1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:13,710 [music: theme; Mozart, Symphony No. 24 (K 182), 2nd Mvt.; Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra of London/Leinsdorf] 2 00:00:13,710 --> 00:00:25,110 Hello there, I'm Peter Schickele, and this is Schickele Mix, a program dedicated to the proposition that all musics are created equal, or as Duke Ellington put it, if it sounds good, it is good. 3 00:00:25,860 --> 00:00:41,600 The bills for this cornucopia of good music are paid by the American Public Radio Program Fund, whose contributors include the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and also by this good radio station right here. 4 00:00:42,860 --> 00:00:45,540 Today's show is called Leave the Meter Running. 5 00:00:46,040 --> 00:00:49,360 Now meters, of course, measure. That's their job. 6 00:00:49,800 --> 00:00:56,800 Whether they're on a taxi, a gas line, or a yardstick, what meters do is divide something into equal units and count them. 7 00:00:57,720 --> 00:01:03,860 Back in Rossini's day, in the early 19th century, opera singers were so jealous of each other 8 00:01:03,860 --> 00:01:10,140 that one apparently came up to him once and complained that she had counted up the number of measures in her aria, 9 00:01:10,140 --> 00:01:21,060 and the number of measures in the tenor's aria, and the tenor's aria had more than hers. Rossini said we need to develop some kind of ariometer to handle such situations. 10 00:01:22,400 --> 00:01:33,720 Rhythmically speaking, music, at least the kinds we're dealing with today, is divided into measures, or bars, which are separated visually by vertical lines through the staff called bar lines. 11 00:01:34,460 --> 00:01:50,940 Bar lines are completely a matter of convenience. They make it easier to keep your place, especially when the rhythmic going gets tough. With very few exceptions, the music would sound the same without bar lines, and in fact they weren't used during the Renaissance, for instance. 12 00:01:51,780 --> 00:02:03,120 The meter of a piece is indicated by the time signature, which these days is shown by a pair of numbers written rather like a fraction, one number over the other, but without any line between them. 13 00:02:03,720 --> 00:02:10,480 The meter defines two things, the number of beats in a measure and the number of subdivisions within the beat. 14 00:02:11,540 --> 00:02:18,060 A good vernacular definition of beat is the unit that corresponds to how you'd tap your foot during a piece. 15 00:02:18,500 --> 00:02:26,700 In France, at the end of the 17th century, they would literally beat a stick on the floor to define the beat. 16 00:02:27,990 --> 00:02:30,430 This is a very fine sounding table. 17 00:02:30,430 --> 00:02:37,670 Now the beat can shift within a section, but something has to be constant for the notation to be of any value. 18 00:02:38,470 --> 00:02:41,810 Sometimes what's constant is too fast to tap your foot to. 19 00:02:42,190 --> 00:02:44,970 Here's a great piece that is interesting in this context. 20 00:02:45,590 --> 00:02:52,930 You can tap your foot throughout most of this work, but every once in a while the composer throws a curve, shifts the beat half a beat. 21 00:02:53,490 --> 00:02:59,610 It's really the half a beat that's constant here, and lets you tap away for a while again before he trips you up. 22 00:02:59,610 --> 00:03:04,550 But it's so much fun being tripped up by this guy of 23 00:03:04,550 --> 00:08:58,420 [music: Stravinsky, Symphony in Three Movements, 3rd Mvt.; Columbia Symphony Orchestra/ Stravinsky] 24 00:08:58,470 --> 00:09:16,240 Igor Stravinsky's Symphony in Three Movements, the composer conducting the Columbia Symphony Orchestra. There were several sections in that movement, as you heard, with different tempos. For instance, the obvious beat in the opening is that, 25 00:09:19,320 --> 00:09:21,880 but if you were to beat twice as fast 26 00:09:21,880 --> 00:09:26,000 You could tap throughout that section without being tripped. 27 00:09:26,650 --> 00:09:30,290 But the important thing is that the beat is a regular unit. 28 00:09:30,490 --> 00:09:35,390 It's a theoretical unit that keeps going no matter what the rhythms of the various parts 29 00:09:35,390 --> 00:09:35,730 are. 30 00:09:36,030 --> 00:09:37,650 The meter keeps ticking. 31 00:09:37,810 --> 00:09:40,010 It has to, otherwise it wouldn't be a meter. 32 00:09:40,880 --> 00:09:51,060 Okay now, Frère Jacques, Frère Jacques, Dormez-vous, Dormez-vous, Now the meter 33 00:09:51,060 --> 00:09:51,680 doesn't stop. 34 00:09:52,740 --> 00:10:11,080 The top notes for a while is a beat long, right? It corresponds with the beat. But when you get to vu, do-re-me-vu, do-re-me-vu, the beat doesn't stop the way I did it then. The beat keeps going. Do-re-me-vu, do-re-me-vu, which is how you know that that top note has two beats. 35 00:10:11,860 --> 00:10:39,780 There's a wonderful story, I don't know whether it's true or not, that when Martha Graham and Aaron Copland were working on Appalachian Spring, she said this next section is in a sort of a slow three, so Aaron Copland went home and wrote a bit of slow music in a triple meter, and he came back, and she said, oh no, no, that's all wrong, it's like this, one, two, three, one, two, three, 36 00:10:39,780 --> 00:11:06,400 3, 1, 2, 3. Well, she was turning the meter off and you can't do that. Now, one caveat if you're trying to tap your toe to a Chopin ballade. In terms of music notation, the beat is regular, but especially in classical music and cocktail piano, the performers often slow the beat down and speed it up, sometimes a lot. This is perfectly normal and nothing to be worried about. 37 00:11:07,140 --> 00:11:36,260 Now, in the third phrase of Frere Jacques, the melody divides the beat, two even notes per beat, but the third phrase of Row, Row, Row Your Boat, for instance, subdivides the beat into three even notes, merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, one two three, one two three, one two three, one two three, so that's a triple subdivision. I'm just mentioning subdivision for the sake of encyclopedic completeness. 38 00:11:36,260 --> 00:11:42,700 We're going to be concerned today with the other aspect of meter, the number of beats in a measure, and where the measure starts. 39 00:11:43,500 --> 00:11:46,600 So how do you figure out how many beats there are in a measure? 40 00:11:47,220 --> 00:11:51,960 Well, we could start with the oomph technique. Let's just start with a tune here. 41 00:11:51,960 --> 00:12:04,640 [music: keyboard demonstration, "Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star"] 42 00:12:04,690 --> 00:12:11,430 Oomphs are the first beat, or downbeat. That's my authentic instrument, by the way. This studio comes equipped with it. 43 00:12:12,090 --> 00:12:17,210 Not a copy. An original, early 1990s Casio Tone Bank. 44 00:12:17,530 --> 00:12:22,110 Now the oomphs are on the first beat or downbeat. Just go with the force. 45 00:12:22,560 --> 00:12:32,180 [music: keyboard demonstration, "Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star"] 46 00:12:32,290 --> 00:12:34,350 So Twinkle Twinkle was oomph. 47 00:12:39,600 --> 00:12:42,960 Or you could go oomph if you're a slower oomph-er. 48 00:12:44,260 --> 00:12:48,640 [music: keyboard demonstration, "Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star"] 49 00:12:48,640 --> 00:12:52,680 We're only concerned here with whether it's in a duple or a triple meter. 50 00:12:52,780 --> 00:12:57,220 I don't care if you want to notate Twinkle Twinkle Little Star in four, oomph, 51 00:12:57,220 --> 00:13:01,960 [music: keyboard demonstration, "Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star"] 52 00:13:03,840 --> 00:13:05,620 or in two, one, two. 53 00:13:08,500 --> 00:13:14,560 They're both duple meters, and composers are pretty much free to call that as they wish without seriously confusing anyone. 54 00:13:15,320 --> 00:13:23,280 But to try to notate Twinkle Twinkle Little Star in three would be so awkward as to merit the designation wrong. 55 00:13:23,660 --> 00:13:32,840 [music: keyboard demonstration, "Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star"] 56 00:13:33,180 --> 00:13:36,040 Actually, sounds pretty good, doesn't it? Very interesting. 57 00:13:36,280 --> 00:13:41,040 But that's because it sounds like what it is, two different meters superimposed. 58 00:13:41,040 --> 00:13:46,180 Writing Twinkle Twinkle Little Star in 3 beats per measure would not be helpful. 59 00:13:47,350 --> 00:13:50,150 But of course the oomph technique is intuitive. 60 00:13:50,630 --> 00:13:54,970 And since you're all sitting there with blue books, I feel as if I ought to tell you something to write down. 61 00:13:55,350 --> 00:13:58,970 Intuition is, after all, simply knowledge we didn't know we had. 62 00:13:59,110 --> 00:14:00,090 So what is that knowledge? 63 00:14:00,790 --> 00:14:04,250 Okay, one of the ways we figure out meter is by pattern. 64 00:14:04,890 --> 00:14:07,290 Sometimes the accompaniment gives you a pattern. 65 00:14:08,170 --> 00:14:23,000 In a waltz, one, two, three, one, the way the pattern repeats gives you a feeling of the meter. Or a polka, one, two, one, two, or one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one. 66 00:14:23,800 --> 00:14:38,000 But what if there's no accompaniment? Here's the beginning of the second movement of Beethoven's String Quartet Opus 59 Number 1. This unaccompanied phrase consists of nothing but one note played 15 times. 67 00:14:38,900 --> 00:14:42,600 [music excerpt: Beethoven, String Quartet, Opus. 59, No. 1, 2nd Mvt.; Amadeus Quartet] 68 00:14:42,700 --> 00:14:46,480 But the first four notes use a rhythmic pattern 69 00:14:47,800 --> 00:14:51,220 There's a pattern that is identical to that of the next four notes. 70 00:14:52,380 --> 00:14:55,000 So the pattern sets up the meter. 71 00:14:55,900 --> 00:15:00,680 [sung: Schickele hums the Beethoven quartet phrase] 72 00:15:02,000 --> 00:15:07,500 The fact that the last note is longer than the others helps too, but we'll get back to 73 00:15:07,500 --> 00:15:08,080 that in a minute. 74 00:15:08,620 --> 00:15:11,700 Then there's defining the meter by harmonic change. 75 00:15:11,700 --> 00:15:15,700 If I play even notes like this, you 76 00:15:19,450 --> 00:15:23,030 have no idea whether I mean them to be grouped in twos or threes. 77 00:15:23,490 --> 00:15:27,470 But if I change harmony every two beats, 78 00:15:27,470 --> 00:15:33,400 [music: keyboard demonstration] 79 00:15:33,450 --> 00:15:37,740 Then you know that it's in doo-wah-diddy time, technically known as duple meter. 80 00:15:38,400 --> 00:15:43,920 Here's a little suitelet, two pieces that use melodic pattern and harmonic change to define the meter. 81 00:15:44,220 --> 00:15:51,620 In the first one, the melodic pattern repeats every two beats and the harmony changes every four beats throughout most of the piece. 82 00:15:51,980 --> 00:16:01,860 In the second, the meter changes regularly, and the reason you know it is because of when the chords change and how the melodic pattern expands and contracts. 83 00:16:02,340 --> 00:16:03,640 See you in six minutes. 84 00:16:03,640 --> 00:17:55,800 [music: J. S. Bach, “The Well-Tempered Clavier,” 1st Prelude; Davitt Moroney] 85 00:17:59,080 --> 00:22:01,380 [music: Glass, "Are Years What?" (North Star); Philip Glass] 86 00:22:02,840 --> 00:22:11,340 First prelude from Johann Sebastian Bach's Well-Tempered Clavier, Book One. That was Davitt Moroney playing the clavecin. 87 00:22:12,470 --> 00:22:23,940 And then we heard from Philip Glass' album, North Star, a piece called Are Years What?, dedicated to Marianne Moore. 88 00:22:25,150 --> 00:22:32,590 And one of the interesting similarities between those two pieces is that in both cases the melodies are merely chord outlines. 89 00:22:33,870 --> 00:22:38,570 My name is Peter Schickele and the program is Schickele Mix on APR. 90 00:22:38,570 --> 00:22:48,220 Another way of defining rhythmic groups is by accenting the beginning of each group volumically. 91 00:22:48,520 --> 00:22:52,660 Don't try that word at home, kids. Simply play each downbeat louder. 92 00:22:53,120 --> 00:22:55,440 Here are 12 equal notes. 93 00:22:55,440 --> 00:23:03,400 [music: keyboard demonstration] 94 00:23:03,400 --> 00:23:07,070 I can present them as three groups of four. 95 00:23:11,610 --> 00:23:38,470 Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom Or four groups of three Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom Isn't this fun? Interestingly enough, volume accents, which is usually what you mean when you use the word accent, are used more often to confuse the meter than to define it. Here's part of a German dance by Schubert. 96 00:23:38,470 --> 00:23:46,570 It's in a triple meter, but he writes accents every two beats for several measures, just to kick up some dust. 97 00:23:46,570 --> 00:24:11,900 [music excerpt: Schubert arr. Webern, "German Dances"; Radio-Symphonie-Orchester Berlin/Bamert] 98 00:24:12,000 --> 00:24:34,520 But one of the most basic techniques for defining meter is one that doesn't get talked about much, at least not at the cocktail parties I go to. And that is the agogic accent. That's agogic, A-G-O-G-I-C. Sorry about the $10 word, folks. As you know, my policy ordinarily is to eschew fancy words. But in 99 00:24:34,520 --> 00:24:36,180 this case, I know of no substitute. 100 00:24:36,900 --> 00:24:42,220 An agogic accent simply means that a note is longer than the note immediately preceding 101 00:24:42,220 --> 00:24:42,400 it. 102 00:24:42,700 --> 00:24:44,960 Very simple, but very basic. 103 00:24:45,800 --> 00:24:48,500 Here's a beautiful example of agogic accents. 104 00:24:49,080 --> 00:24:54,280 The accompaniment is straight eighth notes on one chord for a long time, no help in defining 105 00:24:54,280 --> 00:24:54,700 the meter. 106 00:24:54,980 --> 00:25:00,540 But the melody starts with four equal notes and then a longer one, so you assume the longer 107 00:25:00,540 --> 00:25:03,940 one is the beginning of the second bar, and it's in 4-4 time. 108 00:25:03,940 --> 00:25:10,080 And you're right, because the next pair of bars also has shorter notes followed on the downbeat by a longer note. 109 00:25:10,900 --> 00:25:12,720 Agogic accents in action. 110 00:25:12,720 --> 00:25:41,440 [music excerpt: Beethoven, String Quartet, Opus. 59, No. 1, 1st Mvt.; Amadeus Quartet] 111 00:25:41,440 --> 00:25:43,940 Beethoven, Op. 59, No. 1 again. 112 00:25:44,460 --> 00:25:47,580 Now the long note doesn't literally have to be held out. 113 00:25:47,780 --> 00:25:55,700 A short note followed by rests, that is silence, has the effect, agogically wise speaking, of a long note. 114 00:25:55,700 --> 00:26:10,500 This little excerpt starts with four notes of equal length, but the fourth one is followed by rests, which makes it feel longer and therefore like the downbeat. And the oomph computer in our brain tells us it's in triple time. 115 00:26:13,340 --> 00:26:27,360 [music excerpt: P. D. Q. Bach, “Oedipus Tex,” Aria: “You murdered your father”; Dana Krueger/The Greater Hoople Area Off-Season Philharmonic/ Wayland] 116 00:26:27,980 --> 00:26:33,300 That was the beginning of Billie Jo Casta's aria from P. D. Q. Bach's Oedipus Tex. 117 00:26:33,300 --> 00:26:42,990 When it comes to determining the meter, nine times out of ten you can trust your oomph reflexes instead of consciously analyzing the music. 118 00:26:43,610 --> 00:26:48,810 It's sort of like how in Euclidean geometry you sometimes have to resort to superimposition. 119 00:26:49,090 --> 00:26:56,030 You know, look, just put triangle ABC on top of triangle DEF and they're identical, right? 120 00:26:56,390 --> 00:27:00,530 No, I can't prove it, but look, there's nothing sticking out, they're both the same. 121 00:27:00,600 --> 00:27:03,480 But you can't tell the meter if 122 00:27:03,480 --> 00:27:10,140 you can't find the beat, and one of the inexorable trends in certain kinds of music during the 19th 123 00:27:10,140 --> 00:27:16,220 and 20th centuries has been the disappearance of the beat. Check it out. In this number, you can 124 00:27:16,220 --> 00:27:21,680 feel the beat and the meter. The melody moves in equal notes and has repeated patterns some of 125 00:27:21,680 --> 00:27:28,700 the time, but it's so slow and the accompaniment is so wambly rhythmically, I love this piece by 126 00:27:28,700 --> 00:27:33,400 the way, that you almost have the feeling of floating without a beat. 127 00:27:33,470 --> 00:28:49,720 [music excerpt: Brahms, Clarinet Quintet in B minor, Op. 115, 2nd mvt.; Karl Leister, clarinet; Amadeus Quartet] 128 00:28:49,790 --> 00:29:02,750 The slow movement of the Brahms Clarinet Quintet, written towards the end of the 19th century. Now here's a piece actually written before the Brahms in which you cannot tell where the beat is for quite a while. 129 00:29:02,750 --> 00:31:00,250 [music excerpt: Wagner, Tristan und Isolde, Prelude to Act 1; Vienna Philharmonic, Karajan] 130 00:31:00,300 --> 00:31:03,870 Now you begin to feel a pulse. 131 00:31:27,100 --> 00:31:32,780 It's in a triple meter. You finally find out it's actually written in six, two times three, but it's a triple meter. 132 00:31:32,780 --> 00:31:48,940 Wagner, Prelude to Tristan and Isolde. It may be true that most people like music you can tap your foot to, but here's another very popular work without any feeling of beat or meter for a very long time. 133 00:31:49,500 --> 00:34:03,860 [music excerpt: Debussy, "Prelude a l’apres-midi d’un faune"; Saint Louis Symphony Orchestra/Slatkin] 134 00:34:04,890 --> 00:34:16,970 Finally there you get a very strong feeling of a triple meter because of that phrase repeated over and over again, three beats long. The Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun by Debussy. 135 00:34:17,910 --> 00:34:25,390 Well, one thing leads to another, and before you know it, you've got music with no sense of beat or meter at all. 136 00:34:25,600 --> 00:35:20,700 [music excerpt: Feldman, "The Viola In My Life"; Chamber ensemble/Feldman] 137 00:35:20,800 --> 00:35:26,970 The beginning of Morton Feldman's The Viola in My Life, written in 1970. 138 00:35:27,610 --> 00:35:32,130 The piece is conventionally notated, but only for the sake of convenience. 139 00:35:32,530 --> 00:35:40,110 That is, in order to define the lengths of the notes and the rests in a way that musicians can deal with. 140 00:35:40,110 --> 00:35:49,770 If this were an electronic piece done on a computer, one could simply define the lengths of notes in absolute terms, 3.76 seconds, etc. 141 00:35:50,570 --> 00:36:05,130 I've always felt that a conductor, when doing this kind of music, should make his or her beat-keeping motions as hidden from the audience as possible, since the beat has no kinetic function, no visceral function, only an accounting function. 142 00:36:05,130 --> 00:36:10,660 Most of this eroding of the feeling of a beat took place in slow music. 143 00:36:11,060 --> 00:36:15,740 When Wagner wrote the fast parts of Tristan, the beat is perfectly clear. 144 00:36:16,580 --> 00:36:20,840 But music doesn't have to be slow to be ambiguous metrically, that's for sure. 145 00:36:21,180 --> 00:36:25,620 Here's an up-tempo horn tune that's famously difficult to tap your toe to. 146 00:36:25,960 --> 00:36:29,440 Only at the end of the theme does the beat get spelled out. 147 00:36:30,040 --> 00:37:46,580 [music excerpt: Strauss, Till Eulenspiegels lustige Streiche; Staatskapelle Dresden, Blomstedt] 148 00:37:46,770 --> 00:38:00,550 Now we got a nice 1-2-3, 1-2-3, 1-2-3 kind of meter. You know, by this time, by the end of the 19th century, the beginning of the 20th century, definiteness is just not in. I mean, a Mozart symphony that begins 149 00:38:00,600 --> 00:38:02,700 [sung: Schickele sings the opening of a Mozart symphony] 150 00:38:02,730 --> 00:38:11,850 It's just too definite. Did you notice the Strauss piece, it begins as if it were in the middle. And both harmonically and formally, composers 151 00:38:11,850 --> 00:38:14,870 sought out the indefinite. 152 00:38:15,900 --> 00:38:19,240 Finally, here's some fast music written in 1974. 153 00:38:20,060 --> 00:38:24,480 The notation is exact, but the best musician in the world 154 00:38:24,480 --> 00:38:26,960 could not figure out the meter or meters. 155 00:38:27,940 --> 00:39:02,000 [music excerpt: Carter, Brass Quintet (1974); The American Brass Quintet] 156 00:39:02,180 --> 00:39:06,610 Elliott Carter's Brass Quintet. It's really electric, isn't it? 157 00:39:06,690 --> 00:39:09,250 It has a sort of a freaky jazz feel to it. 158 00:39:10,200 --> 00:39:15,180 Now we'll hear a work that not only changes meter several times, but also tempo. 159 00:39:15,180 --> 00:39:32,150 The two tempos are related in quite a complex way. Four notes in the faster tempo last the same amount of time as three notes in the slower tempo. This is another product of the 1970s. This piece was written somewhat later than the Carter. 160 00:39:32,550 --> 00:39:34,970 One, two, three, four. 161 00:39:34,970 --> 00:43:29,000 [music: Bynum/Bowling, "Lucille" (Ol' Waylon); Waylon Jennings] 162 00:43:29,040 --> 00:43:50,180 Waylon Jennings, singing that monument to metrical complexity, Lucille. Not the other Lucille. "Lucille, you don't do your daddy's will." But this Lucille. And the guy saying these words is Peter Schickele on a program called Schickele Mix on APR. 163 00:43:50,180 --> 00:44:19,900 Well, the clock up there on the wall is one meter that never stops. But we do have a hunk of time left, and I've said all I'm gonna say about beats, so let's go back to accents. I don't mean agogic, I mean the regular garden-variety accents where you play certain notes louder than their neighbors. I mentioned before that they're most often used to contradict the meter rather than define or corroborate it. Here's one of the most famous uses of irregular accents. 164 00:44:21,200 --> 00:44:38,480 [music excerpt: Stravinsky, "The Rite of Spring"; Orchestre Symphonique de Montreal/Dutoit] 165 00:44:38,780 --> 00:45:07,300 Uncle Igor, The Rite of Spring. Now I'd like to go out with a couple of interesting uses of accent. One of the many differences between a piano and a harpsichord is that if you hit a piano key harder, you get a louder note. But with a harpsichord, that's not true. No matter how strongly or weakly you strike the key, the note will sound the same. You can hit that sucker with a sledgehammer, it won't be any louder. The same is true of an 166 00:45:07,300 --> 00:45:12,700 organ, so what you have to do if you want something louder is to add more simultaneous notes. 167 00:45:13,650 --> 00:45:21,070 On the harpsichord, a chord with eight strings sounding will automatically be louder than a chord with three strings sounding. It's that simple. 168 00:45:22,140 --> 00:45:32,060 In our last suitelet, notice how the harpsichord piece starts out with just a two-part texture, right hand and left hand, each playing lines with just one note at a time. 169 00:45:32,060 --> 00:45:39,360 And then after a bit of a pause, it suddenly gets louder because the left hand starts playing thick chords with lots of notes in them. 170 00:45:40,060 --> 00:45:52,560 The second and last number of this suitelet features an unusually great contrast between the accented notes, which are quite loud, and the unaccented ones, some of which you can hardly hear at all. 171 00:45:53,180 --> 00:45:55,280 I'll be back in a few. 172 00:45:55,280 --> 00:50:23,960 [music: Scarlatti, Sonata (K 209); Scott Ross] 173 00:50:25,840 --> 00:53:59,800 [music: Ellington/James/Hodges, "I’m Beginning To See the Light"; Gerry Mulligan Quartet with Chet Baker] 174 00:53:59,900 --> 00:54:04,140 That suitelet could perhaps be called "The Loud and Soft of It." 175 00:54:04,140 --> 00:54:13,580 The first number was Domenico Scarlatti's Sonata K. 209 in A, played by Scott Ross. 176 00:54:14,420 --> 00:54:22,480 Scott Ross has recorded all of the Scarlatti harpsichord sonatas. We're talking about, I think it's over 600 sonatas. 177 00:54:22,800 --> 00:54:28,080 And it's quite an addition too, because he's got a booklet there that not only has a little comment on each sonata, 178 00:54:28,620 --> 00:54:32,220 but prints out the first few bars of each sonata, the music. 179 00:54:32,220 --> 00:55:01,850 And let me tell you, that is wonderful, because when you're talking about over 600 sonatas, it's not like symphonies. I mean, even if you know the key, that's not much of a help. Hey, it's in D major, great, there's 300 sonatas in D major. It's a wonderful idea, I'm glad somebody did it. And then we had Gerry Mulligan and Chet Baker, the old quartet from the early 50s, doing I'm Beginning to See the Light. Here's a nice little thing in duple meter. That's 180 00:55:01,850 --> 00:55:15,840 [music: theme; Mozart, Symphony No. 24 (K 182), 2nd Mvt.; Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra of London/Leinsdorf] 181 00:55:15,840 --> 00:55:17,160 Schickele Mix for this week 182 00:55:17,160 --> 00:55:33,000 Our program is made possible with funds provided by the American Public Radio Program Fund, whose contributors include the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and also by this radio station and its members. 183 00:55:33,900 --> 00:55:44,560 We'll tell you in a moment how you can get an official playlist of all the music on today's program with record numbers and everything. Just refer to the program number. This is program number 44. 184 00:55:45,930 --> 00:55:56,070 And this is Peter Schickele saying goodbye and reminding you that it don't mean a thing if it ain't got that certain je ne sais quoi. You're looking good. See you next week.