It almost seems incredulous that a rugby concussion could give rise to a piano composition . . . and yet here is the proof confirming not a possibility, but a reality! What extraordinary contemporary music Sam Saunders created in his 'Into the Depths of Madness", making the piano sing in a completely absorbing and enthralling way across the full compass and dynamic range of the instrument. The accolade you so graciously bestow on Sam in your commentary was very generous and touching - I'm sure your meeting to discuss his music will have seen two minds ignited by the shared exhilerating joys of performance and composition. Your performance of this work, Cole, was equally extraordinary and amazing in the way you succeeded in communicating the composer's rationale. Totally awesome! (And I was delighted to explore Sam's website with more examples of his music via the marvels of the Internet. Thank you!)
Louis Nagel was on the faculty when I was studying piano in Ann Arbor many years ago. He's a very interesting guy. His wife, Julie Jaffee-Nagel, is also a fascinating person. She's a psychologist who would occasionally give workshops and seminars on dealing with stage fright.
I can't enjoy these contemporary pieces yet. Maybe I don't understand them, I don't know. I have grown to love pieces that at first didn't like. Could be that?
Yes you might be right. I usually feel that it is worth coming back to pieces that don't immediately enthrall me. At least then I can figure out for certain why I don't like a particular piece, and often enough I have ended up loving pieces that I was indifferent to at first. It would have been a shame if I had given up after the first listen! As far as the contemporary language goes, I do think further familiarity helps. It might not necessarily be that there is anything wrong with the music, but that you aren't quite used to the manner of expression. Once you get used to the style you might derive much enjoyment from these kinds of pieces.
So grateful for this ! Beautiful ,mind stretching,Amazing , thoughtful , morphing American Music !!! I so want to hear the Nocturnes this man has written How do players memorize music that changes meters constantly?I saw a guy play Boulez 2 and another in a competition play most of Messiaen Vingt Regars from Memory and I still can't believe its possible though I see on youtube its happening a lot ! What it must be like to have trained with Rosina Lhevinne or Isabelle Vengerova or any of the other famous wizards who really knew the piano.
Really impressive piece of music that. Reminds me a little of Kenneth Leighton, a really good British composer. Has some similarities in some of the sonorities and passagework.
Wow! That was underwhelming! I shouldn't even say that, it was pretty much what I expected from a contemporary piece, meandering, soulless and emotionless without any thought towards musical beauty. I'm very glad my generation is leaving this music behind in favor of Rachmaninoff or Tchaikovsky.
Wow, harshly put! I can't agree with you about it being soulless or emotionless, but obviously it's subjective. To me it seems shocking that anyone would think this piece is not beautiful, especially in the middle section. The piece is mostly tonal and highly melodic and I would think if it as part of the new-Romanticism movement, particularly in the middle section. Certainly it's no more dissonant or meandering than a Prokofiev Sonata! Try some Boulez or Carter if you really want to hear something from that kind of ultra-dissonant school-which is indeed mostly on the way out these days.
@@TheIndependentPianist Let me preface this by saying that I love your videos, especially your analysis of Gershwin's piano concerto. And I am by no means a student of music, I don't have any education in the subject, I am only an enthusiast and can speak only from my personal tastes as well as experience in listening to the music, not studying. But still, in my opinion this is nothing like romanticism, the only thing I can say is that is is new. It does meander, even in that middle section which doesn't really hold a melody in my opinion, nor any type of lyricism which I can perceive as being an ode to the old. The only section which holds a candle to anything romantic is the waltz section of the third movement, which in itself sounds like an homage to Rachmaninoff's third movement of his fourth piano concerto. The middle section is too slow imo, it just sort of sits there until it starts up again and then goes right back down. More importantly, I can't say any of it is very memorable! I'm pretty young, my generation loves memorable melodies and themes, thats why a composer like Rachmaninoff or even Schubert are trending on TikTok. But this is just so... flat. If its meant to be neo-Romanticist, or whatever fancy term the intellectuals can come up with, it doesn't succeed, nor does it hold a candle to orchestral arrangements being made today found in other forms of media, especially video games coming out of Japan (which focus more on memorable themes and emotional lyricism than dissonant theory, Bloodborne / Elden Ring soundtrack lol, hell Gusty Garden from Mario Galaxy is more "classical" than this). Ironic that Japan is doing better at upholding "western" theories of music better than the west (some of the stuff "classical" composers are making now are so surrealist, avant-garde or just plain ugly I can't even understand why they would write them, or how they justify it to themselves). All in all, I'm not surprised that I haven't heard of this. I understand you are a student of music and definitely know way more about terms and musical theory than I will, but all of that is lost on the average listener, who is more concerned with the beauty and aesthetic of the piece rather than any "theory" or "intellectual technique" which might come with it. The piece might try and pay homage to the Romantics, but imo thats just a cover to keep composing more of the same. Look at the theme from Amore Mio Aiutami, a beautiful soaring melody which literally became a well known sound on TikTok. Thats more new Romantic than anything present in this piece, at least to the average listener.
@@aidandavis7657 You might want to consider why someone would want to continue writing "more of the same" when they could have much more immediate success by writing something that would trend on TikTok, or another social media platform. Since it isn't buying them success, perhaps it is because it is something more in tune with their own personal voice. The more I have become familiar with many different styles of musical composition, the more I realize how much versatility there is in the world of music-and how glad we should be for that. Yes, Tchaikovsky and Schubert are wonderful, but that is not the only way that music can be made. And for composers who were working in the early 20th century, it would have felt false to continue copying the styles of their predecessors. They wanted to try something new and forge paths that resonated with their inner voices. That was what Tchaikovsky and Schubert were both doing in their time as well. But whenever we as listeners are faced with something new, or difficult, there is the inevitable resistance that can be felt at first. Because it doesn't follow the patterns of expression we are used to, we immediately throw it aside as garbage! It has nothing to do with whether the music is intellectually conceived or not. It simply has to do with familiarity. How else can you explain that someone like me, who also likes Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff and Schubert, at the same time can appreciate Berg, Bartok and Cage? I don't enjoy these composers' music because of an intellectual reason (no amount of familiarity or intellectual explanations can make me like Boulez's music, even though I've tried and I admit it has brilliance)-I genuinely find them to be beautiful and affecting... in their own way. There is so much music to be heard out there. 400+ years of European classics yes, but also other classical traditions, popular music from all over the world, music of various folk traditions-music being written or improvised by all kinds of people from all walks of life. Some of it will appeal to you more right away, because it will align with your biases, and some will not. Some music you might never come to like, and that is fine! But personally I think writing the music off that we don't like by saying: "this music is emotionless and soulless, end of story" is presumptuous, and more than a little cruel towards living artists. We can't know what that person was feeling when they wrote it, or what it might inspire in others. Instead, maybe we can just say "This is not for me." ....but also, maybe give some of this stuff a 2nd (and 3rd and 4th) chance! Some pieces that I completely did not get on first hearing became treasured works I come back to again and again now, because I refused to be put off at first and kept trying to understand what it was all about. That was the case with Berg's Violin Concerto (1st listen=noise, 10th listen=the most beautiful piece I'd ever heard). It would have been a shame if I had missed that because of my initial reaction.
@@TheIndependentPianistyour enjoyment of something is not indicative at all of its quality. Something can be an absokutely incompetently composed piece like this one, and you can love it, it can also be an incredibly geniously composed masterpiece like Scriabin's op. 60, and you'd hate it. Enjoyment is subjective, quality is not. What makes bartok, boulez etc. Fail, is the fact that no amount of theory will *ever* truly justify their pieces, as their are entirely built upon a foundation of pseudoscience, and simply are not music. Thus you're incapable of using any theoretical perspective to enjoy then, because you, whether subconsciouly or consciously, *know* that it's nonsense, and you'd have to delude yourself to believe it. Also it's not like Tchaikovsky and Schubert are good either, they are just more palatable.
@@Whatismusic123 I don't think I accept your bald statement that quality can be determined in music by objective standards. If it were possible to really agree on objective standards in this field then it would be no problem at all to find a neatly organized list of the best 100 pieces in order, which no one would dispute, any more than they would argue about the timings of sprinters or any other athlete. As I say again and again, music is not a sport, and we shouldn't pretend that it is. The idea that Bartok and Boulez "fail" is also laughable, as they continue to be two of the most highly regarded figures in 20th century music. They may "fail" by your standards, but not for many others. Again, your opinion that this piece is "incompetently" composed is still just your opinion-and not one that carries any weight with me.
It almost seems incredulous that a rugby concussion could give rise to a piano composition . . . and yet here is the proof confirming not a possibility, but a reality! What extraordinary contemporary music Sam Saunders created in his 'Into the Depths of Madness", making the piano sing in a completely absorbing and enthralling way across the full compass and dynamic range of the instrument. The accolade you so graciously bestow on Sam in your commentary was very generous and touching - I'm sure your meeting to discuss his music will have seen two minds ignited by the shared exhilerating joys of performance and composition. Your performance of this work, Cole, was equally extraordinary and amazing in the way you succeeded in communicating the composer's rationale. Totally awesome! (And I was delighted to explore Sam's website with more examples of his music via the marvels of the Internet. Thank you!)
Wonderful performance. Great music is still being written!:-)
Yes indeed. Thanks for watching!
I really enjoyed this piece and your playing is great as always. Thanks for sharing!
Louis Nagel was on the faculty when I was studying piano in Ann Arbor many years ago. He's a very interesting guy. His wife, Julie Jaffee-Nagel, is also a fascinating person. She's a psychologist who would occasionally give workshops and seminars on dealing with stage fright.
Wow !! Fabulous piece. And spot on playing. 🎉🎊🎉🎊. Thrilled soo thrilled to have come across your channel. Winds be ever at your back 🙏🏽☮️
That’s wild and I really like it! Saunders coda of this piece reminds me of the end of Schuberts op.142 no 4
Yes, they both have a wild descent into the bass at the end. That's a nice comparison!
I can't enjoy these contemporary pieces yet. Maybe I don't understand them, I don't know. I have grown to love pieces that at first didn't like. Could be that?
Yes you might be right. I usually feel that it is worth coming back to pieces that don't immediately enthrall me. At least then I can figure out for certain why I don't like a particular piece, and often enough I have ended up loving pieces that I was indifferent to at first. It would have been a shame if I had given up after the first listen!
As far as the contemporary language goes, I do think further familiarity helps. It might not necessarily be that there is anything wrong with the music, but that you aren't quite used to the manner of expression. Once you get used to the style you might derive much enjoyment from these kinds of pieces.
@@TheIndependentPianist I should definitely try to listen to more contemporary music. Also your videos are the best. Thank you🖤
So grateful for this ! Beautiful ,mind stretching,Amazing , thoughtful , morphing American Music !!! I so want to hear the Nocturnes this man has written How do players memorize music that changes meters constantly?I saw a guy play Boulez 2 and another in a competition play most of Messiaen Vingt Regars from Memory and I still can't believe its possible though I see on youtube its happening a lot !
What it must be like to have trained with Rosina Lhevinne or Isabelle Vengerova or any of the other famous wizards who really knew the piano.
Thank you for watching!
Really impressive piece of music that. Reminds me a little of Kenneth Leighton, a really good British composer. Has some similarities in some of the sonorities and passagework.
Thanks, I will look into Leighton!
I’m interested in this piece!
Wow, there are some really interesting ideas in there!
...so who is going to orchestrate the slow section?
The figurations often remind me of Arkadiev’s “Sonata Brevis” and Rzewski’s “The People United Will Never Be Defeated”
nice
What a fantastic piece and video! Is the sheet music still available?
Yes! Email me at cole@independentpianist.com and I will send it to you.
Wow! That was underwhelming! I shouldn't even say that, it was pretty much what I expected from a contemporary piece, meandering, soulless and emotionless without any thought towards musical beauty. I'm very glad my generation is leaving this music behind in favor of Rachmaninoff or Tchaikovsky.
Wow, harshly put! I can't agree with you about it being soulless or emotionless, but obviously it's subjective. To me it seems shocking that anyone would think this piece is not beautiful, especially in the middle section. The piece is mostly tonal and highly melodic and I would think if it as part of the new-Romanticism movement, particularly in the middle section. Certainly it's no more dissonant or meandering than a Prokofiev Sonata! Try some Boulez or Carter if you really want to hear something from that kind of ultra-dissonant school-which is indeed mostly on the way out these days.
@@TheIndependentPianist Let me preface this by saying that I love your videos, especially your analysis of Gershwin's piano concerto. And I am by no means a student of music, I don't have any education in the subject, I am only an enthusiast and can speak only from my personal tastes as well as experience in listening to the music, not studying.
But still, in my opinion this is nothing like romanticism, the only thing I can say is that is is new. It does meander, even in that middle section which doesn't really hold a melody in my opinion, nor any type of lyricism which I can perceive as being an ode to the old. The only section which holds a candle to anything romantic is the waltz section of the third movement, which in itself sounds like an homage to Rachmaninoff's third movement of his fourth piano concerto. The middle section is too slow imo, it just sort of sits there until it starts up again and then goes right back down. More importantly, I can't say any of it is very memorable! I'm pretty young, my generation loves memorable melodies and themes, thats why a composer like Rachmaninoff or even Schubert are trending on TikTok. But this is just so... flat. If its meant to be neo-Romanticist, or whatever fancy term the intellectuals can come up with, it doesn't succeed, nor does it hold a candle to orchestral arrangements being made today found in other forms of media, especially video games coming out of Japan (which focus more on memorable themes and emotional lyricism than dissonant theory, Bloodborne / Elden Ring soundtrack lol, hell Gusty Garden from Mario Galaxy is more "classical" than this). Ironic that Japan is doing better at upholding "western" theories of music better than the west (some of the stuff "classical" composers are making now are so surrealist, avant-garde or just plain ugly I can't even understand why they would write them, or how they justify it to themselves).
All in all, I'm not surprised that I haven't heard of this. I understand you are a student of music and definitely know way more about terms and musical theory than I will, but all of that is lost on the average listener, who is more concerned with the beauty and aesthetic of the piece rather than any "theory" or "intellectual technique" which might come with it. The piece might try and pay homage to the Romantics, but imo thats just a cover to keep composing more of the same. Look at the theme from Amore Mio Aiutami, a beautiful soaring melody which literally became a well known sound on TikTok. Thats more new Romantic than anything present in this piece, at least to the average listener.
@@aidandavis7657 You might want to consider why someone would want to continue writing "more of the same" when they could have much more immediate success by writing something that would trend on TikTok, or another social media platform. Since it isn't buying them success, perhaps it is because it is something more in tune with their own personal voice.
The more I have become familiar with many different styles of musical composition, the more I realize how much versatility there is in the world of music-and how glad we should be for that. Yes, Tchaikovsky and Schubert are wonderful, but that is not the only way that music can be made. And for composers who were working in the early 20th century, it would have felt false to continue copying the styles of their predecessors. They wanted to try something new and forge paths that resonated with their inner voices. That was what Tchaikovsky and Schubert were both doing in their time as well.
But whenever we as listeners are faced with something new, or difficult, there is the inevitable resistance that can be felt at first. Because it doesn't follow the patterns of expression we are used to, we immediately throw it aside as garbage! It has nothing to do with whether the music is intellectually conceived or not. It simply has to do with familiarity.
How else can you explain that someone like me, who also likes Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff and Schubert, at the same time can appreciate Berg, Bartok and Cage? I don't enjoy these composers' music because of an intellectual reason (no amount of familiarity or intellectual explanations can make me like Boulez's music, even though I've tried and I admit it has brilliance)-I genuinely find them to be beautiful and affecting... in their own way.
There is so much music to be heard out there. 400+ years of European classics yes, but also other classical traditions, popular music from all over the world, music of various folk traditions-music being written or improvised by all kinds of people from all walks of life. Some of it will appeal to you more right away, because it will align with your biases, and some will not. Some music you might never come to like, and that is fine! But personally I think writing the music off that we don't like by saying: "this music is emotionless and soulless, end of story" is presumptuous, and more than a little cruel towards living artists. We can't know what that person was feeling when they wrote it, or what it might inspire in others. Instead, maybe we can just say "This is not for me."
....but also, maybe give some of this stuff a 2nd (and 3rd and 4th) chance! Some pieces that I completely did not get on first hearing became treasured works I come back to again and again now, because I refused to be put off at first and kept trying to understand what it was all about. That was the case with Berg's Violin Concerto (1st listen=noise, 10th listen=the most beautiful piece I'd ever heard). It would have been a shame if I had missed that because of my initial reaction.
@@TheIndependentPianistyour enjoyment of something is not indicative at all of its quality.
Something can be an absokutely incompetently composed piece like this one, and you can love it, it can also be an incredibly geniously composed masterpiece like Scriabin's op. 60, and you'd hate it. Enjoyment is subjective, quality is not.
What makes bartok, boulez etc. Fail, is the fact that no amount of theory will *ever* truly justify their pieces, as their are entirely built upon a foundation of pseudoscience, and simply are not music. Thus you're incapable of using any theoretical perspective to enjoy then, because you, whether subconsciouly or consciously, *know* that it's nonsense, and you'd have to delude yourself to believe it.
Also it's not like Tchaikovsky and Schubert are good either, they are just more palatable.
@@Whatismusic123 I don't think I accept your bald statement that quality can be determined in music by objective standards. If it were possible to really agree on objective standards in this field then it would be no problem at all to find a neatly organized list of the best 100 pieces in order, which no one would dispute, any more than they would argue about the timings of sprinters or any other athlete. As I say again and again, music is not a sport, and we shouldn't pretend that it is.
The idea that Bartok and Boulez "fail" is also laughable, as they continue to be two of the most highly regarded figures in 20th century music. They may "fail" by your standards, but not for many others.
Again, your opinion that this piece is "incompetently" composed is still just your opinion-and not one that carries any weight with me.