A Performance of My Piece, “Twelve-Bar”
May 14th, 2011 § Leave a Comment
by Matthew Raley
Last January, violinist Laura Rubinstein-Salzedo premiered a trio I wrote for violin, flute, and cello as part of her senior recital at Sac State. She was joined by Kim Davis (flute) and Courtney Castaneda (cello). I am so grateful for their hard work on the piece, and for their fine playing. Click the link below for a recording.
Audio: Twelve-Bar for Flute, Violin, and Piano
“Twelve-Bar,” draws from two American sources of music. As the title indicates, the piece uses the twelve-bar blues form as an ostinato. All melodic and rhythmic motives come from the folk hymn, “What a Friend We Have In Jesus.” These motives appear in fragments and short quotations of the tune throughout the piece, with the complete tune played by the flute at the end. I hope you enjoy it!
A Performance of “Along the Field”
April 13th, 2011 § Leave a Comment
By Matthew Raley

Ralph Vaughan Williams
Each year, I have the privilege of performing with many excellent student musicians at Chico State. Michael Beale, a fine tenor who graduated last spring, is one of them. We performed the song cycle Along the Field by English composer Ralph Vaughan Williams (1872-1958) at Michael’s senior recital a year ago. The cycle contains eight poems by A. E. Housman.
Vaughan Williams is famous for his lush string writing and folk melodies. While Along the Field shows the folk influence, it is unusual for Vaughan Williams and for art song literature in general. The piece calls for voice and violin only. Its harmonies are spare to the point of austerity.
Here are mp3 tracks of the last three songs from our performance. I hope you enjoy them!
North State Symphony Premieres a New Work
November 10th, 2010 § Leave a Comment
by Matthew Raley
Many orchestras might shun new music during hard economic times. Audiences are often nervous about hearing contemporary pieces, dreading the dissonance associated with the last century. So it’s safer to offer proven concert fare: listeners will pay to hear what they know.
Conductor Kyle Wiley Pickett and the North State Symphony have not retreated from new music, even during the slump. Last May, the NSS gave the west coast premiere of the Clarinet Concerto by Lowell Liebermann, a winning piece played by the fantastic Jon Manasse. Audiences in Redding, Chico, and Red Bluff greeted the new work with thunderous approval. The concerts had great reviews as well.
Every NSS season features major works of the 20th century from composers like Bela Bartok, Igor Stravinsky, and Dmitri Shostakovich, and north state concert-goers have responded with enthusiasm.
This weekend, the NSS will give the world premiere of another new piece, the Symphony No. 1 by Dan Pinkston.
Pinkston is local, the associate professor of theory and composition at Simpson University in Redding. He told me that his interest in composition began early. He was “essentially writing pop songs in junior high school, and studied classical composition in college, as well as for my masters and doctoral degrees. Composing has always been the most natural way for me to express myself musically.”
His Symphony was commissioned by the NSS, which also commissioned Pinkston’s Woman, Why Are You Crying? and gave its premiere in 2007. Pinkston has composed yet another symphonic work called Oracles, which will be premiered at a later date.
The Symphony, he says, is “a conscious attempt to engage the audience.” Pinkston has influences as diverse as Stravinsky, Bartok, the Beatles, and U2. But Shostakovich is his favorite composer. “I have tried to strike the balance [Shostakovich] has between beauty, modernism, form, communication, etc. His music is liked by audiences and musicians, and it moves me personally.”
As the NSS rehearsed the Symphony for the first time last weekend, I was especially impressed by Pinkston’s orchestration. He makes the orchestra sound good — always a winner with musicians, who can be even more surly about new music than audiences. The flow of the work is also well-conceived. It was written to communicate, and it does so with strong use of motivic devices, inventive textures, and drama.
I think north state audiences are going to like this work, and will look forward to more new music from Dan Pinkston. Here’s a conversation between Pinkston and Pickett:
Boredom, Lady Gaga, and My New Friend Olivia
September 16th, 2010 § Leave a Comment
by Matthew Raley
When I saw that Lady Gaga wore a dress made of meat, I considered rejecting the Internet again.
Early in my summer sabbatical, I found that I couldn’t abide the Internet anymore, that I loathed it both for being frantic to get my attention and for being a colossal bore.
Twitter, for me, has turned into the annoying person who won’t stop recommending stuff to read. The actual information on it is paltry. I watched the #sanbruno feed last weekend roar to life like the flames from PG&E’s old gas line, but quickly abandoned it. How many RTs of “1 person confirmed dead” do we need? It was like reading a cable news crawl.
I find that most news websites are stridently partisan, offering little of what the ancients used to call reporting. The vast majority of blogs are unreadable, thuggish, self-absorbed, and profane — irritatingly profane, as though profanity still had shock value. To spend any length of time on Facebook, it seems that my appetite for kidding around has to be gluttonous.
We say that we use the web to “connect.” We rejoice over “connecting” with old friends, people with similar interests, and fellow professionals, as if a connection of 140 characters is significant, as if hitting “tweet” compulsively while your eyes dry out and your face goes slack from hours in front of a screen is personal engagement.
Bottom line: I got sick of trying to convince myself that social media are as great as they claim. I decided that crowdsourcing web content was less a brilliant insight than a desperate ploy to keep boredom at bay. So I paid rude, token snatches of attention to the Internet once a day, and then ignored it.
I resumed normal life this month, with its unavoidable web-staring and “connecting,” just in time to see Lady Gaga and her meat.
Gaga is Our Lady of the Internet, a saint of cyberlife who personifies the web ethic of giving and receiving: I’ll do a little stunt for you if you’ll do one for me. Every day, she feeds the web with a new dress or hat, a new exposure of her skin, or some new pose of her glazed face. And last week, apparently running out of ideas for another stunt, she wore meat.
It happened that I went to speak at a small church in Cottonwood last Saturday. A woman entered just after I began to teach with a person the size of a seven-year-old draped over her shoulder, and at a distance I took the person for a girl. It was clear that she was severely limited: unable to move, hold herself up, or speak. She would moan, and the woman would shift her to the other shoulder for a change of position.
At the first break, I went over to meet the pair. The caregiver introduced me to Olivia, not a girl but a thirty-year-old woman, and she held her up to look at me. As I locked eyes with Olivia, the caregiver said that Olivia had just been released from the hospital. I said to those silent eyes, “I’m so glad you’re here today!” Suddenly the face that had seemed inert moved, a slight but definite pull at the side of Olivia’s mouth. I got a smile. I got another one later as we said goodbye.
A connection.
So there is a woman on the Internet who flies around the globe trying to keep everyone from getting bored with her. There is another woman in Cottonwood who is shifted from one of her caregiver’s shoulders to the other, and who smiles when she meets new friends. Ultimately, I do wonder whose life is richer.
I suppose I won’t reject the Internet. But I will be rude to it, with all its pretense of liveliness. I prefer smiles.
Mystery Violin Identified
August 30th, 2010 § 1 Comment
by Matthew Raley
I’ve been writing about my evaluation this summer of a violin loaned to me by a friend (here, here, and here). My original low expectations were surpassed as I played it, especially after I put on better strings. But I have been bothered by two things. Who was the maker, Lee Nelms? And could the sound of the violin be significantly improved?
My googling of Nelms, you’ll recall, turned up zero. So I drove the violin up to John Harrison, noted luthier in Redding, on the chance that he had at least heard of Nelms. He had indeed.
Harrison told me that Nelms was a maker in Klamath Falls, OR, mainly known among fiddlers (like my friend’s uncle, the violin’s original owner). Nelms died, Harrison thought, sometime around 1988. Harrison stepped past a dozen violins and violas to a bookshelf, covered with a layer of sawdust, and pulled out a reference work on American makers. Nelms was listed, the bio reporting that he started in 1978 and had made 16 violins by 1986, the date of publication. Two instruments a year. Harrison himself had met Nelms numerous times at conventions and had seen several of his violins.
This particular violin, made in 1979, was one of the better Nelms instruments Harrison had seen. But “it has issues.” As a point of workmanship, Harrison noted that the scroll was commercial, not hand-carved. Worse, the tail-piece was too long for the size of the violin, which plays havoc with the main issue: the sound post. Harrison agreed that a more powerful tone could be coaxed out of this violin with a better-fitting post. But proper placement depended on getting a well-proportioned tailpiece.
It would take some investment to improve the violin, but it could be done.
I left pondering the fact that a man I never knew reached across 30 years, down several hundred miles from Klamath Falls, and gained my respect by making a violin. The internet can’t find him, but the members of his guild can. As Harrison said to me with satisfaction, “His violins are still being played.” Nelms won’t be a legend, but his craft has staying power. Not bad at all.
Playing the Nelms Violin
August 10th, 2010 § 1 Comment
by Matthew Raley
For several weeks, I’ve been switching between my violin and one loaned to me by a friend who wants me to evaluate it.
You’ll recall that I had low expectations of this violin until I saw it in the case and played on it a little. Its tone was even, responsive, and capable of different colors even with poor strings.
So I put on an old set of my own strings (Evah Pirazzi, “stark”) and started testing the violin across a range of pieces. I played several Rode caprices, and the better strings made an immediate difference. The violin was resonant, spoke brightly, and barked accents at my command. Double-stops and chords, in which the bow is pulled across several strings quickly, were clear.
I got similar results in the Novácek Perpetuum Mobile. As I played through a couple of Beethoven sonatas I found an additional virtue. The violin was capable of real sweetness when I played lyrical passages. This was confirmed when I read through the 1st violin part to the Brahms clarinet quintet.
But I was always bothered when I would begin playing this violin. It would sound nasal, brash. One evening recently, I started with the 2nd movement of the Brahms quintet, and was able to isolate some of the pitches that squawked the worst. But after ten minutes or so, when I went back to those pitches, the squawk was gone.
Conclusion? This violin is grumpy right out of the case. It needs to warm up.
There are other qualities I wonder about. So I’m going to Redding violin maker John Harrison soon to see if he can find any information about Lee Nelms, and if the sound-post might need adjusting. I’m not one to waste a good excuse to go to Harrison’s shop.
Evaluating a Violin
June 16th, 2010 § 2 Comments
by Matthew Raley
So, a guy asks me to play a violin he inherited. I can’t find any information about the maker, Lee Nelms, but because the instrument exceeds my low expectations I am intrigued. I want to find out how good this violin is. My problem is that I really don’t know how to evaluate one.
Okay, I know how to play. I know what I like. But there’s an art to examining a violin that I just don’t possess.
For one thing, I have never played a great violin. It’s one thing to hear Itzhak Perlman play a Stradivarius in a hall; playing one yourself is something else entirely.
You have the sound immediately under your ear. The surface noise of the bow pulling across the string–or the absence of it–as well as the subtler overtones are all right there. Further, you gain rich tactile information from the way your vibrato warms the tone, the effect of bow pressure and speed, and the vibrations of the violin itself in your hand, shoulder, and head.
John Harrison, a maker in Redding, CA, once told me that he had made a violin decades ago for a Chico State professor. While he was trying the new instrument, Harrison was closeted with the professor’s Strad, examining, measuring, and above all playing. It’s experience like Harrison’s, repeated many times, that I would consider reliable.
To play a truly great instrument is to learn why the sound in the hall is so powerful. Never having had the experience, I feel that my standards are unreliable. I did once play a selection of contemporary Italian violins, each worth a fair amount of money. I didn’t like any of them. Part of me says that my coolness can’t be right, that my thirty-five years of playing instruments in the yuck-to-good range has messed up my taste.
I also don’t really know what I’m looking for in terms of craft. An orchestra colleague of mine, Abraham Becker, once looked over my instrument from various angles, and said, “That is a well-made violin.” Since Abraham is vastly experienced, playing everything from classical to Broadway to tangos from his native Argentina, I was gratified to hear his judgment. But I have no idea why he said it so confidently.
I can spot an atrocious varnish, or other obvious failings. An awful violin passed into my hands only two weeks ago, on which the varnish obscured all the grain of the wood, the purfling around the edges of the top and back was painted rather than inlaid, and the strings were unevenly spaced.
But the finer points of excellent craft I only pick up informally.
Still, The Nelms violin has piqued my curiosity. So here’s what I’m looking at.
The Nelms impressed me in the case as a beautiful piece of work. I love the color of the varnish, and the grain of the split back.
Here is my own violin:
You can see it’s a different model from the Nelms, slightly narrower and longer. You can also see the wear of its two-century history, like the spot where the varnish has worn away on the back by the neck. (The left hand often rests there.) The wood itself has many qualities that I prize, like the unusual grain, and the single-piece back on which the grain is slanted.
I have owned it since high school, when I bought it from my teacher. It hung in his shop for years, and I used to stop in just to play it.
In my next post, I’ll compare the sound of these two instruments, and see if I can’t diagnose the things that bother me about the Nelms.
Mystery Violin
June 11th, 2010 § 5 Comments
by Matthew Raley
In 1989, the first year I was a student at Willamette University, the oldest building on campus, Waller Hall, had just been renovated. While workers were demolishing the interior, they had made quite a discovery under the floorboards of the attic.
Wrapped in newspapers from the 1920s was a violin.
The instrument was appraised as 18th century Italian (the label said 1789, but that’s far from decisive), maker undetermined, worth about $10,000. To those used to guitar prices, that may be a jaw-dropping sum, but in the violin world, such a value is more like an entry fee. The violin was restored to beautiful condition, and advertised all over the country in an effort to find anyone who could lay a plausible claim.
No one did.
It’s a terrific violin mystery. Was it stolen? Why was there no record of an investigation? Who would’ve abandoned such an instrument?
Even better for me, since I was a violin major, I played it for four years. It had a dark, rich tone that carried well in a hall, though it was not loud. It was an easy-playing instrument, responsive and reliable. Most of all, it had character. There were all sorts of colors available to me depending upon bow-speed and pressure.
A few weeks ago, I got another mystery violin.
A local guy had been telling me for years that he had a violin he wanted me to play. One learns to have very low expectations of these things, though I’m always curious.
At last, he brought the violin over and left it for me. What I lifted out of the case was a quite lovely piece of workmanship. Red-brown, dark varnish, a two-piece back with dramatic grain. But the sound?
Well, the strings were really poor. The tone was bright, which to my ear often signals a cheapo, in certain places it sounded a bit nasal. Yet . . .
The tone was even across all the strings, and all the way up the fingerboard. Once the sound was established, the violin was capable of blossoming, or becoming louder and more resonant. There were some sweet overtones that promised more character. And it was quite responsive.
The guy had told me the story. His uncle had bought the violin from an American maker for a few thousand dollars, and the maker had won awards.
I looked at the label. “Lee Nelms, 1979.” Google turned up exactly nothing, which just made me more curious. Even if it isn’t a del Gesu, this instrument isn’t the work of a novice either. He must have other violins out there.
So I’m going to put in some time this summer to find out about this violin, and deepen my own education about violin-making. Check back for updates.
Is An Evangelical Art Music Possible?
October 14th, 2009 § 9 Comments
by Matthew Raley
The father of Christian contemporary music, Larry Norman, recorded a song decades ago quoting Martin Luther: “Why should the devil have all the good music?” It was push-back against those who said rock and roll was inherently devilish.
Ever since, the quote has been a favorite of youth pastors who like to think that Luther was talking about tavern drinking songs that were turned into hymns. Take the music of the marketplace, they say, and make it preach Jesus.
Sorry. Martin Luther never thought the devil lived in taverns. The man liked his beer. As far as Luther was concerned, the devil lived in Rome. Specifically, the devil had taken over St. Peter’s, with its architecture, its sculptures and frescos … and its choirs.
In fact, Luther’s quote was about the most eminent composer of that time, one-time member of the Papal choir, Josquin des Prez. He it was who wrote “all the good music” that the devil had — art music, developed over the centuries from Gregorian chant. This music was pre-Palestrina, having many independent parts, so florid in their mutual imitations that the text of the mass tended to get lost.
Luther himself was a well-trained singer and a composer. He wrote many of the Lutheran hymns himself. They were not tavern tunes at all.
Larry Norman’s little artifact comprehends the scope of my argument over the last few months. Evangelicals have ditched their folk singing tradition (music from life) in favor of pop music (music from the store). In doing so, they leveled the varied and authentic cultures of churches all over the country into the wasteland of Christian radio. Evangelical leaders committed this blunder because of musical illiteracy, and turned their movement into a cultural parasite.
I have argued that the folk singing dynamic can be recovered, and the richness of local church cultures gradually restored.
But there is one last consideration. The art music descended from Josquin and from Luther’s heir, Johann Sebastian Bach, ran aground in industrial society. Philosopher Theodor Adorno said that the only thing left for modern music to express is the alienation of the individual.
Contemporary, newly composed art music (mostly from secular academia) has no mission to edify people, that is, to bring them together on the basis of shared things. The mission of new art music seems to be that of presenting very personal pieces that, it is hoped, will be “accessible” to listeners. It has institutional support, for now, but no philosophical basis.
I may be alone among evangelicals in thinking this is an important problem. But here goes: Evangelical composers could produce what academia cannot, a renewed development of art music from living folk traditions. This art can begin by adding emotional range to a worship service to glorify God, replying to folk singing with artistic affirmation. (An example from Bach here.) An evangelical composer can do this by exploring three mandates:
1. Modernist alienation from the listener is evil.
The musician is a servant of God to the community, not a prophet of his or her own selfish passion. God’s musician should not affirm sentimental delusions in God’s people. He challenges perceptions and assumptions. But he does so within the confession of truths that are prejudicially shared.
New art music, following Adorno, has restricted itself to the tools of deconstruction and shock so long that it now exhibits a pathetic inability to relate. Whatever its brilliance as art — and the brilliance is often real — it is frequently not humane. When it does reach out, it offers the tentative comfort of the emotionally distant.
Overthrow the Beethovenian priesthood of the artist. Reconstitute Bach’s guild of pious craft.
2. Bypass pop music and mine a living folk tradition in a local church.
Pop music is, in the vast majority of cases, dead commercialism. It sometimes renews itself with an act that comes straight from the street. But the market usually softens the act. Renewal may come with the Beatles, but what gets stuck in your head is the Monkeys. There is not enough raw material in pop music to interact with meaningfully.
Evangelicals have a folk tradition. Once they resuscitate it, they should speak to it. The interaction between art composition and folk singing is so long and fruitful that it needs no more than a few names to fill it in: Bartok, Kodaly, Katchaturian, Copland, Shostakovich, Chopin, Paganini, Haydn, etc., etc., etc.
American evangelical folk hymns are fertile ground. They only require a composer who believes what they say.
3. Employ forms that live in the broader American tradition.
An audience responds to form before it responds to style. Form is prejudicial. A composer who aims at edifying an audience shouldn’t waste his time with surface-level stylistic mimicry. Form says “we.” The 12-bar blues and the 32-bar song are both suited to unbelievable stylistic flexibility. And, with Americans, they retain the unconscious power of a Sarabande in Bach’s day. (Bach took care with his stylistic etiquette, yes. But his dance movements are harmonic and contrapuntal tours de force.)
These three mandates had their equivalents in Luther’s day. He understood that the Reformation would never thrive as a cultural parasite on Roman Catholicism. So he worked hard at developing his people’s folk singing. And he inaugurated an artistic tradition that produced, in less than two centuries, Bach himself.





