# Ravel's Bolero



## Glaliraha

To put it bluntly, I consider Ravel's *Bolero* to be the greatest orchestral piece ever written. I'm not entirely sure why, but I think I'm beginning to understand the attraction.
It's simply breathtaking, and it never fails to be dazzling and compelling, not for a single second.


----------



## Polednice

Are you fairly new to classical music? There's nothing wrong with liking that piece so much, and it's great that you have such enthusiasm for it, but I'd be willing to bet a fair bit of money that you won't find a single seasoned listener that would agree that it's the greatest piece ever written  Keep listening and I'm sure you'll find better!


----------



## jhar26

It's far from the greatest piece ever written, but it's very good. Certainly much better than it's usually given credit for on this forum. As far as minimalism goes (which this basically is) it's tops.

PS: I wonder what direction this thread would take if Mirror Image was still a member here.


----------



## classidaho

This is the piece that got it 'kick started' for me (in 1974). I can understand why a person would feel this way. It is near a perfect composition and well thought out.

Some think that a composition must be extremely complex and look towards the genius rather than the music.

As the others have stated, it is no longer my favorite, but iwould still rate high, and I still stop what I amp doing to listen to a good arrangement of it.

It is the only composition that I have ever seen a complete making of a film on (called, I think, 'The Making of Bolero'}.

This is the film that got me kick started during a college class. As the instructor stated '........if you hate classical music, you will like this film. If you like classical music you will love it. If you love classical must, stand by to pee your pants..!', Chuck

PS: I bet you really like 'The Canon, by Pachelbel'..........me also!


----------



## World Violist

It's a really spectacular piece, but I can't call it close to the best... Though Celibidache's very slow, very intense reading does rather make a case for it! Fantastic orchestration (what could one expect from Ravel, anyway?), even though it has no development whatsoever, which is why it can't by any means be called the greatest piece ever written, or even a great piece.

Try Stravinsky's Rite of Spring if you like the percussion  ... Salonen and the LA Philharmonic have an amazing performance on Youtube and CD.


----------



## Weston

It's a beautiful melody played over an ostinato rhythm which could almost be considered an inverted pedal point. This goes on long enough to drive even the most insensitive of listeners nuts and then the piece explodes into unexpected dissonances. I love that. 

It is certainly a finer piece of music to my ears than the Pachelbel Canon. I even like it better than the ostinato heavy Erocia variations of Beethoven.


----------



## TWhite

Bolero was originally written for the ballerina Ida Rubenstein, who wanted a piece with Spanish flavor. Originally, Ravel was going to orchestrate several pieces from the Albeniz piano suite "Iberia", only to find out that the orchestration rights had been handed to Albeniz friend Enrique Fernandos-Arbos (too bad, too, I'd give my left eyeball to have heard what Ravel might have done with the work). 

Ravel described the work as "Orchestral tissue without music." I don't know if he was joking or not, but the work became the 1928 equivalent of a "Best Seller", and probably still his most frequently performed orchestral work. 

It certainly has a lot going for it, IMO. Hypnotic rhythm (even if a true 'Bolero' is in duple, not triple rhythm), tunes that sound sufficiently "Iberian", and that utterly fantastic orchestration that builds in gradual--and extremely sensual--layers. 

It's easy to see why people coming relatively 'new' to Classical music are overwhelmed by it--I know that I was way back when I was just delving into the classical orchestral repertoire. My first introduction to it was a recording by Paul Paray and the Detroit Symphony orchestra that just knocked me out of my seat (the other work on the recording, Rimsky-Korsakov's "Capriccio Espagnole" did just about the same thing). 

Greatest piece of orchestral music ever written? Well, not for me anymore, but for sheer visceral orchestral excitement, it's certainly way up there. 

Tom


----------



## Glaliraha

I've listened to what I consider a fair amount of orchestral music, including classical.

Others I'd include as topping the list are Stravinsky's _*The Rite Of Spring*_ and _*Petrushka*_, Respighi's *Pines Of Rome*, Ravel's orchestration of Mussorgsky's *Pictures At An Exhibition*, Khachaturian's *Sabre Dance* and the *Passacaglia* from Shostakovich's *Violin Concerto #1*.

And as you can probably tell, I'm a 20th Century Music type of guy, but I still listen to and appreciate music from the Renaissance, Baroque, Classical and Romantic periods. Indeed, my username stands for Glass, Liszt, Ravel and Handel, the four composers I'm most currently most enamoured with.


----------



## starry

There isn't one single greatest orchestral piece.


----------



## Polednice

starry said:


> There isn't one single greatest orchestral piece.


Yes there is, and it's by Brahms. Don't ask me which one - it's just by Brahms. That's all you need to know.


----------



## Serenade

Polednice said:


> Yes there is, and it's by Brahms. Don't ask me which one - it's just by Brahms. That's all you need to know.


 Why am I not surprised?


----------



## Ravellian

When people start throwing the word 'best' around, I get pissed... and then someone mentions the 'Bolero' in the same context as 'best'? *INSERT VERY ANGRY FACE*


----------



## Guest

I find it intriguing, but repetitive and ultimately I lose interest.

I won't begin to label anything "best." However, there are many composers that are considered greater than Ravel, and not just by commoners. Most of the world probably doesn't listen to classical anymore, and most that do are probably fairly educated on it. So these opinions aren't exactly uninformed. I'm sure that, even among the most educated critics, you'd get much more votes for Beethoven than Ravel. 

Your "best" lists may very well work for you, but when you start making general statements that they are the "best," as opposed to your personal favorites, they start to get absurd.


----------



## TresPicos

The Bolero is not even Ravel's greatest orchestral piece. But it might make the top 100 orchestral pieces of all time, for originality.


----------



## mueske

Polednice said:


> Yes there is, and it's by Brahms. Don't ask me which one - it's just by Brahms. That's all you need to know.


Brahms himself would deny that though, and give Beethoven as his answer. So that settles it. You must now change your statement to:

Yes there is, and it's by Beethoven. Don't ask me which one - it's just by Beethoven. that's all you need to know.


----------



## Polednice

mueske said:


> Brahms himself would deny that though, and give Beethoven as his answer. So that settles it. You must now change your statement to:
> 
> Yes there is, and it's by Beethoven. Don't ask me which one - it's just by Beethoven. that's all you need to know.


That's not quite true. Brahms happened to be an idiot and could not properly estimate his own genius in comparison to others. Now that I'm here to pass ultimate judgement, I can say that the best piece is by Brahms, and that's an end to the matter!


----------



## afterpostjack

I definitely think it is one of Ravel's better orchestral works, but not the best of all time. I like his "La Valse", "Daphnis et Chloé" orchestral suite or "Une Barque sur L'océan" more. But it does demonstrate that Ravel was a master of orchestration.


----------



## Weston

mueske said:


> Yes there is, and it's by Beethoven. Don't ask me which one - it's just by Beethoven. that's all you need to know.


It's Wellington's Victory, isn't it?


----------



## mueske

Weston said:


> It's Wellington's Victory, isn't it?


It damn well might be!


----------



## James clerk

I love the bolero, eventually gets kind of boring, but love it anyway. HOWEVER the concert for the left hand played by Beroff is, let me see... ,328497932749832748738957348975894738948758934758937458934789573489758947389475897348957348975893475983478957348957930840942049032949387295734895740374957348974587487387873840324-03-20403289957483758435473857 times better. Try it, you'll love it.


----------



## Sid James

I like his other works much better, eg. _Pavane, Daphnis et Chloe, Piano Concerto in G, Spanish Rhapsody_, etc. etc...


----------



## Ian Elliott

I agree, and so did Ravel. He said he wrote only one masterpiece, "but unfortunately it isn't music," and he was clearly referring to Bolero. I say, not bad for a rush job.


----------



## Manxfeeder

I like it because it has not one but two sax solos. Anything that will get two sax players into suits and out of the unemployment line is notable. 

Is it proper to say it's a theme and variations, but the variations are in orchestral color?


----------



## Ian Elliott

Never thought of that. I think you are right.


----------



## Conor71

I have pretty main-stream taste in CM and find nothing wrong with Bolero - I have listened to it many times and still enjoy it!.


----------



## Vaneyes

It's *hypnotic*.


----------



## graaf

World Violist said:


> Though Celibidache's very slow, very intense reading does rather make a case for it!


After reading this, I got his version and was amazed! Thanks for the info.



DrMike said:


> I find it intriguing, but repetitive and ultimately I lose interest.


I actually like repetitive music, if the theme is good enough. Since I love the main theme in Bolero, and aforementioned Celibidache takes his time in developing it, it's a real gem for me.


----------



## LindenLea

Bolero is clever, the idea of this 15 minute orchestral crescendo seems like a blinding flash of originality that had never been done before, or since, but for me it pales into musical insignificance compared with much of Ravel's other exquisite music, especially the Daphis ballet music, the string quartet, Tombeau de Couperin, Mother Goose, and best of all for me, La Valse. Ravel himself even admitted that Bolero had no form, no development, and no modulation, and he predicted that most orchestras would refuse to even play it, and that it simply represented an experiment in a very limited direction. To me its a piece which, once you've heard it a few times, you feel no pressing urge or need to hear it again, and it wouldn't bother me if I never did, most great music reveals itself in many different ways over the years and new things emerge that you missed before, but it's virtually impossible for any orchestra or conductor to put an original interpretation on Bolero, virtually every performance and recording to me sounds identical to every other, and I imagine it is bottom of most conductors list of works to conduct, providing you could get him to hold a baton and beat a metronome mark tempo of about 72, you could probably get a chimpanzee to conduct it!!


----------



## Ian Elliott

*Ravel's music*

I never tire of Bolero, which perhaps I associate with the height of my adolescence. You are right though that he wrote much more interesting music. I believe he invented neoclassicism with Le Tombeau de Couperin. In addition to the quartet, his other chamber works are worth repeated listening, and the chamber opera Les Enfants et les Sortileges is delightful. Much of his chamber music, or at least segments of it, can be heard in the film Un Coeur en Hiver, which is cryptically about Ravel himself, though this is not revealed in the film or its trailers.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Personally, I love Bolero. I wouldn't cite it as my favorite orchestral work of all time... nor even my favorite by Ravel (I might go with the Piano Concerto for that)... but neither would I dismiss it simply because of its popularity. There are those who make the repeated (and misguided) assumption that simply because a work is popular (the "Moonlight" sonata, Beethoven's 5th, the _Brandenburg Concertos_, _The Four Seasons, La Traviata, Carmen The Magic Flute, The Barber of Seville_, etc...) and often embraced by those new to classical music, this is due to the fact that the music itself is simple-minded... and best left behind when one's tastes become more sophisticated. Such popularity has little to do with the merits of the works one way or another and far more to do with marketing, film, tv, the media, etc... I rarely listen to classical music on the radio, and as a result, when I come to play the Brandenburgs, or the _Four Seasons_, or _Bolero_ they are not works that I have been so bombarded with that I cannot listen to them afresh. 

:tiphat:


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Personally, I love Bolero. I wouldn't cite it as my favorite orchestral work of all time... nor even my favorite by Ravel (I might go with the Piano Concerto for that)... but neither would I dismiss it simply because of its popularity. There are those who make the repeated (and misguided) assumption that simply because a work is popular (the "Moonlight" sonata, Beethoven's 5th, the _Brandenburg Concertos_, _The Four Seasons, La Traviata, Carmen The Magic Flute, The Barber of Seville_, etc...) and often embraced by those new to classical music, this is due to the fact that the music itself is simple-minded... and best left behind when one's tastes become more sophisticated. Such popularity has little to do with the merits of the works one way or another and far more to do with marketing, film, tv, the media, etc... I rarely listen to classical music on the radio, and as a result, when I come to play the Brandenburgs, or the _Four Seasons_, or _Bolero_ they are not works that I have been so bombarded with that I cannot listen to them afresh.
> 
> :tiphat:


Well put. I enjoy _Bolero_. It has lots of energy! (Ravel's chamber music rank well in my lists of favourite Romantic chamber works, too).


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Ravel gives the flute the first variation.


----------



## Meaghan

Poor Ravel was rather irked by Bolero's lasting popularity. He wanted more attention to be given instead to those of his works he considered more substantial. 

But I like Bolero. I got to see a really terrific ballet of it (choreography by Nicolo Fonte) a couple years ago that made me appreciate the piece itself more than before.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

Bolero...Bo-le-ro....Bo-le-ro....Bo-le-le-le-le-le-le-le-le-le-le-ro-ro-ro-ro-ro-ro-ro....Bo-le-ro-bo-le...ro


Wunderwar! Es una mier...bull sh...


----------



## Ad Libitu

Glaliraha said:


> To put it bluntly, I consider Ravel's *Bolero* to be the greatest orchestral piece ever written. I'm not entirely sure why, but I think I'm beginning to understand the attraction.
> It's simply breathtaking, and it never fails to be dazzling and compelling, not for a single second.


Not sure you're right...Maybe you can explain better why do you think this is the greatest orchestral piece ever written?


----------



## myaskovsky2002

*?*

K.....mon!

Martin

:trp:


----------



## myaskovsky2002

Please....Think about the greatest! Rimsky-Korsakov.

Just the Spanish Capriccio is better!

Martin


----------



## Ian Elliott

All right. But apart from Debussy's Iberia, I think for great Spanish music we should go to the Spaniards themselves: Albeniz, Granados, de Falla.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

myaskovsky2002 said:


> Please....Think about the greatest! Rimsky-Korsakov.
> 
> Just the Spanish Capriccio is better!
> 
> Martin


HAHA! A Russian being better at making Spanish music that an actual Spanish person (well... Basque that is)?

However, I think the Russians followed some stereotypes, I mean, all they did was copy the bass lines, use some triplet sequences, and throw some castanets in there.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

Did I say that R-K could compose better music than a Spaniard...Imposssssssssible...Martin didn't say that (I confirm). Albeniz, Granados, de Falla are ok, Rimsky-Korsakov is much better for me!!!!!!!
(R-K= Rimsky-Korsakov). Los españoles son españoles como siempre y nosotros los argentinos no los queremos demasiado....El mejor ejemplo los gallegos...sun brutos como bestias. ¡Olé!

Martin, con castañuelas.


----------



## Ian Elliott

You are being very kind to old Rimsky. But for me Debussy holds the palm. The ending of Iberia, I'll admit, is somewhat weak, but the first two movements are masterful, especially the first, 'Par les rues st par les chemins.' Sorry, but I like it better than R-K.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

> I consider Ravel's Bolero to be the greatest orchestral piece ever written


HUGE LOL!...You ears are virgin or almost! LOL again.

Martin


----------



## jhar26

Legendary ballerina Sylvie Guillem....


----------



## Jean Christophe Paré

Huilunsoittaja said:


> HAHA! A Russian being better at making Spanish music that an actual Spanish person (well... Basque that is)?
> 
> However, I think the Russians followed some stereotypes, I mean, all they did was copy the bass lines, use some triplet sequences, and throw some castanets in there.


Ravel's French. He was influenced by Basque culture through his mother, but that's like saying I am better in Italian music because my grandfather was Italian.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Jean Christophe Paré said:


> Ravel's French. He was influenced by Basque culture through his mother, but that's like saying I am better in Italian music because my grandfather was Italian.


I knew that. But he's not pure French, I meant.


----------



## Camilla

Glaliraha said:


> To put it bluntly, I consider Ravel's *Bolero* to be the greatest orchestral piece ever written. I'm not entirely sure why, but I think I'm beginning to understand the attraction.
> It's simply breathtaking, and it never fails to be dazzling and compelling, not for a single second.


It is a great piece and it gives me a good feeling when I hear or play it, but I personally wouldn't consider it the greatest ever written.

To me it always reminds me of ice skating!!


----------



## Ralfy

I'm always reminded of the film _10_.


----------



## Vor Gott

I think that it being a personal favourite is far more accurate. Esteeming it to be the best piece of Orchestral music ever composed implies comparison with generally excepted masters of composition on some scale usually involving intellectual complexity and emotional vigor.


----------



## RBrittain

Brilliant piece, very unique. Very emotive.


----------



## gr8gunz

One big crescendo. Redundant, boring and overplayed. I like Ravel but Bolero just never did it for me. Rapsodie Espagnole is a much more interesting work as are many others of his IMHO.


----------



## tdc

I think its ok, but quite repetitive. I prefer the shortened version of it actually. Its probably one of Ravel's weakest pieces, but I still listen to it here and there.


----------



## Xaltotun

I don't get it, myself (and I'm a Ravel fan)... it's nice background music and probably wonderful when accompanied with film, but as music, it just feels like a big (although clever) joke.


----------



## RBrittain

It requires a certain state of mind. If I'm in an excitable, wanting mood, then it probably would bore me. But if I'm in a calm, stoical, reflective and/or tired mood, it's an incredible piece.


----------



## RBrittain

This is a rather nice recording, by the way:






(there are a few pops, be warned)


----------



## tdc

Xaltotun said:


> but as music, it just feels like a big (although clever) joke.


Honestly I think this is more or less what it was intended to be. I remember reading a music scholar once wrote an article suggesting this piece was actually evidence of brain damage Ravel suffered in an auto accident, (compared to earlier works). This article was later refuted though by various pieces of evidence for one -Ravel himself reffered to this piece once as 'a piece for orchestra without any music'.


----------



## RBrittain

I also read that it was influenced by his onset of dementia. I'm not too sure what is true, but I do know that Ravel did not intend it as 'a joke'. He did downplay the piece, because it was unlike any piece of classical music being performed, and was probably wary of the reception it might receive. But I think it's clear that he did like it. He was repeatedly annoyed with conductors, like Toscanini, for playing it too fast. It needs to be played slowly. As Ravel said, it is "a very long, gradual crescendo with no contrasts and practically no invention except the plan and the manner of execution". But, its plan and manner of execution is, in my opinion, quite brilliant. I consider it a magnificent piece and a truly original work.


----------



## tdc

RBrittain said:


> I also read that it was influenced by his onset of dementia. I'm not too sure what is true, but I do know that Ravel did not intend it as 'a joke'. He did downplay the piece, because it was unlike any piece of classical music being performed, and was probably wary of the reception it might receive. But I think it's clear that he did like it. He was repeatedly annoyed with conductors, like Toscanini, for playing it too fast. It needs to be played slowly. As Ravel said, it is "a very long, gradual crescendo with no contrasts and practically no invention except the plan and the manner of execution". But, its plan and manner of execution is, in my opinion, quite brilliant. I consider it a magnificent piece and a truly original work.


I must admit I find the main theme quite charming, which is why I listen to it from time to time. For some reason it reminds me of exploring out on a nature trail in beautiful mountain scenery. Im sure Ravel must have found something redeemable in it as well, or he wouldn't have released it!


----------



## gr8gunz

tdc said:


> Im sure Ravel must have found something redeemable in it as well, or he wouldn't have released it!


What little I know of Ravel (CD liner notes mostly) he personally disliked the piece and wished that "someone else wrote it". That may not be too accurate however. The folks who write liner notes are nortorious for adding their own embellishments.


----------



## RBrittain

tdc said:


> I must admit I find the main theme quite charming, which is why I listen to it from time to time. For some reason it reminds me of exploring out on a nature trail in beautiful mountain scenery.


Yes, the first bit of it often reminds me of a journey through the desert - The slow, pattering progression.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

*Bolero makes me think of this...*






Best


----------



## Petwhac

Bolero is certainly a great piece and very original. It is brilliantly orchestrated but then all of Ravel's music is brilliantly orchestrated. It is _far_ from his best piece (whatever that really means) and even _further_ from the best ever piece. IMO.
His attention to detail and acutely refined sense of colour are second to none. EG, in places he doubles the melody at the 5th or the octave + 5th but at a quieter volume which emulates the effect of an organ stop adding harmonics to the fundamental note.
In other words, providing the performers achieve the correct balance, it changes the tone colour of the melody, creating in effect, a new instrument.
In this day and age the piece would not be nearly so celebrated if it hadn't been used in the film 10!


----------



## Kieran

Petwhac said:


> In this day and age the piece would not be nearly so celebrated if it hadn't been used in the film 10!


Or - maybe - Torville & Dean.

But I think it's a marvellous work...


----------



## myaskovsky2002

*Pessimistic*



> To put it bluntly, I consider Ravel's Bolero to be the greatest orchestral piece ever written. I'm not entirely sure why, but I think I'm beginning to understand the attraction.
> It's simply breathtaking, and it never fails to be dazzling and compelling, not for a single second.


Yeah...transpose Bolero to 2011...what do you get? The music you listen at the Gym while you're training...the same rythm shaking your brain, simple, very simple and a great rythm...not too many notes (like Mozart...LOL).

Martin, analytic


----------



## Ethereality

Glaliraha said:


> To put it bluntly, I consider Ravel's *Bolero* to be the greatest orchestral piece ever written. I'm not entirely sure why, but I think I'm beginning to understand the attraction.


I never understood it really. It's one of the worst pieces I know.


----------



## mbhaub

It is the most boring piece I know. Last evening I was at a rehearsal for an upcoming concert and the last thing on the schedule was Bolero. I'm playing the contrabassoon part. You sit for 10 minutes - counting seemingly endless rests - then finally you start: C, rest, G; C, rest, G; over and over and over and over and over. Trying to stay interested and not lose your place is torture. Then the then the last quarter note of the measure changes to two eighths - maybe to wake the player up? But you better be paying attention for the sudden modulation to E - there's two staves left and by the end you're brain dead. Even the wind soloists who have very taxing and challenging parts (for 16 measures) eventually have to play the humdrum repetitious accompaniment. For those people who like it, who listen to it regularly, more power to you.


----------



## pianozach

mbhaub said:


> It is the most boring piece I know. Last evening I was at a rehearsal for an upcoming concert and the last thing on the schedule was Bolero. I'm playing the contrabassoon part. You sit for 10 minutes - counting seemingly endless rests - then finally you start: C, rest, G; C, rest, G; over and over and over and over and over. Trying to stay interested and not lose your place is torture. Then the then the last quarter note of the measure changes to two eighths - maybe to wake the player up? But you better be paying attention for the sudden modulation to E - there's two staves left and by the end you're brain dead. Even the wind soloists who have very taxing and challenging parts (for 16 measures) eventually have to play the humdrum repetitious accompaniment. For those people who like it, who listen to it regularly, more power to you.


LOL.

Well, you know, *Bolero* isn't about the boring CBsn part.

I happen to be a *Bolero* fan. I _KNOW_ it's repetitive, but no more so than some random piece from *Glass*. :devil:

I know *Ravel* himself didn't like it; it was just a little experiment to him, and I believe he was rather befuddled at its popularity eclipsing his other more "serious" works. 

But it's got tension, it's got drama. Sure, it's repetitive, but within the repetition are some really beautiful moments and colors that Ravel gets out of the orchestra.


----------



## Livly_Station

I *love* Ravel's Bolero. To me, it's genius! Love its mysterious but sensual vibe on top of that martial, hypnotic rhythm. Yes, it's repetitive, but the melody is outsatanding and alluring, and all the different orchestral colors as well as the increased intensity of each repetition bring renewed momentum each time.

In my mind, there's a cinematic quality in the way that it feels like we're slowly approaching a scene where something life-changing is inexorably about to happen. The moments before a great revelation or a great catharsis. Definitely suspenseful, but also irresistible.


----------



## vtpoet

Nothin' nobody's gonna agree on, but I'd say that Rimsky-Korsakov's Schérézade is a nominee. But there is indeed an argument to be made for Bolero.


----------



## chipia

I think it has a great melody, but the reliance on repetition makes the piece in the end unsatisfying. I wish there was more development of the really beautiful theme.

Some trivia: Ravel's Bolero inspired Larry Clinton's "Bolero in Blue" which was rumoured to be the inspiration for Webber's "Memory" from the musical "Cats".





What do you think? Does Webber trace his roots to Ravel?


----------



## Merl

I'm OK with the Bolero as long as its a few years in between hearing it. To say it's overplayed would be a gross understatement. Like others, it was probably one of the first pieces I got into but equally it was one of the first pieces I stopped playing through over-familiarity. A 'Smoke on the Water' of classical music.


----------



## EdwardBast

Attacking Ravel's _Bolero_ strikes me as pointless in the same way as targeting Duchamp's Fountain, the 12-tone system, and Cage's 4'33". It was foreordained by the nature of reality and the human organism that some joker was going to invent these things. I'd just be glad Ravel did such a good job of it because another composer might have used a tune from a Lehar operetta.


----------



## Livly_Station

EdwardBast said:


> Attacking Ravel's _Bolero_ strikes me as pointless in the same way as targeting Duchamp's Fountain, the 12-tone system, and Cage's 4'33". It was foreordained by the nature of reality and the human organism that some joker was going to invent these things. I'd just be glad Ravel did such a good job of it because another composer might have used a tune from a Lehar operetta.


Why do I feel like you were kicking the Bolero while arguing against attacking it?


----------



## Gothos

Merl said:


> I'm OK with the Bolero as long as its a few years in between hearing it. To say it's overplayed would be a gross understatement. Like others, it was probably one of the first pieces I got into but equally it was one of the first pieces I stopped playing through over-familiarity. A 'Smoke on the Water' of classical music.


True.Except playing it doesn't get you thrown out of guitar shops.


----------



## EdwardBast

Livly_Station said:


> Why do I feel like you were kicking the Bolero while arguing against attacking it?


I'm not sure why.  I was mainly just commenting on its archetypal nature, the purity of the idea behind it that made it (or something like) inevitable. It's a good tune and a fun way for the young to learn the sound of orchestral instruments. I have nothing against it even though I don't see myself seeking it out on a concert schedule.


----------



## Livly_Station

chipia said:


> I think it has a great melody, but the reliance on repetition makes the piece in the end unsatisfying. I wish there was more development of the really beautiful theme.


I think _Bolero_ wouldn't be _Bolero_ if it had more development and additional material. To me, _Bolero_ feels like an inexorable monolithic piece that couldn't be anything else ever like a work of nature.

The result of such modifications could have been beautiful too, I admit, but, honestly, it would also make it much more ordinary and probably less remarkable.


----------



## tdc

I pretty much agree with Edbast's comments in regards to _Bolero_. It can be frankly an annoying piece, yet I honestly love the melodic material.

The first version of _Bolero_ I heard was an edited version placed on a greatest hits classical music compilation CD I picked up when I was a classical newbie. I actually prefer listening to the work in that format clocking in at about 5 minutes, however neither version is something I listen to at all anymore. Its pretty easy to hear the piece in my mind now with striking clarity anytime I want.


----------



## Heck148

The solos in Bolero can be quite challenging...for that i find it occasionally interesting to hear...not a piece i listen to all that frequently....that said, I'll take it over the "Taco-belle Cannon" any day of the week...lol!!


----------



## pianozach

I'm laughing my *** off.

*Dudamel* conducts while Yngwie is guest soloist.






Wait for it . . . .


----------



## hammeredklavier

Heck148 said:


> I'll take it over the "*Taco-belle Cannon*" any day of the week


is that a kind of weapon used in food fights?


----------



## Heck148

hammeredklavier said:


> is that a kind of weapon used in food fights?


LOL!! More like an acoustical assault on our sanity!!


----------



## fbjim

Bolero can be a really fun test piece for orchestral sonority - old recordings of Czech or French ensembles playing it are really enjoyable listens. Some of those sonorities you simply don't hear anymore.


----------

