Sam Rivers - Colours

“There is a fascinating little museum in the section of Manhattan known as Soho - the Museum of Holography. Don’t ask me how it works, but what this museum exhibits is realistic three-dimensional images and artworks that seemingly just float on thin air. Just like those cheap old science fiction movies - you see something sitting there as large as life, yet when you try to grab it, all you come up with is nothing. And to make matters worse, for somebody like me who is still amazed that a wireless radio can actually make music, the images can -move-. They tell me that holography is a thing that will be quite common in the future - you might telephone your Aunt Martha and end up with a full-sized, life-like Aunt Martha sitting in your living room.

“Now you might think I’m setting you up for one of those liner-note writer’s analogies - holography is modern and fresh, as is Sam Rivers: holography is based on simple and traditional methods, as is the music of Sam Rivers; holography is mind-boggling, as is Sam Rivers. Well, you’re right, in a way, but what brings to mind that Soho museum in conjunction with Samuel Carthorne Rivers is much more obvious: you can enter that museum, lay down your money, and leave with your very own holograph of Sam Rivers working out on the soprano saxophone. You have a choice of sizes and prices (I, cheapskate that I am, bought a teeny-weeny one), but there it is - a Sam Rivers holograph for your very own.

“Okay, what’s the point? The point is: if there’s something that is advancing art, that is new and unique, it shouldn’t be surprising to find Sam Rivers somehow involved in it.

“There is no end to the facets that make up Sam Rivers and this recording of his Wind of Manhattan ensemble adds yet another new dimension to his recorded œuvres: an entire herd of smoking reeds and woodwinds.

“About the music contained herein, Sam Rivers says, ‘When I had my studio (Studio Rivbea), one of the reasons I had it was because I had all this music and I needed a place to rehearse it and perform it. I had most of this music then, and a lot of musicians played it. I’d say I wrote most of this - about 1973, or veven earlier. And some of the members of the World Saxophone Quartet - Hamiet Bluiett and Julius Hemphill - were part of the group that played that music then. I want people to know that this music has been around for some time and no one’s heard it for lack of record exposure.

“I tell Sam that the music here reminds me, at times, of a pipe organ or calliope. He says, ‘I noticed that. The closeness of the sounds of the instruments does make it sound like that. I was surprised at some of the things that happened on it - it wasn’t altogether experimental, but there were some things that I didn’t think would work when I wrote them, because of my knowledge, earlier in my career, of so-called traditional harmonies. But then I did them anyway, and they really work. A lot of the things that I was always taught weren’t correct for arranging - like the clusters with the same timbre instrument - were not supposed to happen at all. But they do, they sound very good. And there are times when these things sound like trumpets and trombones. All these things surprised me.’

“I ask Sam why there isn’t any soloing on the album, and he explains, ‘These are all very long pieces with the improvising. I wanted to get the music in rather than the improvising and that’s why I took that out. I knew that each composition would fit on an album itself. It didn’t matter to me because I know that I’ve got too much music to get it all recorded, so I can afford to be extravagant. And I did have some good soloists. I know they’re going to be quite perturbed that I took out all the solos.’

“What we are left with is high-caloric music with Sam Rivers’ typical intensity and brilliance. There are rave-ups of counterpoint; joyous, sassy honking and testifying; and bright bouquets of lushness. When you hear writing of this calibre for a reed section, only one name comes to mind and Sam Rivers acknowledges, ‘Duke Ellington is my role model.’ It is clear to see.

“About the specific music on the album, Sam Rivers only wants to point out that ‘Colours’ is a completely written piece - 136 dense bars and every one of them is notated. I’ll also add that ‘Lilacs’ is part of a 24 song suite, ‘The Flower Suite’.

“‘I consider myself to be a pretty rounded musician in all styles,’ says Sam Rivers. ‘Just not ‘free’, which is what I’m -known- for. That’s pretty much the latest part of my thing. There’s no such thing as having music without chords or harmony. Even though you say you’re playing ‘free’, if you put that stuff down, you can put the chords right with it, whether the player knows he’s doing it or not. That’s the point.’

“The point here is that Winds of Manhattan adds another dimension to an immensely talented, determinedly individualistic musician. Sam Rivers is a force in contemporary music. There ain’t no moss on Sam Rivers. And, for yet another dimension, set up your Sam Rivers holograph before you put this album on.

“The future, here we come!!” (Lee Jeske. From the liner notes.)

A1. Lilacs

A2. Colours

A3. Spiral

B1. Matrix

B2. Revival

B3. Blossoms

mp3/192kbps

Christoph Willibald Gluck - Alceste

"Among the works for the stage written by Gluck in the 5 years between 1774 and 1779 for Paris, are not only original compositions but also new arrangements of old works. To these belong 'Orphée et Euridice' (August 1774), the two comic operas 'L'arbre enchanté' (February 1775) and 'Cythère assiégée' (August 1775) as well as the last work in the series 'Alceste' (April 1776). The changes effected in these works vary in nature and extent. The older and new version of the two comic operas are both based on French texts but in the case of 'L'Orphée et Euridice' and 'Alceste' the language problem is important and pregnant with consequences. Both these music dramas were originally composed to Italian texts by Calzabigi but in the Paris adaption French was naturally substituted for Italian which led necessarily to changes in the declamation and the melodic treatment. But the contrast between the two versions is not confined to such details. There is a greater formal variety and a more refined or at least altered tonal structure. The Vienna (Italian) and Paris (French) versions of 'Alceste' are related or identical only on the most basic level and in certain details; as artistic wholes they are independent phenomena.

"The adaption of the Italian libretto into French is the work of a man of letters called Le Blanc du Roullet (1716-1786), of aristocratic Norman ancestry, bailiff and knight of the order of Malta, who came to Vienna in about 1770, apparently as a secretary at the French embassy, and in the following years, working closely with Gluck, wrote the text for 'Iphigénie en Aulide' and helped Gluck realize his Parisian ambitions culminating in the acceptance and performance of the 'Iphigénie en Aulide' (1773/74) by the Académie royale, which led to him being considered tiresome and overbearing by Gluck's other friends and members of the institute (especially Francœur).

"Particularly significant for the new version of the text was Gluck's meeting with J.J. Rousseau in 1774, apparently in the period before the premiere of 'Iphigénie'. Gluck asked this enthusiastic admirer for an opinion on the Italian 'Alceste' which Rousseau was reluctant to give. Finally, however, he consented because 'Mr. Gluck was so insistent that I could not refuse him this kindness'. Evidently Gluck wished to profit from Rousseau's criticisms for the new version of the work. It would appear that he did in fact do so for Rousseau it was, as he himself later confirmed, who inspired the fundamental alteration in Act 2, the transfer of the court feast from the middle to the beginning of the act. It is however, probable that Gluck only began to compose the music for the French 'Alceste' on his return to Vienna at the end of March 1775. The first mention of it is in a letter to a Parisian friend and patron the Abbé François Arnaud dated 12 May 1775 in which there is a brief reference to 'Alceste'. One of the most important written documents on this subject is Gluck's letter of 1 July 1775 to du Roullet, a 'letter in 3 acts' as he jokingly describes it. Act I is concerned with the correct production of the second version of 'Cythère assiégée' of 1775, which in his view, was not being properly done in Paris. In Act 2 he speaks of a buffo libretto by an unnamed author which he had been offered, mentioned also in later letters but finally not accepted. Act 3 finally deals with 'Alceste' with unusual thoroughness. Gluck mentions in particular the dance interlude at the beginning of Act 2 which must not become too long as it is neither a solo nor a pas de deux. He wanted the views of his librettist about this. He then goes on to speak of the much discussed Act 3. Gluck does not consider the solution sent to him by du Roullet a satisfactory one, it being more suitable for an opera by Chabanon, Marmontel etc. but not for a 'masterpiece' 'Alceste'. The nature of du Roullet's finale may be inferred from Gluck's words: 'What the devil do you think Apollo is doing here with the arts, they are in their place with him on Mount Parnassus, here they interfere too much with the story.' In place of du Roullet's final apotheosis in the style of traditional French opera Gluck outlines a different solution which came to him in a 'flash' and which he considers 'infinitely better' than du Roullet's and - with disarming flattery - which 'would be a fitting crown to the beauty of your work'.

"Gluck's plan for the end of Act 3 formed the basis for further work on this difficult section of the opera which was given its premiere on 23 April 1776 in a version not substantially different from this one. Gluck also gives some indications about the performing length of the work at this stage. Act 1 takes 40 minutes and Act 3 until the arrival of Apollo takes 20 minutes so that 'Alceste' can never be a 'winter season opera'. 'Fortunately' he hastens to add. Meanwhile the final form of the work appears to have expanded. Gluck's words expressing his wish to have only a chaconne as ballet finale are very remarkable indeed. The conventional ballet finale is out of place even in 'Iphigénie en Aulide' and here ('Alceste') 'even more so'. Gluck was at that time waging a tenacious war against the French custom of following the close of an opera with a lengthy ballet. Even when writing to Franz Kruthoffer in Paris on 30 May 1775 about the opera-ballet 'Cythère assiégée' which was to be published and performed simultaneously, he expressed no wish for a final divertissement, regarding it as a 'hors d'œuvre'. In a further letter to Kruthoffer on 31 July 1775 he confirms this view and adds on a threatening note, 'What is more in future in my operas I will write no more ballet music apart from that which is part of the action and if people do not like it I will write no more operas as I have no wish to be reproached in all the papers that my ballets are weak, mediocre etc. The lousy curs will have no more of them from me and my operas will always finish with the words.' The ultimate finale of 'Alceste', however, showed that Gluck was not able to impose his will on Paris.

"Finally it may be said that Gluck's letter illuminates his relationship with this work and his view of the basic material. 'I myself go almost mad when I go through it. The nervous tension it generates lasts for too long and one is gripped by it from the first word to the last.' He compares the work a barrel of frozen wine 'of which the essence has collected in the centre, it is really delicious but too substantial to be drunk in any quantity. Woe to the poet or musician who would undertake another work of the same kind.' Gluck returns again and again to the physically overpowering nature of the material and looks forward to finishing it and having it performed soon. 'Believe me this kind of opera is very wearing', he exclaims and he is no beginning to understand why Quinault and Calzabigi introduce so many subsidiary personages who give the spectator an opportunity to relax. A work like 'Alceste', however, 'is not an amusement but a serious matter'.

"Work on 'Alceste' was once more under way and Gluck is already thinking of publishing. On 29 November he wrote to Franz Kruthoffer: 'I will shortly be sending you something of Alceste which I am thinking of having produced after Easter. Would you therefore sound Mr. Peters (to whom my compliments) to see whether he would like to have it. He is so honest that I would like to give him preference.' At the end of the month, however, he must have received an anxious 'Alceste' letter from du Roullet because in his letter of 2 December to his Parisian friend Gluck mentions new problems which must have been raised by du Roullet in the meantime. This letter, like the one dated 1 July, throws a very important light on Gluck's views. Half reluctantly half encouragingly he exclaims, 'When are you going to stop worrying about 'Alceste', do you want to become pale and thin as at the time of 'Iphigénie'?'. In a remarkable passage he then attempts to convince du Roullet that the working out of the 'Alceste' story, which is the main problem, is not as difficult as the latter believes if Gluck's plan is followed. The main ideas in the letter may be summarised as follows above all du Roullet must remember that he is writing for the opera and not a tragedy for actors. Thus the rules which bound Voltaire and Racine do not apply to him. On this subject Gluck writes the following significant words, 'Sometimes one must disregard rules, and create one's own so as to derive effective results from them'. He adds almost self-consciously revolutionary words, pointing out that 'the ancient Greeks' were men 'with a nose and two eyes like us' and we don't always have to submit to their rules. On the contrary 'we must rise above' their rules and 'break the chains' with which they would bind us and 'try to become originators ourselves'.

Gluck then continues on the subject of the two projects, his own and that of du Roullet, between which the final form of Act 3 is to be decided. First he humorously disarms the objection made by du Roullet to his own plan on the ground that, if used it would deprive the librettist of the authorship of the third act. Furthermore, he adds, du Roullet's project would turn the work into a 'reversed pyramid'. The opera begins with the choirs taking part in the action which in the first two acts is carried forward mainly by them. This means that the people are spontaneously participating and do not wish to lose their King and Queen. In Act 3, however, the choirs are no longer present. The drama, however, so Gluck insists, 'cannot end before these poor people are consoled' and he is not convinced by du Roullet's point that Apollo causes the royal pair to reappear. That is a 'hors d'œuvre' and 'dragged in by the skin of its teeth'. Moreover, Apollo appears in the guise of magician for a second time: after the change of scene from the wood of death to a splendid square it is Apollo who transports the people there by 'magic'. Furthermore the choir starts to sing suddenly 'without having been gradually prepared for its happiness'. In Gluck's sketch, however, 'everything follows on naturally without any need for miracles and the piece finishes with pomp and grandeur as it began without recourse to special effect.' Gluck adds that it is not for musical reasons that he urges the adoption of this version, for the music is here a side issue and very short anyway, but because, after repeated readings of the text, he remains unconvinced of the naturalness and good effect of du Roullet's plan. In a happy mixture of irony, courtesy, and insistence he concludes by saying that if du Roullet's mind is not set at rest by all this, then he Gluck, on his arrival in Paris would undertake to convince him - or failing that - be convinced by him. Finally he says that now he must think only of 'Alceste' so as to finish the first two acts before the departure of the courier at the beginning of January.

"At the end of the year the two first acts were ready to be despatched. In one of his last letters written to François Arnaud (31 January 1776) before his departure for Paris, Gluck again briefly outlined the 'Alceste' problem, expressing considerable doubt about the form of the third act and the solution of the drama. Although the whole is now 'smoother' than in the Italian version and, if he succeeds in inspiring choir and soloists, 'you will have a sensational work which will put you out of patience with others', on the other hand he confesses that he is not happy with the solution of Act 3. 'The opera will be like a beautiful portrait with withered hands' by which he probably means that Alcestis' awakening does not flow logically from the action and thus puts a strain on dramatic cohesion. Du Roullet too, he continues, said correctly that the action is over with the death of Alcestis. On the other hand one must consider, he said, that Euripides, no novice in theatrical matters, introduces Hercules who brings Alcestis back to life and to her husband, thus avoiding choking the life out of the piece with too many rules. This is the first time that Hercules is mentioned in the discussions concerning 'Alceste' and significantly it is by Gluck himself. Possibly is was he who, a quarter of a year later, decided to introduce the figure of Hercules.

"Gluck set out in this third and shortest Paris journey before the middle of February 1776. He arrived in Paris at the beginning of March and his first care was to complete Act 3. Together with du Roullet he must have accomplished this in a few days as the libretto was passed by the censor and ready for printing on March 19th. As stated on the title page of the printed text the premiere had been fixed for Tuesday, 16 April 1776. However, probably due to the Easter holidays, there was insufficient rehearsal time and the performance was postponed for 8 days until Tuesday, 23 April. This change could not be included in the libretto already in print. On 20 April the 'Mémoires secrets' mention th announcement of the opera and describe it as 'sad, lugubrious, horrifying'. It is mentioned again on 23 April, the day of the premiere, referring to the announcement of the libretto, noted with a certain reserve. It remains to be seen, thus significantly, whether the French musical public will be of the same opinion. The general view after rehearsals was that the first two acts of 'Alceste' were 'lovely' but the last act 'worthless'. The weak points of the work, ever again a subject of critical discussion, were thus highlighted.

"After a few performances, the negative reaction of critics and public, as well as their own doubt, cause Gluck and du Roullet to make radical alterations to Act 3. On 6 May the 'Mémoires secrets' announce that changes are expected in the next day's performance of 'Alceste'. Gluck himself is full of confidence, convinced that if his work is not succesful immediately then it would be the following year or in 10 years, because his music mirrors nature faithfully and is very true to life. If one relies on the 'Mémoires secrets' of 12 May then it would appear that it was only in the 6th performance on Friday, 10 Myay that the much discussed changes were introduced, above all the figure of Hercules. The 'Mémoires secrets' of 12 May report that the house was full and very excited about the new form of the work which had been awaited for several performances. Nevertheless the piece gained nothing and Gluck's serious admirers would prefer the older version. M. Grimm too mentions the introduction of Hercules, who, although he does not appear on a cloud like a god yet appears at the beginning of Act 3 as if 'fallen from the heavens'. According to Grimm there were several further alterations. At first Hercules repulsed the furies with blows of his club (scene 5) thus preventing them from seizing Alcestis. The effect of this was ridiculous so then the furies were to be permitted to seize their victim. Alcestis was to disappear inside the dark gates of the underworld. Admetus in the utmost despair makes to follow her but is held back by Hercules who saves Alcestis and restores her to her husband." (Rudolf Gerber, tr. Ruth von Csorba. From the liner notes.)

Performers: Chor und Symphonieorchester des Bayerischen Rundfunks, Serge Baudo, Jessye Norman, Nicolai Gedda, Tom Krause, Bernd Weild, Siegmund Nimsgern

1.1. Ouverture

1.2. Acte I: 'Dieux! Rendez-nous Roi, Notre Pere'

1.3. Acte I: 'O Malheureux Admete!'

1.4. Acte I: 'Dieu Puissant! Ecarte Du Trone'

1.5. Acte I: 'Immortel Apollon!'

1.6. Acte I: 'Ou Suis-je? O Malheureuse Alceste!'

1.7. Acte I: 'Tes Destins Sont Remplis'

1.8. Acte I: 'Divinites Du Styx'

2.1. Acte II: 'Que Les Plus Doux Transports Succèdent Aux Alarmes'

2.2. Acte II: 'Ô Mon Roi! Notre Appui! Notre Père!'

2.3. Acte II: 'Cher Époux!'

2.4. Acte II: 'Grands Dieux! Pour Mon Époux, J'implore Vos Secours'

3.1. Acte III: 'Nous Ne Pouvons Trop Répandre De Larmes'

3.2. Acte III: 'Après De Longs Travaux'

3.3. Acte III: 'Grands Dieux, Soutenez Mon Courage!'

3.4. Acte III: 'Ciel Admète! Ô Moment Terrible!'

3.5. Acte III: 'Ami, Leur Rage Est Vaine'

3.6. Acte III: 'Poursuis, Digne Fils!'

3.7. Acte III: 'Et Vous, Qui Vous Montrez À Vos Rois'

3.8. Acte III: 'Reçois, Dieu Bienfaisant'

3.9. Acte III: 'A Mes Amis'

flac/16-bit

Johannes Brahms - 4 Ballades, Op. 10; 2 Rhapsodies, Op. 79; 10 Intemezzi

"Occasionally unsure what title, if any, he should give a piece, Brahms came to use the term intermezzo as a rubric under which he could file anything that was not especially whimsical or fiery. The Three Intermezzi, Op. 117, do not require the technical facility necessary to perform many of his earlier works, but an incisive musicality is paramount for a proper understanding of these musical miniatures. The fact that they are all marked Andante also presents a problem for the performer, who must probe the details of each work and stress the contrasting elements. All three Intermezzi of Op. 117 were written in the summer of 1892, the year of their publication. This is one of the rare cases in which Brahms gave a specific title for an entire set of pieces. Two of the three Intermezzi received their first performances shortly after they were written: No. 1 on February 18, 1893, and No. 2 on January 30 of the same year.

"Prefaced by lines from Herder's translation of Lady Anne Bothwell's Lament, a Scottish lullaby, the first Intermezzo is in E-flat major and cast in ABA' form. The central section, on E flat minor, obscures the 6/8 meter before returning to the major mode for the modified reprise of the first section.

"A sonata-form movement in B-flat minor, the second Intermezzo provides an excellent example of thematic transformation. The first theme, traced by the uppermost thirty-second notes in the arpeggios of the first two measures, becomes the second theme, played in the top notes of block chords 30 measures later. Because the rhythmic movement from note to note is changed and the textures of the two passages are very dissimilar, it takes a perceptive pianist to locate and bring out the transformed melody. Brahms chooses the relative major, D flat, for the second theme while the development section is built around the fluid arpeggios of the first theme. In the recapitulation, the second theme, truncated and transformed, vacillates between the tonic major and minor.

"Brahms once referred to the third Intermezzo of Op. 117 as 'the lullaby of all my grief.' In C sharp minor, the piece is in ternary form (ABA'), with a central section on A major. Section A consists of two ideas, the first stated in parallel octaves. The entire complex is repeated, although the melodies are accompanied differently and some segments appear in a higher register. The move to A major for the B section creates a sense of relaxation as the leaping theme, again with right-hand octaves, provides a stark contrast to the linear, opening idea. A brief transition leads to the return of section A, re-harmonized and in a form more akin to its second half than to the beginning." (Description of the Intermezzi by John Palmer. From AllMusic. See here.)

Performer: Glenn Gould

1.1. 4 Ballades, Op. 10 No. 1 In D Minor 'Edward Ballade': Andante
1.2. 4 Ballades, Op. 10 No. 2 In D Major: Andante
1.3. 4 Ballades, Op. 10 No. 3 In B Minor 'Intermezzo': Allegro
1.4. 4 Ballades, Op. 10 No. 4 In B Major: Andante Con Moto
1.5. 2 Rhapsodies, Op. 79 No. 1 In B Minor: Agitato
1.6. 2 Rhapsodies, Op. 79 No. 2 In G Minor: Molto Passionato, Ma Non Troppo Allegro

2.1. Intermezzo In E-Flat Major, Op. 117/1: Andante Moderato
2.2. Intermezzo In B-Flat Minor, Op. 117/2: Andante Non Troppo E Con Molta Espressione
2.3. Intermezzo In C-Sharp Minor, Op. 117/3: Andante Con Moto
2.4. Intermezzo In E-Flat Minor, Op. 118/6: Andante, Largo E Mesto
2.5. Intermezzo In E Major, Op. 116/4: Adagio
2.6. Intermezzo In A Minor, Op. 76/7: Moderato Simplice
2.7. Intermezzo In A Major, Op. 76/6: Andante Con Moto
2.8. Intermezzo In B Minor, Op. 119/1: Adagio
2.9. Intermezzo In A Minor, Op. 118/1: Allegro Non Assai, Ma Molto Appassionato
2.10. Intermezzo In A Major, Op. 118/2: Andante Teneramente
2.11. Intermezzo In A Major, Op. 118/2: Andante Teneramente

flac/16-bit

Othmar Schoeck - Penthesilea

"He was a quiet artist, a composer who consciously chose to avoid styles and schools. Is the time perhaps now ripe for us to appreciate him not only as a 'pioneer' who set out in completely new directions but also as a 'perfecter'? 

"By 'we' I mean the third generation of music lovers no longer completely under the spell of the Second Viennese School, we who no longer as our fathers — often at the risk of life and liberty — have to contend for Schönberg and his circle, who can finally utter names like Zemlinsky, Schreker, Busoni, Korngold or Schoeck without fear of ridicule, as was the case just ten or twenty years ago. Nothing is more cruel than time: it enshrouds the past. Yet nothing is more just: it allows us to rediscover, to hear and see anew; it turns victory to defeat and corrects misunderstandings. 

"How many of these misunderstandings must be corrected? It would suffice to correct just one — namely, that except for 'Elektra', 'Erwarning', and 'Wozzeck', only second-rate works were composed. He certainly didn't make it easy for us, the 'minor Swiss Lieder composer' Schoeck. Why did he choose Kleist of all people? And why his grimmest work, 'Penthesilea'? Why the bizarre instrumentation: only four solo violins, but a disproportionate number of violas, cellos and double-basses; no harps, instead two pianos, no bassoons, only a bass bassoon, but ten (!) clarinets, four trumpets in the orchestra and three much-used trumpets on stage. A devil's advocate would identify one particular sore spot for the performers: the demands placed on the singers who must move from the sung to the spoken word, and not to dialogue à la 'Fidelio', but to the most demanding Kleist verse — a challenge for even the best stage actors. 

"If I may reply as Schoeck's advocate: Could a director or dramaturge have edited the work more expertly for the stage than Schoeck has? Who could not succumb, after repeated listening, to the austere, yet expressive sound of the orchestra. And on the transition from the sung to the spoken word, Schoeck's friend Hermann Hesse observed that 'throughout the work, with an almost frightening confidence, the finger is placed on the centre, on that point where the experience of the poem converges on a single word or on the vibrations between the words'. Again and again we are confronted — and estranged — by how much more conservative musicians are than writers or artists. There they sit on the treasure of the 'time-proven' and 'familiar', like Fafner guarding the Rheingold. The time has come to add the gold piece 'Penthesilea' to the hoard." (Gerd Albrecht, tr. Lionel Salter. From the liner notes.)

Performers: Symphonieorchester und Chor des ORF, Gerd Albrecht, Helga Dernesch, Jane Marsh, Marjana Lipovšek, Theo Adam

1. 'Was Gilt's? Dort Naht Die Unheilkunde Schon'
2. 'Hetzt Alle Hund' Auf Ihn!'
3. 'Hier, Meine Wackeren Aetolier, Heran!'
4. 'Der Weicht, Ein Schatten, Vom Platz'
5. 'Sie Lebt Nicht Mehr'
6. 'Penthesilea! O Du Träumerin'
7. 'Er Wär' Gefangen Mir?'
8. 'Komm Jetzt, Du Süßer Nereidensohn'
9. 'Wir Treten Jetzt Die Reise Gleich Nach Themiscyra An'
10. 'Argiver Nah'n, Erhebt Euch!'
11. 'Triumph, Triumph!'
12. 'Ein Herold Naht Dir, Königin'
13. 'Ha! Stellt Sie Sich?'
14. 'Entsetzen! O Entsetzen!'
15. Trauermarsch/'Seht! Seht Ihr Frau'n'
16. 'Ach, Prothoe'
17. 'Was Brütet Sie, Die Schreckliche, Wohl Jetzt?'

mp3/320kbps

David Allan Coe - Underground Album

Of course one of Coe's most controversial releases, this album (for fairly obvious reasons) was sold only at shows or through mail order via Coe's own D.A.C. label. Happily though, this is not just an exercise in cheap shock value. The musicianship is tight, Coe is on form if sounding a little strung out (one wouldn't expect a clean and sober man to be writing these songs anyway, who cares), and songs like "Nigger Fucker", "One More Time", "Little Susie Shallow Throat" and "Fuckin' in the Butt" are genuinely hilarious. More than anything, the sense of fun and endless good times pervades.

A1. Rock And Roll Fever
A2. Panheads Forever
A3. Nigger Fucker
A4. Coffee
A5. One Monkey
B1. One More Time
B2. Little Susie Shallow Throat
B3. Pick 'Em, Lick 'Em, Stick 'Em
B4. Don't Bite The Dick
B5. Fuckin' In The Butt

flac/16-bit