Poulenc is so criminally underrated. I'd go so far as to put him at the same level as the greatest french composers, like Ravel or Debussy. Such liveliness, modernism, and character.
Poulenc was a neo-classicist using ready-made techniques , Ravel and Debussy revolutionaries. Poulenc is performed a lot anyways, i saw his opera performed at my university . What you hear here is film music craftsmanship niveau of the time. It is very good music, but still too common and vague for concert
While I enjoy his music too, he doesn't even come close to Ravel, let alone Debussy who was one of the greatest geniuses of all time and in the same category as Bach, Beethoven and Wagner. He wasn't even the greatest composer of Les Six, a title that goes to Honegger by a wide margin.
I love his music so much, Poulenc is starting to get more and more performed (given also that is copyright on the work is starting to end) and so i am more than sure that it will be incorporated in more programms. Of course they will probably put his masterpiece concertos, although i think his masses is where the real genius lies. I think Animaux Modelle Suite would be a greater and a more entertaining symphonic work to listen for a concert. I Personally cherish Poulenc very much (his Stabat Mater is my Fav) and would love to listen to all of his music in concerts but it is not to all very appealing, since he is a pure contradicition: charming and unhinged in the most poulenc way possible (the sinfonietta though is only the first of these, a rare specimin)
His flute sonata is considered by many to be the greatest ever! Practically zero flutists would agree with you. His chamber music alone puts him at the top. He was one of the most melodically gifted composers of the 20th century. When is this Boulez nonsense going to end? Who is listened to more now, Mr. cerebral onanism himself, or Poulenc? What a bunch of hooey!@mrtchaikovsky
In classical music comments on TH-cam, "underrated" is an overrated word. And I don't see "neo-classicist" as a bad thing. Stravinsky and Prokofiev have some lovely pieces that are called "neo-classicist" too.
if you like his orchestral colouring, you should check out "les animaux modelles" suite. It's enchanting, witty, macabre and just so wondefully orchestrated
Poulenc is the quintessential boulevardier, with the French virtues of charm, wit, a touch of the banal, and a hint of vulgarity that makes him irresistible.
Hahaha, and this is one of the more tamer works of poulenc, if you listen to something else of him, you gonna hear how crazy he can get. I would personally suggest, if you like some funny and crazy stuff to check out his concerto for 2 pianos, or his Concerto Champetre (for harpsichord)
its a very good recording, i personally like the "hr-Sinfonieorchester" version, couse it has a bit of a cleaner and more colorful sound. But just personal preference. if you have time check it out😁
I think that The Addams Family's music is like Francis Poulenc's orchestral music. His organ concerto and the first movement of this work is like the addams family suite.
Poulenc was a neo-classicist using ready-made techniques , Ravel and Debussy revolutionaries. Poulenc is performed a lot anyways, i saw his opera performed at my university . What you hear here is film music craftsmanship niveau of the time. This piece is still very good music, i would recommend any film composer to study it, but still too common and vague for concert, principally at that critical times when he lived. All the final cadences have something off, confirming that is music from nowhere to nowhere. Amazing is how he almost excludes minor keys! It is a major chord ecstasy.
I hate this Notion that you have to be a revolutionary or do something never seen before to be a serious or a really good composer. In my opinion "Originality" (and i mean this in terms of Style and techniques and so on) is a criteria that CAN be important. But it shouldnt always be a Factor on wether or not someone is a Great Composer. I for one care about wether the Music is good or wether its Bad and very little about how revolutionary or forward looking it is. There can be composers who dont Change the Path of Music but who just simply write Great Music, and there is nothing wrong with that. And how do you define "film music craftsmanship"? I agree that there are a lot of mediocre film composers but there are a few who are really exceptional composers. You cant define "film music crafsmanship" as if every film composer was at the same level. And again in Film music your job is often not to be super Original and daring, but to write Music that fits the Story and the pictures. But that doesnt mean that a piece of film music cant be Great music. And i really dont like the Term "Neo-classicist" as it really doesnt mean anything. Just because you write Tonal Music or dont follow, or even lead, modern Trends you are automatically "neo-classicist"? I really dont like this kind of nonsensical categorizing of Music. Poulenc was of the Opinion that by engaging with the music of past composers it can only enrich compositions of the present, as opposed to the idea that such inspiration makes one’s work less “original.” And i agree. I also cant agree with your assessment that Poulencs pieces come from nowhere and go nowhere. The cadences feel a bit awkward and imperfect but i think that is entirely Intentional and thats precisely what makes them Interesting and kind of relatable and real. All of the music is carefully and tastefully crafted.
i dont know if you ment it as a joke since you are obviously a Boulez fan, and boulez openly despiced poulenc, even though poulenc admired and founded a lot of boulez's work. If its not a joke, than shame on you for bringing hate into such cheery and enchanting music.
@@OctopusContrapunctus as a huge Boulez and Poulenc fan I'll just add to this that I loved this piece! Really annoying when people listen to abstract composers like Boulez, Varese, or Feldman and use it as some sort of intellectual high ground to shit on a composer that doesn't mind using a major sixth chord here and there.
@@seandanielson4530 I completely agree, intelectuality even if amazing, is not everything. And even in more intelectual abstract music nowadays there is always space for a bit of humor.
![Aram Khachaturian - Spartacus Suite No. 2 (1955) [Score]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OnMm_tVTnpE/mqdefault.jpg)
Poulenc is so criminally underrated. I'd go so far as to put him at the same level as the greatest french composers, like Ravel or Debussy. Such liveliness, modernism, and character.
Poulenc was a neo-classicist using ready-made techniques , Ravel and Debussy revolutionaries.
Poulenc is performed a lot anyways, i saw his opera performed at my university . What you hear here is film music craftsmanship niveau of the time. It is very good music, but still too common and vague for concert
While I enjoy his music too, he doesn't even come close to Ravel, let alone Debussy who was one of the greatest geniuses of all time and in the same category as Bach, Beethoven and Wagner. He wasn't even the greatest composer of Les Six, a title that goes to Honegger by a wide margin.
I love his music so much, Poulenc is starting to get more and more performed (given also that is copyright on the work is starting to end) and so i am more than sure that it will be incorporated in more programms. Of course they will probably put his masterpiece concertos, although i think his masses is where the real genius lies.
I think Animaux Modelle Suite would be a greater and a more entertaining symphonic work to listen for a concert.
I Personally cherish Poulenc very much (his Stabat Mater is my Fav) and would love to listen to all of his music in concerts but it is not to all very appealing, since he is a pure contradicition: charming and unhinged in the most poulenc way possible (the sinfonietta though is only the first of these, a rare specimin)
His flute sonata is considered by many to be the greatest ever! Practically zero flutists would agree with you. His chamber music alone puts him at the top. He was one of the most melodically gifted composers of the 20th century. When is this Boulez nonsense going to end? Who is listened to more now, Mr. cerebral onanism himself, or Poulenc? What a bunch of hooey!@mrtchaikovsky
In classical music comments on TH-cam, "underrated" is an overrated word. And I don't see "neo-classicist" as a bad thing. Stravinsky and Prokofiev have some lovely pieces that are called "neo-classicist" too.
Wow this is truly amazing can’t believe I have never heard of this composer!
His concerti are all fantastic, especially the double piano and the organ concerti
if you like his orchestral colouring, you should check out "les animaux modelles" suite. It's enchanting, witty, macabre and just so wondefully orchestrated
I cracked up at the 3rd movement's Brahms' style stealing XDDDDDDDD truly a genius XD
Poulenc is the quintessential boulevardier, with the French virtues of charm, wit, a touch of the banal, and a hint of vulgarity that makes him irresistible.
8:00 - II. Molto vivace
13:23 - III. Andante Cantabile
19:05 - IV. Finale
Poulenc utiliza aqui elementos de seu fabuloso concerto para piano. Linha melódica envolvente, atemporal e anos luz acima de nosso tempo.
Like Haydn on crack - actually that doesnt even begin to cover it. Great work
Hahaha, and this is one of the more tamer works of poulenc, if you listen to something else of him, you gonna hear how crazy he can get. I would personally suggest, if you like some funny and crazy stuff to check out his concerto for 2 pianos, or his Concerto Champetre (for harpsichord)
i guess i forgot about "Les Bishes" thats a fun orchestral suite
Love this piece! The recording is amazing!
its a very good recording, i personally like the "hr-Sinfonieorchester" version, couse it has a bit of a cleaner and more colorful sound. But just personal preference. if you have time check it out😁
idk why i got this on my recommended page, didnt disappoint
Magnifique. ❤
I simply love poulenc soooo much
Now that was robust! 💪🏽
I think that The Addams Family's music is like Francis Poulenc's orchestral music. His organ concerto and the first movement of this work is like the addams family suite.
Poulenc was a neo-classicist using ready-made techniques , Ravel and Debussy revolutionaries.
Poulenc is performed a lot anyways, i saw his opera performed at my university . What you hear here is film music craftsmanship niveau of the time.
This piece is still very good music, i would recommend any film composer to study it, but still too common and vague for concert, principally at that critical times when he lived. All the final cadences have something off, confirming that is music from nowhere to nowhere. Amazing is how he almost excludes minor keys! It is a major chord ecstasy.
I hate this Notion that you have to be a revolutionary or do something never seen before to be a serious or a really good composer. In my opinion "Originality" (and i mean this in terms of Style and techniques and so on) is a criteria that CAN be important. But it shouldnt always be a Factor on wether or not someone is a Great Composer. I for one care about wether the Music is good or wether its Bad and very little about how revolutionary or forward looking it is.
There can be composers who dont Change the Path of Music but who just simply write Great Music, and there is nothing wrong with that.
And how do you define "film music craftsmanship"? I agree that there are a lot of mediocre film composers but there are a few who are really exceptional composers. You cant define "film music crafsmanship" as if every film composer was at the same level.
And again in Film music your job is often not to be super Original and daring, but to write Music that fits the Story and the pictures. But that doesnt mean that a piece of film music cant be Great music.
And i really dont like the Term "Neo-classicist" as it really doesnt mean anything. Just because you write Tonal Music or dont follow, or even lead, modern Trends you are automatically "neo-classicist"? I really dont like this kind of nonsensical categorizing of Music.
Poulenc was of the Opinion that by engaging with the music of past composers it can only enrich compositions of the present, as opposed to the idea that such inspiration makes one’s work less “original.” And i agree.
I also cant agree with your assessment that Poulencs pieces come from nowhere and go nowhere. The cadences feel a bit awkward and imperfect but i think that is entirely Intentional and thats precisely what makes them Interesting and kind of relatable and real. All of the music is carefully and tastefully crafted.
whoa 1:24
5:27
23:55
13:23
15:26
Disgust
i dont know if you ment it as a joke since you are obviously a Boulez fan, and boulez openly despiced poulenc, even though poulenc admired and founded a lot of boulez's work.
If its not a joke, than shame on you for bringing hate into such cheery and enchanting music.
@@OctopusContrapunctushate?
@@OctopusContrapunctus as a huge Boulez and Poulenc fan I'll just add to this that I loved this piece! Really annoying when people listen to abstract composers like Boulez, Varese, or Feldman and use it as some sort of intellectual high ground to shit on a composer that doesn't mind using a major sixth chord here and there.
@@seandanielson4530 I completely agree, intelectuality even if amazing, is not everything. And even in more intelectual abstract music nowadays there is always space for a bit of humor.