It's taken a while {cough}, but I've actually started in earnest the preparatory work for a post looking at Comp. 136 (- which in turn is part of the groundwork for an analysis of Ensemble Montaigne (Bau 4) 2013, as most recently discussed last month).
Here's the thing: in getting into that, I also answered a couple of outstanding questions which I first put out there last year, and unfortunately the upshot is that I now have to explain a couple of instances where information formerly on Restructures* was wrong, and in at least one case, information on officially-released product on the Music & Arts label is wrong as well. Nitpicking, or worthwhile emendation..? Well, you be the judge ;-)
The cases in point are two of B's duo albums, both of which (naturally) include versions of 136: Duo (Leipzig) 1993 (with Ted Reichman) and Duets 1987 (with Gino Robair). Actually it was the latter which started this, what with its being the earlier release and (not coincidentally) the one which contains the first recorded version of 136 that I can find. The problem here is quite simple, and given that it mainly concerns a correction to a discography which technically no longer exists*, it really does fall into the category of nitpicking, but - look, I can't help it.
So, it was already established that Rastascan made a mistake with one of the titles on the original LP release; actually there were a couple of oddities regarding the '87 LP, which is credited rather eyebrow-raisingly to Gino Robair / Anthony Braxton, not the other way around; true, it was on Robair's label, but even so... anyway, the more significant issue with it was that the last track on Side A was listed as "Composition No. 134 (+96)". This was wrong, and it got corrected when Music & Arts put out the expanded version of the album on CD the following year: at that point, the title of (what was then) track six became Comp. 136 (+ 96), and to confirm it, the graphic title for 136 is displayed (albeit not the one for 96, but that will be explained in a later post). The album is also credited, as one would frankly expect, to Anthony Braxton / Gino Robair at this point.
This - some of it - was detailed on Restructures, back in the day (albeit the artist credit still followed the original LP). What was wrong was the track listing, or rather the precise running order: aware that tracks one and three on the CD were the previously-unreleased recordings, Jason G. allotted these their correct slots, but then reverted to the running order of the LP for the rest of the entry. In other words, it was listed thus:
1. Improvisation & Prelude (Robair / Braxton) [6:05]
2. Comp. 86 (Braxton) [12:03]
3. Frictious Singularity (Robair / Braxton) [8:19]
4. Ballad For The Children (Robair / Braxton) [3:11]
5. Comp. 136 (+ 96) (Braxton) [6:55]
6. Counting Song (Robair) [5:22]
7. Comp. 40 D (+ 96 + 108 B) (Braxton) [8:25]
8. Decline Of Reason (Robair) [4:08]
- which is not the correct order at all, from track four onwards. The entire programme was switched up for the CD release: Comp. 40d (...) is at 4, then "Ballad For The Children" at 5, Comp. 136 (+ 96) at 6, and "Decline Of Reason" at 7, with "Counting Song" bringing the album to a close**. OK, so you could (sort of) argue that the published listing represented the expanded version of the original release, and was thus "accurate in principle", but the fact is, it doesn't match any physical version of the album in the real world. It was, at best, a rather eccentric way of doing it.
That's it for that one, though: the titles and running order on the actual CD are fine, as far as this friendly experiencer can tell; and I can confirm that the graphic title for 136 - reproduced in miniature on the back cover, and blown up in the liner, and which depicts downhill skiers in the sun (on a hill the slope of which turns into one of B's familiar diagrams-with-numbers-and-letters) - is the same one which is reproduced pretty much everywhere else you'd expect to see it. So it's definitely that opus number, and not 134 as the vinyl had it; while I remember, the graphic title for 86 is correct also (albeit not reproduced in colour, as would ideally be the case): the reason for pointing that out will become clearer presently.
The album with Reichman is a little more problematic, inasmuch as the fault was both with the label and with Restructures (understandably, in this instance). This release only ever existed in one edition, on CD, and a rather bizarre feature of it is that the actual track listing per se does not appear anywhere on it; not on the back cover, not on the disc itself and not in the liners. Now, the back cover does list the tracks which are included, with their graphic titles (but read on) - however, it doesn't number these as such, and they are laid out in such a way that the running order is not exactly clear. Jason was doubtless giving us his best guess when he rendered it thus:
1. Comp. 101 (Braxton) [20:58]
2. Comp. 168 (Braxton) [11:07]
3. Comp. 136 (Braxton) [14:27]
4. Comp. 167 (Braxton) [12:39]
5. Comp. 86 (Braxton) [6:56]
- which is certainly one reasonable way of interpreting this:
- but not quite the right way, alas. He was only slightly out: Comps. 136 and 167 are transposed***. (This led to some confusion when I was researching 136, as will - again - be explained in a later post.)
The other issue is one which I first flagged up earlier this year: the diagram which relates to Comp. 86 in the above photo is not the same one which appears on the duo album with Robair, a problem which at the time I simply didn't have the energy to try and sort out. As detailed above, though, I have now established that the correct graphic, minus colouring, was used for the Robair duo; the one shown in the photo here is in fact the graphic title for Comp. 100. So is the track itself, which closes the Reichman duo, actually 100 rather than 86? I don't have an answer yet to that question, but it seems unlikely: 100 is a work for creative orchestra, and it would be quite out of character for B. to have used it in a duo setting - whilst 86 was specifically written as a duet#, even if it most often turns up as a collage piece. Hence, I will presume for the time being that the opus number is correct, and that it simply uses the wrong graphic title.
Have I just cleared some stuff up, then, or simply confused everyone further? Answers on a postcard... but for now, that's it, and the next post will (probably..!) be an attempted comparative analysis of Comp. 136, at long last.
* Anybody reading this presumably has access to the version of the discography as it appears on the Wayback Machine, but it still seems only appropriate to refer to Restructures in the past tense :(
** Also - and this really is such a micro-nitpick that even I didn't put it in when I posted this - the track times for "Ballad..." and "Counting Song" are wrong as well; again, this is because they are taken from the credits for the original vinyl (and must have been wrong there). The correct running order and timings can be found on the relevant Discogs page, even if nowhere else...
*** Again, the correct order is provided on Discogs.
# Comp. 86 is one of a set: FOUR DUET COMPOSITIONS (1978): Comp. 85-88
A set of four compositions for one woodwind instrument and string bass. Each piece is designed to establish a particular conceptual area for improvisation - both thematically and structurally. This material can also be linked together for performance in any combination desired. The score is written in concert pitch and can be executed by any wind instrument in any key. [This was also on Restructures, but of course it was sourced from the published Composition Notes.]
No comments:
Post a Comment