|
northern
|
 |
« on: April 15, 2016, 12:55:07 pm » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Albion
|
|
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2016, 12:57:29 pm » |
|
Wow!!!!!!!!!
;D :o ;D
|
"A piece is worth your attention, and is itself for you praiseworthy, if it makes you feel you have not wasted your time over it." (Sydney Grew, 1922)
|
|
|
|
jimfin
|
|
« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2016, 07:19:42 am » |
|
How wonderful, though I might have hoped for a different work, as Omar was recorded by Chandos. Nevertheless, it's an incredibly beautiful work, and I feel that Bantock was more confident with choral genres than purely orchestral (as he tended to be a bit over-rhapsodic when left with only an orchestra).
|
|
|
|
|
|
guest251
Guest
|
|
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2016, 09:45:44 am » |
|
Were there not some small cuts in the Handley/Chandos recording? I was just wondering if this Del Mar one might be absolutely complete?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Albion
|
|
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2016, 03:31:57 pm » |
|
Were there not some small cuts in the Handley/Chandos recording? I was just wondering if this Del Mar one might be absolutely complete?
Yes there were, and yes it is! :) |
"A piece is worth your attention, and is itself for you praiseworthy, if it makes you feel you have not wasted your time over it." (Sydney Grew, 1922)
|
|
|
|
Grandenorm
|
|
« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2016, 06:00:55 pm » |
|
And hurray for this because some of the cuts on Chandos were IMHO disfiguring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimfin
|
|
« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2016, 07:45:17 am » |
|
Oh, well if there were cuts, this is even more exciting!
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimfin
|
|
« Reply #7 on: April 17, 2016, 07:45:44 am » |
|
Next up: the complete Song of Songs?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grandenorm
|
|
« Reply #8 on: April 17, 2016, 11:50:11 am » |
|
Yes please. But has it ever been broadcast?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Albion
|
|
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2016, 06:45:22 pm » |
|
Next up: the complete Song of Songs?
Yes please. But has it ever been broadcast?
No. :( |
"A piece is worth your attention, and is itself for you praiseworthy, if it makes you feel you have not wasted your time over it." (Sydney Grew, 1922)
|
|
|
|
Grandenorm
|
|
« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2016, 07:03:37 pm » |
|
Then a recording is, alas, unlikely. In my opinion, the three works of Bantock's that really need performing and remain unrecorded are the completed parts of Christus, the Song of Songs and Ferishtah's Fancies (songs for tenor and orchestra). But I feel we are unlikely to hear them. The Song of Songs would be ideal for a prom performance, but it won't happen with the current controller of BBC Radio 3 who probably hasn't even heard of Bantock! Much less Holbrooke et al.
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimfin
|
|
« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2016, 09:46:15 am » |
|
I love the bits of Song of Songs that are available on Hyperion, but I believe it's a far more enormous work even than Omar Khayyam. I guess we're more likely to hear the Cauldron of Annwn than that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dundonnell
|
|
« Reply #12 on: April 18, 2016, 03:37:22 pm » |
|
Does anyone know how much of the work was cut for the Chandos recording? I can see from the cd booklet the text omitted but I wonder how much running time that amounts to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grandenorm
|
|
« Reply #13 on: April 29, 2016, 05:27:54 pm » |
|
Probably not more than about 4 or 5 minutes in total, which is why I couldn't understand the point of making the cuts at all, most of which were from Pt. I. There were no cuts in Part III. Nevertheless, as I say, to someone who knows the work well, as I do, they are very annoying. And they matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dundonnell
|
Probably not more than about 4 or 5 minutes in total, which is why I couldn't understand the point of making the cuts at all, most of which were from Pt. I. There were no cuts in Part III. Nevertheless, as I say, to someone who knows the work well, as I do, they are very annoying. And they matter.
Thank you for that information. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
