Stanley Bate's Symphony No 3 is featured as a new cd release on
the Dutton website,if anyone doesn't already know.
It is coupled with Erik Chisholm: Pictures by Dante and some short pieces by Richard Arnell.
May be this post should be in New Recordings.
Indeed it should, Gareth!
My sincere apologies for this. My excitement at seeing the cd got the better of me.
No need to apologise Pengelli. It's no problem.
Thank you,Mark. Re: Bate. His music is romantic & lyrical,so I do
feel it fits in here,in the right part of the forum,of course!
I wonder whether Bate's name went against him. Nothing wrong with it,really,but it's so homely (Hovis) and un-exotic sounding?
I wonder if he was called Stratislav Batesov whether his works would be played more often. Would not be the first composer to change his name.
Eli Parish and Leon Dudley seemed initially to have a "Hovis" feel to them.
Thal
William Brian,Edwin Yorke Bowen & a certain,Joseph Holbrooke
spring to mind. Not so extreme;but it didn't seem to help much!
Re Bates' name: Remember the old Joe Green/Giuseppe Verdi bit? I wonder, too, if "Stanley" has aesthetic or class associations in Britain? Would "Stanley Beethoven" sound promising? Even with Mozart we usually prefer Amadeus to Gottlieb.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51kvzhwUNIL._SL500_AA300_.jpg) (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61DRHFN8d6L._SL500_AA300_.jpg) (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51VC1gABjCL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
... a worthless piece of undistinguished pastiche ... Bate's mind is totally devoid of distinction - 1953 BBC criticism of the Violin Concerto No. 3 Op. 58 (1947/50). ???
With Piano Concertos 2 and 3 also available in the broadcast archive, the above assessment beggars belief.
.. a worthless piece of undistinguished pastiche ... Bate's mind is totally devoid of distinction - 1953 BBC criticism of the Violin Concerto No. 3 Op. 58 (1947/50). ???
Why are you surprised? This classic piece of bigotted claptrap issued from the BBC!!!
Back again,I'm afraid! Lot's of very fascinating postings on this forum as usual,I see.
Thanks for the Bate excerpts Albion & the other forum user who supplied them. I can't wait to hear some of this on a nice shiny Dutton cd,complete with their usual striking choice of artwork on the front! The Piano Concerto's certainly sound well worth Dutton's time & money to my ears. By the way,who was that BBC nonentity anyway?
Strangest of the archive contributions so far,have to be the Gaze Cooper excerpts. There's allot of ambient atmosphere there;for a moment I wondered if the performance would ever get going. Is this from a privately recorded source? Unfortunately, the sound quality and performances don't really do much to further the extremely neglected Gaze Cooper's cause and I will defer judgement until Cooper get's a fairer hearing! But thank you very much to whoever provided these snippets. Preserving this kind of material is what music appreciation is all about.
Despite having had it on the 'wanted' list for a whole year, I've only just got round to the Dutton recording of Stanley Bate's Symphony No.4 - what a terrific piece it is, and clearly by the same hand as the superb 3rd (which indicates to me that this composer had an individual voice). What had put me off purchasing slightly was the coupling - a 'realisation' of Symphony No.7 by Richard Arnell (whose Symphonies 1-6 I greatly admire). I needn't have worried - Martin Yates has done a fabulous job of melding the composer's unfinished sketches together (he was in close consultation with Arnell shortly before the latter's death in 2009) and this proves a very fitting and poignant conclusion to a highly impressive symphonic career.
:)
Having got to know Bate's Piano Concerto No.2 from the composer's own performance, I am more than usually excited at the prospect of hearing Victor Sangiorgio tackle the virtuosic Allegro di bravura first movement - a veritable moto perpetuo whirlwind of notes. The Sinfonietta No.1 will be completely new to virtually every listener on the planet (including me) - so this is really a disc to savour, and hopefully will lead to several more of Bate's concertos (and possibly ballet scores) reaching the studio.
;D
Having been a trifle surprised and, I have to admit, disappointed by Arnell's more modernist 6th Symphony I was a bit wary of the unfinished 7th but-as you say-Martin Yates has done a superb job and the 7th really is a most moving work :)
Hugely impressed just now by Maurice Jacobson's huge Cantata "The Hound of Heaven" :) :)
So far Dutton have confined themselves to those scores of Bate's published by Lengwick and now controlled by "The Music Group" - in other words, those with performing materials readily available. The other orchestral music, including the later PCs and the VCs remains in MS - mostly in the RCM. I really hope Dutton continues to explore this composer, but it will require just a bit more determination on their part if these other works are to be recorded. The PCs are particularly problematic because Bate labelled a number of differing MSS, some incomplete, as No. 3. The RCM does not seem to have No. 4, but it is not entirely clear - someone needs to do some work here. VC No. 2 seems only to exist in a MS piano/violin score, though full scores of 1 & 3 are held in the RCM.
Thanks, Gareth - that is a very interesting point you have made regarding the works selected. I think that a good way to encourage Dutton to invest long-term in Stanley Bate would be for members of this forum to purchase every relevant disc and then 'press-gang' their friends to do the same.
Oh, and don't forget to email Dutton regularly with eloquent requests for further recordings!
;)
I hope the estate would be willing to cooperate with someone in letting them make performing editions in part to make it easier for Dutton or other interested companies if any (I know that the Sorabji Archive charges a moderate fee for copies of scores but that seems reasonable (I acquired a print copy of their microfilm of one of his later works that way, and planned to typeset it though nothing came of that for various reasons having to do with me.))
Quote from: Gareth Vaughan on Wednesday 12 October 2011, 22:10The PCs are particularly problematic because Bate labelled a number of differing MSS, some incomplete, as No. 3. The RCM does not seem to have No. 4, but it is not entirely clear - someone needs to do some work here. VC No. 2 seems only to exist in a MS piano/violin score, though full scores of 1 & 3 are held in the RCM.
Let's hope that Bate's scores can be put in order - I would particularly love to hear Violin Concerto No.3: anything which provokes the response
... a worthless piece of undistinguished pastiche ... Bate's mind is totally devoid of distinction
from the BBC can't be all bad!
;D
QuoteI hope the estate would be willing to cooperate with someone in letting them make performing editions in part to make it easier for Dutton or other interested companies
That assumes there
is an estate. Quite often there isn't.
Quoteanything which provokes the response
... a worthless piece of undistinguished pastiche ... Bate's mind is totally devoid of distinction
from the BBC can't be all bad!
Hear! Hear!
From what I could gather(which may be wildly inaccurate ;D):
Piano Concerto No.1 was a student work, completed probably in 1934 and given a first performance in December 1934 at the Royal College of Music.
Piano Concerto No.2, commissioned by Sir Henry Wood, was completed in May 1940 and premiered on 8 February 1942 in New York with the composer as
soloist and Beecham conducting the New York City Symphony Orchestra.
Piano Concerto No.3(1) was begun in October 1951 and completed in August 1952 but then set aside.
Piano Concerto No.3(2) was premiered on 30 August 1957 with the composer as soloist and John Hollingsworth conducting the BBC Symphony Orchestra.
Piano Concerto No.4 was completed but never performed.
Piano Concerto No.5 was incomplete when the composer died.
Violin Concerto No.1 was completed in November 1937.
Violin Concerto No.2, Op.43 was written in 1943 but not premiered until a broadcast on Dutch Radio in February 1951 by Nap de Klijn.
Violin Concerto No.3, Op.58 was written between 1947 and 1950 and premiered on 11 June 1953 by Antonio Brosa with the London Symphony Orchestra under
Richard Austin.
Looks pretty comprehensive.
:)
Quote from: Dundonnell on Wednesday 12 October 2011, 22:59Piano Concerto No.1 was a student work, completed probably in 1934 and given a first performance in December 1934 at the Royal College of Music.
Piano Concerto No.2, commissioned by Sir Henry Wood, was completed in May 1940 and premiered on 8 February 1942 in New York with the composer as
soloist and Beecham conducting the New York City Symphony Orchestra.
Piano Concerto No.3(1) was begun in October 1951 and completed in August 1952 but then set aside.
Piano Concerto No.3(2) was premiered on 30 August 1957 with the composer as soloist and John Hollingsworth conducting the BBC Symphony Orchestra.
Piano Concerto No.4 was completed but never performed.
Piano Concerto No.5 was incomplete when the composer died.
Violin Concerto No.1 was completed in November 1937.
Violin Concerto No.2, Op.43 was written in 1943 but not premiered until a broadcast on Dutch Radio in February 1951 by Nap de Klijn.
Violin Concerto No.3, Op.58 was written between 1947 and 1950 and premiered on 11 June 1953 by Antonio Brosa with the London Symphony Orchestra under Richard Austin.
and here are more concertante works ...
Concertino for piano and chamber orchestra, Op.21, completed 17th December 1937 and premiered on 8th February 1938 with the composer as soloist and the Eastbourne Municipal Orchestra conducted by Kneale Kelly (RCM MS 5869)
Concertante for piano and string orchestra, Op. 24, completed in August 1938 and premiered on 5th June 1939 by Lloyd Powell as soloists and the Riddick String Orchestra conducted by Kathleen Riddick (RCM MS 5876)
Concerto for two pianos and orchestra, Op. 43, composed in 1943
Concerto Grosso for piano and strings, completed on 1 April 1952 and premiered with the composer as solois and the Paris Radio Orchestra in June 1952 (RCM MS 5867, published by Lengnick)
Cello Concerto, premiered Autumn 1954 by the Eastman Rochester Symphony Orchestra (RCM MS 5881)
Harpsichord Concerto, completed May 1955 and premiered with Yolanda Penteado Matarazzo as soloist (RCM MS 5868, published by Lengnick)
:)
And then again - as with Dutton's Arnell series, it would be wonderful to hear some of the ballet music, especially -
Perseus, Op.26, premiered 18th November 1939 (RCM MS 5915) - for orchestra
Cap Over Mill, Op.27, completed in 1939 (RCM MS 5912) - for two pianos
Highland Fling, Op.50, completed in November 1946 and premiered on 26 March 1947 (RCM MS 5913) - for orchestra
Troilus and Cressida, Op.60, completed in 1948 (RCM MS 5916) - for instrumental ensemble
:)
Thanks for the further detailed information regarding other compositions by Stanley Bate :)
As probably all of you know, there are many more details in Michael Barlow and Robert Barnett's quite substantial essay 'STANLEY BATE - Forgotten International Composer' on Musicweb: http://www.musicweb-international.com/bate/index.htm (http://www.musicweb-international.com/bate/index.htm).
The line that intrigues me most is "Glanville-Hicks claimed he wrote a dozen or more symphonies ...".
Out shopping earlier this year I had a Stanley Bate CD in my hand, going for the price of 1 Naxos and ... put it back again. [Confessions]
:'( Sins are there to be forgiven, but ... ::) ;)
Quote from: Paul Barasi on Monday 13 February 2012, 21:00
Out shopping earlier this year I had a Stanley Bate CD in my hand, going for the price of 1 Naxos and ... put it back again. [Confessions]
Hand or head, you must remove the offending organ immediately! ::) ;D
There's a pun there somewhere... but put feet on that organ's pedal, anycase.
I have raged in the pages of this forum on previous occasions about the declining standard of the reviews published in that formerly august publication "The Gramophone" but have still never actually got to the stage of making a decision to cancel my subscription- a subscription which I have maintained for 48 years.
The new(April) edition carries a review of the Bate/Reizenstein piano concertos release from Dutton. The review is written by Peter Dickinson, himself a distinguished composer, onetime Professor of Music at Keele University and elsewhere, and author of the standard text on the music of Sir Lennox Berkeley.
Dickinson devotes half of his review to telling his readers about the careers of the two composers, essentially summarising the content of the cd booklet notes. (One might have thought that in this day and age readers could be expected to find these sorts of details as readily on the internet and that what they really need is to be told about the music ???)
As to the music, this is what Dickinson writes:
"Stanley Bate has already had a good innings(with the previous releases from Dutton of his music, presumably)...........The Reizenstein is relentlessly energentic in the outer movements but, as a Hindemith pupil, he knew about continuity so the pace and the virtuosity never let up, except in a pleasantly cool if unmemorable slow movement. Bate's concerto is much less disciplined. His almost comic opening presages debts to Prokofiev; there's a meandering slow movement and a fizzing finale with stock-in-trade figurations. Agreeable mainstream stuff...."
and that's it. There is a further sentence about the performance which is called "truly outstanding".
This review has, finally, made up my mind for me :( If this is what passes for a serious review in Britain's oldest music magazine then that is a utter disgrace and a quite appalling insult to the memory of the generations of distinguished and erudite writers on music whose reviews graced the pages of the magazine throughout its 90 year history.
Exactly so. Farewell "The Gramophone" - requiescat in pace.
Quote from: Gareth Vaughan on Thursday 08 March 2012, 13:20
Exactly so. Farewell "The Gramophone" - requiescat in pace.
As they say........."Sad But True" :(
What finally turned me from it was the review of the 'Gothic', saying something like "now it's been performed lately, it can be put back on the shelf for another 40 years" and "I've never enjoyed a second-rate work so much". I could take genuine criticism of Brian, but damning with faint praise was just too much. I'm now happily subscribing to the IRR
I don't think that the wretched magazine actually cares anymore about losing readers like us :( It obviously still sells..........but to whom, I wonder ???
I still buy it: it's not all bad, although it's nowhere near as good as it used to be - a sign of the general dumbing down of culture in our day, I suppose. However, I do find it useful for information purposes and, after all, not everything gets reviewed in IRR, superior though that magazine is. Of course, if I were on a limited budget, it would have to be IRR...
Apologies: back to Bate!
The debate about 'Gramophone' is long-standing - which is not to say it is moribund, for it seems to occur each month coinciding with the publication date of the wretched magazine.
For good or ill I maintain a subscription - which is as yet uncancelled, but then I groan as it drops through the letterbox and I think to myself of the chore of flicking through its pages and probably becoming very irritated at most of its content.
So why not cancel that subscription? Good question, and I've no convincing answer. I suppose, like Alan, I see it as a source of information. All of us, save those who work within the music business, are pretty much in the same boat. Our only 'access' to the world outside us (including what is being performed, the scope and nature of a composer's works, information about composers we don't yet know about, and in general all the stuff that makes us buzz) is what we read about on our computer screens or in comics like 'Gramophone'. So I keep up with 'Gramophone' simply because I'm prone to nightmares about something I might otherwise miss.
And I sure don't appreciate Gramophone on account of the quality of its content. That is just plain dismal - and it seems to degenerate just a little bit further each month. I agree at least 120% with Dundonnell's final comment. Dumbing down seems to be the order of the day. The next bit might easily offend someone who earns their crust within a university, as indeed I did until a few years ago when I was able to get out. Peter Dickinson is certainly a respected academic (among all the other things he does). But sadly the passage quoted is just sheer tosh. I'm sure he would curl up in horror with a moment's reflection on what he'd actually written. Certainly within the 'humanities' (and I hope for all our sakes the same is not true of the natural sciences) much academic writing these days is just facile, semi-plagiarised, second rate, flibbertigibbet, pretentious rubbish that contributes not a jot towards any kind of enlightenment or real understanding, and it is just casually tossed out with the aim of showing that its author is 'right on', can talk the jargon, and maybe can make a useful contribution to improving a RAE rating. That rather harsh judgment has a global application.
Perhaps one little example might suffice. Couple of years ago permission was given to a fairly prominent American academic to go ahead with a hopefully definitive 'life, letters and works' project on my father-in-law. The academic in question is 'director' of a graduate school and has a list of publications longer than anything yet devised by Dundonnell. Besides articles with titles such as 'Rape and Buggery in the Modern English Novel' (heavens, I thought, has she actually read any modern English novels?) I also noticed she has published a number of books on 'conducting research in humanities', 'study skills for graduate students', 'completing doctoral projects' and so forth. A pretty nifty person in the academic world, one might think. However life over two years became more and more of a nightmare. Each day one, two and sometimes five e-mails would arrive asking about (generally) some perfectly clear cut issue or something that anyone with sense could determine for themselves.
One day in a fit of temper over one particular e-mail, I just replied "Work it out yourself. Do your own damned work. End of correspondence." The e-mail in question had read:
"Hi, who is this guy Harold MacMillan who keeps getting mentioned? Hope you can help (and quickly 'cos I'm wanting to move on). Thx."
Truly!!! The book was eventually published at the end of last year. In two vast great volumes priced at £80 per volume. By some university press in America of whom I'd never even heard. Imagine a total of 600 pages filled with the kind of garbage indistinguishable from that in the Reizenstein review. And its author admitted to me that she's got no interest at all in whether people actually read it. The important thing is to publish, to push up the ratings, and to make your work invulnerable to any kind of critical discussion by keeping it entirely bland and facile.
And there you have my view of much of the current academic world. Just had to express that grouch, and I'm conscious it is far away from 'Gramophone' and even further away from Stanley Bate and Franz Reizenstein.
Very interesting, Peter :) Maybe I should just keeping buying the wretched publication for the reasons given by Alan and yourself ??? :-\
Picking up however your point about Peter Dickinson and his comments on the Bate Piano Concerto, I was talking over dinner earlier this evening with a friend who ran the Music Department at a university before becoming a BBC music producer and finally the managing director of a BBC orchestra. He was equally shocked when I told him about the review but reminded me that Dickinson does have a very distinguished career as a writer on music and is now 78 years old.
To be charitable therefore I will go with your suggestion that this was a review which Dickinson himself will regret writing and is not a fair reflection of his quality as a writer on music.
Having on occasion had articles published in the Japan Times, I know how much one's original writing can get mangled, rewritten and then taken out of context, so it is possible that Dickinson didn't mean to sound quite how he comes across. Slashed and edited articles have a tendency to sound dismissive, precisely because all the caveats and softeners have gone. But the one person who cannot be exonerated from blame for the content is the magazine's editor.
I must admit I occasionally buy 'Gramophone', just because it is quite a different type of magazine from the IRR. The latter is entirely about reviews, whereas 'Gramophone' has longer articles about music in general. They are often patronising and full of facts that a three-year-old would know, but they can be interesting. This month I flicked through the pages and was not tempted to purchase, however.