Discussion:
The new standard repertoire?
(too old to reply)
rcspross
2006-02-08 04:29:35 UTC
Permalink
Dear Fellow visitors to the barnyard.

Back in the days when Segovia dominated the classical guitar music
scene,
almost single handedly created a new concert repertoire, which lasted
for maybe
50 years, and as Julian Bream, John Williams and others enlarged
the repertoire, I'm brought to wonder what pieces do the younger players

( Those under 50 ) consider the most important pieces to have in their
repertoire and or hope to have in their repertoire during the course of
their
careers.

I'm mostly thinking about either music which has only recently been
discovered,
or newly transcribe for the first time, or music which is contemporary
with our times

Is there a new standard and what is it?

Any comments?
Richard Spross
Jackson
2006-02-08 05:07:48 UTC
Permalink
When, in total opposition to this age of relativism, we concern
ourselves with what is true over what is simply new, such questions
become irrelevant. I say this as one considerably under 50.
Larry Deack
2006-02-08 05:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jackson
When, in total opposition to this age of relativism, we concern
ourselves with what is true over what is simply new, such questions
become irrelevant. I say this as one considerably under 50.
I found the last part wonderfully redundant.

I was just talking about truth tables with a friend today.

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

You might find this part interesting... or redundant.
Jackson
2006-02-08 05:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Deack
I found the last part wonderfully redundant.
hahaha.... Good one.

The kind of nonsense I've written above and elsewhere is why I won't
allow myself to pursue publication until well after I'm 40. I must let
the words of my youth fade away. Willie Nelson has a wonderful song
where he says mournfully, "I let the words of my youth fade away." But
how much better would the world be if more people let that happen!
Larry Deack
2006-02-08 06:15:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jackson
hahaha.... Good one.
The kind of nonsense I've written above and elsewhere is why I won't
allow myself to pursue publication until well after I'm 40. I must let
the words of my youth fade away. Willie Nelson has a wonderful song
where he says mournfully, "I let the words of my youth fade away." But
how much better would the world be if more people let that happen!
You are publishing.

All the dots can be connected at some point in the future if someone
wants to connect them. The bits seems to hang around a lot longer than
we seem to think they will when we create them. Look at RMCG FAQ bot for
proof of the longevity of our bits.

I think you had the right idea but the technology made you a publisher
and your words can haunt you for years or provide you with hours of
embarrassing laughter with your friends who are similarly inclined to
spontaneous outbursts of utter stupidity....
David Raleigh Arnold
2006-02-08 11:30:37 UTC
Permalink
When ... we concern
ourselves with what is true over what is simply new, such questions
become irrelevant...
Isn't it the relativist who is more likely to discern the difference
between new and true? Irrelevant to whom?

It's an interesting question, and I'm interested answers to it, but for me
the latest is my own. Also, there's a lot of unfinished business with the
old repertoire. Segovia ignored some of the best stuff. I am dimly aware
that the "Classical" guitar has come back. Charlie Byrd predicted
that, BTW. But your contention as elided above sort of applies to me.

So what's a direct answer to the question? I'm old, I can't give one.
Anyone looked at university curricula lately? That probably stays about
30 years behind, instead of 50. daveA
--
Free download of technical exercises worth a lifetime of practice:
"Dynamic Guitar Technique": http://www.openguitar.com/instruction.html
email: "David Raleigh Arnold" <***@openguitar.com>|<***@cox.net>
or use ***@Mail.Link: http://www.openguitar.com/contact.html
rcspross
2006-02-09 06:23:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Raleigh Arnold
When ... we concern
ourselves with what is true over what is simply new, such questions
become irrelevant...
Isn't it the relativist who is more likely to discern the difference
between new and true? Irrelevant to whom?
It's an interesting question, and I'm interested answers to it, but for me
the latest is my own. Also, there's a lot of unfinished business with the
old repertoire. Segovia ignored some of the best stuff. I am dimly aware
that the "Classical" guitar has come back. Charlie Byrd predicted
that, BTW. But your contention as elided above sort of applies to me.
So what's a direct answer to the question? I'm old, I can't give one.
Anyone looked at university curricula lately? That probably stays about
30 years behind, instead of 50. daveA
That's a good suggestion looking at University curricula, but it is funny
that you mention the University as being only 30 years behind. Maybe
so. I remember my college piano teacher using the 50 year figure.
Richard Spross
Post by David Raleigh Arnold
--
"Dynamic Guitar Technique": http://www.openguitar.com/instruction.html
David Raleigh Arnold
2006-02-09 14:03:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by rcspross
Post by David Raleigh Arnold
When ... we concern
ourselves with what is true over what is simply new, such questions
become irrelevant...
Isn't it the relativist who is more likely to discern the difference
between new and true? Irrelevant to whom?
It's an interesting question, and I'm interested answers to it, but for
me the latest is my own. Also, there's a lot of unfinished business
with the old repertoire. Segovia ignored some of the best stuff. I am
dimly aware that the "Classical" guitar has come back. Charlie Byrd
predicted that, BTW. But your contention as elided above sort of
applies to me.
So what's a direct answer to the question? I'm old, I can't give one.
Anyone looked at university curricula lately? That probably stays about
30 years behind, instead of 50. daveA
That's a good suggestion looking at University curricula, but it is funny
that you mention the University as being only 30 years behind. Maybe so. I
remember my college piano teacher using the 50 year figure. Richard Spross
I'm sure he's right, but guitar teaching is newer in Universities,
so perhaps it's not quite as bad as with piano. Wishful thinking? Could
be. daveA
--
Free download of technical exercises worth a lifetime of practice:
"Dynamic Guitar Technique": http://www.openguitar.com/instruction.html
email: "David Raleigh Arnold" <***@openguitar.com>|<***@cox.net>
or use ***@Mail.Link: http://www.openguitar.com/contact.html
KenK
2006-02-08 09:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Good question Richard!

I hope it illicits a real discussion.
Being 48 and quite enraptured of the Segovian repertoire, I'm not fully
qualified to answer, but-
It seems that playing Barrios (especially La Catedral) and Brouwer have
become standard.
Koyunbaba seems to be some kind of favorite.
Andrew York pieces get a bit of play as well.
I think the Aguado Rondo in Amin has become a watershed or right of
passage.

It seems that both Bream and Williams (Isbin as well) have had the
largest impact on standard rep expansion. Of course that may be just my
narrow view, but I do notice a lot of young players on these forums
attempting the Bream/Willams additions to the Segovian rep.

I don't think the "Repertoire" has evolved that much.
People like their classics. New works are generally regarded as more of
an obligation or necessary evil than a genuine pursuit. It seems to
take quite a while for any work to be regarded as a new standard.

I'm curious to hear what others have to say about this.
KenK
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
2006-02-08 14:45:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by KenK
Good question Richard!
I hope it illicits a real discussion.
Being 48 and quite enraptured of the Segovian repertoire, I'm not fully
qualified to answer, but-
It seems that playing Barrios (especially La Catedral) and Brouwer have
become standard.
Koyunbaba seems to be some kind of favorite.
Andrew York pieces get a bit of play as well.
I think the Aguado Rondo in Amin has become a watershed or right of
passage.
It seems that both Bream and Williams (Isbin as well) have had the
largest impact on standard rep expansion. Of course that may be just my
narrow view, but I do notice a lot of young players on these forums
attempting the Bream/Willams additions to the Segovian rep.
I don't think the "Repertoire" has evolved that much.
People like their classics. New works are generally regarded as more of
an obligation or necessary evil than a genuine pursuit. It seems to
take quite a while for any work to be regarded as a new standard.
I'm curious to hear what others have to say about this.
KenK
Doc recently mentioned William Foden in relation to tremolo.
Apparently he and a gaggle of others were dominant in guitar practice
maybe 100 years ago. A recent issue of Soundboard spoke of what I think
they called the "banjo, mandolin, guitar" movement around the turn of
the last century. It was a time of plucked instrument orchestras, harp
guitars and other arcana that are largely forgotten--swept away by the
the wave of Iberiana early in the 20th century.
But things change. Certainly the geographical focus of guitar practice
and repertoire has shifted decisively away from Spain, or more
accurately toward all the corners of the globe. One is likely to see
music in American guitar programs from Japan, Croatia, and Brazil. That
has to be a good thing. I'm not too worried about Koyunbaba being a
concert staple for centuries. ;-)

Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
rcspross
2006-02-09 06:24:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by KenK
Good question Richard!
I hope it illicits a real discussion.
Being 48 and quite enraptured of the Segovian repertoire, I'm not fully
qualified to answer, but-
It seems that playing Barrios (especially La Catedral) and Brouwer have
become standard.
Koyunbaba seems to be some kind of favorite.
Andrew York pieces get a bit of play as well.
I think the Aguado Rondo in Amin has become a watershed or right of
passage.
It seems that both Bream and Williams (Isbin as well) have had the
largest impact on standard rep expansion. Of course that may be just my
narrow view, but I do notice a lot of young players on these forums
attempting the Bream/Willams additions to the Segovian rep.
I don't think the "Repertoire" has evolved that much.
People like their classics. New works are generally regarded as more of
an obligation or necessary evil than a genuine pursuit. It seems to
take quite a while for any work to be regarded as a new standard.
I'm curious to hear what others have to say about this.
KenK
Well we had some valuable contributions, but it is sad it ended so soon.
Thanks for your contribution.
Richard Spross
ag
2006-02-08 12:09:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by rcspross
Dear Fellow visitors to the barnyard.
Back in the days when Segovia dominated the classical guitar music
scene,
almost single handedly created a new concert repertoire, which lasted
for maybe
50 years, and as Julian Bream, John Williams and others enlarged
the repertoire, I'm brought to wonder what pieces do the younger players
( Those under 50 ) consider the most important pieces to have in their
repertoire and or hope to have in their repertoire during the course of
their
careers.
I'm mostly thinking about either music which has only recently been
discovered,
or newly transcribe for the first time, or music which is contemporary
with our times
Is there a new standard and what is it?
Any comments?
Richard Spross
Guitar repertoire is wide and varied more than enough to feed many
repertoires of many different players who can show their originality and
inventiveness also with picking up fresh and surprising programs. Standards
is exactly what guitarists should avoid, currently.

ag
ktaylor
2006-02-08 15:29:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by ag
Guitar repertoire is wide and varied more than enough to feed many
repertoires of many different players who can show their originality and
inventiveness also with picking up fresh and surprising programs. Standards
is exactly what guitarists should avoid, currently.
ag
I would bet, Richard, you are a bit frustrated by the answers to your
post, so far. But such a question opens a door much wider than
specificity will fill. This is too interesting of a question on many
levels.

When we are students, preparing a full program may take several years
and we are often influenced most by the interactions with our teachers
and our comrades. When we become more independant, our learning and
playing skills become more facile and we no longer are reliant on our
teacher's taste and requirements, our choices are affected by the
interaction with an audience or the purchaser - or we may avoid that
influence altogether, interact with the phantoms of our own isolation,
and live with the consequences.

Some audiences want to hear standards, some want to hear fresh works,
some want a mixture. Many professional, but non-concert guitarists,
have repertoire imposed upon them, such as in the recording studio
setting, accompaniment services, or specific ceremonial repertoire -
their musical skill being what is purchased. Most concert performers
these days play new repertoire with a sprinkling of standards. (For a
more specific answer to your question look at the programs for the last
few GFA festivals to see the "new" ones that reoccur.)

Interesting that some some standards of the past decades are being
"rediscovered" with new engravings and transcriptions. I, myself, who
long ago grew dull to some of them have recently revisited them, due to
the interest they inspire in young students less jaded than I. I have
rediscovered their artistic quality as my attention is dragged back by
my students' enthusiasms.

I am reminded that if there is a really a thing called ART in music. It
must be permanent. It does not change with fashion or diminish with
repetition. It illustrates itself eternally for those who have the ears
and the spirit to hear. And yet, inspires, if not requires, the
composer and performer to embody it with new forms and new meaning.

Kevin Taylor
rcspross
2006-02-09 06:17:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by ag
Guitar repertoire is wide and varied more than enough to feed many
repertoires of many different players who can show their originality and
inventiveness also with picking up fresh and surprising programs. Standards
is exactly what guitarists should avoid, currently.
ag
I would bet, Richard, you are a bit frustrated by the answers to your
post, so far. But such a question opens a door much wider than
specificity will fill. This is too interesting of a question on many
levels.
When we are students, preparing a full program may take several years
and we are often influenced most by the interactions with our teachers
and our comrades. When we become more independant, our learning and
playing skills become more facile and we no longer are reliant on our
teacher's taste and requirements, our choices are affected by the
interaction with an audience or the purchaser - or we may avoid that
influence altogether, interact with the phantoms of our own isolation,
and live with the consequences.
Some audiences want to hear standards, some want to hear fresh works,
some want a mixture. Many professional, but non-concert guitarists,
have repertoire imposed upon them, such as in the recording studio
setting, accompaniment services, or specific ceremonial repertoire -
their musical skill being what is purchased. Most concert performers
these days play new repertoire with a sprinkling of standards. (For a
more specific answer to your question look at the programs for the last
few GFA festivals to see the "new" ones that reoccur.)
Interesting that some some standards of the past decades are being
"rediscovered" with new engravings and transcriptions. I, myself, who
long ago grew dull to some of them have recently revisited them, due to
the interest they inspire in young students less jaded than I. I have
rediscovered their artistic quality as my attention is dragged back by
my students' enthusiasms.
Thanks Kevin for your interesting explanation.
Post by ktaylor
I am reminded that if there is a really a thing called ART in music. It
must be permanent. It does not change with fashion or diminish with
repetition. It illustrates itself eternally for those who have the ears
and the spirit to hear. And yet, inspires, if not requires, the
composer and performer to embody it with new forms and new meaning.
And it is here that I ask the question of the young players. What pieces do
they want to play over and over again which move them permanently and
will likely be the repertoire of the