Alexander Scriabin

J

Jingle_Bells

Guest
I'm a professional pianist and composer. I would like to recommend one of my absolute favorite composers who doesn't really get the respect he deserves, and therefore you may have never heard of him: Alexander Scriabin (1872-1915, Russian) (A search of his name on this forum came up empty)

Most of his music is written for piano, but he has 5 symphonies and a couple other non-piano solo works as well. The 2 best symphonies are Nos. 4 and 5. No. 4 is the "Poem of Ecstasy" and No. 5 is "Prometheus: Poem of Fire" which is the best. The best recording of both of these is with Lorin Maazel conducting and Vladimir Ashkenazy playing piano and one of the London orchestras. It also contains the Piano Concerto which is less interesting. I highly recommend getting a collection of his 10 Piano Sonatas which showcase the progression of his composing the best of any collection of his works. My favorite recordings of them are by Ruth Laredo and Vladimir Ashkenazy. Marc-Andre Hamelin also does a good job. Horowitz has recorded the 3rd, 5th, 9th, and 10th. There are 2 CDs titled "Horowitz Plays Scriabin" and they're both excellent.

Here is a youtube video of Horowitz playing the "Poem, Op. 72: Vers la flamme:"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_FKKIC1oSw

I've played this and it is indeed "very difficult!" Actually, the biggest problem is stamina on those tremelos.
 
Whoa! I never heard this before. I don't know if this really Scriabin playing, but I do know there is a recording of him playing this piece and this is an incredible rendition, nonetheless. I played this for my Junior recital and it is by far Scriabin's most famous piece (not my favorite, though).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK2uTtuI84w&mode=related&search=
 
Scriabin was very "interesting" personally. He was a theosophist and claimed to compose his work with the help of synethesia- though he never showed his system of relating colors to tones (which he thought of as an objective relationship) to anyone. Do you know if he wrote a violin sonata or a piece for solo violin (the great violinist Ruggiero Ricci said he knew of one).
 
Kesdjan said:
Scriabin was very "interesting" personally. He was a theosophist and claimed to compose his work with the help of synethesia- though he never showed his system of relating colors to tones (which he thought of as an objective relationship) to anyone. Do you know if he wrote a violin sonata or a piece for solo violin (the great violinist Ruggiero Ricci said he knew of one).
Click to expand...
His philosophy was a mismash of ideas from Theosophy and other things he picked up along with his own bizarre fantasies. He did indeed layout his color scheme for the major keys. He even went further and attributed emotions to each of the keys. I would bet you could find it on the net. It is printed in the Dover edition of the orchestral score to Poem of Ecstasy and Prometheus. He did not write anything for solo violin. He wrote the second variation on a Russian Theme for string quartet by various composers. There may be an arrangement of something that someone else made.
 
Jingle_Bells said:
It is printed in the Dover edition of the orchestral score to Poem of Ecstasy and Prometheus.
Click to expand...
This reference to Pometheus might explain the title of the first piece you proposed : "Vers la flamme". For the non French speaking forumites it means "towards the flame".
 
Axel_Dunor said:
This reference to Pometheus might explain the title of the first piece you proposed : "Vers la flamme". For the non French speaking forumites it means "towards the flame".
Click to expand...
Yes, Scriabin became very obsessed with fire towards the end of his life. I believe he saw it as a purifying agent, much like fire worshippers in India. His piano playing has been described as "all nerve, a holy flame." Vers la flamme has been likened to a roman candle which starts with small sparks and gradually bursts into a spasm of flame.
 
Hello Jingle_Bells :) I am a professional trumpet player and amatuer composer, and yes!! what color Scriabin came up with! The afforementioned Poem of Ecstasy, incidentally, is, IMHO, one of the hardest principle trumpet parts to "get through in one piece".

Kesdjan, FWIW I found this regarding synesthesia and scriabin:

[...]Scriabin's system of colored musical keys:
C# -- Purple
F# -- Bright Blue/Violet
B -- Blue
E -- Sky Blue
A -- Green
D -- Yellow
G -- Orange
C -- Red
F -- Deep Red
Bb -- Rose/Steel
Eb -- Flesh
Ab -- Violet
Db -- Purple (same as C#)
Gb -- Bright Blue/Violet (same as F#)
[...]
http://www.library.yale.edu/~mkoth/keychar.htm

objectively speaking, the pitch C is in fact infraredish --- right at the transition point. I recall reading an article on the signs page that scientists discovered that stars "humm" at a C. This led me to do a bit of research about a year ago regarding the objective color of pitch. The mathematical formula for any C is : 2^n + 2^(n-5) Hz

Middle C being 264 Hz, three octaves lower is 33 Hz --- I remember thinking that it was quite fascinating that such an important number in the occult is the vibratory foundation of the cosmos, or rather a lower octave.


P.S. I'm unable to find the article. Does anyone else remember reading this? I'll continue the search, but if anyone can point me to the article, or just put a link here, that would be great :)

Kris
 
Nice to meet you, RflctnOfU (Kris?)!

If you can tell me how to post a scanned image, I can put up the whole chart and the forwards to the scores of the Poem of Ecstasy (including the written Poem of Ecstasy) and Prometheus. Very fascinating stuff.
 
Jingle_Bells said:
I'm a professional pianist and composer. I would like to recommend one of my absolute favorite composers who doesn't really get the respect he deserves, and therefore you may have never heard of him: Alexander Scriabin (1872-1915, Russian) (A search of his name on this forum came up empty)

Most of his music is written for piano, but he has 5 symphonies and a couple other non-piano solo works as well. The 2 best symphonies are Nos. 4 and 5. No. 4 is the "Poem of Ecstasy" and No. 5 is "Prometheus: Poem of Fire" which is the best. The best recording of both of these is with Lorin Maazel conducting and Vladimir Ashkenazy playing piano and one of the London orchestras. It also contains the Piano Concerto which is less interesting. I highly recommend getting a collection of his 10 Piano Sonatas which showcase the progression of his composing the best of any collection of his works. My favorite recordings of them are by Ruth Laredo and Vladimir Ashkenazy. Marc-Andre Hamelin also does a good job. Horowitz has recorded the 3rd, 5th, 9th, and 10th. There are 2 CDs titled "Horowitz Plays Scriabin" and they're both excellent.

Here is a youtube video of Horowitz playing the "Poem, Op. 72: Vers la flamme:"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_FKKIC1oSw

I've played this and it is indeed "very difficult!" Actually, the biggest problem is stamina on those tremelos.
Click to expand...
I've just listened to this, and I don't normally like piano. I have trouble listening to most piano pieces, there is too many gaps between notes (beyond what the composer meant), it is almost too digital, not analog enough, with little flow, coupled with choppy convergence: hard drops that never seem to coalesce. (Well, that's my feeling only).

I have to mention that this piece was interesting.

I was engaged with it, like I was listening to a slow signal that was carrying information.

Thanks for this.
 
Azur said:
I've just listened to this, and although I have trouble listening to most piano pieces (not too much of a fan about piano, seems there is too many gaps between notes, almost too digital, not analog enough, little flow with choppy convergence), I have to mention that this piece was interesting.

I was engaged with it, like I was listening to a slow signal that was carrying information.

Thanks for this.
Click to expand...
My pleasure. Your comment is very curious. I'm very aware that people who don't play the instrument they are listening to don't hear it the same as those that do. But, "too digital, not analog enough, little flow with choppy convergence." (?!?!)

What, exactly, are you comparing it to? How is any acoustic instrument "not analog enough?" Have you ever heard a live acoustic concert?

Back in myyyyyy dayyyy................. I'm only 30 for god's sake!
 
Jingle_Bells said:
Azur said:
I've just listened to this, and although I have trouble listening to most piano pieces (not too much of a fan about piano, seems there is too many gaps between notes, almost too digital, not analog enough, little flow with choppy convergence), I have to mention that this piece was interesting.

I was engaged with it, like I was listening to a slow signal that was carrying information.

Thanks for this.
Click to expand...
My pleasure. Your comment is very curious. I'm very aware that people who don't play the instrument they are listening to don't hear it the same as those that do. But, "too digital, not analog enough, little flow with choppy convergence." (?!?!)

What, exactly, are you comparing it to? How is any acoustic instrument "not analog enough?" Have you ever heard a live acoustic concert?

Back in myyyyyy dayyyy................. I'm only 30 for god's sake!
Click to expand...
Note: I've edited my entry while you were writing yours.


And yes, :) I've been to many acoustical concerts. You are undoubtedly right when you say the player hears it different than the listener. That seems to apply to many things, though. :)


You should know, though, that most Cello pieces almost immediately bring me to tears. It just isn't the same with me where the piano is concerned, totally different "receptors" get activated when I hear piano.

*shrug*

It doesn't mean that I cannot see the structure and appreciate a well crafted tapestry, there is just something "not quite there" for me with the instrument. Even in melancholic pieces, a single note after some time is still too "sharp". Too technical, contrasting. (Please, please, PLEASE don't mention harpsichord *shudder*).


Cheers, and most appreciative that you brought these here. It is always welcomed to be exposed to unknown pieces of creativity.
 
Azur said:
You should know, though, that most Cello pieces almost immediately bring me to tears. It just isn't the same with me where the piano is concerned, totally different "receptors" get activated when I hear piano.

*shrug*

It doesn't mean that I cannot see the structure and appreciate a well crafted tapestry, there is just something "not quite there" for me with the instrument. (Please, please, PLEASE don't mention harpsichord *shudder*).
Click to expand...
There may be a simple reason for that. The piano is tuned to the "equal temperament" scale which is artificial. The 11 pitches above the fundamental are slightly detuned from the natural harmonics that are generated from a single tone. The keyboard instruments are the only ones with this feature. (Yes, the harpsichord is an abomination, yet tuned differently)

There is a distinct difference between the harmonic quality of a string quartet or choir and a piano.

No, I don't have a life :)
 
Ahh! Thanks for that.

I had no clue about this.

Not quite sure what it means with respect to how I respond to sound, but you have peaked an interest in that now.

Thanks!
 
Azur said:
Ahh! Thanks for that.

I had no clue about this.

Not quite sure what it means with respect to how I respond to sound, but you have peaked an interest in that now.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
The difference is that there are different vibrations given off for harmonies in terms of frequencies and the interference of sound waves. The pulsations that result are different and the resonant harmonics are more amplified.
 
Jingle_Bells said:
Azur said:
Ahh! Thanks for that.

I had no clue about this.

Not quite sure what it means with respect to how I respond to sound, but you have peaked an interest in that now.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
The difference is that there are different vibrations given off for harmonies in terms of frequencies and the interference of sound waves. The pulsations that result are different and the resonant harmonics are more amplified.
Click to expand...
I think I see.

Are there any kind of harmonic "points' that have been mapped as being "better" received, or maybe known to have a statistically significant response by listeners?

Have you come across mention of constructs (in your studies) that seem to please (and, of course eschewed as being "stock") in compositions?


What I'm wondering about here, is whether most people are predisposed to "like" certain sequences, involving (or not) certain harmonics?

If they do, have you come across this in your formal studies or otherwise?

Any pointers would be appreciated.


Cheers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom