Saturday, October 1, 2016

Once, Twice, Three Times a Concerto

Repeat post from almost two years ago

One of my favorite genres of classical music is the concerto.  A concerto is where you have an orchestra with a soloist in front of the orchestra.  For example, in a piano concerto you will have the orchestra with the pianist in front of the orchestra close to the conductor.  There have been concertos composed for all the instruments in the orchestra [I had to check to see if there has ever been a concerto for double bass and orchestra and there have been].

Piano Concerto aka Concerto for Piano and Orchestra
Although not as prevalent, you do have multiple concertos. double and triple concertos.  A double concerto would have two soloists in front the orchestra.  The soloists can involve two different instruments, like violin and cello, or two of the same instruments, like Mozart's double piano concerto #27.

Brahms Concerto for violin and cello - Ex. of Double Concerto
There are even less triple concertos, so when you find one like Beethoven's great Triple Concerto for Violin, Cello, Piano and Orchestra, it is indeed a treat.  To have three great soloists in front of a symphony orchestra in such a beautiful concerto is so wonderful to see and hear. 

The audience gets a special treat from the usual solo concerto where there is interplay between the soloist and orchestra.  In a triple concerto like the great Beethoven's, you not only have interplay between the orchestra and the three soloists, you also have interplay between the three soloists [violin, cello and piano].   So, it is almost like getting to hear a trio along with a concerto in the same piece.

Beethoven's Triple Concerto - For violin, cello, piano and orchestra
Another difference between a single concerto and a multiple concerto, in a usual concerto the soloist will be playing by memory without any sheet music in front of him [almost all the time].   But, and I am not sure if this is just tradition, in a double or triple concerto, the soloists will have the score in front of them just like the rest of the orchestra.  This is not to say the soloists haven't memorized the score just as the soloist in a concerto has.  I am sure they know it backwards and forwards. 

Beethoven's Triple Concerto is scored in the bright key of C Major. In the first movement, allegro, listen to the exciting climax, worthy of a climax in the final movement that would lead to a rousing ovation.  You may wonder then, why doesn't the crowd applaud at the end.  Because that exciting climax is just the end of the first movement and there are two more great movements to come before the piece is over - then applause will then rain down the concert hall. 

The second movement which begins at the 18:58 mark in the following video is a melodic romantic movement, largo.  There is no break between the second and third movement but a bridge that leads to the exciting third movement, rondo alla polacca, that begins at the 24:45 mark of the following video.

Please turn up the volume and listen to this awesome treat by Beethoven of his, not once, not twice, but his three times famous Triple Concerto in C Major. 

L.V. Beethoven: Concerto for Violin, Cello and Piano in C Major:

Thursday, September 29, 2016

Marco Rubio On Jose Fernandez And Cuban Americans

Hat Tip: to my friend from Littleton, Colorado, Cathy York who posted the following on Facebook:

"You don't need to be a baseball fan or a political junkie for this tribute to pull at your heartstrings.  You only need to be an American.
Senator Rubio is a gifted, eloquent speaker. We in the GOP could have had him as the GOP's nominee. I believe his efforts to trounce Hillary Clinton in the election would be all but over by now if he had been."

Thank you for posting this Cathy.  Oh, do I echo your comments about the great Senator Marco Rubio from Florida.  I call him the "great communicator 2". 

The Tales with the great communicator!

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Jim Geraghty - 'Stop Looking For Scapegoats, Trump Fans'

Along with Jonah Goldberg's G-File, one of my favorite newsletters I receive in my e-mail box is National Review Online's, Jim Geraghty's, "Morning Jolt".   Please read this post I did on his newsletter: "Morning Jolt - The Indispensable Newsletter"

gives a "morning jolt" in his newsletter
Tuesday's [Sept. 27] Morning Jolt, the day after the Hofstra U. presidential debate, Jim Geraghty had a really good Morning Jolt.  I really loved his first article that I agree with 100% entitled, "Stop Looking for Scapegoats, Trump Fans".

Here is the beginning of this article:
Donald Trump and his fans can complain about Never Trump and recalcitrant Republicans all they like. But last night, starting at 9 pm Eastern, in front of tens of millions of people, perhaps a hundred million viewers, nothing else mattered but the candidates. The ads, the surrogates, the rallies, the ground game — all of that fades away, and for an hour and a half, it’s just Trump, Hillary Clinton, and questions from Lester Holt. There are no other outside factors, no distractions. Winning the race is all on him, and it’s perhaps the single biggest moment of the campaign, his single best opportunity to lay out the case for himself and the case against Clinton.
If you’re a Trump fan, and you feel like he did a great job, then great, you have nothing to worry about. If you’re a Trump fan and feel he missed a lot of opportunities . . . that’s on him. That’s not the fault of Ben Sasse. That’s not the fault of Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney or anybody who’s refusing to support him.
There has been this inane argument that one or two senators, a couple of retired GOP figures, and some writers and bloggers and folks on Twitter are going to cost Trump the presidency by refusing to jump on the bandwagon. That’s nonsense. That’s scapegoat-shopping. We’ll see if last night’s debate changes the numbers in this race. It’s been enough of a topsy-turvy year where it’s quite possible Trump enjoys a surge; particularly for the first half-hour, he came across as a figure you could picture in the Oval Office. But there seems to be pretty broad consensus that she got a lot of attacks in, mentioned a lot of the unsavory or controversial parts of Trump’s record, and made him spend a lot of time on the defensive. He never got around to mentioning some of her weakest spots — the Clinton Foundation, allegations of favor-trading, Benghazi, her support for arming the rebels in Syria. He barely mentioned Libya. The word “e-mail” came up four times in ninety minutes.
This morning he’s blaming the microphone. Last night on CNN, Corey Lewandowski blamed Lester Holt. But the person who has more control over Donald Trump’s debate performance than anyone else is . . . Donald Trump. No one else can go up there and make his argument for him. If his fans are disappointed this morning, they should be disappointed with him. And if they’re mad, they should be mad at him.
To read the rest of this article and get all of Jim Geraghty's morning newsletters, I suggest you go to NRO and subscribe.


Monday, September 26, 2016

How The Presidential Race Stands On The Day Of The Debate

Using the data from Real Clear Politics, Nate Silver's 538, Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball and Maxim Lott and John Stossel's Election Betting Odds Site, the Tales will show how the presidential race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump stands today, Sept. 26, 2016 on the morning of the first presidential debate.  One week from today, on Monday Oct. 3, 2016 in the morning, I will show the change, if any, in the presidential race that should be evident after the debate results have solidified. 

Real Clear Politcs on Sept. 26, 2016 10:30AM:

Nate Silver's Five Thirty Eight [polls plus forecast]on Sept. 26, 2016 10:30AM:

Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball [Sept.19 Update] on Sept. 26, 2016:
 Election Betting Odds on Sept. 26, 2016 10:30 AM:

 Summary before debate [Sept. 26, 2016] data:

RCP:  Clinton 45.9-Trump 43.8=  Clinton +2.1%

538: odds of winning on Nov.8 =  Clinton 51.8 - Trump 48.2

Crystal Ball [electoral college] Dems 272-GOP 215 Toss Up-51

Election Betting Odds:  Clinton 61.5% - Trump 35.8%