May 9th, 2008
3:12 pm
Archive for Uncategorized
Richmond Flowers
I am trying out a new “widget” from slideoo.com.
Music as comfort
Those who know me the best know that among my favorite music is that written by Bach. I confess, I’m more a Bachfan than a Biberfan, but, alas, I chose a moniker that was more unique.
I recently experienced something that would have some folks reaching for the wine bottle, the anti-depressants, or… pulling their hair out. I’ve never believed in treating stress or sorrow with chemicals.
Instead, I pull up my Bach. Specifically, this evening, his most profound work (my opinion, sure), the Kunst der Fuge. Last movement. Deeper than a gallon tub of ice cream, more rich than caramel sauce, and quite profound.
I have so many copies of this recording; tonight I found the Concerto Italiano version “sloppy.” This is music that breathes. I had the opportunity years ago to perform parts of KdF and it was a very emotional experience. Listening to music is one thing; putting breath, tears, and effort into what it heard is something all the more powerful.
That’s why I likely poured all my frustrations growing up as a teenager into the piano. It was therapy.
Beethoven String Trios, Thomas Tallis
Right now, I’m listening to Perlman, Zuckerman, and Harrell perform Beethoven’s Trios for Strings, an EMI-issue that I purchased from Borders Books and Music in Rochester, NY, likely, in 1993. It, along with so much music, has for me associations with place and time.
We studied in great detail each of Beethoven’s String Trios in my music theory classes at the University of Rochester. Our professor, Dr. Daniel Harrison, chose these for some specific reason, I’m sure. This was not a history class, mind you, but theory. We studied the structure of each piece, the harmonic details at play, and we were quizzed on being able to recognize an excerpt of the pieces–specifically, what work and what movement.
I am not sure why he gave us these quizzes. Except, to say, you got to know the pieces really well, and you sort of ended up liking them a lot. I think when you spend a lot of time with something, you appreciate it (or end up loathing it; that’s an option too).
The String Trios are far less-well known than Beethoven’s more prodigious genre, the string quartet. While I own all of both collections, it’s the trios I come back to most often for listening. I know the characteristics of each one, and simply like them all.
I’m listening now to the Scherzo of op.9 no.3, and it puts me right back into the classroom: I see some of the faces of my academic colleagues. I can smell pencil (freshly sharpened, ready to strike on the paper to write that this is, in fact, the Scherzo from op. 9, no. 3). I remember writing to my friend Neumann at the time, telling him in a letter that “Beethoven was a genius,” despite the fact, in high school, I had declared him boring.
For me, Bach was #1. But now Beethoven was approaching as competition. It was soon after, probably another year, that I had asked for the set of all of Beethoven’s piano sonatas. The set I received was the one by Richard Goode, on Nonesuch. All 10 CDs.
It was in graduate school that I asked again for a set, this time, the Emerson Quartet with Beethoven’s string quartets. To this day, I have favorites from both the quartet and sonata collections, but it is the string trios to me that are the more interesting and accessible.
Having written my own string quartet, you wouldn’t believe how difficult it seems (to me, fellow composers) to write only for three voices. Being a rather anti-social person, you wouldn’t believe how frustrating it is to have lost all the personal relationships that I had when I first discovered all of this fascinating music.
Each us there, together in a room, set with the assignment of getting to know old Beethoven’s trios for strings better than we knew our favorite music, connected by our location and time (Rochester, NY, mid-1990s), by our professor, by our interest (music), by our age (on the cusp of turning 20), each of us intelligent with unknown futures, etc., etc., etc. What would become of us? What has become of us?
My searching thoughts feel more appropriate listening to Thomas Tallis’ Spem in Allium, a 40-part motet for 40 voices. We studied that in music history class, described by our professor (Dr. Massimo Ossi) as “renaissance surround sound.” It just happens to be the next track on my iTunes after the Beethoven trios (organized by performers: Perlman, Peter Phillips). What awesome sounds.
I have heard this piece in person (some years ago, the Tallis Scholars came to Richmond, VA, and performed this at the University of Richmond). How I long to find fellow enthusiasts. It’s a shame to go through life appreciating this art in solitude.
(Not to end on such a sad note; but the Tallis is not exactly as happy or optimistic as the Beethoven.)
Speaker Cable
I have been doing a lot of reading (online, magazines) over the past year on reviews of different audio components, including speaker cable. What I have found is, if you want to believe something, you can likely find someone out there who has written it. Not great, when you’re trying to make an informed decision.
What makes me laugh about it all, in an unfortunate way, are so many reviews that confuse and obfuscate terms that are borrowed both from musical and technical lexicons. You’ll see things written like harmonic cohesion or more realistic soundstage. I no doubt know it is difficult to describe what you hear with words, but some of what is written boils down to nonsense.
Or that a certain cable is better for one type of music (i.e., rock, classical, jazz, etc.).
That’s not to say that some of these folks like what they are listening to.
What makes choosing components in a stereo more difficult is the variety of vintages, brands, and types of configurations you can create and place together. No doubt, we’d call this synergy between the components. Personally, I am not even sure if “synergy” exists. It seems to make sense, but the word itself always makes me suspicious.
This weekend I replaced my speaker cable. I have been on an upgrade path for my stereo since I first acquired my first hi-fi system in 1996. This system still does exist (everything but the cables) connected today to my computer. However, it was replaced by larger, costlier equipment in my main listening room. This weekend, I retired my first set of speaker wire. At the time it was sold to me, the dealer told me it would be a “good match” for my bookshelf speakers and integrated amplifier.
Today, I am using a preamplifier with two monobloc amplifiers. Somewhere, I bought into the notion that “separates” are better, and what this means is that the signal is mushed side by side in stereo in the computer (where all my music is stored), is separated coming out of the digital to analogue converter (DAC), never to be together again, until it’s born as sound.
With my new cables , the sound is separated again, in theory, as I am using a bi-wiring option on my speakers. The treble is taken up in one dedicated pair of wires, while the bass is taken up on a separate pair.
You read that the quality of speaker cable will affect the sound. Now, I will admit, my 1996 purchase was not cheap. I figured I could pay $20-30 for some cable back then. When I paid what I did, I figured this was pretty good stuff! Today, not accounting for inflation, I’ve spent 10 times the amount on the new wires. I feared that I wouldn’t hear a difference, and that what some of what I’d read might be true: “the cable doesn’t really make a difference.” In other words, were those folks who simply went out and got a big spool of 16-gauge wire at the electronics store really smart?
Of course, I’m still getting used to the sound. But I figure it this way. The sound has to travel along a signal path from the computer to the speakers. The signal length inside the equipment is relatively short, so the sound spends an insignificant amount of time traveling those wires compared to what they travel along the speaker wire. Interconnects are like 3 feet. The speaker cable is 10 feet. That more than 3 times the length. If anything is “coloring” the sound, I wager, it’s the wire between the different components.
The sound with the new wires is definitely different–no reservations! Several tracks, in fact, sound like they’re from entirely new recordings. I’m searching for words to describe some of the differences, but my mind is choosing some of the same audiophile babble I’ve been reading: soundstage, air, transparency, etc. Off the top of my head, this is what I’ve noticed:
- more detail
- more bass
- different color
I’m not equipped to speak the techno-babble. But I am to speak for the music-babble. Many recordings now sound more musical, where as what I am saying is, I’m hearing more of the music. Perhaps it is dynamics, I am not sure. But the sound is even more detailed than before, and I feel as if this has been a good investment, because I’m getting more out of the other pieces of the hi-fi puzzle that I’ve invested in.
As a former practicing musician, the details matter. Any investment to reveal more details is an investment in better enjoyment of music.
