I trust everyone noticed that Naxos did a sale recently? Which is to say, the cheapest record label sold oodles of CDs cheaper than they do normally. Which is to say, I bought a gash load of stuff for cheap as chips. Lutoslawski, more Schnittke (evil man), Mahler's 3rd, Bartok's Mikrokosmos, more Hildegard 'Hildy' von Bingen, Mozart's mass in C minor and other things probably.

Mr Noumenal - I have a Naxos version of Turangalila that seems to have been recorded by an idiot. Recommend me a decent recording/ conductor.

Oh, I also heard Kremer doing Bach's Sonatas and Partitas for solo violin recently. As I may have mentioned before, Heifetz's version is superlative, but good ole' Giddy does an alright job of it.

Furthermore: bump.

i am taking a course that will get me into the musicology department at hebrew university. so starting october i shall be a musicology student, anybody here study that? any advice?

I think we have the same recording of the Turangalila.... The Polish National Radio Symphony Orchestra? What can I say, it was cheap. But I've never had a huge problem with the recording. There are only a handful of recordings out there I think.

BBC Music Magazine has an extensive online reviews section and according to them, the best recordings are Pierre-Laurent Aimard (piano), Dominique Kim (ondes martenot); Berlin PO/Kent Nagano on Teldec and Jean-Yves Thibaudet (piano), Takashi Harada (ondes martenot); Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra/Riccardo Chailly on Decca.

Those reviews are usually pretty reliable. Hey.

I'm a music theory student, which is pretty close. No advice really.

Main Entry: pre·ten·tious

 

Pronunciation: pri-'ten(t)-sh&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: French prétentieux, from prétention pretension, from Medieval Latin pretention-, pretentio, from Latin praetendere
1 : characterized by pretension : as a : making usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing) <the pretentious fraud who assumes a love of culture that is alien to him -- Richard Watts> b : expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature <pretentious language> <pretentious houses>

Why don't you just fuck off? No, really, you can just fuck off. Go and die somewhere you worthless shit.

And besides the above (which is entirely correct) where's all this peace and love and respect for your fellow I & I bollocks? Cunt.

where is all of yours? all I did was state my opinion regarding classical music, i didn't disrespect it, i didn't insult it directly. I honestly feel that classical European music is the webster's definition of pretentious in that it many people make "usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing)".

sorry. everybody knows that African music invented rock and roll, and thus changed the world, and made classical European music seem boring and yes, pretentious in comparison.

The definition of pretentious, which you so kindly provided, says characterised by pretension. Which is to say that the implication of your post is that either the listeners to classical music are pretentious, or the music itself is pretentious, or most likely both. Which is, in essence, calling the music and its appreciators 'frauds', by the Websters definition. I would take that as a direct insult by inference, and I'm not the most overly sensitive of people.

The assumption that rock n' roll and classical music are somehow mutually exclusive is, frankly, horseshit. That's like saying that rock n' roll dismissed the need for klezmer or jazz or gagaku or something. It's a big world. Just because you don't get classical doesn't mean that it's pretentious. Just because I don't understand what strikes me as a horrible religion doesn't mean I want to slag it off. Although I will say "the pretentious fraud who assumes a love of culture that is alien to him" sounds like a white rasta to me.

I was listening to Stravinsky's Ebony Concerto today.

Sibelius, Quintet in G-minor for me. And Scriabin 'Le Poeme de l'extase'. Fun and or games.

That made me laugh! Racist!

classical music is pretentious. rock and roll and jazz evolved in a vaccuum. and since when did everyone on this board become such experts on Rastafari? it seems that everyone is telling me this and that about what I should and shouldn't do as a part of the Rastafari community. You can call me pretentious if you'd like, you might be right, like I am RE: classical music, but don't call my assimilation into Rastafari and Ethiopian culture a fraud. I don't need to defend my social identity to you, but If you feel that me calling classical music pretentious is insulting your own ability to live in yr own culture, well for that I am also sorry, but please, get off the whole "white rasta" tip, it is funnier then how you all perceive me, seriously.

selama nna wadada,

Excuse me?

pretentious= observation
vaccuum comment = sarcasm.

Fair enough. my bad. although disagree about the classical = pretentious thing. I'm not a massive classical fan, and i'm about as pretentious as they come.

Alright, I don't particularly care, I perceived that you made a cheap and unwarranted dig, I gave back in kind.

Classical music is not pretentious.
I have no more of a problem with Rastafari than I do with any other religion.

Classical music is also an artform that grew out of many social strata of Europe (and, latterly, America and East-Asia). It is no more 'my culture' than it is 'anyone else's culture' to be into classical music, or to make it.

Rock and jazz is not pretentious - have you heard any jazz other than Dixie stuff? Black people can disappear up their own arses to, y'know? Also, unless I'm much mistaken, Rock music does include the like of YES or Queen or Meatloaf.

'Classical music' is an incredibly broad term that covers about 700 years worth of music. Rock/ jazz are likewise incredibly broad terms that cover, at most, 100 years of music. Both are capable of incredibly ridiculous ideas, terrifically haughty notions and, yes, pretention. Sometimes that can be enjoyable (I am, after all, a Wagner fan of sorts). Sometimes less so (I'm not fond of Grateful Dead). The point I'm trying to make is that it doesn't seem very understanding of your fellow man to pass judgement on what he enjoys, hence my cheap dig at yourself. Judge not lest ye be judged yourself indeed.

Anyway, apologies for any injury caused, I don't care to continue this argument anymore, if you still don't get my point, fine, never mind, c'est la vie etc.

And, in the mean time, I heard Gorecki's 3rd the other day and thought it was unmitigated tripe.

What Bach should I get?

i play piano. i despise bartok (burn in hell, bela) & realllllly have been enjoying clementi lately.

i know i'll be rocking the boat with this comment but paganini is fucking awesome. yes, his capricci are shred wankery boredom but his concertos? absolutely amazing, in fact, i'm going to dig my tape with his concertos.

other than him, i haven't really gotten so into classical, i'm actually going backwards from branca, rhys chatham (genius, genius composer), lamonte, tony conrad, charlemagne palestine, cage, stockhausen, terry riley... don't know if all of them count; actually, i don't care, i like their music.