|
Post by carol on Apr 11, 2006 0:43:18 GMT
Hi Qin players: This is the guzheng's version of ¾Æ¿ñ Jiu Kuang by Wang Zhongshan. I think he adopted from LXT's version. bbs.huain.com/attachment.php?aid=40207&checkid=3b2ee&download=1I like it personally, except it's a little too fast. I think it's more authentic compare to other guqin songs on guzheng, such as Guang Lin San and Mei Hua San Nong. Those two songs shouldn't be played on guzheng at all. I want to hear other Qin players' comments.
|
|
|
Post by sleepy on Apr 12, 2006 0:25:25 GMT
Hi Qin players: This is the guzheng's version of ¾Æ¿ñ Jiu Kuang by Wang Zhongshan. I think he adopted from LXT's version. A very faithful adaptation based on LXT's rendition of Ruan Ji's (210–263) Jiu Kuang. Almost too faithful that one can't help but compare the zheng version with that of the qin. If Wang Zhongshan was aiming at making a version that mimics the qin's then this is a very successful attempt. This leads to a question: does this level of "authenticity" kind of loose the point of transferring a composition from one instrument to another? Why mimic the original when you have the chance to "naturalize" the score for the new instrument? The tempo is fine, since this is a faithful adaptation, it's just as fast in LXT's version. I would say though, Wang's tempo lacks a bit variation on the whole. Again, if authenticity is the goal of adaptation, indeed, some zheng versions of Guangling and Meihua aren't that successful as a faithful adaptation. Those versions may not be written well enough for the zheng, but I wouldn't say Guangling and Meihua shouldn't be played on the zheng at all: Guangling San is all about the sentiments of an assassin, or a revolutionary; while Meihua glorifies certain "gentlemanly" qualities (jun zi—I don't know if there's an equivalent in English). Can these qualities be expressed on the zheng? But of course, all you need is a well recomposed score and a musically articulate performer. As I listened to John Thompson's rendition of Jiu Kuang, these words came to mind—German beer drinking song. Then should Qiu Kuang be played on the qin at all? Of course yes. Most of the time it's more to do with how a piece is played, not so much with what instrument it's played on.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on Apr 12, 2006 18:15:19 GMT
Can't get into the site. It says it's busy and so can't allow guests to enter...
BTW, you've got to distingush between triple-time JK and quadruple-time JK, coz they are different. And JK is about gentlemenly drinking, not the drinking you see in some parts of the city at 12 in the night...
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Apr 12, 2006 22:48:00 GMT
I don't think ANYBODY has topped Zhang Ziqian's playing of Jiu Kuang. It's just transcendent.
|
|
|
Post by carol on Apr 15, 2006 20:22:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Apr 15, 2006 22:16:42 GMT
This isn't based on LXT's version at all -- it's quite close to the original Yao Bingyan version. The giveaway is that while YBY (followed by Zhang Ziqian) keeps it in triplets throughout, the 'northern' version played by Wu Jinglue, LXT, and Wu Wenguang cuts one beat out to make it "3 + 3 + 2 + 3".
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on Apr 16, 2006 9:26:10 GMT
Heard it and I can say that it does follow LXT's version quite closely, except the last section, because he only plays it once then stops, missing the 《仙人åé…’è²ã€‹ bit at the end of the original score. And yes there was missed beat; which slighty threw me off my counting. EDIT: Rubbishy forum still won't let me enter CJK properly! Oh well, the CJK should say "xianren tu jiu sheng" [the sound of the immortal exhaling/spitting out the wine].
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Apr 16, 2006 14:46:54 GMT
I'm sorry, get a recording of YBY/ZZQ and compare. The zheng rests between the opening triplet sections, which the northern version doesn't do. Other phrases are distinctly YBY, including the descent after those initial triplets, and the phrase on the lowest strings.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on Apr 16, 2006 16:42:36 GMT
Aw yes, what I was meant to say was it follows YBY version, not LXT version mosre closely. got slightly mixed up with all these versions...
BTW, I play four-time JK nowadays, trying to dapu directly from SQMP. I find four-time much more pleasant to play. I also tryi to stick very closely to the original score (including prolonging some notes, etc). Rather nice. I will record it for my wiki article soon.
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Apr 16, 2006 17:33:25 GMT
I wonder if it's the triple-time that has made Jiu Kuang so popular. In fact, I think there are exactly two reasons for its popularity: 1. triplets = unusual/cool 2. since it's about drunkenness it seems to give the player license to go nuts and have fun, which is all too rare in qin music...
Of course the Emaciated Immortal says that this is not drunkenness as understood by base people, but high-minded tipsiness. I wonder if I should get 'high-mindedly tipsy' before I play it next...
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on Apr 17, 2006 11:59:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by carol on Apr 17, 2006 18:24:34 GMT
How do I open the .ogg file?
|
|
|
Post by davidmdahl on Apr 17, 2006 19:31:17 GMT
To play an ogg file, you will need a media program that can handle the format. I use WinAmp (www.winamp.com). It is another program to download, but at least it is free. Be sure to grab the Full (Pro not needed). The Lite version will not do it.
Best wishes,
David
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on Oct 18, 2006 16:53:11 GMT
I've been analysing different rhythms of Jiu Kuang recently. There are three types:
1. 6/8 time (really, it is compound duple time, not triple) 2. 6/8 5/8 time (LXT's version) 3. 4/4 (or 2/4) time
Actually, 6/8 sounds exactly the same as 3/4 (simple triple time) but I wonder why they don't transcribe it as 3/4 instead of 6/8 on the scores 've seen? Is it because of the grouping of the triplets is easier? To make it truly triple time in compound rhythm, you'll have to transcribe it as 9/8 (compound triple time) which sounds rather distinctive when I tried...
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Oct 18, 2006 20:23:24 GMT
My typology would go like this:
1. 4/4 or 2/4 time...this is the least common, and is usually seen as kind of a curiosity. John Thompson does this, I guess GY has done it in private performances, and...Charlie, you do it too, right?
2. The original Yao Bingyan rhythm, which Zhang Ziqian also does. (Here I have to say again that ZZQ's recording of JK is the most transcendent and dao-laden I've heard.) With * as an upbeat and "1" as strong beat defining the beginning of a rhythmic cell: [/li][li][12312312123][/li][li][123... So it's kind of "3+3+2+3+*"
3. The Beijing rhythm, played by WJL and his students and now quite common. [/li][li][1231231212][/li][li][123... So really it's a matter of there being one less beat in the Beijing version: "3+3+2+2+*"
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on Oct 18, 2006 20:55:17 GMT
Yep, I play 4/4 time JK, but I also switch between that and the other two versions (namely 6/8 and 6/8 5/8). And I'm also experimenting with 9/8 time. So in effect, I may end up with 4 different versions of JK up my sleeves!
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on Aug 31, 2007 4:35:58 GMT
Can someone please tell me again, what is the attraction of Jiu Kuang (in its original guqin version)? Personally I don't find it a very creative piece at all (I suspect this has to do with my western music-trained ears...), but I'd love to hear from someone who loves this piece and who would be prepared to defend it. BTW, what other fast (or fast-ish) pieces are there that you would recommend to a beginner (I am thinking of a piece whose tempo goes roughly at the same pace as Jiu Kuang).
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Aug 31, 2007 4:40:37 GMT
It is a very rare piece in historical qinpu and became popular only after Yao Bingyan set it to triple meter in the 1950s or 60s. I am pretty sure it became popular because it seems "fun", and offers the qin player a rare opportunity to play fast and rhythmically. It probably seems charming. What do you mean by "creative"?
The piece ITSELF, by which I mean "as written about in SQMP" is a serious affair. Don't let all the fast superficial renditions fool you: there is Dao in this piece. It lies not in "fun" or flash, but in buoyant simplicity. The best performances I have heard are by Yao Bingyan and Zhang Ziqian. ZZQ of course has a "magic touch" that makes any piece marvelous; it particularly works here.
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on Aug 31, 2007 4:56:23 GMT
Well what I meant was that if I was to listen out for the rhythm and the melodic structures of the piece, I wouldn't know that there is anything imaginative about the triple meter or the melodic contour etc. that the piece features. I've found it a bit like a technical excerise and that the end result sounded like a nursery ryhme at best whose naivety is disguised in the noble qin sound. I'd like my perception of the piece changed since this may well be my next piece. I can understand (or think I understand) what you are saying about the taoist charm, though, since there are many classic stories in Chinese taoism and buddhism that are associated with drunkenness and that are supposed to demonstrate aspects of taoist/buddhist philosophies. Unfortunately to me I think the association between this piece - or at least the effects it has on me - and taoism is a bit unfathomable.
Any other piece that shares rioughly the same tempo?
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Aug 31, 2007 6:02:37 GMT
Well first of all, triple meter is itself a novelty in traditional Chinese music. That's John Thompson's argument for why it is NOT appropriate for Jiu Kuang--which I could buy historically, but not artistically since it works so well. Melodically it is nothing remarkable. I would not consider it a technical exercise (since those don't really exist in traditional Chinese music either) but I can understand why it would sound like a nursery rhyme. Of course, to people of certain expectations, MOST Chinese music will sound like nursery rhymes, but that's a totally different conversation... I'm reminded of an earlier thread where I suggested that to understand the qin is to understand why extreme simplicity can be artistically paramount. One way the qin challenges us (all of us) is by forcing us to realize that more notes, more genres, more dynamic range, more expressiveness.......do not constitute better music. The qin forces us to consider that "better music" can also be made by making the notes as few as possible, the texture bland, the expression muted. The qin will also advance philosophical arguments to the effect that fewer notes and blander textures are *definitely* superior to most of the "real music" that we listen to. You can agree or disagree with these arguments, but it pays to try to understand them. You mention naivete as a bad thing. I will claim (for now) that naivete is a good thing, and that Jiu Kuang epitomizes it. Only the "noble qin sound" is WORTHY of this kind of naivete. Recall Laozi: "If people didn't laugh at it, it wouldn't be the Way." Zhuangzi is a big fan of stupidity too, though there may be various layers of quotation marks around " " " stupidity " " ". This might help: www.silkqin.com/02qnpu/07sqmp/sq10jk.htm
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on Aug 31, 2007 7:08:58 GMT
Well first of all, triple meter is itself a novelty in traditional Chinese music. That's John Thompson's argument for why it is NOT appropriate for Jiu Kuang--which I could buy historically, but not artistically since it works so well. Melodically it is nothing remarkable. I would not consider it a technical exercise (since those don't really exist in traditional Chinese music either) but I can understand why it would sound like a nursery rhyme. Of course, to people of certain expectations, MOST Chinese music will sound like nursery rhymes, but that's a totally different conversation... I'm reminded of an earlier thread where I suggested that to understand the qin is to understand why extreme simplicity can be artistically paramount. One way the qin challenges us (all of us) is by forcing us to realize that more notes, more genres, more dynamic range, more expressiveness.......do not constitute better music. The qin forces us to consider that "better music" can also be made by making the notes as few as possible, the texture bland, the expression muted. The qin will also advance philosophical arguments to the effect that fewer notes and blander textures are *definitely* superior to most of the "real music" that we listen to. You can agree or disagree with these arguments, but it pays to try to understand them. You mention naivete as a bad thing. I will claim (for now) that naivete is a good thing, and that Jiu Kuang epitomizes it. Only the "noble qin sound" is WORTHY of this kind of naivete. Recall Laozi: "If people didn't laugh at it, it wouldn't be the Way." Zhuangzi is a big fan of stupidity too, though there may be various layers of quotation marks around " " " stupidity " " ". This might help: www.silkqin.com/02qnpu/07sqmp/sq10jk.htm Well I think that's a very enlightening post; thanx SCW. Didn't you once do a recording of this piece? Or maybe it wasn't you... What other piece of a comprable tempo would you know there is out there in qin repertoire?
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Aug 31, 2007 12:18:34 GMT
Tempo is not the best way to classify Jiu Kuang. There are ultra-fast (LXT) and ultra-slow (GY) renditions, and everything in between. JK is most distinctive for its texture: it has lots of discrete notes, with drone and combinatoric patterns. There's no other qin piece I know of that has that distinctive texture, so there's really nothing comparable to it.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on Aug 31, 2007 17:12:57 GMT
I recall recently that Damon Albarn, when composing for his Monkey opera, said that he felt a purely pentatonic melody sounded like 'Chopsticks'.
And you say nursery rhymes like they are a 'bad thing'. Eva Wong said that Lie Zi is basically a book of Chinese nursery rhymes...
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on Aug 31, 2007 18:21:07 GMT
...which is funny because Chopsticks is not pentatonic. I wonder why everyone makes that comparison--it must be the title leading them on.
|
|
|
Post by dsouthwood on Sept 1, 2007 0:21:14 GMT
Does anyone have a transcription of Jiu Kuang by Wang Zhongshan? I would love to play that on the guzheng. Does the music exist in either Western or Simplified notation?
Dennis
|
|