferent to the things in life possessing intrinsic value.


And jet we voted for their bosses.
They pull the strings.


----------



## starthrower

KenOC said:


> Where I live, municipal orchestras are almost entirely funded by donations and ticket sales No tax money is involved. And that's fine. I don't believe that the taxpayers, whose tastes are in aggregate far different from mine, should have to foot the bill for my enjoyments.


What about all the other things your tax dollarsare paying for? Are you in agreement on all of them? The NEA is a pittance, yet people bitch about it. And most orchestras cannot survive on ticket sales, and many corporate sponsors have pulled the plug. I don't care for sports, but I don't bitch that all tax dollars should be held back for these activities.


----------



## Vaneyes

What the hell, your tax dollars pay for the underprivileged's health & welfare, your tax dollars can pay for your enjoyments, also. 

Meanwhile, re Ravel Museum update, it appears to be open for business.

https://travelguide.michelin.com/eu...velines/montfort-lamaury/maurice-ravel-museum

http://www.fondationmauriceravel.com/en/come-visit-le-belvedere/

Related:

Feb. 4 - 6, 2017 articles -

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...um-le-belvedere-montfort-lamaury-france-music

https://jessicamusic.blogspot.ca/2017/02/ravel-museum-throws-out-dutoit-and.html


----------



## Minor Sixthist

What an incredibly complex individual. I admire something about him that's hard to place . . . just how much was beneath that surface. I feel like he's such an enigma and I love it. Needless to say his complexities show themselves in his music, and I feel Bolero, in its simplistic redundancy, makes an even bolder statement about his complexities as a person.


----------



## chalkpie

Major Ravel binge going for me. I have delved deeper into his music than ever before, and I am more amazed what I continually find . A few works that have really been speaking to me more than ever this time around:

Gaspard de la Nuit
Piano Trio in A minor
Introduction and Allegro
Daphnis et Chloe
Ma Mere L'Oye
Miroirs
various vocal pieces 
+ a bunch more 

I know all of this music, but this time around after playing them multiple times over a few weeks or so now, I feel like I have really cracked them. 

Amazing composer - easily Top 5, possibly Top 3 at this point.


----------



## chalkpie

STILL riding Ravel. I am so utterly addicted to his music right now its insanity! But good insanity.

BTW, these lectures on Ravel are absolutely amazing and totally worth your time. The lecturer named Bruce Adolphe is fantastic - very funny yet makes it quite interesting. This will open your mind to just how brilliant Ravel was with his techniques and composing methods. Start with this one and then watch the others on both Gaspard and the Trio in A. Enjoy.


----------



## tdc

chalkpie said:


> STILL riding Ravel. I am so utterly addicted to his music right now its insanity! But good insanity.
> 
> BTW, these lectures on Ravel are absolutely amazing and totally worth your time. The lecturer named Bruce Adolphe is fantastic - very funny yet makes it quite interesting. This will open your mind to just how brilliant Ravel was with his techniques and composing methods. Start with this one and then watch the others on both Gaspard and the Trio in A. Enjoy.


Thanks for posting this, fascinating stuff. Now that I have a better understanding of the structure and harmony used in this movement, I'm blown away and my appreciation of the piece has just been greatly expanded. I'm looking forward to watching Bruce's video on the Trio.


----------



## Room2201974

chalkpie said:


> STILL riding Ravel. I am so utterly addicted to his music right now its insanity! But good insanity.
> 
> BTW, these lectures on Ravel are absolutely amazing and totally worth your time. The lecturer named Bruce Adolphe is fantastic - very funny yet makes it quite interesting. This will open your mind to just how brilliant Ravel was with his techniques and composing methods. Start with this one and then watch the others on both Gaspard and the Trio in A. Enjoy.


Thank you for posting that *chalkpie*. Laparra's _Ulysse_ won the Prix de Rome in 1903, instead of this brilliant quartet. Too bad the competition wasn't based on compositional ability.


----------



## Josquin13

It's great to see that there are other fans out there of the music of Maurice Ravel! I rate him highly among my favorite composers. Debussy too. With both composers, it's been a goal of mine to listen to and collect every note they ever composed (which I'll only do with composers that I greatly admire). It's been a wonderful obsession.

For me, Ravel had a fascinating imagination, and gift for musical invention. Plus, his ability to orchestrate & match various instruments to create unique sound worlds, is incredible. I never tire of his music, even after decades of listening to it, though of course I like some of his works better than others. My favorite Ravel compositions are his Daphnis et Chloé, Ma mére l'Oye, Gaspard de la Nuit, Miroirs, Sonatine, Jeux d'eau, the String Quartet, Piano Trio, Introduction et allegro, Pavane pour infante défunte, & Trois poémes de Mallarmé, etc..

With this post, I'll initiate a series of posts where I intend to mention & provide links to my favorite Ravel discoveries over the past several decades--the films, musicians, conductors, books, and recordings that I've most treasured.

I'll begin with Ravel's 3rd and final student, the French composer and conductor Manuel Rosenthal (1904-2003). (Ravel's other two students were Ralph Vaughan Williams & George Gershwin.) I consider Rosenthal's recordings of his teacher's music to be essential listening for Ravel fans. His reminiscences of Ravel the man are also fascinating (for instance, did you know that Ravel ate mackerel everyday for lunch, and after that a very rare cooked steak?). With that in mind, I'll offer the following links: (1) Rosenthal talking about Ravel on BBC radio, which includes his fascinating recollection of when he asked Ravel, towards the end of the composer's life, about which piece of music Ravel wished to be played at his funeral?, and (2) a short book that Rosenthal wrote about three French composers that he knew, including Ravel (the other two being Satie & Poulenc; although Rosenthal was also good friends with Milhaud, Honegger, & Stravinsky), and (3) I'll provide links to Rosenthal's excellent Ravel recordings.

1. Rosenthal's BBC reminiscences of his teacher, Ravel: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p01td2ry

2. Rosenthal's 81 page 1987 book (which unfortunately, appears to be OOP & has become pricey on Amazon), containing his thoughts about music, and as noted, his personal memories of composers Ravel, Satie, and Poulenc: https://www.amazon.com/Satie-Ravel-...d=1542670856&sr=1-3&keywords=manuel+rosenthal

There's also a 1995 book by Rosenthal, entitled "Ravel: Souvenirs de Manuel Rosenthal" which I've not read. Nor do I know if it's ever been translated into English (although Rosenthal was fluent in English, having spent a number of years in the states, so it's possible that he wrote an English edition, too... ?).

3. Rosenthal's Ravel recordings:

Daphnis et Chloe is my favorite Ravel recording by him: 





Here's a YT link to Rosenthal's excellent recordings of the Complete Ravel Orchestral works (including a first rate Ma mére l'Oye): 




L'Heure espagnole & L'enfant et les sortiléges (which I couldn't find on You Tube):

https://www.amazon.com/Ravel-LEnfan...8&qid=1542735984&sr=1-11&keywords=Ravel+opera
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06X3ZLM6V/ref=dm_ws_sp_ps_dp
https://www.amazon.com/Ravel-LHeure...-1&keywords=rosenthal+ravel+l'heure+espagnole
https://www.amazon.com/Ravel-Lheure...35902&sr=1-9&keywords=Ravel+l'heure+espagnole

4. Of interest, Rosenthal orchestrated three of Ravel's 1904-06 songs for voice & piano (songs 2-4), "Cinq mélodies popularies Grecques", which Ravel didn't get to, having orchestrated only two of the 5 songs (nos. 1 & 5):





: Soprano Victoria de los Angeles' performance of these songs, accompanied by conductor Georges Prêtre, is easily the finest I've heard, & a benchmark recording, IMO (although I've liked others too).













At the advent of the digital era, there were only two conductors left living (that I know of) with links directly back to Paris during the time of Ravel and Debussy--they were Manuel Rosenthal and Jean Fournet. I greatly value the recordings of both conductors in the French repertory, especially in the music of Ravel and Debussy. Although Fournet was able to leave us many more digital recordings than Rosenthal, due to his contract with Denon in Japan & the many concerts he gave in that country. It's a shame that comprehensive box sets haven't been issued for either conductor (although Supraphon did release a very recommendable box set of Fournet's recordings "in Prague": https://www.amazon.com/Jean-Fournet...730308&sr=1-1&keywords=jean+fournet+supraphon, and there is an 8 CD box set of Fournet's live 1960s radio broadcasts with the Netherlands Radio Philharmonic, as well: https://www.amazon.com/Jean-Fournet...r=1-1&keywords=jean+fournet+netherlands+radio). But, to date, there hasn't been a single box set devoted to Rosenthal's conducting, which there should be (plus, I'd be very interested to know what a record label might be able to 'unearth' from various radio archives, etc., including whether a recording of Rosenthal's Pelleas et Melisande exists).

Of further interest, Rosenthal's conducting students at the Paris Conservatoire between 1962 and 1974 included Yan Pascal Tortelier, Eliahu Inbal, Jean-Claude Casadesus, Marc Soustrot, and Jacques Mercier. Of these five, I've most enjoyed Inbal's 4 CD survey of Ravel's complete orchestral music with the Orchestre de Paris, originally released by Denon (& later made available by other labels)--which I'd count among the better Ravel sets of the digital era, along with Dutoit, Boulez, and Abbado's). As much as I admire Dutoit, Boulez, and Abbado in Ravel, a case could be made that Inbal's Ravel is more idiomatic (due to his studies with Rosenthal), certainly more so than Abbado's (which isn't all that French sounding--though that's not necessarily a weakness). Along with Tortelier's excellent Ravel series with the Ulster Orchestra for Chandos, too. I consider the Ravel surveys of both conductors to be a part of Ravel & Rosenthal's legacy as teachers:

Eliahu Inbal:










https://www.amazon.com/Maurice-Rave...542730532&sr=8-11&keywords=eliahu+inbal+ravel
https://www.amazon.com/Maurice-Orch...1542730532&sr=8-9&keywords=eliahu+inbal+ravel
https://www.amazon.com/Ravel-Ma-Mer...542730532&sr=8-13&keywords=eliahu+inbal+ravel
https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Orc...542730532&sr=8-10&keywords=eliahu+inbal+ravel

Yan Pascal Tortelier:









https://www.amazon.com/Sheherazade-...words=tortelier+ravel+introduction+et+allegro

https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Orc...id=1542736487&sr=1-1&keywords=Ravel+tortelier. Tortelier's set is also available on less expensive individual CDs(same as Inbal's): https://www.amazon.com/Ravel-Valse-...words=tortelier+ravel+introduction+et+allegro.

P.S. There's also the following recommendable Harmonia Mundi CD from conductor Jean-Claude Casadesus and the Orchestre National de Lille, with pianist Georges Pludermacher (himself a student of Ravel's friend, Jacques Fevrier), among other Rosenthal students' recordings: https://www.amazon.com/Ravel-Jean-C...-catcorr&keywords=jean-claude+casadesus+ravel


----------



## tdc

Great presentation here on Ravel's Piano Trio, it would have been nice to hear some of his thoughts on the finale as it is such a unique movement in Ravel's oeuvre, however this video focuses mostly on the first movement.

Some thoughts I take away from this:

- Much of Ravel's music features very similar chord progressions that we find in Mozart, with harmonic modifications (extra 'color' added to the chords). I now have a better understanding of Ravel's hyperbolic statement "My music is nothing but Mozart."
- Bruce confirmed something I've posted here before; Ravel is more neo classicist in structure than Debussy.
- The piece fluctuates between Dorian and Phrygian, yet the powerful coda of the first movement is in a mode that was made up by Ravel. I feel like Ravel's intuitive sense of harmony was astounding.


----------



## Josquin13

To continue from my post above, as promised,

The following (favorite) Canadian documentary film on Ravel used to be available on VHS tape (in English & English subtitled), but unfortunately today it's difficult & very pricey to find on DVD. However, that isn't a problem if you understand German +/or speak French & English, as a German copy of the film has been posted on You Tube. The languages spoken by the musicians interviewed in the documentary (who all knew Ravel) are French & English--subtitled in German, while the narration of the film has been dubbed in German. If you can't understand the words, the Ravel performances are still worth hearing, IMO: especially pianist Alicia de Larrocha's performance of Ravel's Piano Concerto with the Montreal Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Charles Dutoit (which to my knowledge has never been issued on CD, most frustratingly):

The documentary is posted in four parts. Sadly, it evokes a world & time in France that is no longer--evidenced right from the opening scene where we see pianist Gaby Casadesus listening to Ravel's Bolero on an old phonograph record:


















I hope people enjoy it.


----------



## flamencosketches

Bump for a master composer.

Ravel wrote a few of the most beautiful minuets of all time.


----------



## paulbest

Maurice Ravel, the most unrecognized, under appreciated, composer of all time. thanks for reviving composer who I would eventually get around to posting comments. 

I offer quite a few comments on amazon, about the significance and genius of Ravel,
Have nearly all the most important piano solo recordings. Perhaps 8 complete sets. 

Continue posting YT vids, like to hear new performances, I may have missed.


----------



## flamencosketches

Do you have the Samson François CD of Ravel's complete piano music? It's phenomenal IMO. Perhaps my favorite. I also love Martha Argerich in Ravel, but sadly she hasn't recorded all of it.

Since you asked for Youtube vids, here is another of my favorite Gaspards:






From an amazingly talented pianist. Clearly very young at the time of recording too.

When I first started getting REALLY into classical music over this past holiday season, the composers I was completely obsessed with were Bach, Mozart, and Ravel. The later especially helped my love of solo piano bloom into a full blown obsession. I've since started playing. (Can't play any Ravel yet though  give me a few years)


----------



## paulbest

Although many Ravelians rave about Pogorelich, I am not one of them. 
Neither Argerich. 
Gieseking , even before him, another pianist I can not recall at the moment, established the textures, tempos, phrasing in very well crafted poetics. Though , we now have superior recordings in other aspects. Still any pianists who fails to carefully study and note Giesekings masterful recordings, will do so at his own peril of loss. 
Listening to the many recordings I have, one can decipher which has done his homework paying close attention to Gieseking, and those who have overlooked the great master, to their loss. 
I can not place a 1,2,3 favat the moment. 
I do like very much, and many are in agreement with Bavouzet's performances
If you only had 1 set, that would be the one. 
On Samson, I did have some LP's , yet at that time, Gieseking was champ, and that was that. 
But recently I purchased the 6 cd set with the great Cluytens/Conservatoire , good recording, May prefer Martinon/French National, in fact I do.
The other 3 cds have the Samson recordings. 
Samson offers very interesting renditions. Not sure if I am able to offer more at the moment, as I can't recall exactly how he takes the works.

I will go to YT now and report back what I find out.

oh yes, I too am a Ravelian, for life. There are a few of us out there, you are not alone.


----------



## paulbest

For anyone who doubts the fact Ravel is the greatest composer for piano solo, 
Here is a video which will dispel any misgivings. 
Richter is very well known as a legendary craftsman. I had many of his Bach, Rachmaninov LPs , some may not have been ever released on Cd format, In both composers, few meet his achievements. 
Note how he managing to hold it together, though nothing great, my only purpose is to show just the horrific difficulty of this score.

Even the Argerich YT vid shows her struggles clearly.


----------



## paulbest

Here you can read my comments on this masterful YT upload of the REAL winner of this piano comp in 2013

Exceptional performance, though Zi Xu did miss a note or 2.

These piano comps are rigged.


----------



## paulbest

ahh now today, I realize what it was about my initial intro with Samson on his Ravel. He veered off from Gieseking's *standards* 
Samson is what we call, idiosyncratic. , ,,he plays with his flare. But when you possess talents as his, let the gifted artist play as he wills. 
Outstanding artist, just stunning gifts in understanding Ravel,.
I am in agreement with you. Though very different from say Bavouzet and, in fact, none of the other 8/9 cd sets, come near his interpretations. Samson is unique as the music itself. 
Ravel meets Samson is the way I tag that record. 
Others may not care for his mannerisms. .
This is what happened decades ago, I was totally convinced Gieseking was the definitive and as Samson seemed to clash with the great master, , I lost interest.


----------



## flamencosketches

You've given me a lot to respond to and I've gotta get to bed. For now I'll say a couple things. As for Gieseking, I LOVE his Debussy, but I am not crazy about his Ravel. I'm not sure why that is but I think it has to do with some of the core differences between the two Frenchmen, and stark differences they are. They're often lumped in together as "the impressionists", and maybe that's what they are to an extent. But their styles could not be more wildly different from each other.

In any case, with such high praise from you regarding Gieseking's Ravel, I will have to revisit. He has a cheap complete Ravel box set on Warner (?) so I may have to pick it up. Samson François is a new favorite of mine in Ravel (as well as Chopin: he was student to the great Chopin master Alfred Cortot so that should come as no surprise) but his idiosyncratic approach totally changed the way I look at Ravel's music.

Argerich was I think the first I ever heard in Ravel alongside Jean-Yves Thibaudet who I'm not too crazy about anymore. So I kind of imprinted on her style. I guess Pogorelich, idiosyncratic though he is, kind of falls under that banner of Ravel playing. Almost Lisztian, not too much on the "impressionistic" side of things. I like this style as well as that of monsieur François.






This is a great performance of an indeed extremely difficult piece, IMO.


----------



## paulbest

You have keen sense of hearing, understanding , a quality I lacked terribly back in my early days. ...Then I began a long arduous journey of critiquing the recordings of all my fav composers. 
I was informally tagged as the 1 minute clip review guy .
Most forum members could not rely on any of my recommends,,lol, I don't blame them..thats all we had back in the day,, YT uploads were thin and sparse. 

I am not aware there is a dif in Giesekings, Debussy and his Ravel. Gieseking was the best we had back in the LP days, so I never doubted his performances.,.. though today, I can now hear, he does not match m=others who now offer more crafted performances. Plus the EMI record engineer really failed at his job on the Gieseking, ,,,for my life I can never ever understand why EMI did not make TWO, DOS records of Gieseking's Debussy and Ravel, This way posterity could pick and chose which is the better of the 2. The british are the world's worst record studios. This is a fact, most will readily admit. 

A better sound, may have rescued that record, it is unlistenable. 
Remaster is a gimmick. 
, Bavouzet is must have. Samson offers spectacular playing skills some may find him, too individualistic. 
There are others, more later.


----------



## paulbest

So you prefer Argerich over Braunschweiler and that of Zi Xu?


----------



## flamencosketches

paulbest said:


> So you prefer Argerich over Braunschweiler and that of Zi Xu?


I still have yet to listen to your two. Let me do that when the album I have on now finishes up in a couple of minutes. I must warn that it will be hard to beat Argerich, as like I said she is who I "imprinted" on for Ravel (much like you with Gieseking).

As I mentioned earlier I'm going to seek out that Gieseking CD of the complete Ravel on your glowing recommendation. And I'll look into Bavouzet too. I'm not familiar with his playing at all.


----------



## flamencosketches

Ok, let's see. Ms. Braunschweiler delivered a great performance. All around clean sound, hardly missed a note which as you mentioned is just about impossible with this piece. A bit lacking in dynamic I guess, but overall impressive.

I liked Mr. Xi Zu a lot more. Yes this is hard to beat. Competition or not that was a great performance. 

Good finds there.


----------



## paulbest

flamencosketches said:


> Ok, let's see. Ms. Braunschweiler delivered a great performance. All around clean sound, hardly missed a note which as you mentioned is just about impossible with this piece. A bit lacking in dynamic I guess, but overall impressive.
> 
> I liked Mr. Xi Zu a lot more. Yes this is hard to beat. Competition or not that was a great performance.
> 
> Good finds there.


Honestly, I do not offer a recommend on the Gieseking. I was tempted to order the set, *for old times sake* as it goes on the cheap, like $10. But alas, not recommended. 
There are superior records out now. Though I have 8+ sets, I would honestly, at the moment, just recommend the Bavouzet, And you say you have the Samson? 
Stay with those 2. I usually never like idiosyncratic performances, but this is a rare exception, with Samson in Ravel,His skills are stunning, even if he veers outside the beaten paths.
I am hard wired to Gieseking's perforamnces, He set the gold standards for all the textures, tempos, proper phrasing in both Debussy and Ravel,,though not the finest now that we have dozens other recordings, still he trail blazed the paths to Ravel's extremely difficult music.

Its seems to me Bavouzet spent more time listening to Gieseking, than did Thibaudet. I'm guessing, just a hunch tells me so.

There is a YT vid comparing the 2 side be side.

Samson ignores Gieseking and goes off on his own. Amazing, just unreal that he was successful at it.

I will try today to recall the pianist before Gieseking, who also understood how to play Ravel,, , perhaps Marguerite Long

I do think Zi Xu is superior to Katia.

The 2013 piano comp gave 1,2,3 place awards to pianist not equal to Xu. But the others played the old standards, which is why they won. 
None of the 3 winners, could match Xu here in Ravel, which is why I awarded him gold/silver/ and the bronze to the pianist in the Prokofiev concerto.


----------



## flamencosketches

As expected I butchered the poor guy's name :lol: 

Ok, noted. I do really like Gieseking's Debussy, but the sound quality there is rough too and the playing is not without mistakes (doesn't bother me; I love Schnabel's Beethoven for example). I wonder if Debussy's or Ravel's music is better suited to idiosyncratic interpretation. I think generally, neither is much. 

Have you heard any of Ravel's piano rolls? There may be enlightening clues there as to how he played his own music. 

To veer off of piano music for a moment, what do you like as far as his orchestral music? Chamber music? The Emerson Quartet has a phenomenal rendition of his string quartet alongside Debussy's.


----------



## paulbest

flamencosketches said:


> As expected I butchered the poor guy's name :lol:
> 
> Ok, noted. I do really like Gieseking's Debussy, but the sound quality there is rough too and the playing is not without mistakes (doesn't bother me; I love Schnabel's Beethoven for example). I wonder if Debussy's or Ravel's music is better suited to idiosyncratic interpretation. I think generally, neither is much.
> 
> Have you heard any of Ravel's piano rolls? There may be enlightening clues there as to how he played his own music.
> 
> To veer off of piano music for a moment, what do you like as far as his orchestral music? Chamber music? The Emerson Quartet has a phenomenal rendition of his string quartet alongside Debussy's.


You have a very keen sense of music, I can tell. Schnabel's Beethoven is unique, as I recall from the LP days, though he may not rank high on folks list of preferred today in 2019, as *dated sound*. 
Also you are correct, with Debussy, the more difficult to get right, in terms of melodic, poetic imagery. Which is why I have fewer keepers in Debussy. Ravel is more open to various(slightly so) interpretations. Not so with Debussy, at least concerning most of his piano works, and orchestral as well.
The piano rolls of Debussy and that of Ravel are incredible testimonies to their talents of imagination. They shape their pieces with pauses and tempos, that few have equaled. Bavouzet is one exception in Ravel. Will have to get back with you on the Debussy. Agree on Gieseking's Debussy. Though many have recoded Debussy since his late 1950's, few have matched his gifts of poetry, dynamics, tempos. One word: Perfection.,,, It is the record quality which prevents me from purchase. the distortion destroys the enjoyment. 
I can never forgive the EMI engineers 
in the Gieseking Ravel and Debussy. The british are the worst at record quality. 
I have most every recording in the Ravel SQ. 
More on that later

If you acquire just 1 set in both compoers orchestral, go with the most notable, EMI's Martinon release, Goes for cheap. 
You will not need any others.

Yes I do know of Monteux /Concertgebouw/1963(?) record of Ravel's Daphne,,,Sure is memorable, intense and so, that would be worthy to hear
YT has a upload of that masterful performance.


----------



## Manxfeeder

Any thoughts on Robert Casadesus? When I first heard his Ravel recording, I hated it, because I didn't get what he was doing. But I figured out he is playing with a sense of classicism, which actually suits Ravel.


----------



## paulbest

Manxfeeder said:


> Any thoughts on Robert Casadesus? When I first heard his Ravel recording, I hated it, because I didn't get what he was doing. But I figured out he is playing with a sense of classicism, which actually suits Ravel.


I heard Casadesus back in the LP days, ,,I also had issues with his performance and do not own the cd.

Here is Francois in Debussy, , the liberty he takes in Ravel works fine, but as flamencosk mentions above, the perimeters for individual temperament, in Debussy are more confined/restricted.

I do not like how Francois takes this work of Debussy, perhaps his best work





.


----------



## millionrainbows

This is interesting: an orchestral version of Gaspard de la Nuit, by Marius Constant (the guy who wrote the Twilight Zone theme!)









@Paul Best, great video of Richter. I love that!


----------



## philoctetes

The latest remasters of Gieseking's work have cleaned up the bass. I never liked them much but now I do, especially the Ravel.

Got a copy of Bavouzet cheap and it did not survive the cut. Francois is still the champ.


----------



## millionrainbows

Dominique Merlet's set is very good.


----------



## philoctetes

I like Baudo as an alternative to the usual wallpaper... the mp3s are a good deal on Amazoo


----------



## paulbest

millionrainbows said:


> This is interesting: an orchestral version of Gaspard de la Nuit, by Marius Constant (the guy who wrote the Twilight Zone theme!)
> 
> View attachment 117538
> 
> 
> @Paul Best, great video of Richter. I love that!


Hi, yes Richter is managing Ok, = struggling, he barely survived.

But hey, where in THIS WORLD did you come up with this record?
I've seen every Ravel record in print, except this one.

I bet its a old rare OOP LP.

I want to hear it.

I know its old school and very charming.


----------



## paulbest

millionrainbows said:


> Dominique Merlet's set is very good.
> 
> View attachment 117541
> View attachment 117542


Yet again, where are you finding these possible gems. have not heard it, so can't fully comment, But he is French, and thatsa huge plus to start.

Another LP/OOP I am sure. 
Looks like a EU release only, or perhaps Canada.


----------



## paulbest

philoctetes said:


> The latest remasters of Gieseking's work have cleaned up the bass. I never liked them much but now I do, especially the Ravel.
> 
> Got a copy of Bavouzet cheap and it did not survive the cut. Francois is still the champ.


Are you sure?
The YT upload with a compare of Thibaudet and Bavouzet,,,you can not find even a single negative comment on Bavouzet's recording. 
Is it too clinical? lacks zesto, fire, passion? 
I mean you havea right to your opinion, and we can respect this. But the near 100% consensus is that Bavouzet has a highly polished, refined, along with depth and eloquence. 
I suggest you relisten just once more,, I know I wrote Francois off decades ago, and now I understand his approach, and am fascinated by his skills and craftmanship. Yet his individualistic way in Debussy, is a complete disaster.


----------



## philoctetes

paulbest said:


> Are you sure?
> The YT upload with a compare of Thibaudet and Bavouzet,,,you can not find even a single negative comment on Bavouzet's recording.
> Is it too clinical? lacks zesto, fire, passion?
> I mean you havea right to your opinion, and we can respect this. But the near 100% consensus is that Bavouzet has a highly polished, refined, along with depth and eloquence.
> I suggest you relisten just once more,, I know I wrote Francois off decades ago, and now I understand his approach, and am fascinated by his skills and craftmanship. Yet his individualistic way in Debussy, is a complete disaster.


Thibaudet v Bavouzet - a lightweight matchup. I never mentioned Thibaudet. If so fascinated by Francois... why not follow the lure?

Yes, I gave Bavouzet several good listens. Now that I think about it, I compared him to the remastered Gieieking. I wanted to be sure then, and I am still sure now. Bavouzet was missing something. Individualism?

I'm not a consensus listener, or rather, I like to create my own consensus. I've turned a few people on to Francois, so I must be doing something right.


----------



## paulbest

Agree, I too never ever follow the crowds,,unless its on the path to great composers such as ,,well I won;'t barrage you and others here about whom I love,,everyone here is sick and tired of hearing of those composers mentioned. 


anyway, no , the GENERAL consensus is just THAT, Generalization, nothing individual. 
Apparently you know Gieseking is the principle recording in Ravel and more, in Debussy, although its abit dated in craftmanship and as I say, remastered is a gimmick, which I will not fall for, You can imagine it sounds better, and tahts OK, but not for me..

We should mention here something Ravel is often quoted concerning his works, *just play them as on the paper*,,,well, obviously he was being a bit facetious, yet everyone takes him seriously verbatim .

He was suggesting, do not go into abstractions, nor over clinical. 
Play it as it should be played, More simple said than done. 
I will give Francois the exception to the rule (as per Ravel), due to his incredible skills and crafting. 

But if we hold true to Ravel's dictum, then Francois is *out of order in the court*.. 
Would be very interesting to know Ravel's reaction to his countryman's bold and daring INTERPRETATIONs. 


Ravel might just shrug with applause and a Bravo or 2, How could he not approve.

Can you find me a place, minute/second where Bavoizet misses the mark of superior excellence??
Go over to a YT vid with Bavouzet, and provide for us all, where you might have some issues. 

I mean perhaps your opinion is in a general manner, but as we agree, generalizations are what you and I avoid.
But please try , if you can, to find a spot where Bavouzet stubs his big toe. 
Just 1 instance, we won;'t hold you to locate a 2nd slipup from Bavouzet. Considering Bavouzet did not make the grade,,,you should have no problem finding a flubbed section with quick ease. 
I'll be waiting with suspense. .


----------



## paulbest

In fact, while listening to Bavouzet, the thought occurred to me, that maybe here is what Ravel was referring to , *play it as it is on the score*. 
That it WAS possible to meet Ravel's request.
I had my doubts , Bavouzet dispelled that skepticism.


----------



## tdc

I like Pascal Roge and Andre Laplante in Ravel, particularly the latter, unfortunately (to my knowledge) Laplante hasn't recorded the complete piano works.


----------



## paulbest

tdc said:


> I like Pascal Roge and Andre Laplante in Ravel, particularly the latter, unfortunately (to my knowledge) Laplante hasn't recorded the complete piano works.


I also enjoy Roge.

I have the OOP Laplante. Its OK , does not rank in my top 5. 
I would not pay the amazon listing at $175


----------



## tdc

paulbest said:


> I have the OOP Laplante. Its OK , does not rank in my top 5.
> I would not pay the amazon listing at $175


The pieces on that Laplante are my number 1, especially the Miroirs and Pavane. I picked the disc up a few years ago for about $20.


----------



## paulbest

tdc said:


> The pieces on that Laplante are my number 1, especially the Miroirs and Pavane. I picked the disc up a few years ago for about $20.


Time to cash in 

https://www.amazon.com/Andre-Laplante-Ravel-Maurice/dp/B000002RGM

If I could get even $100, SOLD
I just might ,, in fact will list it,,,this way I can pay off part of my amazon cd bill , run up with Henze. cds


----------



## philoctetes

paulbest said:


> I bet its a old rare OOP LP.


Probably not, it says DDD on the cover

I can't find that CD on Spotify but Petitgerard has a number of CDs on Naxos as a composer!


----------



## Mandryka

I've been enjoying this recording of transcriptions mostly, well worth seeking out I'd say.









I also had to take a train journey a couple of weeks ago and I read this, quite fun


----------



## millionrainbows

paulbest said:


> Yet again, where are you finding these possible gems. have not heard it, so can't fully comment, But he is French, and thatsa huge plus to start.
> 
> Another LP/OOP I am sure.
> Looks like a EU release only, or perhaps Canada.


 I feel lucky to have gotten both discs of the Merlet. I found the first one used, at Half-Price books. I'd remembered seeing it in a mail-order catalogue which sold discount classic labels from Europe. I remember they featured different budget labels like Arte Nova, with Schoenberg's Choral Works. The second disc I managed to find on-line on E-bay. I was lucky to get that one.

The "Gaspard" orchestration I found used in HPB also. It was in a "run" of what looked like somebody's collection, spread out through the bins. I remember getting my used Pettersson discs from that same batch.

Apparently, Dominique Merlet is a teacher in France, highly regarded for his meticulous technique, according to an Amazon customer review. I found a couple of pictures of him:


----------



## paulbest

millionrainbows said:


> I feel lucky to have gotten both discs of the Merlet. I found the first one used, at Half-Price books. I'd remembered seeing it in a mail-order catalogue which sold discount classic labels from Europe. I remember they featured different budget labels like Arte Nova, with Schoenberg's Choral Works. The second disc I managed to find on-line on E-bay. I was lucky to get that one.
> 
> The "Gaspard" orchestration I found used in HPB also. It was in a "run" of what looked like somebody's collection, spread out through the bins. I remember getting my used Pettersson discs from that same batch.


 Yes great finds, rare, and would like to hear Merlet, as I collect all Ravel solo cds.

Yet I am hesitant to believe it will trump my top 3 fav in my collection. Still I would like to have it, each artist offers something different.


----------



## millionrainbows

I found what looks like the same set by Merlet, on the Bayard label:

https://www.amazon.com/Integrale-Oe...minique+Merlet&qid=1556804327&s=music&sr=1-19










Also, I just found the Mandala releases on e-bay:

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313&_nkw=Dominique+Merlet&_sacat=11233


----------



## millionrainbows

Paul Best said "Dominique Merlet is French, that's good." Now explain the fact that Gieseking is German. :lol: I admit, I have been heard to say "Russians playing Russian music: is best, as well as raising an eyebrow at European versions of Charles Ives...


----------



## paulbest

millionrainbows said:


> Paul Best said "Dominique Merlet is Frech, that's good." Now explain the fact that Gieseking is German. :lol: I admit, I have been heard to say "Russians playing Russian music: is best, as well as raising an eyebrow at European versions of Charles Ives...


 In some composers this peculiarity is true, French to French, Russian, to Russian, Czech to Czech. More often than not this rule applies.

In Gieseking's case, this has puzzled the critics since the recording was issued. 
No one as yet has been able to provide a explanation.

My best guess, is that Gieseking must have been raised/resided very near the French border, and spoke French from a early age and also quite possible has French blood in his family tree. 
All 3 factors combined allows Gieseking to play in such a poetic delicate manner.

Ives, Carter breaks lines, their music has a universal character. Copland is American and has to be American performances.

In RVW, has to be british performaces and no others. 
So on, so forth. In Pettersson , although the Swedes are champions , the radio orchestras of England BBC/Scottish Radio etc, and the german radio orchestras, seem to connect equally as well as the Swedes.

American orchestras have yet to perform Pettersson,,,well Ok, the Baltimore made a LP with Comissiona way back when.

We yet await a USA performance of Pettersson.

A Russian performance of a Pettersson would be really cool sounding. 
Apology for going off on a tangent..
I can not ever imagine Pettersson making a performance in the Brahms concert hall in Vienna, 
The French could never pull off a Pettersson sym , with any degree of success. 
again sorry for running off like this.


----------



## millionrainbows

paulbest said:


> In some composers this peculiarity is true, French to French, Russian, to Russian, Czech to Czech. More often than not this rule applies.
> 
> In Gieseking's case, this has puzzled the critics since the recording was issued.
> No one as yet has been able to provide a explanation.
> 
> My best guess, is that Gieseking must have been raised/resided very near the French border, and spoke French from a early age and also quite possible has French blood in his family tree.
> All 3 factors combined allows Gieseking to play in such a poetic delicate manner.
> 
> Ives, Carter breaks lines, their music has a universal character. Copland is American and has to be American performances.
> 
> In RVW, has to be british performaces and no others.
> So on, so forth. In Pettersson , although the Swedes are champions , the radio orchestras of England BBC/Scottish Radio etc, and the german radio orchestras, seem to connect equally as well as the Swedes.
> 
> American orchestras have yet to perform Pettersson,,,well Ok, the Baltimore made a LP with Comissiona way back when.
> 
> We yet await a USA performance of Pettersson.
> 
> A Russian performance of a Pettersson would be really cool sounding.
> Apology for going off on a tangent..
> I can not ever imagine Pettersson making a performance in the Brahms concert hall in Vienna,
> The French could never pull off a Pettersson sym , with any degree of success.
> again sorry for running off like this.


With all the old Hymn tunes, college tunes, and pop tunes quoted in Ives, there is plenty that is American.

If they ever play Pettersson in the USA, it should be with the Louisiana Philharmonic. :lol:


----------



## paulbest

millionrainbows said:


> With all the old Hymn tunes, college tunes, and pop tunes quoted in Ives, there is plenty that is American.
> 
> If they ever play Pettersson in the USA, it should be with the Louisiana Philharmonic. :lol:


 lol 
Oh yeah, does the Louisiana Phil still exist?
Seriously, have not herad 1 word about that orch in decades, seriously,,,be right back....
tep, still hangin in there lol
unreal its still hanging on by,,,,,, a thin violin string,

It dies, comes back to life, dies again, comes back under a new title....

They love to perform,,,of all composers,,,,,Beethoven,,,who would have guessed.

No , no Pettersson, That ain't gonna happen, Never.

Snow ball in hell of a chance....

https://lpomusic.com/Online/default.asp


----------



## paulbest

I did not even peek at the schedule,,watch someone hit back,,,hey paul, ck out the Lou concert schedule,,, full 15 sym cycle of ,,,Pettersson…
lol

but how could I even imagine that,,as Petttersson is not on any orch's minor/major,,,perhaps a highs chool has it going,,,here in the USA, not 1 sym of all orchestra s in the USA,,,,
in one full year,,,
so imaginative USA orch's , so bold, so daring,,such wonders of wonders of all wonders ,,,the classical world in the USA, ..
,,don't save me any seats....


----------



## paulbest

Here is Bavouzet in one of Ravel's most arduous works for any performer.

Obviously he studied closely, Gieseking's master recording. And the payoff is a great success.
Although this recording trumps Gieseking, we might not have this performance along with quite a few top quality , in my collection, had Gieseking not recorded his masterful late 1950's recording. 
We all owe a huge debt to Gieseking's incredible trail blazing artistic skills.


----------



## paulbest

Listening to a new cd set, Erato's release of the EMI/early 1960's records of Francois/piano 3 cds + Cluytens/French Conservatoire 3 cds.
Get it for the Cluytens. Even though you may have the great Martinon EMI set, you really need this Cluytens as well. ~~~MUST HAVE~~~~
I felt for a long time, since I have the Martinon *definitive* set,, no need to add the Cluytens. ~~~WRONG~~~ and at this low price, why wait,,,may go OOP and then years later forced to pay OOP prices.


----------



## flamencosketches

paulbest said:


> Listening to a new cd set, Erato's release of the EMI/early 1960's records of Francois/piano 3 cds + Cluytens/French Conservatoire 3 cds.
> Get it for the Cluytens. Even though you may have the great Martinon EMI set, you really need this Cluytens as well. ~~~MUST HAVE~~~~
> I felt for a long time, since I have the Martinon *definitive* set,, no need to add the Cluytens. ~~~WRONG~~~ and at this low price, why wait,,,may go OOP and then years later forced to pay OOP prices.


Yes, I have that set too. It's so good. Cluytens and the Conservatoire orchestra sound great in these works. Funny that this is coming from the orchestra of the very same school that kicked out Ravel twice :lol: and of course Samson François is amazing in Ravel, if unconventional. A steal for the price.


----------



## paulbest

flamencosketches said:


> Yes, I have that set too. It's so good. Cluytens and the Conservatoire orchestra sound great in these works. Funny that this is coming from the orchestra of the very same school that kicked out Ravel twice :lol: and of course Samson François is amazing in Ravel, if unconventional. A steal for the price.


 No you see Francois gets on my nerves. 
I like some of his passages,,,others I don't, and so, its unlikely of my 7+ Ravel complete sets, his cd will ever see play time.

I would have loved to know the details as to why Ravel had issues at the main conservatoire.

Old crusty profs? Ravel had razor sharp wit,,perhaps a few profs felt the blade. A student is not suppose to know more than the prof.


----------



## flamencosketches

Too bad. As I've mentioned before, he's my favorite Ravel pianist (and one of my favorites in Chopin). What is it that you don't like about his style exactly, is it the slow tempos?

Preferences aside, you must admit that his complete recordings of Ravel AND Cluytens' complete Ravel recordings with the Conservatoire for $15 is a steal.


----------



## philoctetes

I buy few large complete box sets, but when I do.... I go for the Cluytens...

Stay in tune, my friends...


----------



## flamencosketches

Does anyone have this box set:









Good bit of Ravel on there, looks like. Along with plenty of other greats. I'm not all that familiar with his conducting, but I hear him frequently ranked among the greats, especially in terms of French music. 33 bucks for 13 CDs ain't a bad deal at all too.


----------



## philoctetes

Yes I have that. It was another must-have when it came out, like the Cluytens box. I also recommend his Berlioz box.

His Dutilleux and Honegger are the best, and the Brahms #1 was an instant fave. Lotta good music.


----------



## flamencosketches

Yeah it looks pretty much essential. Damn it. Whoever had the idea to make these big, cheap reissue box sets for Warner was a marketing genius. I bet they are making a killing at it.


----------



## philoctetes

flamencosketches said:


> Yeah it looks pretty much essential. Damn it. Whoever had the idea to make these big, cheap reissue box sets for Warner was a marketing genius. I bet they are making a killing at it.


If you're a Munch-kin like me, you'll want this too.


----------



## flamencosketches

Wow, that looks great too. How's the sound? As we know, '50s live recordings can be dicey (I'm sure this is an issue on that Warner box; I believe some of those recordings date back to the '40s even).


----------



## philoctetes

I think the sound is fine for radio broadcast, pretty consistent and I can't recall any obvious tape glitches. It's kinda expensive on Amazon but check Berkshire Record Outlet where I found it for less. 

Nuits d'ete and Damoiselle elue, with Victoria de LA, were recorded live at the same time as the studio recordings for RCA. But the RCA recordings became scarce until Sony reissued them very recently, and the two pieces belong together as they are here. The Faure Requiem is not great enough to be essential, but there it is anyway. And any piece by Milhaud is always welcome.

PS - I should add the disclaimer that I'm one of those weirdos who actually likes the performance quality of older recordings over many of the newer ones, especially in French music, Bruckner, and certain other sectors of the CM domain...


----------



## tdc

I recently listened to the _Piano Concerto in G_, Boulez/Zimerman recording, and I think its my favorite interpretation...my that work is excellent. Masterpiece. Ravel's music seems almost inhuman to me. It is just so...(clear/colorful/radiant/immaculate?) Gah I can't find words to do it justice.


----------



## paulbest

tdc said:


> I recently listened to the _Piano Concerto in G_, Boulez/Zimerman recording, and I think its my favorite interpretation...my that work is excellent. Masterpiece. Ravel's music seems almost inhuman to me. It is just so...(clear/colorful/radiant/immaculate?) Gah I can't find words to do it justice.


I've heard all available records, Zimerman /Boulez/Cleveland is the finest,,,perhaps a Silver in the bunch.

The challenges of the middle movement,,,,near impossible.

Ravel is unique as was Mozart, same level of genius. = Immaculate and Glorious.
I still say Ravel is not yet fully recognized for his genius.

I could write a book on that subject.


----------



## paulbest

philoctetes said:


> I think the sound is fine for radio broadcast, pretty consistent and I can't recall any obvious tape glitches. It's kinda expensive on Amazon but check Berkshire Record Outlet where I found it for less.
> 
> Nuits d'ete and Damoiselle elue, with Victoria de LA, were recorded live at the same time as the studio
> 
> PS - I should add the disclaimer that I'm one of those weirdos who actually likes the performance quality of older recordings over many of the newer ones, especially in French music, Bruckner, and certain other sectors of the CM domain...


I will have to reconsider the Nuits/Los Angeles, might be something there of some interest.

On Faure, not interested. All my Faure cds are thick with dust.

Many of the older pre 1960's recordings offer a more authentic interpretation vs many newer records.

I always look for older as 1st choice,,,then I add on any newer records.

Like you I'm a historic buff.

I'm not a fan of Bruckner,,,but I' bet you would love to have the Furtwangler 51 in DDD sound in Bruckner's 7th/Berlin.
sadly the 2 great codas/violin sections. , end of 1st/4th move, are lost to poor sound.


----------



## mikeh375

I've been acquainting myself with the score to the complete Daphnis and Chloe for over 30 years and still find delights in there. What an ear he had and his penchant for delicate colour is wonderful. It's probably in my top 5 of all time.


----------



## paulbest

mikeh375 said:


> I've been acquainting myself with the score to the complete Daphnis and Chloe for over 30 years and still find delights in there. What an ear he had and his penchant for delicate colour is wonderful. It's probably in my top 5 of all time.


The things that go on inside Daphnis , is simply unreal. 
Its ironic that I should always use the shortened title *Daphne*,,,as I am the one who vociferously complains of any recording which offers *Part 2* only.,,,I mean, who here wants there Beethoven, Mahler , Bruckner sym spliced in half,,and served up?

Refund please.

And to think the RCA/Chicagoians made Martinon record only part 2,,,is unforgivable and just deplorable, ,,SHAMEFULL!!

How could Martinon accept that deal???

Might have been another great by Martinon.


----------



## mikeh375

paulbest said:


> The things that go on inside Daphnis , is simply unreal.
> Its ironic that I should always use the shortened title *Daphne*,,,as I am the one who vociferously complains of any recording which offers *Part 2* only.,,,I mean, who here wants there Beethoven, Mahler , Bruckner sym spliced in half,,and served up?
> 
> Refund please.
> 
> And to think the RCA/Chicagoians made Martinon record only part 2,,,is unforgivable and just deplorable, ,,SHAMEFULL!!
> 
> How could Martinon accept that deal???
> 
> Might have been another great by Martinon.


,
Paul, over here in the UK, we have a commercialised radio station called Classic FM which you are probably aware of. Often just one movement from say a concerto is played (and that is more often than not the damn Bruch vln conc, but often Part2 as well), preceded and followed by ads. I hated it when the station first broadcast, but have come to understand that it has probably helped to popularise the great art a little and so might not be such a bad thing. Mind you I'm too much of an elitist to listen to it -I like my music as it's supposed to be.
Martinon probably just took the money like we all often do in the profession (ok I'm cynical and maybe being unfair-like we all are in the profession..etc.etc), but one hell of a sunrise is better than none right? At least they don't put ads for pile cream onto cd's and vinyl....yet..

_Daphnis recommends Anusol when you just gotta Dance_


----------



## millionrainbows

You must look past cliches, "greatest hits" and popularity, and listen afresh. Can you do it? Can you overcome the inertia of the ubiquitous and get into this work for what it really is? There's a good reason, you know.

Maybe sex with your girlfriend will help.


----------



## Flutter

millionrainbows said:


> View attachment 119246
> You must look past cliches, "greatest hits" and popularity, and listen afresh. Can you do it? Can you overcome the inertia of the ubiquitous and get into this work for what it really is? There's a good reason, you know.
> 
> Maybe sex with your girlfriend will help.


Took the words out of my mouth, I've actually done that myself, not lying


----------



## flamencosketches

I dont quite hear the Boléro as particularly sexual. In my experience, Daphnis et Chloé has been better for that purpose


----------



## Flutter

flamencosketches said:


> I dont quite hear the Boléro as particularly sexual. In my experience, Daphnis et Chloé has been better for that purpose


Hearing Daphnis et Chloe live approx two years ago really gave me that impression, I would agree. Although Bolero really has that constant build up, unlike Daphnis' very dynamic form (and as specifically aimed at ballet), Bolero has a gradual intensity that is incomparable. 
Sometimes people liken it to minimalist but I have yet to hear anything from the minimalist camp that has that kind of explosive power, Bolero is a unique piece.

But Daphnis et Chloe IS incredibly erotic and it becomes even more unavoidably erotic if you watch the ballet (whether live or a video). It's a sexy composition, I cannot deny it. It's also very romantic, in the emotional sense. Woah!


----------



## aleazk

I would say pretty much every piece by Ravel has a certain voluptuousness, even the "sad" ones. It's one of the most characteristic aspects of his music, I think. It's similar, perhaps, to Chopin, a composer that Ravel greatly admired. Maybe that's the reason why, despite the very modernist aspects of his pieces (think about _Jeux d'Eau_ in its historical context, 1901, not even Debussy had composed something like that at that point, Ravel is the true father of the modernist piano, or the _Trois poemes de stephane mallarme_, the _Chansons madécasses_, etc.), some people, new to his music, tend to call it " romantic" as an intuitive response to his music. Debussy, on the other hand, is more cold in this aspect, a more radical departure, perhaps, from romanticism; no wonder he became the father of modernism.


----------



## paulbest

aleazk said:


> I would say pretty much every piece by Ravel has a certain voluptuousness, even the "sad" ones. It's one of the most characteristic aspects of his music, I think. It's similar, perhaps, to Chopin, a composer that Ravel greatly admired. Maybe that's the reason why, despite the very modernist aspects of his pieces (think about _Jeux d'Eau_ in its historical context, 1901, not even Debussy had composed something like that at that point, Ravel is the true father of the modernist piano, or the _Trois poemes de stephane mallarme_, the _Chansons madécasses_, etc.), some people, new to his music, tend to call it " romantic" as an intuitive response to his music. Debussy, on the other hand, is more cold in this aspect, a more radical departure, perhaps, from romanticism; no wonder he became the father of modernism.


Great post

Jeux , 1901?? UNREAL... Then there was Debussy's Prelude ,,,,1899!!!!! Some mention Scriabin as a influence on thes to youthful masters, at that time.

I had no idea Ravel loved Chopin,,,and yes here is where Ravel takes maybe not so much ideas, as inspiration, for his magisterial works. 
The 2 composers solo works are different. 
Remember ravel made arrangements of Mussorgsky's opera and his famous Pictures at a Exhibitions,,,both are outstanding, and is something perhaps beyond the powers of Debussy.

Debussy never scored anything close to Ravel's supreme masterpiece Daphnis,,which sadly some modern records only program *Part 2*,,,what the reason for cutting the masterpiece in half, shows lack of judgement.

Yes I admit,,I broke my strict rule of never buying cd with a *Part 2 ONLY*,,as I am a collector of that work,,,,now I have regrets doing so, even though the Martinon/Chicago was cheap and 1 other,,,which I can not recall which release,,,But there is enough of those stupid records to make to a complaint of that negligence.

So you suggest, *Debussy, father of modernism*,,a belief which I also hold,,,but with modifications, to include the power of Wagner' s Parisfal and maybe Tristan. Both sending shock waves throughout Europe.


----------



## flamencosketches

I'm good with calling Wagner the grandfather of modernism (he spawned–in addition to Debussy–Richard Strauss, Schoenberg and arguably Stravinsky), with Debussy definitely being the father figure. Ravel is more of a loving uncle.


----------



## paulbest

flamencosketches said:


> I'm good with calling Wagner the grandfather of modernism (he spawned-in addition to Debussy-Richard Strauss, Schoenberg and arguably Stravinsky), with Debussy definitely being the father figure. Ravel is more of a loving uncle.


Nice post, well thought out.

I will post this vid here and also on the Debussy page

As you mention and urged me to look further and perhaps try to get into Scriabin, as he is similar to ravel's poetics,,,so I went to YT, looked up various vids and came across this one. 
Ashkenazy , various Scriabin

From the opening minute,,,it is very clear, Ravel listened a lot and played a lot of Scriabin,,,perhaps at the time in the Conservatorie, Scriabin was like *The Beatles* of that day, top hit composer,,,,beating oyt Chopin.

I can now see where many of Ravel's magical and indeed mystical poetics are ~~~born out of~~~ his creative imaginations, fostered, nurtured by Scriabin. 
Now here the mystery is solved.

Chopin >>>Scriabin>>>>Ravel
The fruit and flower of the romantic tradition. 
And oh what a tree, producing a ~~~Cornucopia ~~of Fruits and Flowers. 
Amazing,,just amazing.

So I ~~~Get~~~ my Chopin and Scriabin ~~~ via Ravel


----------



## Larkenfield

"As you mention and urged me to look further and perhaps try to get into Scriabin, as he is similar to ravel's poetics."

Scriabin is far more closely associated with Chopin than Ravel. In fact, there's nothing connecting him with Ravel that I've ever come across, but maybe I've missed it. The Chopin poetic influence on Scriabin can be heard in many of his early works. Why don't some listeners research these composers and look into their backgrounds before drawing such conclusions?

Scriabin's Preludes:






However, Maurice Ravel was deeply impressed by Chopin too:
http://www.nathancarterette.com/new-page


----------



## mikeh375

Flutter said:


> Sometimes people liken it to minimalist but I have yet to hear anything from the minimalist camp that has that kind of explosive power, Bolero is a unique piece.


I wonder if Shostakovitch took on board the concept of Bolero in the Leningrad Symphony - equally (and more appropriately!) explosive for a single idea.


----------



## paulbest

No I did not mean to say , there are *obvious* influences of Chopin on Ravel,,,only very distant,,,or maybe none at all. But as you say,,,Scriabin has some scant sounds one can find in Chopin,,and is yet different from Chopin,,maybe Ravel played both masters music and this had some influences in how he arrived at his mystical masterpieces.
I say mystical in the sense, its more than just innovative, its unique. Its like a wonderland, a magical place. 
Which other composers before Ravel can we attribute such ideas, such imaginations? Scriabin is much closer to Chopin,,than Ravel is to Scriabin. 
I hear no influences from either Schumann even less so, Schubert on Ravel. 

Ravel was born with this creative imagination, ,I've always felt his music was unique in this regard.


----------



## paulbest

The DJ from CM New Orleans radio just wrote,,,the conductor in the Ravel Raposdie Espanol,,was none other than...
Carlo Giulini

,,,let me ck his orch,,,be right back.....with the Los Angeles/DG


Zero stars out a possible 10.


----------



## flamencosketches

This is a great video, and it really helped me appreciate Ravel's La Valse, which I now see as one of his great masterpieces. Previously, I didn't really get it and just saw it as some kind of vaguely psychotic tribute to Johann Strauss Jr. What a phenomenal work! Especially in terms of orchestration, one of Ravel's greatest skills, it is a huge achievement.

As for my favorite version, it has to be André Cluytens with the Paris Conservatoire Société Orchestre:






I'm completely satisfied with all of these Cluytens Ravel recordings, which have replaced Dutoit, who I am no longer listening to, as my go-to. But I listened to something by Martinon last night and now I want to pick up some of his Ravel recordings. His sensibility with this music is equally great to Cluytens'.


----------



## paulbest

I was going to post that excellent, incredible, exposition of Ravel's masterpiece,,,you beat me to it.

I also, had no idea all that analysis was inside The Valse. Makes sense, Ravel was deep and all his works have many hidden meanings.

The composer in the vid is a genius at his understanding in ravel

This is why we love Ravel, 2nd time posting 
THIS


----------



## Brazealnut

My great-grandfather introduced me to classical music via _Bolero_, so Ravel will always hold a special place in my heart. As the thread creator strongly suggested, I did expand my palate beyond _Bolero_ and discovered the orchestration genius that is Ravel. I especially like his piano concerto in G and _La Valse_. He's definitely one of those composers that speaks to the listener at an emotional level, despite the technicality of the music.


----------



## paulbest

That's a good point, never occurred to me, Ravel was meticulously exacting in his writing, piano works which only the few brave are willing to accept the challenge to record.
Yet in spite of this highly tech, framing of the music, it still holds gorgeous sensitive colorful poetry. What a unseemingly contrast.


----------



## paulbest

aleazk said:


> I would say pretty much every piece by Ravel has a certain voluptuousness, even the "sad" ones. It's one of the most characteristic aspects of his music, I think. It's similar, perhaps, to Chopin, a composer that Ravel greatly admired. Maybe that's the reason why, despite the very modernist aspects of his pieces (think about _Jeux d'Eau_ in its historical context, 1901, not even Debussy had composed something like that at that point, Ravel is the true father of the modernist piano, or the _Trois poemes de stephane mallarme_, the _Chansons madécasses_, etc.), some people, new to his music, tend to call it " romantic" as an intuitive response to his music. Debussy, on the other hand, is more cold in this aspect, a more radical departure, perhaps, from romanticism; no wonder he became the father of modernism.


Well Debussy wrote Prelude in ,,,,~1~8~9~4~. 
But agree for piano solo, Ravel was the new voice for piano, principle, followed by Debussy.

Back to Ravel's masterpieces.


----------



## paulbest

Let us not ever forget Ravel. 
As i have mentioned often here on TC, Ravel may have been *over looked* = not yet fully recognized. Not cognizantly. 
The word cognizant , root is from ancient greek, , root is gnosis. 
Which I am, or try to be one.


----------



## flamencosketches

Ravel is one of the most popular and widely performed composers in the world, I wouldn't say he's been underlooked! He is certainly one of the greatest, though, in my eyes.


----------



## paulbest

well i was thinking about a topic entitled
Stravinsky OR Ravel on your deserted island...pick 1 only please, you have parachuted to safety with only one complete cd set in ypur survival bag,,,the rest other composer you did not place in the survival bag went down with the plane, as you gently parachute to a desert island with a portable LED solar recharger,,,so you will have a lifetime of listening to only 1 or the other,,,lets see how the votes would go,,,I say 50/50.
= Ravel has not yet made recognition, = cognition = gnosis.
If you think Strav is on the same level as Ravel


----------



## Littlephrase

Stravinsky is on the same level as Ravel.


----------



## paulbest

Littlephrase1913 said:


> Stravinsky is on the same level as Ravel.


Oh lets see, Rite and Firebird..... anything else? Think hard,, you might come up with something, Neither of those 2 greatest hits interest me. 
Two smash hits,,to me Strav has been hyped , super hyped.


----------



## paulbest

Gergiev hyping TO DEATH Strav's Fire4birdIE. 
Ridiculous


----------



## paulbest

just the mere fact the classical community continues to take Strav's Rite seriously, amazes me . I find it a bit odd, as the work is rather thin, vacuous , flimsy. 
Its a patch work of ideas , with no central them, little connective tissue, bits N pieces all stitched together, Yet it gets applause and program time.






Folks take Stravinsky seriously , 100 years later....


----------



## mmsbls

paulbest said:


> ...Folks take Stravinsky seriously , 100 years later....


This is Ravel's guestbook. Stop disparaging Stravinsky in Ravel's guestbook.


----------



## paulbest

mmsbls said:


> This is Ravel's guestbook. Stop disparaging Stravinsky in Ravel's guestbook.


I understand, But I was baited. 
I simply inquired if folks feel ravel has not been given his due recognition and someone believes Stravinsky is not less than ravel, yet his equal.
I find this very perplexing a thought. 
I was over reacting to such a preposterous assumption. 
Based upon a quick compare of the 2 composers works. 
I mean its like a mountain compared to a molehill.
I am trying to awaken the classical community to think as a creative , enlightened community,,where we can make new and evolving ideas come to life. Why stagnant?
Life is all about relaization, revelation.
If a day goes by and there is no new ideas being discussed in the CC, the spirit will stagnate.

Sure Ravel did not score a violin concerto, where Stravinsky did write a VC> Yet come to find out Stravisnky confessed he was not up to writing a VC, so his violinist friend suggested that he would asssit in the score, where upon Stravinsky agreed and we have a VC from Stravisnky,,which may not be among the finest, but at least he has aVC to his credit, whereas Ravel does not.
Did Stravisnky write a SQ or a tril?
This is am not sure, as i say I know very little of his muisc.

Just gettinga few things off my chest here, i am not belittleing Stravinsky , just trying to place things in perspective. 
I see no harm in this comparison. 
But I JUST KNEW someone would come along with no evidence and claim, *yeah sure, Stravinsky is equal to Ravel*. 
Which is no doubt the general consensus among the CC. 
Which is not correct.


----------



## flamencosketches

You were not baited, YOU brought up Stravinsky. And for what it's worth, the Firebird is not one of his best works by a long shot, it's a good early work that shows his promise, but that's it. If that's what you're judging him by, then yes, he's going to come up short.


----------



## elgar's ghost

As a sidebar question, is it worth investigating what's available of Ravel's _Prix de Rome_ work?


----------



## flamencosketches

elgars ghost said:


> As a sidebar question, is it worth investigating what's available of Ravel's _Prix de Rome_ work?


I was just wondering the same thing of Debussy's.


----------



## Littlephrase

paulbest said:


> Oh lets see, Rite and Firebird..... anything else? Think hard,, you might come up with something, Neither of those 2 greatest hits interest me.
> Two smash hits,,to me Strav has been hyped , super hyped.


Stravinsky wrote dozens of masterpieces, beyond the early trilogy of ballets. Do you want me to provide an exhaustive list?


----------



## starthrower

Don't bother. Paul knows best. He can't be convinced otherwise.


----------



## tdc

elgars ghost said:


> As a sidebar question, is it worth investigating what's available of Ravel's _Prix de Rome_ work?


I found the music well constructed but fairly conventional and not really sounding like Ravel. Interesting to hear, but not music I've returned to.


----------



## elgar's ghost

tdc said:


> I found the music well constructed but fairly conventional and not really sounding like Ravel. Interesting to hear, but not music I've returned to.


Thanks for the reply, tdc - this might explain why recordings are scarce.


----------



## paulbest

Ravel premiered his SQ , 1908 age 27
Bartok's 1st SQ , 1911 , age 30.
Interesting. 
There are hints of Ravel's in the 1st SQ. 1st movement. 
Both great SQ;s, Bartok went on to compose 5 more masterpieces in this genre.


----------



## millionrainbows

Ravel's string quartet is much more conventional than any of Bartok. I wonder how he can be held individually in so much esteem, with Debussy lurking so near.


----------



## paulbest

Not sure what you mean.
I just discovered Bartok, via superior records.
Ravel 's SQ, I've not made any decisions as to rating records.
I will look up this EMI you posted. 
have never seen it before.


----------



## paulbest

Found IT
The recording I was looking for.
I have this cd in my collection, as it took hours and hours of reserach to discover
I think this is a*very interesting* perf, if not my fav
btw I did not like the EMI SQ group, something about either the cellist or viola.


----------



## Mandryka

The portamento is very nicely done, and the sound of the ensemble is warm and friendly. It somehow throws the music back into Edwardian times rather than make it look forward to today.

If you’re interested in this sort of interpretation, then be sure to hear the Capet Quartet too, and the Galimir.

By the way, I’m enjoying the Hagen’s 2000 DVD performance very much in this, the complete opposite of Calvet. The music can be far more interesting than just congenial and agreeable, if the musicians just dig a little. There are potentially disturbing passages of enormous expressiveness, darkness.


----------



## millionrainbows

The differences between Bartok and Ravel: Ravel is always clearly tonal, Bartok is not. 
Bartok uses modern methods of approaching music, among which are: dividing the chromatic scale symmetrically, at the tritone, rather than the 4th or 5th as in tonal music. 
This tritone division is inherently 'unstable' or non-tonal, because the 5th is what gives triads stability. 
This emphasis on the tritone creates relations to whole tone scales (augmented sounds) and diminished scales (diminished and 6-note scales), which are tonally ambiguous.
Thus, in Bartok, we will usually only hear "localized" points of "centricity" or tonal focus. This puts emphasis on motivic cells rather than whole areas of tonality.


----------



## tdc

millionrainbows said:


> Ravel's string quartet is much more conventional than any of Bartok. I wonder how he can be held individually in so much esteem, with Debussy lurking so near.


Probably because Ravel's music is so different than Debussy. Their String Quartets are worlds apart, certainly, the harmonic colors in Ravel are so unique and unlike any composer.

Your statement is equivalent to asking how could Mozart be held individually in such esteem with Haydn lurking so near. If the two composers differences are not apparent to you, maybe the problem is with your ears.


----------



## paulbest

Nice posts of late, 
With the right artists both composers music come alive.
I have the 1934 Calvet and offers something missing in other records. The cohessive-ness at times is lacking, so its not my 1st choice. 
The other historic record, Capet SQ , has a odd violinist , which does not work for me.
I decided to ck one last time(having research all available many times past decade or so) for yet another interesting take on the Ravel and found this one , recorded back in 1987.
Reissued several times.
Ravel scored a very challenging SQ for artists.


----------



## paulbest

We should all list our top 3 best records of the Ravel. . .


----------



## millionrainbows

tdc said:


> Probably because Ravel's music is so different than Debussy. Their String Quartets are worlds apart, certainly, the harmonic colors in Ravel are so unique and unlike any composer.


I'm looking at and hearing _similarities_ between Debussy and Ravel, not differences.



> Your statement is equivalent to asking how could Mozart be held individually in such esteem with Haydn lurking so near. If the two composers differences are not apparent to you, maybe the problem is with your ears.


I notice you used Mozart and Haydn together, as I did with Debussy and Ravel, so this means you understand exactly what I'm saying, but you are dedicated to approaching every composer as "unique." That's a noble sentiment, but doesn't "disprove" or invalidate my comparison.

Debussy and Ravel: both French, both impressionists, both using ninth chords, harps, coloristic harmony, etc. _(...but Ravel wasn't French...blah blah...)_

Why should we hold Debussy in any less esteem than Ravel? How can Paul Best focus in on Ravel like this, as if there is some great chasm of difference between Ravel and Debussy?

Note that in post #489, the CD that Paul Best shows _also includes Debussy. Obvious, obvious._


----------



## Mandryka

An interesting place to compare Debussy and Ravel is in the 3 Mallarmé settings.


----------



## paulbest

The Debussy SQ is very frequently paired with the Ravel,,,for reasons. 
I have always found listening to the 2 as reflections not contrasts. 
Debussy and Ravel seemed paired like Schoenberg/Berg. 
Or say Beethoven and Brahms. 
I really can not think of any moe pairings in history,,,well no, Bach, Vivaldi. 
Mozart's bright star with Haydn's tiny moon. 
But take Prokofiev and Shostakovich, no connections whatsoever. 
Sibelius and Pettersson, completely different solar systems. 
The Ravel /Debussy connection is the most notable in all CM history. (excepting the 3 2nd Viennese masters) 
Both are unique in their styles, yet centrically united in some unique way.


----------



## paulbest

paulbest said:


> Nice posts of late,
> With the right artists both composers music come alive.
> I have the 1934 Calvet and offers something missing in other records. The cohessive-ness at times is lacking, so its not my 1st choice.
> The other historic record, Capet SQ , has a odd violinist , which does not work for me.
> I decided to ck one last time(having research all available many times past decade or so) for yet another interesting take on the Ravel and found this one , recorded back in 1987.
> Reissued several times.
> Ravel scored a very challenging SQ for artists.
> 
> View attachment 122625


Someone from TC must have taken my recommend, gone over to amazon and bought the last $20 copy,,,,,,i purchased 1 off ebay, under $20 and wanted a 2nd copy,,,but its gone ...Now i had to buy a 2nd and 3rd copy off ebay($10, dif release/budget label/not sure if it is the real deal,,and the other 3rd copy off amazon, different release, has the Smtena along with the Debussy.

My plan is to scalp for a nice price in yrs to come..I plan to snap up all I can afford over the yrs. 
:devil:


----------



## Littlephrase

paulbest said:


> The Debussy SQ is very frequently paired with the Ravel,,,for reasons.
> I have always found listening to the 2 as reflections not contrasts.
> Debussy and Ravel seemed paired like Schoenberg/Berg.
> Or say Beethoven and Brahms.
> I really can not think of any moe pairings in history,,,well no, Bach, Vivaldi.
> *Mozart's bright star with Haydn's tiny moon*.
> But take Prokofiev and Shostakovich, no connections whatsoever.
> Sibelius and Pettersson, completely different solar systems.
> The Ravel /Debussy connection is the most notable in all CM history. (excepting the 3 2nd Viennese masters)
> Both are unique in their styles, yet centrically united in some unique way.


Haydn's tiny moon? You've gone too far with this one, Paul!


----------



## philoctetes

We have a new game. After Paul:

Hovhaness' Great Whale with Partch's Puny Hitchhiker

Who's next?


----------



## paulbest

well let me say this, women sure havea hard time getting Debussy right,,,whats up with that?
Ravel they can get, not Debussy, I can't find even 1 female recording artist with a successful release.
As I say, with Ravel, we can locate a few descent recordings, Not so in Debussy, None available. Anyone gota clue to this puzzle?
Debussy requires a distinctive poetic spirit which a woman comes up short on, is the answer.


----------



## Strange Magic

The pairing of Ravel and Debussy is to me the most satisfying and fertile A/B comparison in CM. The two quartets, the harp pieces, the Spanish-inspired works, the personal back-and-forthing between the two men as both rivals and mutual inspirations. And the whole bodies of each's works. We are fortunate that they occupied the same musical time and much of the same space.


----------



## paulbest

Very nice post, 
I wonder just what Debussy meant in his comment to Ravel about his SQ, written,,,,wait be right back,,,,,Ok Debussy premiered his SQ in 1893 at age 31,,Ravel 1903, age 28. 
Something along the lines *its perfect do not change a thing*. 
I can only imagine the feelings that went through Debussy in his 1st hearing of the work. 
We are lucky, we have cds and can play the masterpiece at will, all day long if we want to,,dif interpretations. 
makes us appreciate the treasures on our shelf.

still, i am curious as to why women can not get Debussy right....anyone?


----------



## millionrainbows

paulbest said:


> well let me say this, women sure havea hard time getting Debussy right,,,whats up with that?
> Ravel they can get, not Debussy, I can't find even 1 female recording artist with a successful release.
> As I say, with Ravel, we can locate a few descent recordings, Not so in Debussy, None available. Anyone gota clue to this puzzle?
> Debussy requires a distinctive poetic spirit which a woman comes up short on, is the answer.


That's not true; all grandmothers love "Claire de Lune." :lol:


----------



## paulbest

:lol:
so so true. 
but truthfully, if you are driving along in traffic, and the FM has CdeLune on,,,it does not grab you too?


Look, you got me on that one,,,but you have lots to answer the Debussy topic,,which i surmise you are cking out now and thinking how to respond.
I hold to my idea, women have a rough go at Debussy, now why is this so true?


----------



## millionrainbows

paulbest said:


> :lol: Look, you got me on that one,,,but you have lots to answer the Debussy topic,,which i surmise you are cking out now and thinking how to respond.
> I hold to my idea, women have a rough go at Debussy, now why is this so true?


Debussy just did what the hell he wanted to. Maybe Ravel had a harder time with the academy, but that's why I respect them both. I mean, pieces like "Jeaux" and the Preludes Book II, Debussy is just so good. But yes, I recognize the singular voice of Ravel. Gaspard de la Nuit is proof of that.


----------



## paulbest

Travincek SQ/Points Classics budget label, just arrived , 1st Class Mail from Georgia , just now,,,Debussy SQ just finished up,,Ravel's in the 1st movement. Glad I bought the last 3 or 4 low priced copies, My plan is to snap up all available and scalp yrs from now. 
Finally a Debussy SQ rendition i can be happy with, start to ending.
The ravel, I had 1 or 2 others i liked, but this travincek is STU*NNING> 
WOW 2 winners on 1 cd. 
How often do you find that?
This Czech group, IMHO has the finest Debussy and finest Ravel SQ on record. 
Possibly, yes in fact is, superior to the 1934 Calvet french SQ. 
,,,well I have another points Classic copy comming from France any day, Kean Luc says its on the way,,I really wanted to send him more cash for shipping, as the cd went cheap on ebay at like 3 and ship like $5,,I wanted to give him another $10 for ship,,I told him to keep a eye out for Livia Rev's Debussy/Hyperion, maybe I can do business with him in the future. 
I felt guilty buying so cheap.


----------



## Janspe

I have been an admirer of Ravel for many years, and some of his works - the piano concertos, most of the solo piano compositions, the magnificent orchestral scores... - remain firm favourites.

But for some reason, I find _Daphnis et Chloé_ impenetrable. There's just something about it that prevents me from getting into it properly. I readily admit that it is a fantastic work, but I haven't been able to form a personal relationship with it. What am I missing? Maybe a live performance could do the trick...


----------



## paulbest

Janspe said:


> I have been an admirer of Ravel for many years, and some of his works - the piano concertos, most of the solo piano compositions, the magnificent orchestral scores... - remain firm favourites.
> 
> But for some reason, I find _Daphnis et Chloé_ impenetrable. There's just something about it that prevents me from getting into it properly. I readily admit that it is a fantastic work, but I haven't been able to form a personal relationship with it. What am I missing? Maybe a live performance could do the trick...


 Try this
Although Martinon and Cluytens are my 2 favs in this magical score. Skip those 2 and try these 2. 
Pierre Monteux/Concertgebouw/1955
and
Pierre Boulez /New York Phil Orch/1975.
Either one of these should draw you in. 
If not, just skip it and wait some years.


----------



## Room2201974

paulbest said:


> still, i am curious as to why women can not get Debussy right....anyone?


----------



## CnC Bartok

Room2201974 said:


>


You're too late! Over on the Debussy thread, it seems that, having been called out for explicit sexism/ blind bigotry about women playing Debussy, our chap has had a Road to Damascus moment, and now it seems girlies actually CAN do Debussy. Amazing how making a fool of oneself with inanely daft and ever so slightly offensive generalisations, how quickly the scales can fall from ones eyes.....
be careful, soon these women will be demanding the right to vote, or attend university. What next? The right to drive cars? What is the world coming to?


----------



## paulbest

well had you guys posted Rev and Cecile Ousset as the answer to my query , i would not have gotten myself into that mess, and yes, the Kocsis arrived, good, I know others will say THE BEST,,and thats their opinions. 
. Rev and Ousset reign supreme in Debussy, Two women. 
Sorry, the men have been ousted.


----------



## millionrainbows

Debussy's "Children's Corner" sucks (what do they do over there in the corner?), we all see it as pablum; but most of the comparative criticism with Ravel is fueled by this kind of pablum. Of course, Ravel had the benefit of foresight, for territory Debussy had already blazed.

Debussy had a longer and slower development than Ravel, because he was the true pioneer. Ravel had the luxury of watching all this, and learning.

BTW, I ordered that 17-CD set by Marcelle Meyer; also the 10-CD Tagliaferro set. A lotta music for cheap!

Special thanks to starthrower and phiocetes! :tiphat:


----------



## Mandryka

which came first, Ravel’s Mirrois or Debussy's Images? I.e. who influenced whom?


----------



## starthrower

Debussy's first book was completed the same year Ravel finished Miroirs in 1905. And book 2 of Images was composed two years after in 1907.


----------



## tdc

Ravel's impressionistic piano piece _Jeux d'eau_, was composed in 1901, before Debussy had written any such works for piano. Both composers were pioneers, shared some of the same influences, and also influenced each other.


----------



## millionrainbows

Debussy was born in 1862, Ravel in 1875.


----------



## Rogerx

*Joseph Maurice Ravel French 7 March 1875 - 28 December 1937)*



Joseph Maurice Ravel French 7 March 1875 - 28 December 1937)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Ravel


----------



## flamencosketches

Rogerx said:


> Joseph Maurice Ravel French 7 March 1875 - 28 December 1937)
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Ravel


How fitting that I've started my day with Gaspard de la nuit, Valses nobles et sentimentales, the Prélude, & À la manière de... I had no idea.

Happy birthday to one of my favorite composers.


----------



## Rogerx

^^^^^^^
I started with this one 


Ravel: Complete music for violin & piano
Alina Ibragimova (violin) & Cédric Tiberghien (piano)


----------



## flamencosketches

Rogerx said:


> ^^^^^^^
> I started with this one
> 
> 
> Ravel: Complete music for violin & piano
> Alina Ibragimova (violin) & Cédric Tiberghien (piano)


I have been meaning to get a disc of his violin and piano music, and this is one of two I've been looking at, the other is the Capuçon brothers and Frank Braley which also includes the great piano trio. I will probably order one or the other before the day is over.


----------



## Rogerx

flamencosketches said:


> I have been meaning to get a disc of his violin and piano music, and this is one of two I've been looking at, the other is the Capuçon brothers and Frank Braley which also includes the great piano trio. I will probably order one or the other before the day is over.


Though choices in life, they are both great.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Happy belated birthday to the great Frenchman! What a composer. I think the fact that he's often lumped in with Debussy as an "impressionist" is quite unfortunate considering he has his own entirely distinct and special voice. Hearing his quartet for the first time was one of those special experiences getting into CM that I won't soon forget. For some reason I tend to "crave" his music more than others; in fact, I think I'm going to go for some of his piano music played by Jean-Efflam Bavouzet.


----------



## Bigbang

I just bought Ormandy Ravel on Sony along with Rachmaninoff 3 symphonies phillips duo/3rd piano with Garrick Ohlsson all for nothing. Love the deals. So listen to Ravel for last few days (Bernstein/Ormandy) and not even realize it was his birthday yesterday when I bought the Ormandy disc and played it last night and this morning.


----------



## tdc

Lately I've been often drawn to listen to the Menuet from Le Tombeau De Couperin, (performed by François-Joël Thiollier). Such a stunningly beautiful piece! I would love to play it one day.


----------



## flamencosketches

tdc said:


> Lately I've been often drawn to listen to the Menuet from Le Tombeau De Couperin, (performed by François-Joël Thiollier). Such a stunningly beautiful piece! I would love to play it one day.


Stunningly beautiful is right. It's a shame Ravel's piano music is so damn difficult, there's a lot of it I'd love to learn.

My favorite pianist in Ravel is Samson François. I also recently got the Pascal Rogé set, and then just yesterday I got the Philippe Entremont set. Very excited to explore both, and then there's two more I'm interested in: Jean-Efflam Bavouzet & Vlado Perlemuter on Nimbus. Do I need all this? Hell no. I'd be totally fine with just the great François set. But Ravel is one of my favorite composers, and sometimes I like to hear different interpretations of his great music.


----------



## aleazk

Mandryka said:


> which came first, Ravel's Mirrois or Debussy's Images? I.e. who influenced whom?


Debussy invented the harmonic language, Ravel invented the impressionist piano language (particularly his signature water effect.)


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Gosh, Le Tombeau de Couperin is just so painfully beautiful. Listening right now to Pascal Roge (possibly the king of French piano music) play it. Maybe one of the most gorgeous things ever written for the piano. Every time I listen to Ravel it brings me back to my early days of listening to classical when I was enraptured with him, and still very much am.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

aleazk said:


> Debussy invented the harmonic language, Ravel invented the impressionist piano language (particularly his signature water effect.)


Interesting that he found piano music so much harder to write than orchestral music. He was, of course, amazingly skilled at both, but I think he found that getting the same kind of colors and textures out of the piano that he wanted to get from the orchestra was much harder. In times of compositional drought, he would make orchestral transcriptions of his piano works. Conversely, Gaspard de la Nuit he called "an orchestral transcription for the piano."


----------



## xankl

In the mood for some of Ravel's piano music yesterday I put this on and was so blown away by the beauty of it I almost considered for a moment that if I could only listen to one disc of Ravel piano this might be it. Of course when I considered all the other versions that would have to go, I reconsidered. I do like it a lot though.


----------



## DeepR

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Gosh, Le Tombeau de Couperin is just so painfully beautiful. Listening right now to Pascal Roge (possibly the king of French piano music) play it. Maybe one of the most gorgeous things ever written for the piano. Every time I listen to Ravel it brings me back to my early days of listening to classical when I was enraptured with him, and still very much am.


I love the orchestral version as well. I recommend Zoltan Kocsis and the Hungarian National Philharmonic Orchestra. It includes great orchestrations of the two pieces that Ravel didn't orchestrate (Fugue and Toccata).


----------



## DeepR

aleazk said:


> Debussy invented the harmonic language, Ravel invented the impressionist piano language (particularly his signature water effect.)


Seems to me they took further what Liszt did years earlier.


----------



## DavidA

Some of the playing here has to be heard to be believed! Especially in the left hand concerto!


----------



## flamencosketches

DavidA said:


> View attachment 131586
> 
> 
> Some of the playing here has to be heard to be believed! Especially in the left hand concerto!


François is definitely my favorite pianist of Ravel. Amazing.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Rogerx said:


> ^^^^^^^
> I started with this one
> 
> 
> Ravel: Complete music for violin & piano
> Alina Ibragimova (violin) & Cédric Tiberghien (piano)


Would you say this is a favorite? I can't find it for streaming on Amazon so I'd have to buy it to hear it.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Question from a new Ravel listener: Can the collective here give me some recommendations for your favorite recordings of Miroirs?


----------



## tdc

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Question from a new Ravel listener: Can the collective here give me some recommendations for your favorite recordings of Miroirs?


My favorite version is by Andre Laplante, another good one is Pascal Rogé. Samson François is quite popular as a Ravel interpreter, although not really to my taste.


----------



## Manxfeeder

tdc said:


> Samson François is quite popular as a Ravel interpreter, although not really to my taste.


In my case, I think he's a good choice for a second recording. Someone like Pascal Roge will play it as it should be, and Francois will insert his idiosyncracies to let you know how it can be.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Question from a new Ravel listener: Can the collective here give me some recommendations for your favorite recordings of Miroirs?


Jean-Efflam Bavouzet (27:09 in the video below) and Samson Francois. Francois has a special swagger and penetration, while Bavouzet brings the French lightness and precision. Roge is, as always, a great straightforward and idiomatic rendition.

As an aside, this music is fiendishly hard to play. It would probably take me a year just to get all the notes right, let alone refining my touch so I could play it as lightly and effortlessly as it requires. The range of almost orchestral textures that Ravel pulls from the piano is staggering.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

tdc said:


> My favorite version is by Andre Laplante, another good one is Pascal Rogé. Samson François is quite popular as a Ravel interpreter, although not really to my taste.





Manxfeeder said:


> In my case, I think he's a good choice for a second recording. Someone like Pascal Roge will play it as it should be, and Francois will insert his idiosyncracies to let you know how it can be.





Allegro Con Brio said:


> Jean-Efflam Bavouzet (27:09 in the video below) and Samson Francois. Francois has a special swagger and penetration, while Bavouzet brings the French lightness and precision. Roge is, as always, a great straightforward and idiomatic rendition.
> 
> As an aside, this music is fiendishly hard to play. It would probably take me a year just to get all the notes right, let alone refining my touch so I could play it as lightly and effortlessly as it requires. The range of almost orchestral textures that Ravel pulls from the piano is staggering.


Thanks all. I struck out on Amazon Music with Bavouzet and Rogé but I'll look for them on YouTube. The others I've got in my cue. I appreciate it.


----------



## Neo Romanza

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Would you say this is a favorite? I can't find it for streaming on Amazon so I'd have to buy it to hear it.


The reason you can't find this album to stream is because it's a Hyperion album. Hyperion hasn't got onboard with streaming yet (and good for them for that I say). You can probably find that album second-hand for a good price. I would say pick it up --- it's excellent.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Jean-Efflam Bavouzet (27:09 in the video below) and Samson Francois. Francois has a special swagger and penetration, while Bavouzet brings the French lightness and precision. Roge is, as always, a great straightforward and idiomatic rendition.
> 
> As an aside, this music is fiendishly hard to play. It would probably take me a year just to get all the notes right, let alone refining my touch so I could play it as lightly and effortlessly as it requires. The range of almost orchestral textures that Ravel pulls from the piano is staggering.


Just finished watching/listening to the Bavouzet. Absolutely sick. Thanks for the rec.


----------



## chill782002

Minoru Nojima is an amazing interpreter of Ravel, in my opinion.


----------



## flamencosketches

It's François all the way for me, though in the case of Miroirs in particular I do rather enjoy Pascal Rogé as well. I picked up Bavouzet's Ravel set cheaply used the other day but haven't heard any of it yet. It's very highly acclaimed as far as the more recent recordings go.


----------



## tdc

Bavouzet I find not to my tastes for similar reasons as the François. They both have what I perceive as an odd sense of phrasing and rhythmic approach to this music, though both are obviously good pianists. For me the music loses some of its natural grace and flow in their hands. I did however very much enjoy the Louis Lortie that was on the same video as the Bavouzet.


----------



## tdc

The Nojima sounds interesting too, might have to listen to more of that.


----------



## flamencosketches

Nojima does sound interesting. I'll have to explore her work.


----------



## millionrainbows

This thread is one of the reasons I still miss Paul Best.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

millionrainbows said:


> This thread is one of the reasons I still miss Paul Best.


Never knew Paul, but reading through this thread recently, he had some great contributions.


----------



## tdc

Paul Best did have some good contributions to this thread, unfortunately he also exhibited a good degree of narcissistic, trollish behavior, and he probably contributed about 10 annoying posts on this forum for every good one. Kontrapunctus was a poster I enjoyed having around, he left this forum at the same time Paul Best started trolling here, and he still hasn't returned. There could be others. I don't miss Paul Best, I applaud the mods for banning him.


----------



## chill782002

flamencosketches said:


> Nojima does sound interesting. I'll have to explore her work.


I believe Minoru Nojima is a he rather than a she. I love his Ravel though.


----------



## flamencosketches

chill782002 said:


> I believe Minoru Nojima is a he rather than a she. I love his Ravel though.


Right you are-for some inexplicable reason I was mixing him up with Noriko Ogawa. Thank you for the correction.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

chill782002 said:


> Minoru Nojima is an amazing interpreter of Ravel, in my opinion.


Finally got a chance to listen to this and it is amazing. First of all the tone of his piano and the way it is recorded is excellent and only adds to the overall experience by GETTING OUT OF THE WAY. Then there is his playing. It is really beautiful. The ebb and flow of his dynamics are fantastic. Very expressive playing. At no time did I get the feeling that any part of this piece was difficult to him, and it seems as though even the most difficult passages are handled artfully. I'm really glad you shared this. I might end up buying this one.


----------



## millionrainbows

tdc said:


> I don't miss Paul Best, I applaud the mods for banning him.


I'm glad that Kontrapuntus is gone. I always found him to be irritating. I laugh to myself every time I think about it.

Have you ever noticed how "trolls" seem to expose our own pretenses? That's why I thought Paul Best was a much-needed "open window" in the forum which allowed some of the "bad air" to escape.


----------



## sstucky

I love Ravel. The music is polished beyond description and yet deeply moving. I can’t listen to L’Enfant without crying.


----------



## ELbowe

As a 10 year old I heard for the first time "Bolero" at a friends home on an LP from "Readers Digest Light Classical Music" Box set, it was one of those moments that is etched in my memory and was pivotal in my musical journey, now 60+ years on and counting (I hope). It holds a special place and a year ago i found the same box set of LPs at a Salvation Army store. My extensive collection of Ravel's works in various forms are never far from the turntable/CD player but I often return to the Bolero and remember how it started a magical interest in all Classical music (all music for that matter!!) . My exploration of Ravel has been a journey (and continues) and his diversity of compositions reminds me why he remains so high on my list of favourite composers. I recognize for some Bolero is nails on a blackboard.......but not for moi !!


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

^Bolero was one of the first classical works I heard too, and along with Debussy’s La Mer it got me hooked on orchestral music. I don’t understand why it often gets derided - yes it unfortunately overshadows Ravel’s other works and it’s far from being a masterpiece, but sometimes music is just fun!


----------



## ELbowe

Allegro Con Brio said:


> ..... it's far from being a masterpiece, but sometimes music is just fun!


Indeed it is, and for that I am so thankful !! Thank you!


----------



## gregorx

Allegro Con Brio said:


> ^Bolero was one of the first classical works I heard too, and along with Debussy's La Mer it got me hooked on orchestral music. I don't understand why it often gets derided - yes it unfortunately overshadows Ravel's other works and it's far from being a masterpiece, but sometimes music is just fun!


It is recognizable among those who don't really listen to, or have a real interest in, classical music - in other words, most people. Maybe it gets derided by those who do listen to classical music because of that. Ravel is one of my favorite composers, but _Bolero_, good as it is, is well down on the list of his compositions I would queue up.

For his part, Ravel said he didn't like it and was annoyed by how popular it became. He said it was orchestration without music, just a long gradual crescendo. Pretty amazing piece though.

Interesting ACB, _La Mer _and _Nocturnes _were the two pieces that got me hooked on classical music. That was years ago and I still love both of them.


----------



## thejewk

I posted it in the bargains thread, but I'll mention it here too. Bach Guild put out a download of recordings by the KLR Trio (Kalichstein-Laredo-Robinson) for very little money. I got it on Amazon UK for £1.29, mainly for the Shostakovich pieces, but the Ravel pieces in the set are uniformly superb. I've spent the morning listening to the three sonatas and the trio, and I'm blown away by them.


----------



## John O

Ravels quartet is modelled on Debussy’s Qt, hence the comparison, but his musical language is his own


----------



## Sid James

*A Ravel diary* - recent listening

Saint-Saens said that "there is nothing more difficult than talking about music." Writing about Ravel's music, with its refinement and simplicity, proves that Saint-Saens had a point. Ravel is like the Hemingway of music, everything which is there has been pared down to the essence.

*Gaspard de la Nuit*

Whether or not you've read the poems that inspired this work, there is a nocturnal quality here which is obvious, at least when you hear _Le Gibet_. It gets to something deep, going beyond the macabre subject matter of the gallows of the title. The gamelan-like sounds suggest something ancient, even primeval, and of time standing still. Of the two other movements, _Scarbo_ is memorable for the way it builds suspense up to a staggering climax.

*Piano Trio*

Even when compared to other works by Ravel, this work is notable for its classical clarity and restraint. Ravel said that he was influenced by the trios of Saint-Saens.

In purely musical terms, there is nothing superfluous about the trio. Alexis Roland-Manuel wrote of its "lightness and distinction." It projects moods of comfort, warmth and even passion. The last movement is my favourite, it makes me feel like I'm at the beach. There is something elemental about it, akin to Monet's paintings of the seashore. There is a hint of the salon here, but without any sentimentality. The delicate oriental sounding opening gives way to more vigorous passages and a climax in which, as usual, Ravel doesn't hold back.

*Rapsodie Espagnole*

This is a fascinating work, because it goes beyond being a mere picture postcard. Mind you, by incorporating Spanish dance forms, there is no shortage of music which brings to mind swirling skirts and toreadors. Ravel even uses castanets to great effect, especially in the festive concluding movement. However, the four-note motif which goes through the work has a mysterious, dark and even obsessive quality to it. So too, the inclusion of celesta and string glissandi, which make me think of the piece as a sort of Spanish cousin to Bartok's _Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta_. A symphony in miniature, it's still more suave than disturbing, but there is a kind of dark passion underneath the surface.

Recordings

Gaspard - Martha Argerich, piano, DG 447 438-2













Trio - Joachim Trio, Naxos 8.550934





Rapsodie - London SO/Pierre Monteux, Decca 466 667-2


----------



## juliante

With each listen to a new work i become increasingly enchanted by Ravel. Case currently in point - Le Tombeau de Couperin for solo piano. The fugue - wonderous stuff!


----------



## Neo Romanza

juliante said:


> With each listen to a new work i become increasingly enchanted by Ravel. Case currently in point - Le Tombeau de Couperin for solo piano. The fugue - wonderous stuff!


_Le Tombeau de Couperin_, _Miroirs_, _Jeux d'eau_ and _Gaspard de la nuit_ are reasons enough to place Ravel in the upper pantheon of great composers.


----------



## Janspe

I just realized that the _Introduction et allegro_ for harp, flute, clarinet and string quartet is a work I haven't heard in years - and immediately rushed to listen to it! What a beautiful piece it is.


----------



## John Zito

Janspe said:


> I just realized that the _Introduction et allegro_ for harp, flute, clarinet and string quartet is a work I haven't heard in years - and immediately rushed to listen to it! What a beautiful piece it is.


Heard it for the first time over the summer, and I've been drunk on it since. The Ensemble Wien-Berlin recording on DG was my ninth most-listened-to track on Spotify this year. The twelfth most-listened-to was the arrangement for two pianos:


----------



## Guest

I have been listening to Ravel's exquisite *Le Tombeau de Couperin* - one of my absolute favourite piano works. I have the Lortie recording which is second here on this link.

This brings back memories. In the late 80s I was having piano lessons from a wonderful musician who had graduated from the conservatorium near our place. He was highly eccentric, lived with his mother on a farm and looked forward to me coming each week for my 'lessons'. How we talked!! I was and remain a bog standard pianist (how I ever reached 8th Grade is a wonder of the world!) but my 'lessons' were comprised of him delving into his music and playing for me; one memorable day he played most of "Le Tombeau" and the next week Prokofiev Sonata 7. Ginastera was also a feature of his spontaneous performances.

I learned a lot about music from that - something I was able to take with me to university a few years later. Sadly, my friend finally smoked himself to death at the very early age of 45 in 2008.

Lortie's Le Tombeau here from *26:32*. Much the superior of the previous performance.


----------



## Guest

Neo Romanza said:


> _Le Tombeau de Couperin_, _Miroirs_, _Jeux d'eau_ and _Gaspard de la nuit_ are reasons enough to place Ravel in the upper pantheon of great composers.


*Completely agree*, but don't forget the Piano Trio in A Minor and 'Daphnis et Chloe'.


----------



## John Zito

Christabel said:


> I have been listening to Ravel's exquisite *Le Tombeau de Couperin* - one of my absolute favourite piano works. I have the Lortie recording which is second here on this link.


Lortie's recording of the complete piano music is my reference, and _Le Tombeau de Couperin_ is definitely one of the highlights. It's very beautiful, but there are moments where he seems to deliberately _not_ smooth out the edges. He leans into the dissonances and plays certain passages in this tart, spiky way that I love. I'm thinking of the left hand at the beginning of the Rigaudon here versus here, or the climax of the Prelude here versus here.

And his recording of the solo piano arrangement of _La Valse_ is by far my favorite:


----------



## Guest

You are so right about this. And beautifully expressed too. Just comparing the link of "Le Tombeau" you can hear the difference between the two versions and Lortie's more exuberant and somewhat 'spikey' way (great description) are models for how this music should sound, IMO.

However, "La Valse" is a work that I've never much cared for. Suffice it to say that listening to Lortie's version is easily the best I've heard. The Piano Concerto in G is a long-time favourite too.


----------



## John Zito

Christabel said:


> You are so right about this. And beautifully expressed too. Just comparing the link of "Le Tombeau" you can hear the difference between the two versions and Lortie's more exuberant and somewhat 'spikey' way (great description) are models for how this music should sound, IMO.


I'm with you. I think it's one of those things where the music doesn't need any extra help to be lush and beautiful. That's built in. So there's room to play with a harder edge and point up the more acerbic elements.


----------



## Guest

John Zito said:


> I'm with you. I think it's one of those things where the music doesn't need any extra help to be lush and beautiful. That's built in. So there's room to play with a harder edge and point up the more acerbic elements.


You know, when I listen to this music (and other music, of course, like Beethoven) it takes away every little care I have and I regard myself as extremely fortunate to have found a gateway to the transcendent. When I was teaching I'd tell my (teenaged) English students, "you need to have a belief in something external to the self; that might take the form of music, art, literature or religion". Some of them listened!!


----------



## Guest

There's something deeply moving about Ravel's Piano Concerto for the Left Hand. The opening tutti reminds me of another work but I can't place it at the moment. Anyway, Yuja Wang uses too much pedal for my taste here:


----------



## John Zito

Christabel said:


> You know, when I listen to this music (and other music, of course, like Beethoven) it takes away every little care I have and I regard myself as extremely fortunate to have found a gateway to the transcendent. When I was teaching I'd tell my (teenaged) English students, "you need to have a belief in something external to the self; that might take the form of music, art, literature or religion". Some of them listened!!


That's a lot better than the advice I gave my college students: delete your social media and stop drinking coffee.

(Wait, is this social media? Hmmm...)



Christabel said:


> There's something deeply moving about Ravel's Piano Concerto for the Left Hand. The opening tutti reminds me of another work but I can't place it at the moment.


I couldn't agree more. For my money the Left Hand Concerto and the Piano Trio are Ravel's most deeply felt and "profound" works (in the sense of "profound" that is usually reserved for cats like Beethoven, Brahms, Bruckner, etc). That music is totally inexhaustible to me.

My favorite recording of the concerto is Zoltán Kocsis with Iván Fischer and the Budapest Festival for the very specific reason that in the middle of the fast section, when the piano lays out and the bassoon and trombone have solos, they add these blue notes that are totally not written but are so perfect. I cannot un-hear that, and it has sort of spoiled me for everyone else: here versus here.



Christabel said:


> Anyway, Yuja Wang uses too much pedal for my taste here:


Looks like she was still sort of learning it. I wonder if the studio recording is better.


----------



## Guest

Thanks for the link and your wonderful comments. I have been to performances of the Budapest Festival Orch/Ivan Fischer when we were staying in Vienna throughout 2011. That orchestra literally glowed in the dark, such was the frisson of their playing. That was the Liszt bi-centenary year and quite a bit that composer's works were on the 'menu', as it were, and I was extremely sad to have heard nothing of Ravel whatsoever. In fact, I wonder if the Viennese even like French composers as nothing from any of them was played in the Musikverein or anywhere else for that matter. The Orchestre de Paris played there too - and not a thing from Ravel.

What do you think of the orchestral arrangements of pieces from "Le Tombeau de Couperin"? I am very fond of them, I must say. There is a beautiful classical symmetry to this music, which I can't even define but I know it's there. It's ineffable.






I started reading the Roger Nichols biography of Ravel but it was heavy going, compared to most others I've read of other composers. It seemed to get bogged down and there was no sense of forward movement, so I finally abandoned it.


----------



## golfer72

I really like Ravel too. I just never seem to get around to him that much. So much music, so little time


----------



## Guest

Here's Ravel's "Pavane" for orchestra:






I prefer the piano version: oh, those chords....


----------



## Rogerx

golfer72 said:


> I really like Ravel too. I just never seem to get around to him that much. So much music, so little time


Changing priorities can work refreshing .


----------



## juliante

golfer72 said:


> I really like Ravel too. I just never seem to get around to him that much. So much music, so little time


Yet - he is one of the most concise composers, easier to make room for than all my other personal top tier composers.


----------



## Gargamel

John Zito said:


> Heard it for the first time over the summer, and I've been drunk on it since. The Ensemble Wien-Berlin recording on DG was my ninth most-listened-to track on Spotify this year. The twelfth most-listened-to was the arrangement for two pianos.


I feel this requires really good speakers for the colors to be audible? Wouldn't consider that to be the issue with more percussive piano pieces, e. g. Ravel's Valses nobles et sentimentales, or Poulenc's nocturnes.


----------



## John Zito

Christabel said:


> What do you think of the orchestral arrangements of pieces from "Le Tombeau de Couperin"? I am very fond of them, I must say. There is a beautiful classical symmetry to this music, which I can't even define but I know it's there. It's ineffable.


Love 'em. And I don't agree with the view that I've read (can't remember where) that the orchestrations make the piano original obsolete. If anything, they make you appreciate really good performances of the piano original that can manage to bring out the different lines like the orchestration naturally does. I'm thinking of that inner voice at the beginning of the Forlane that the english horn plays.

What are your go-to recordings of the orchestral version?



Christabel said:


> I started reading the Roger Nichols biography of Ravel but it was heavy going, compared to most others I've read of other composers. It seemed to get bogged down and there was no sense of forward movement, so I finally abandoned it.


So funny you mention it. I picked it for my winter break reading this year, and I'm just halfway now. I'm enjoying the new things I'm learning, but as you say I'm not especially enthusiastic about the writing itself. I'm sure I'll never read it cover to cover again. At least one thing the book does well is draw attention to the importance in Ravel's output of his songs: _Histoires naturelles_, Mallarmé songs, _Chansons madécasses_, etc. Up to now I hadn't given them much thought, but I'm having fun correcting that:






Also, I never realized that Ravel lived at home with his parents and brother well into his 40s. It wasn't until the 1920s (his father died in 1908 and his mother in 1917) that he finally got his own place.



Gargamel said:


> I feel this requires really good speakers for the colors to be audible? Wouldn't consider that to be the issue with more percussive piano pieces, e. g. Ravel's Valses nobles et sentimentales, or Poulenc's nocturnes.


I'll defer to you on that. I've never had a proper sound system. I've always just listened to recordings through ear buds, headphones, computer speakers, car speakers, etc. So I literally do not know what I'm missing.


----------



## SanAntone

I periodically pull up this on Spotify and play it on random mode.










Fantastic.


----------



## starthrower

SanAntone said:


> I periodically pull up this on Spotify and play it on random mode.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fantastic.


Nice box! I have a copy.


----------



## Guest

This is a magnificent performance by Richter and it's annoying they couldn't cancel the gratuitous audience noise!!






@John Zito: I really appreciated your comments and also your response to the Ravel biography. What constitutes a good music biography? That would be a good question to explore. Mine would be Swafford's biographies of both Beethoven and Brahms (the latter recommended in an interview with Stephen Kovacevich!) and also Humphrey Burton's bio of Leonard Bernstein!!

My go-to for "Le Tombeau" for orchestra? This version with LSO/Abbado which also has the two piano concertos: Argerich and Beroff.


----------

