I'm very aware hearing this piece (composed in 1969) again after many years that people nowadays are simply unaware of the extraordinary explorations and expansions of both instrumental and vocal technique that were going on around this time in "classical" music. Specifically, the vocalist's role was written for Roy Hart (1926-1975), a notable pioneer in extended vocal technique. Very interesting to listen to this right after hearing/watching Jonathan Groff's wonderfully mad King George (yes, the same one) in Hamilton! :-)
0:05 - I. The Sentry (King Prussia's Minuet) 5:28 - II. The Country Walk (La Promenade) 9:04 - III. The Lady-In-Waiting (Miss Musgrave's Fancy) [11:52 - Transition] 13:24 - IV. To Be Sung On The Water (The Waterman) 16:24 - V. The Phantom Queen (He's Ay A-Kissing Me) [19:06 - Transition] 19:48 - VI. The Counterfeit (Le Conterfaite) 21:42 - VII. Country Dance (Scotch Bonnett) 26:20 - VIII. The Review (A Spanish March)
Do you mean the multiple arrows with lines? Those mean to pizzicato rapidly either slower or faster depending on speed. Other arrows that are thicker indicate a more cluster like sound while the x's on a note tell the vocalist to "choke" on the note. Other things to notice: a late slur after a note is to go upwards or downwards. Even breathed notes are apparent as if to talk on top of the note.
You can’t be serious right? You’re telling me this is classical music? My view of it is the relaxing kind. Please don’t scold me if I don’t know anything about classical music. I love it so don’t destroy my dream, thx.
@@CutieRingoJoy Yes and no. It depends on your exact definition of "classical music" and then your exact view on what constitutes evolution and what revolution. First off, there are several common definitions of "classical music:" As defined in (A) the first layman's way, it usually describes most of the western musical tradition starting at the medieval era, meaning roughly anything between the medieval era and the modern era of western music. In other words, this is the definition people use for whom anything old and western is classical music. As defined in (B) the second layman's way, it is roughly synonymous with the common practice period. This is the definition people use for whom "classical" means anything involving popular, well-known and relatively accessible composers like Mozart or Beethoven. As defined in (C) the third layman's way, it describes music that uses certain instruments and textures associated with the music of the common practice period. This is the definition people use for whom anything played by strings and piano is classical music. As defined in (D) the stricter way, "classical music" means music of a specific era marked by things like a lesser emphasis on counterpoint, more works composed for orchestra, development of sonata form and others. This is the era Mozart was part of. There's probably a bunch of other definitions, but these are the main ones I can come up with right now. Then there's the question of whether one considers music like this as an evolution or revolution. Opinions may differ. I consider it a revolution. Golan Gur's "Arnold Schönberg and the Ideology of Progress in Twentieth-Century Musical Thinking" is a good primer on that composer's views regarding his role in western musical history. Many other avantgarde composers have expressed this attitude openly, but I admit I would be hard-pressed to really back that up well and succinctly, since there just isn't much research on the motives of people deciding to compose in some avantgarde style. If you have a look around, you should probably find some writing by the composers themselves, since avantgarde artists usually aren't all that shy about explaining their reasons, or at least what they perceive their reasons to be. And in general, the desire to break free from tradition wholesale is unique to music like in this video, whereas earlier eras also sought to free themselves from tradition but went about it with much more careful consideration about what to keep or discard and why, and all having in common immediate aesthetic considerations, while music like this and avantgarde music in general mostly disregards aesthetic considerations completely in favour of more cerebral ones. All that is to say that if we consider it a revolution against western tradition, then only definition C allows us to call it classical music. Definition A would work if we considered it an evolution and therefore part of the western musical tradition. Considering that definition C is very superficial, it's safe to say that music such as this is ultimately **not** classical music. It doesn't follow the western musical tradition other than by following a slow and measured loosening of tonality with a complete disregard for tonality in a way similar to a child who imitates its mother putting on lipstick by smearing it all over its face. At least that's my view of things. Take everything with a grain of salt, including what I just wrote, and research things yourself if you wanna be sure.
This is defined as classical music only insofar as the namers desire it to be so since that naming is essential to their goal of being a deliberate performative destruction of that genre dressed up in high minded language. Self indulgent intellectual wankery, meant solely as a means for it's performers to look down on tradition and surviving only due to that, much as anarchists thrive while there is a social structure around them but would quickly regret the bloody chaos that would ensue should their principles gain sole sway.
Heh, ok, that came out more abrasive than it could have. Some people will garner value from this stuff as a thought exercise and I suppose thats fine, but the grasping at an umbrella term to garner legitimacy whilst engaging in its destruction is definately a part and parcel of the whole thing, and I wish people were more honest about that....
Very "interesting". But we're not getting anything like what's in the score, e.g. 1:28 - "very large bass drum", triple-f (more like a tenor drum, mf at best). Chords from the vocal soloist to follow? Nope. "Breath only"? Don't think so. And what on Earth is the pianist to make of bar #1? Looks like an F below the range of any piano I've ever come across. And the natural?? Against what key signature? And what are the notes to follow? Very hard to tell. This opus undoubtedly has a certain shock and possibly (unintentional?) comedic value; hard to discern any point to it beyond that. 😁
![Alan Hovhaness - Symphony No. 18 (Circe) for Orchestra, Op 204 (1963) [Score-Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OaJ8_nKuShc/mqdefault.jpg)
Man, imagine a production of "Hamilton" but King George III sings this instead of "You'll Be Back," and then the play goes on as normal.
What’s Hamilton?
@@JasonMcChristianthank you
When he said "undo the door" I felt that.
For me it was “pity me”
“Undo the door” Dumbledore said calmly
3:21
The score alone is a work of art
I studied this at A level
I think it’s a work of beauty
My music teacher played this for us today and told us to describe the features of this song 🙃
"What are this song's features?"
Yes.
It was drawn by hand
The features of this song make me hungry, but maybe I’m just always hungry… 🤔
I'm very aware hearing this piece (composed in 1969) again after many years that people nowadays are simply unaware of the extraordinary explorations and expansions of both instrumental and vocal technique that were going on around this time in "classical" music. Specifically, the vocalist's role was written for Roy Hart (1926-1975), a notable pioneer in extended vocal technique. Very interesting to listen to this right after hearing/watching Jonathan Groff's wonderfully mad King George (yes, the same one) in Hamilton! :-)
It's a shame a recording with Hart's voice doesn't exist :(
This is a certified hood classic
0:05 - I. The Sentry (King Prussia's Minuet)
5:28 - II. The Country Walk (La Promenade)
9:04 - III. The Lady-In-Waiting (Miss Musgrave's Fancy)
[11:52 - Transition]
13:24 - IV. To Be Sung On The Water (The Waterman)
16:24 - V. The Phantom Queen (He's Ay A-Kissing Me)
[19:06 - Transition]
19:48 - VI. The Counterfeit (Le Conterfaite)
21:42 - VII. Country Dance (Scotch Bonnett)
26:20 - VIII. The Review (A Spanish March)
"Now, what are some of this piece's features?"
Yes.
I love smooth jazz
One of my favourite works.
I think i once heard this somewhere, long ago, because i wanted to make a sound poem and this was what I was aiming for in style. 😄
I suddenly learned where Serj Tankian got his vocal inspiration from
I saw 0:05 and my heart dropped
amazing!
certified hood classic
"They're Coming To Take Me Away" ain't got nothing on this
this is the most beautiful somg ive ever heard
srsly tho
How i'll explain my musical taste to my friends.
Nobody:
Nothing:
DEVOID OF ANYTHING:
NOT EVEN A SINGLE SUBATOMIC PARTICLE:
My alarm: 0:05
The birds and the lawnmower: 3:45
My neighbours: 4:20
22:53
"I've seen the future of horror, and his name is Peter Maxwell Davies"
I suppose the baritone never sing again after this performance
He has a little bit more than 8 octaves of vocal range, is no problem for him. Believe me! his name: Roy Hart.
@@faomiranda Isn't this actually Julius Eastman?
@@musik350 This is what I've been led to believe. With that knowledge, his performance here is very deliberate in its idiosyncrasies.
22:15 I don't know what that was but that was NOT a horse! D:
Your horse doesn't make that sound?
@@memesthemaker8429 Only if it's hoarse.
@@albertomarcantonio3179 Or coarse.
@@visveee6678 oh, of course 🤦🏻♂️
@@Ragnar_Aevarsson But not quite, I don't have a source.
Wonderful recording! Who’s the ensemble?
9:20 now, all this piece is pretty disturbing....but still I think this page framed whould be very pretty on my wall :)
what kind of music sheet is thatttt, it looks like a building
@@adelinelie1866 perhaps a bird cage?
Those arrows are confusing… what do they all mean?
Do you mean the multiple arrows with lines? Those mean to pizzicato rapidly either slower or faster depending on speed. Other arrows that are thicker indicate a more cluster like sound while the x's on a note tell the vocalist to "choke" on the note. Other things to notice: a late slur after a note is to go upwards or downwards. Even breathed notes are apparent as if to talk on top of the note.
Next to Stockhausen's "Gesang der Jünglinge" and Ligeti's "Lux Aeterna" this is one of the most discomforting pieces I know.
You ment probably Ligeti's Aventures...
Or ligetis requiem
Lux Aeterna is one of Ligeti's more easily to understand piece i think
5:28 suddenly, meet the Scout
this is the julius eastman recording right?
29:00 Rhythm of the Gargantua
This is so hilarious.
Who is this great Baritone?
In this performance, composer dancer and all around interesting human Julius Eastman
@@somethinglikethisorthat273 Thanks to you,, NOT THE OP.
Who are the performers?
I'm not sure, unfortunately...
What like to blast music this in Edinburgh's Underground Vaults!
3:20
Goodnight Taylor James Green.
Yup,this is scary AF
You can’t be serious right? You’re telling me this is classical music? My view of it is the relaxing kind. Please don’t scold me if I don’t know anything about classical music. I love it so don’t destroy my dream, thx.
Sorry to destroy your dream, this is classical music, and if you only think of it as relaxing then you don't really know classical music...
Hadrien I grew up with classical music. Classical music has diff genres.
@@CutieRingoJoy Yes and no. It depends on your exact definition of "classical music" and then your exact view on what constitutes evolution and what revolution.
First off, there are several common definitions of "classical music:"
As defined in (A) the first layman's way, it usually describes most of the western musical tradition starting at the medieval era, meaning roughly anything between the medieval era and the modern era of western music. In other words, this is the definition people use for whom anything old and western is classical music.
As defined in (B) the second layman's way, it is roughly synonymous with the common practice period. This is the definition people use for whom "classical" means anything involving popular, well-known and relatively accessible composers like Mozart or Beethoven.
As defined in (C) the third layman's way, it describes music that uses certain instruments and textures associated with the music of the common practice period. This is the definition people use for whom anything played by strings and piano is classical music.
As defined in (D) the stricter way, "classical music" means music of a specific era marked by things like a lesser emphasis on counterpoint, more works composed for orchestra, development of sonata form and others. This is the era Mozart was part of.
There's probably a bunch of other definitions, but these are the main ones I can come up with right now. Then there's the question of whether one considers music like this as an evolution or revolution.
Opinions may differ. I consider it a revolution. Golan Gur's "Arnold Schönberg and the Ideology of Progress in Twentieth-Century Musical Thinking" is a good primer on that composer's views regarding his role in western musical history. Many other avantgarde composers have expressed this attitude openly, but I admit I would be hard-pressed to really back that up well and succinctly, since there just isn't much research on the motives of people deciding to compose in some avantgarde style. If you have a look around, you should probably find some writing by the composers themselves, since avantgarde artists usually aren't all that shy about explaining their reasons, or at least what they perceive their reasons to be. And in general, the desire to break free from tradition wholesale is unique to music like in this video, whereas earlier eras also sought to free themselves from tradition but went about it with much more careful consideration about what to keep or discard and why, and all having in common immediate aesthetic considerations, while music like this and avantgarde music in general mostly disregards aesthetic considerations completely in favour of more cerebral ones.
All that is to say that if we consider it a revolution against western tradition, then only definition C allows us to call it classical music. Definition A would work if we considered it an evolution and therefore part of the western musical tradition. Considering that definition C is very superficial, it's safe to say that music such as this is ultimately **not** classical music. It doesn't follow the western musical tradition other than by following a slow and measured loosening of tonality with a complete disregard for tonality in a way similar to a child who imitates its mother putting on lipstick by smearing it all over its face.
At least that's my view of things. Take everything with a grain of salt, including what I just wrote, and research things yourself if you wanna be sure.
This is defined as classical music only insofar as the namers desire it to be so since that naming is essential to their goal of being a deliberate performative destruction of that genre dressed up in high minded language. Self indulgent intellectual wankery, meant solely as a means for it's performers to look down on tradition and surviving only due to that, much as anarchists thrive while there is a social structure around them but would quickly regret the bloody chaos that would ensue should their principles gain sole sway.
Heh, ok, that came out more abrasive than it could have. Some people will garner value from this stuff as a thought exercise and I suppose thats fine, but the grasping at an umbrella term to garner legitimacy whilst engaging in its destruction is definately a part and parcel of the whole thing, and I wish people were more honest about that....
His symphonies are good, tho
ohio music
16:32 Aight, Miss Piggy.
This is hilarious, goddamn i write boring music lol
Who’s the Baritone?
Julius Eastman
Julius Eastman
it's actually me.
We don’t allow this kind of formalism in the USSR.
lol
The USSR doesn't exist
pink floyd would be proud
Mr.Bradshaw gang
Very "interesting". But we're not getting anything like what's in the score, e.g. 1:28 - "very large bass drum", triple-f (more like a tenor drum, mf at best). Chords from the vocal soloist to follow? Nope. "Breath only"? Don't think so.
And what on Earth is the pianist to make of bar #1? Looks like an F below the range of any piano I've ever come across. And the natural?? Against what key signature? And what are the notes to follow? Very hard to tell. This opus undoubtedly has a certain shock and possibly (unintentional?) comedic value; hard to discern any point to it beyond that. 😁
The fact that this is considered music is insulting to me
A lot of skill went into the composition and performance of this. You can respect that even if you don't get anything out of the music.
The fact that you could say something like this about this piece is insulting to me
Weird/creepy≠bad
would you rather the so-manieth soulless corporate film score or pop track or rather something made by artists meant to actually further art in music?
21:43