Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/16/18 5:12 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 5:07 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 4:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 4:34 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 4:09:24 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 2:16 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:21:07 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 1/16/18 12:13 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 06:57:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:37:48 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:58:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

Never enjoyed watching a performance more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDiaRZy0Ak


===

Nice.Â* I understand that there are some people who can listen
to that
without thinking of Bo Derek.Â*Â* :-)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Yup, I'se one. I didn't know Bo Derek was in a movie named
'Bolero' until just now. I'm wondering
where I was in 1984 when that came out. (I looked it up on You
Tube.) Hell, I was right here working
at the Army Personnel Center. Too damn busy to go to the
movies, I reckon.


The "Bolaro" reference was originally from the movie "10".



Ravel was never on my favorites list, and he dropped even lower for
orchestrating and turning Modest Mussorgsky's lovely Pictures at an
Exhibition into a bombastic Herring piece.Â* :(

===

Here's some Ravel that may be subtle enough for your delicate
sensibilities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNlYMvFA5U


I'm familiar with Ravel's compositions. As far as I know, there is no
requirement that I like or prefer the music of all composers of
serious
music, or even all the compositions of composers I do prefer.

One of the more bizarre peculiarities of this newsgroup is the
"demand"
for group think. Must be all the military experience here, eh?



No one demanded that you like that version.Â* In fact, you took a
shot at John because he did like it, and you didn't.Â* Your own
version of demanding group think.Â* It was normal, and expected, that
you be an asshole about it, though.Â* Business as usual for you.

So true.Â* Harry has been like that for decades.Â* He has little
respect for what other people like or enjoy unless it happens to
shared by him,
which is very rare.

Most mentally stable people understand and accept that people have
different tastes and likes.



I stated I didn't like it. I don't give a **** whether you like it or
not. I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music.


Can you respect the fact that some find it enjoyable?Â*Â* Nope.Â* You
can't, because *you* don't like it.Â* That's the personality quirk that
is so consistent in you over the past 20 years.





Once again, I don't give a **** whether you (or anyone else) likes it or
not. I don't dislike it because Herring likes it.

Just Beautiful!
 

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

.....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929. Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet (two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was

Just Beautiful!
 

On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 6:22:53 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 5:12 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 5:07 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 4:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 4:34 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 4:09:24 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 2:16 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:21:07 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 1/16/18 12:13 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 06:57:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:37:48 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:58:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

Never enjoyed watching a performance more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDiaRZy0Ak


===

Nice.Â* I understand that there are some people who can listen
to that
without thinking of Bo Derek.Â*Â* :-)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Yup, I'se one. I didn't know Bo Derek was in a movie named
'Bolero' until just now. I'm wondering
where I was in 1984 when that came out. (I looked it up on You
Tube.) Hell, I was right here working
at the Army Personnel Center. Too damn busy to go to the
movies, I reckon.


The "Bolaro" reference was originally from the movie "10".



Ravel was never on my favorites list, and he dropped even lower for
orchestrating and turning Modest Mussorgsky's lovely Pictures at an
Exhibition into a bombastic Herring piece.Â* :(

===

Here's some Ravel that may be subtle enough for your delicate
sensibilities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNlYMvFA5U


I'm familiar with Ravel's compositions. As far as I know, there is no
requirement that I like or prefer the music of all composers of
serious
music, or even all the compositions of composers I do prefer.

One of the more bizarre peculiarities of this newsgroup is the
"demand"
for group think. Must be all the military experience here, eh?



No one demanded that you like that version.Â* In fact, you took a
shot at John because he did like it, and you didn't.Â* Your own
version of demanding group think.Â* It was normal, and expected, that
you be an asshole about it, though.Â* Business as usual for you.

So true.Â* Harry has been like that for decades.Â* He has little
respect for what other people like or enjoy unless it happens to
shared by him,
which is very rare.

Most mentally stable people understand and accept that people have
different tastes and likes.



I stated I didn't like it. I don't give a **** whether you like it or
not. I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music..


Can you respect the fact that some find it enjoyable?Â*Â* Nope.Â* You
can't, because *you* don't like it.Â* That's the personality quirk that
is so consistent in you over the past 20 years.





Once again, I don't give a **** whether you (or anyone else) likes it or
not. I don't dislike it because Herring likes it.

"I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music."

Yeah, John has nothing to do with it.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929. Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet (two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was


Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an orchestrated
dance piece.

Just Beautiful!
 

On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 8:36:27 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929. Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet (two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was


Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an orchestrated
dance piece.

As in all things life, things changed. "It is usually played as a purely orchestral work, only rarely being staged as a ballet."

In fact, "The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.. Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet (two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a version for two pianos, published in 1930."

Seems that although he may have started out in one direction, he ended up in another. It was, in the end, first published for piano.

Now go listen to some soft chamber music.

Just Beautiful!
 

On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:32:59 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 6:22:53 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 5:12 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 5:07 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 4:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 4:34 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 4:09:24 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 2:16 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:21:07 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 1/16/18 12:13 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 06:57:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:37:48 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:58:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

Never enjoyed watching a performance more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDiaRZy0Ak


===

Nice.* I understand that there are some people who can listen
to that
without thinking of Bo Derek.** :-)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Yup, I'se one. I didn't know Bo Derek was in a movie named
'Bolero' until just now. I'm wondering
where I was in 1984 when that came out. (I looked it up on You
Tube.) Hell, I was right here working
at the Army Personnel Center. Too damn busy to go to the
movies, I reckon.


The "Bolaro" reference was originally from the movie "10".



Ravel was never on my favorites list, and he dropped even lower for
orchestrating and turning Modest Mussorgsky's lovely Pictures at an
Exhibition into a bombastic Herring piece.* :(

===

Here's some Ravel that may be subtle enough for your delicate
sensibilities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNlYMvFA5U


I'm familiar with Ravel's compositions. As far as I know, there is no
requirement that I like or prefer the music of all composers of
serious
music, or even all the compositions of composers I do prefer.

One of the more bizarre peculiarities of this newsgroup is the
"demand"
for group think. Must be all the military experience here, eh?



No one demanded that you like that version.* In fact, you took a
shot at John because he did like it, and you didn't.* Your own
version of demanding group think.* It was normal, and expected, that
you be an asshole about it, though.* Business as usual for you.

So true.* Harry has been like that for decades.* He has little
respect for what other people like or enjoy unless it happens to
shared by him,
which is very rare.

Most mentally stable people understand and accept that people have
different tastes and likes.



I stated I didn't like it. I don't give a **** whether you like it or
not. I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music.


Can you respect the fact that some find it enjoyable?** Nope.* You
can't, because *you* don't like it.* That's the personality quirk that
is so consistent in you over the past 20 years.





Once again, I don't give a **** whether you (or anyone else) likes it or
not. I don't dislike it because Herring likes it.

"I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music."

Yeah, John has nothing to do with it.

He's having a hard time keeping his own bull**** straight.

Just Beautiful!
 

John H
- show quoted text -
He's having a hard time keeping his own bull**** straight.
.....

Next we’ll work on old Abe’s “of the people, by the people, and for the people...�. That’ll be interesting...

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet (two
people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a version for
two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation needed]
for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording session
was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted the
Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an orchestrated
dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano. Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/16/2018 9:21 PM, John H wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:32:59 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 6:22:53 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 5:12 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 5:07 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 4:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 4:34 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 4:09:24 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 2:16 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:21:07 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 1/16/18 12:13 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 06:57:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:37:48 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:58:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

Never enjoyed watching a performance more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDiaRZy0Ak


===

Nice.Â* I understand that there are some people who can listen
to that
without thinking of Bo Derek.Â*Â* :-)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Yup, I'se one. I didn't know Bo Derek was in a movie named
'Bolero' until just now. I'm wondering
where I was in 1984 when that came out. (I looked it up on You
Tube.) Hell, I was right here working
at the Army Personnel Center. Too damn busy to go to the
movies, I reckon.


The "Bolaro" reference was originally from the movie "10".



Ravel was never on my favorites list, and he dropped even lower for
orchestrating and turning Modest Mussorgsky's lovely Pictures at an
Exhibition into a bombastic Herring piece.Â* :(

===

Here's some Ravel that may be subtle enough for your delicate
sensibilities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNlYMvFA5U


I'm familiar with Ravel's compositions. As far as I know, there is no
requirement that I like or prefer the music of all composers of
serious
music, or even all the compositions of composers I do prefer.

One of the more bizarre peculiarities of this newsgroup is the
"demand"
for group think. Must be all the military experience here, eh?



No one demanded that you like that version.Â* In fact, you took a
shot at John because he did like it, and you didn't.Â* Your own
version of demanding group think.Â* It was normal, and expected, that
you be an asshole about it, though.Â* Business as usual for you.

So true.Â* Harry has been like that for decades.Â* He has little
respect for what other people like or enjoy unless it happens to
shared by him,
which is very rare.

Most mentally stable people understand and accept that people have
different tastes and likes.



I stated I didn't like it. I don't give a **** whether you like it or
not. I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music.


Can you respect the fact that some find it enjoyable?Â*Â* Nope.Â* You
can't, because *you* don't like it.Â* That's the personality quirk that
is so consistent in you over the past 20 years.





Once again, I don't give a **** whether you (or anyone else) likes it or
not. I don't dislike it because Herring likes it.

"I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music."

Yeah, John has nothing to do with it.

He's having a hard time keeping his own bull**** straight.



Take note of what he said:

"I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music."

He claims to be a master at using words, yet ..

Is it John's *taste* in music that Harry doesn't like or is it "overly
bombastic music" that he doesn't like?

Two different things.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/18 5:18 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 9:21 PM, John H wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:32:59 -0800 (PST), Its Me
wrote:

On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 6:22:53 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 5:12 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 5:07 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 4:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 4:34 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, January 16, 2018 at 4:09:24 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze
wrote:
On 1/16/18 2:16 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:21:07 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 1/16/18 12:13 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 06:57:39 -0500, John H

wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:37:48 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:58:39 -0500, John H

wrote:

Never enjoyed watching a performance more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDiaRZy0Ak


===

Nice.Â* I understand that there are some people who can listen
to that
without thinking of Bo Derek.Â*Â* :-)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Yup, I'se one. I didn't know Bo Derek was in a movie named
'Bolero' until just now. I'm wondering
where I was in 1984 when that came out. (I looked it up on You
Tube.) Hell, I was right here working
at the Army Personnel Center. Too damn busy to go to the
movies, I reckon.


The "Bolaro" reference was originally from the movie "10".



Ravel was never on my favorites list, and he dropped even
lower for
orchestrating and turning Modest Mussorgsky's lovely Pictures
at an
Exhibition into a bombastic Herring piece.Â* :(

===

Here's some Ravel that may be subtle enough for your delicate
sensibilities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYNlYMvFA5U


I'm familiar with Ravel's compositions. As far as I know, there
is no
requirement that I like or prefer the music of all composers of
serious
music, or even all the compositions of composers I do prefer.

One of the more bizarre peculiarities of this newsgroup is the
"demand"
for group think. Must be all the military experience here, eh?



No one demanded that you like that version.Â* In fact, you took a
shot at John because he did like it, and you didn't.Â* Your own
version of demanding group think.Â* It was normal, and expected,
that
you be an asshole about it, though.Â* Business as usual for you.

So true.Â* Harry has been like that for decades.Â* He has little
respect for what other people like or enjoy unless it happens to
shared by him,
which is very rare.

Most mentally stable people understand and accept that people have
different tastes and likes.



I stated I didn't like it. I don't give a **** whether you like it or
not. I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic
music.


Can you respect the fact that some find it enjoyable?Â*Â* Nope.Â* You
can't, because *you* don't like it.Â* That's the personality quirk that
is so consistent in you over the past 20 years.





Once again, I don't give a **** whether you (or anyone else) likes
it or
not. I don't dislike it because Herring likes it.

"I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music."

Yeah, John has nothing to do with it.

He's having a hard time keeping his own bull**** straight.



Take note of what he said:

"I don't like Herring's taste for overdone, overly bombastic music."

He claims to be a master at using words, yet ..

Is it John's *taste* in music that Harry doesn't like or is it "overly
bombastic music" that he doesn't like?

Two different things.



Oh, joy...

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/2018 6:40 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written
for piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Old one. But, let's get back to the subject at hand, huh? If a musical
score is *published" for piano, wasn't it written for piano?

Or maybe you just don't know. That's ok too. Admitting you don't know
is the first step towards recovery.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/18 6:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2018 6:40 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano.
There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like
any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel
conducted the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for
Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It
was written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written
for piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student
I knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Old one.Â* But, let's get back to the subject at hand, huh?Â* If a musical
score is *published" for piano, wasn't it written for piano?


Nope. In this case, it was written on a piano and published, but it was
written *for* an orchestra.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/2018 7:44 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 6:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2018 6:40 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano.
There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't
like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my
opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The
recording session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day,
Ravel conducted the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for
Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It
was written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written
for piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student
I knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he
would say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Old one.Â* But, let's get back to the subject at hand, huh?Â* If a
musical score is *published" for piano, wasn't it written for piano?


Nope. In this case, it was written on a piano and published, but it was
written *for* an orchestra.




Guess you missed "published *for* piano", huh?

I'll give you credit for consistency. Your progressive-liberal thought
process leaves you in a constant state of denial.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/18 7:50 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2018 7:44 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 6:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2018 6:40 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano.
There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't
like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and
for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my
opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in
1929. Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and
piano duet (two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself
arranged a version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The
recording session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day,
Ravel conducted the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for
Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It
was written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written
for piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering
student I knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering
school," he would say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Old one.Â* But, let's get back to the subject at hand, huh?Â* If a
musical score is *published" for piano, wasn't it written for piano?


Nope. In this case, it was written on a piano and published, but it
was written *for* an orchestra.




Guess you missed "published *for* piano",Â* huh?

I'll give you credit for consistency.Â* Your progressive-liberal thought
process leaves you in a constant state of denial.



This seems simple enough:

The Story Of Ravel's Boléro

Before he left for a triumphant tour of North America in January 1928,
Maurice Ravel had agreed to write a Spanish-flavoured ballet score for
his friend, the Russian dancer and actress Ida Rubinstein (1885-1960).

The idea was to create an orchestral transcription of Albeniz’s piano
suite Iberia. But on his return Ravel discovered that the orchestration
rights had been granted to the Spanish conductor Enrique Arbós. Although
Arbós generously gave up these rights, Ravel abandoned the idea and set
about preparing an original score.

Ravel had long toyed with the idea of building a composition from a
single theme which would grow simply through harmonic and instrumental
ingenuity. Boléro’s famous theme came to him on holiday in
Saint-Jean-de-Luz.

He was about to go for a swim when he called a friend over to the piano
and, playing the melody with one finger, asked: “Don’t you think that
has an insistent quality? I’m going to try to repeat it a number of
times without any development, gradually increasing the orchestra as
best I can.�

He began work in July. By Ravel’s standards the piece was completed
quickly, in five months – it had to be ready for Rubinstein to choreograph.

“Once the idea of using only one theme was discovered,� he asserted,
“any conservatory student could have done as well.�

The relentless snare-drum underpins the whole of the 15-minute work as
Ravel inexorably builds on the simple tune until, with a daring
modulation from C major to E major, he finally releases the pent-up
tension with a burst of fireworks.

Boléro was given its first performance at the Paris Opéra on November
20, 1928. The premiere was acclaimed by a shouting, stamping, cheering
audience in the midst of which a woman was heard screaming: “Au fou, au
fou!� (“The madman! The madman!�). When Ravel was told of this, he
reportedly replied: “That lady… she understood.�

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, he said: “I am particularly
desirous there should be no misunderstanding about this work. It
constitutes an experiment in a very special and limited direction and
should not be suspected of aiming at achieving other or more than it
actually does.�

Yet although Ravel considered Boléro one of his least important works,
it has always been his most popular.

https://is.gd/8pNwCq

Just Beautiful!
 

On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 05:13:20 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet (two
people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a version for
two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation needed]
for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording session
was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted the
Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...”

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an orchestrated
dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano. Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.

You seem to forget that Krause is omniscient. Therefore he knows what the composer was thinking
while composing.

Just Beautiful!
 

On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 07:56:21 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 1/17/18 7:50 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2018 7:44 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 6:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2018 6:40 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano.
There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't
like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and
for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my
opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in
1929. Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and
piano duet (two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself
arranged a version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The
recording session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day,
Ravel conducted the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for
Polydor.[8]...”

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It
was written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written
for piano.* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering
student I knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering
school," he would say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Old one.* But, let's get back to the subject at hand, huh?* If a
musical score is *published" for piano, wasn't it written for piano?


Nope. In this case, it was written on a piano and published, but it
was written *for* an orchestra.




Guess you missed "published *for* piano",* huh?

I'll give you credit for consistency.* Your progressive-liberal thought
process leaves you in a constant state of denial.



This seems simple enough:

The Story Of Ravel's Boléro

Before he left for a triumphant tour of North America in January 1928,
Maurice Ravel had agreed to write a Spanish-flavoured ballet score for
his friend, the Russian dancer and actress Ida Rubinstein (1885-1960).

The idea was to create an orchestral transcription of Albeniz’s piano
suite Iberia. But on his return Ravel discovered that the orchestration
rights had been granted to the Spanish conductor Enrique Arbós. Although
Arbós generously gave up these rights, Ravel abandoned the idea and set
about preparing an original score.

Ravel had long toyed with the idea of building a composition from a
single theme which would grow simply through harmonic and instrumental
ingenuity. Boléro’s famous theme came to him on holiday in
Saint-Jean-de-Luz.

He was about to go for a swim when he called a friend over to the piano
and, playing the melody with one finger, asked: “Don’t you think that
has an insistent quality? I’m going to try to repeat it a number of
times without any development, gradually increasing the orchestra as
best I can.”

He began work in July. By Ravel’s standards the piece was completed
quickly, in five months – it had to be ready for Rubinstein to choreograph.

“Once the idea of using only one theme was discovered,” he asserted,
“any conservatory student could have done as well.”

The relentless snare-drum underpins the whole of the 15-minute work as
Ravel inexorably builds on the simple tune until, with a daring
modulation from C major to E major, he finally releases the pent-up
tension with a burst of fireworks.

Boléro was given its first performance at the Paris Opéra on November
20, 1928. The premiere was acclaimed by a shouting, stamping, cheering
audience in the midst of which a woman was heard screaming: “Au fou, au
fou!” (“The madman! The madman!”). When Ravel was told of this, he
reportedly replied: “That lady… she understood.”

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, he said: “I am particularly
desirous there should be no misunderstanding about this work. It
constitutes an experiment in a very special and limited direction and
should not be suspected of aiming at achieving other or more than it
actually does.”

Yet although Ravel considered Boléro one of his least important works,
it has always been his most popular.

https://is.gd/8pNwCq

Gosh, all that research for a piece of music you don't like.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/2018 8:12 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 07:56:21 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 1/17/18 7:50 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2018 7:44 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 6:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/17/2018 6:40 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano.
There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't
like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and
for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my
opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in
1929. Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and
piano duet (two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself
arranged a version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The
recording session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day,
Ravel conducted the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for
Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It
was written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written
for piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering
student I knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering
school," he would say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Old one.Â* But, let's get back to the subject at hand, huh?Â* If a
musical score is *published" for piano, wasn't it written for piano?


Nope. In this case, it was written on a piano and published, but it
was written *for* an orchestra.




Guess you missed "published *for* piano",Â* huh?

I'll give you credit for consistency.Â* Your progressive-liberal thought
process leaves you in a constant state of denial.



This seems simple enough:

The Story Of Ravel's Boléro

Before he left for a triumphant tour of North America in January 1928,
Maurice Ravel had agreed to write a Spanish-flavoured ballet score for
his friend, the Russian dancer and actress Ida Rubinstein (1885-1960).

The idea was to create an orchestral transcription of Albeniz’s piano
suite Iberia. But on his return Ravel discovered that the orchestration
rights had been granted to the Spanish conductor Enrique Arbós. Although
Arbós generously gave up these rights, Ravel abandoned the idea and set
about preparing an original score.

Ravel had long toyed with the idea of building a composition from a
single theme which would grow simply through harmonic and instrumental
ingenuity. Boléro’s famous theme came to him on holiday in
Saint-Jean-de-Luz.

He was about to go for a swim when he called a friend over to the piano
and, playing the melody with one finger, asked: “Don’t you think that
has an insistent quality? I’m going to try to repeat it a number of
times without any development, gradually increasing the orchestra as
best I can.�

He began work in July. By Ravel’s standards the piece was completed
quickly, in five months – it had to be ready for Rubinstein to choreograph.

“Once the idea of using only one theme was discovered,� he asserted,
“any conservatory student could have done as well.�

The relentless snare-drum underpins the whole of the 15-minute work as
Ravel inexorably builds on the simple tune until, with a daring
modulation from C major to E major, he finally releases the pent-up
tension with a burst of fireworks.

Boléro was given its first performance at the Paris Opéra on November
20, 1928. The premiere was acclaimed by a shouting, stamping, cheering
audience in the midst of which a woman was heard screaming: “Au fou, au
fou!� (“The madman! The madman!�). When Ravel was told of this, he
reportedly replied: “That lady… she understood.�

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, he said: “I am particularly
desirous there should be no misunderstanding about this work. It
constitutes an experiment in a very special and limited direction and
should not be suspected of aiming at achieving other or more than it
actually does.�

Yet although Ravel considered Boléro one of his least important works,
it has always been his most popular.

https://is.gd/8pNwCq

Gosh, all that research for a piece of music you don't like.



That or is it because others happen to like it?

Just Beautiful!
 

Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet (two
people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a version for
two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation needed]
for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording session
was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted the
Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an orchestrated
dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano. Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.



Was Ravel a Republican? :)

Just Beautiful!
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Difference between Engineers and journalism students is Engineers have to
produce true, readable instructions.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/18 12:13 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Difference between Engineers and journalism students is Engineers have to
produce true, readable instructions.


Thank goodness you don't write instructions.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/16/2018 6:02 AM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:54:57 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 1/15/18 5:37 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:58:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

Never enjoyed watching a performance more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDiaRZy0Ak


===

Nice. I understand that there are some people who can listen to that
without thinking of Bo Derek. :-)


"There is no music in it," Ravel wrote. But it does build to an
overloud, schmaltzy climax, which is why, I assume, why Herring likes it.

Actually, I like the whole piece.


Would have been better if Jack Nicholson was conducting. :-)

Mikek

Just Beautiful!
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 12:13 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Difference between Engineers and journalism students is Engineers have to
produce true, readable instructions.


Thank goodness you don't write instructions.



I did, and did it very well.

Just Beautiful!
 

On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 12:39:42 -0600, amdx wrote:

On 1/16/2018 6:02 AM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:54:57 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 1/15/18 5:37 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:58:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

Never enjoyed watching a performance more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDiaRZy0Ak


===

Nice. I understand that there are some people who can listen to that
without thinking of Bo Derek. :-)


"There is no music in it," Ravel wrote. But it does build to an
overloud, schmaltzy climax, which is why, I assume, why Herring likes it.

Actually, I like the whole piece.


Would have been better if Jack Nicholson was conducting. :-)

Mikek


'Bout as scary! Did you read the comments below? There are some very funny ones there.

Just Beautiful!
 

On Wednesday, January 17, 2018 at 2:16:27 PM UTC-5, John H wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 12:39:42 -0600, amdx wrote:

On 1/16/2018 6:02 AM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:54:57 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 1/15/18 5:37 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:58:39 -0500, John H
wrote:

Never enjoyed watching a performance more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDiaRZy0Ak


===

Nice. I understand that there are some people who can listen to that
without thinking of Bo Derek. :-)


"There is no music in it," Ravel wrote. But it does build to an
overloud, schmaltzy climax, which is why, I assume, why Herring likes it.

Actually, I like the whole piece.


Would have been better if Jack Nicholson was conducting. :-)

Mikek


'Bout as scary! Did you read the comments below? There are some very funny ones there.

One of the best:
"You can't compose a song that has the same melody playing for over fifteen minutes and make it sound good"
Maurice Ravel: "Hold my beer."

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/18 1:47 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 12:13 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Difference between Engineers and journalism students is Engineers have to
produce true, readable instructions.


Thank goodness you don't write instructions.



I did, and did it very well.



Now that is funny.

Just Beautiful!
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 1:47 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 12:13 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Difference between Engineers and journalism students is Engineers have to
produce true, readable instructions.


Thank goodness you don't write instructions.



I did, and did it very well.



Now that is funny.


Not as funny as a jingle writer who is not nationally renown for speech
writing according to,google.

Just Beautiful!
 

On 1/17/18 8:01 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 1:47 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 12:13 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Difference between Engineers and journalism students is Engineers have to
produce true, readable instructions.


Thank goodness you don't write instructions.



I did, and did it very well.



Now that is funny.


Not as funny as a jingle writer who is not nationally renown for speech
writing according to,google.


I haven't written a jingle since 1974 or 1975, but they were fun to
write, "orchestrate," and produce.

Just Beautiful!
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 8:01 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 1:47 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 12:13 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...�

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.Â* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Difference between Engineers and journalism students is Engineers have to
produce true, readable instructions.


Thank goodness you don't write instructions.



I did, and did it very well.



Now that is funny.


Not as funny as a jingle writer who is not nationally renown for speech
writing according to,google.


I haven't written a jingle since 1974 or 1975, but they were fun to
write, "orchestrate," and produce.



They were probably bombastic orchestrations.

Just Beautiful!
 

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 06:09:09 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 8:01 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 1:47 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 12:13 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/17/18 5:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/16/2018 8:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/16/18 6:39 PM, Tim wrote:

4:05 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I know words aren't an area of expertise for you. You claimed Ravel
wrote Bolero for the piano. He did not. He wrote it on a piano. There's
a big difference there.

I never said I liked the "original" version of Bolero. I don't like any
versions of Ravel's Bolero. The work I like and referenced is
Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, which was written on and for
the piano. Ravel later orchestrated the piano work and, in my opinion,
turned it into something it was never meant to be.

Here is the most famous performance of Pictures, by the incredible
Russian pianist Sviatoslav Richter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNq3VMzqXqM

....


Harry, I see google isn’t your friend today...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boléro

“
The piece was first published by the Parisian firm Durand in 1929.
Arrangements of the piece were made for piano solo and piano duet
(two people playing at one piano), and Ravel himself arranged a
version for two pianos, published in 1930.

The first recording was made by Piero Coppolain Paris[citation
needed] for the Gramophone Company on 8 January 1930. The recording
session was attended by Ravel.[7] The following day, Ravel conducted
the Lamoureux Orchestra in his own recording for Polydor.[8]...”

According to this, Piano it was



Your wiki post doesn't mean the piece was written *for* piano. It was
written on a piano, but Ravel's intention was to produce an
orchestrated dance piece.

If a composer *publishes* a piece written for piano, it was written for
piano.* Your cognizant thinking is going to hell in a handbasket.


Uh-huh. Your language skills remind me of a funny engineering student I
knew in college. "Before I enrolled in engineering school," he would
say, "I couldn't spell engineer. Now I are one."

I don't know if that was original with him, though.


Difference between Engineers and journalism students is Engineers have to
produce true, readable instructions.


Thank goodness you don't write instructions.



I did, and did it very well.



Now that is funny.


Not as funny as a jingle writer who is not nationally renown for speech
writing according to,google.


I haven't written a jingle since 1974 or 1975, but they were fun to
write, "orchestrate," and produce.



They were probably bombastic orchestrations.

LOL!