Frank Bridge editionhttps://youtu.be/gg25_Z43sW8>How do I get into classical?This link has resources including audio courses, textbooks and selections of recordings to help you start to understand and appreciate classical music:https://pastebin.com/NBEp2VFhPrevious: >>122776564
Judge R. Strauss on his best works, that is everything with a soprano in it.https://youtu.be/Nz8wt98tZHQ?si=PDhllx66QWEoc7Ag
>>122809004Barenboim with the Chicago Symphony Orkestra convinced me Linz Version is the best version of Brückner's first. It does sound more powerful and moving. Why did he change it in Vienna?
People actually listen to Bruckner's first symphony? In different versions no less?!
>>122809168The Brucknerpill is a gateway to a world of... different versions and endless debate
>>122809004Why there is so few love for Villa-lobos here? His Tupi choral in Floresta da Amazonia is genius stuff
>>122809207I like Villa-Lobos and have posted him before. I've seen others post his music too. He's just not that well-known compared to many other composers.https://youtu.be/0_bJD9VCmFs
>>122807819There's plenty to dislike about Richter's late period. He was at his best in the 50s-70s.
>>122809316His Schubert is simply too slow for me
>>122809342It's really only the 21st Sonata that he's particularly slow. And, yes, I agree as far as his interpretation of that sonata is concerned.
>>122809004This oldest Italian opera must be absolved from the censure that Wagner pronounced upon the later one. It was not a loose collection of arias, but really what it claimed to be—a dramma per musica. Monteverde, of all composers, perhaps has the closest affinity with Wagner; there is some truth in Guido Adler’s remark that the creator of The Ring should really be regarded as a representative of the Renaissance, and more particularly of the Renaissance opera. The creators of the stilo rappresentativo, as the new kind of music was called, had the same ideals as Wagner. For them, as for him, music was not an end-in-itself, but served only to express the drama, and it was their desire that the orchestra should be invisible. Their melody, however, took the form of dramatic declamation, the inherent expressiveness of which can still move the modern hearer most profoundly. Monteverde’s lament of Ariadne (Lamento d’Arrianna) may be cited as an example.The music of a Monteverde had been a re-birth from musical declamation. Being in essence the negation of song, it could not employ any song-text that was compressed into an artificial or monotonous verse-metre; what it demanded was a free rhymed prose, in which rhyme and metre existed only as servants of the music. With this aversion to rhyming lines of the same length, that broke up the musical tissue in an obviously unnatural way, music entered the path that was to lead it, after a ample of centuries of wandering, to the style of Wagner.
>>122807193>But for you to be incapable to see what sets apart a Beethoven melody from a Beetles melodyif the beatles took a beethoven melody and set it to a beatles song, it would still be pop rock. plenty of popular musicians quote melodies from mozart, bach, tchaikovsky, paganini, rachmaninoff et al, but no one here considers blackpink to be classical music. on the other hand, if beethoven were alive in the 1960s and used a beatles melody (which, as funny as it sounds, is not terribly far off from his usage of folk melodies, which he did fairly often) in a piano sonata, it would still be classical music. the reason for this is beyond your comprehension because you are a midwit whose only argument is MUH FEEWINZ and MUH SENSITIVIEZ and is incapable of comprehending the objective facets of music that differentiate their conception and therefore intent. >>122809168brucknerites are a special kind of mentally ill. the rest of us know that only the symphonies from 4 onwards warrant repeated listening.
How many of you play a classical instrument/ are have been in some kind of band or orchestra? Can you all read music?
>>122809342Where does it fall on the Richter Scale?
>>122809207Wolf House?
>>122809537I would certainly include B3 myself.
>>122809537>if the beatles took a beethoven melody and set it to a beatles song, it would still be pop rock.Except they could never create that melody. That's the point, it would just be a Beetles song that includes a classical melody; the melody itself, and its artistic value, remains classical. You have a total insensitivity to the true meaning of art, like you genuinely thing Beethoven chose or thought up a melody in a mental state of academic analysis. The academic criteria established for the comprehension of an artform does not, and never will, ensure a real understanding of art or why it is made. One sees it all the time, academic mediocrity breaking down the formal conception of a Madonna, but somehow forgetting the significance of its religious subject and why the artist is using any technique at all. And it can be demonstrated almost psychoanalytically, the 'feeling' remains in such a state of regressive underdevelopment, that calling 'feeling' into art is assumed to only mean the most primitive response possible. Feeling is quite literally dead for them, there is no such thing as supreme subtlety or originality in feeling, because feeling -- and this plays into their superiority complex -- is only for the least intelligent individual when they react to art. That is how little they know art! And it is easiest in music for this particular type of vulgar personality to arise, because music exists as pure form, and can be analysed in that way apart from its living tones. The objective facets of music exist for feeling, and this will only strike a person as an extreme statement if they know absolutely nothing about artistic feeling.
>>122809537Parts of Here Comes The Sun sound like parts of Prelude in D from book 1 of the WTC(The Beatles did it better though)
>>122809734lmao. What?
>>122809795Aesthetic experience includes feeling. What's so confusing about that? Autists who obsess over theory and want nothing to do with human feeling should be banned from studying art. They'll just pervert the entire definition of what art is.
>>122809734holy mother fucking exercise in missing the goddamn point. do you not know what a quotation in music is?https://youtu.be/wNOXu_yoDYI?si=I0YwR6OUt3_NKJVNexplain why this quotation of the primary subject of the slow movement of the pathetique sonata is somehow not a classical melody in “feeling” in spite of being THE EXACT SAME MELODY.
>>122809867Calm down autistic sister
>>122809681I am self-taught on piano but never been a part of band or orchestra unfortunately. Maybe in the future I will.Yes of course I can read sheet music. But I don't know theory well, so I'm studying that, slowly.
>>122809903i can’t think of anything more autistic than insisting that the only thing that differentiates classical music from popular music is some vague indescribable FEEWINZ and then going on a thousand word sperg tirade on why MUH FEEWINZ is the supreme comprehension of art or whatever the fuck that retard was trying to say in that wall of text i skimmed through.
>>122809537If the world is ill, being sane is considered a disease. Brückner's first 3 symphonoes are filled with beautiful moments and vitality. He already sounds like himself, with his own, majestic voice, from the start, as he had spent 40 years preparing to begin his compositions. There is no sudden leap of quality on the forth; his symphonies, instead, are all part of the same conversation, of Brückner with God, with the listener being free to join from the moment he is inserted in his life
>>122809933putting an umlaut in bruckner’s name doesn’t suddenly make his first 3 symphonies any less amateurish and laborious.
>>122809933I'm with you.>>122809955kek
>>122809867I explicitly said if a song exactly quotes a classical melody then the melody remains classical and of the same value, ignoring any questions of performance (which are obviously not insignificant). Any idiot will tell you the Billy Joel song is not classical in feeling, that it completely ruins the original feeling of the melody, not least by it certainly not being performed classically. This is an obvious sign of your own underdevelopment in this area, and you should take this as an injunction to better yourself. I mean, even in just the instrumentation, can't you see the all important difference between a jazzy pop orchestration and a pianoforte?
>>122809918>the only thing that differentiates classical music from popular music is some vague indescribable FEEWINZNo one said this. You're the one sperging out because you're been shown to be an unfeeling autist.
>>122809955>According to widespread opinion, the Third can be regarded as Bruckner's artistic breakthrough. In it, the "real and complete Bruckner" comes into expression for the first time.[12] According to Rudolf Kloiber, the third symphony "opens the sequence of Bruckner's masterpieces, in which his creativity meets monumental ability of symphonic construction."Who to believe? Sisterposter on /mu/ or a serious critic? Mmm...
>>122809964>that it completely ruins the original feeling of the melodyit’s the exact same goddamn melody. explain to me exactly how billy joel ruins it without using the word FEEWINZ. in fact, explain literally anything you’ve said without resorting to “i-it’s just subjective and you wouldn’t get it!”, because that’s basically the summation of every waste of breath you’ve uttered on this hellhole of a general. >even in just the instrumentationexcept i asked about melody, which you seem all obsessed with. orchestration has nothing to do with melody. they’re still the same notes in the same contour and even the same register. arguably, the only real difference between the two melodies is key. not that you would know this, since apparently you can’t differentiate orchestration from melodic content. >>122809974you did, tourist sperg. don’t try to deny it, we’ve all seen your gay fucking spergfest over the last 12 hours. >>122809979since we seem so concerned with “serious critical” opinions, should i start quoting hanslick reviews of bruckner symphonies?
>>122810019The point is that there seems to be a general consensus about Bruckner getting good from #3 onwards whereas you completely arbitrarily choose to exclude the 3rd from his great works
>>122810109>arbitrarilyperhaps it’s because i don’t really like the 4th or the 3rd to begin with, and i find the 4th to be a much better symphony than the 3rd, so it serves as a logical cutoff point for me.
>>122810019>it’s the exact same goddamn melody.Which no one is disagreeing with, you mentally ill autist. But next time you want to hear a beautiful classical melody performed, please go ahead and put a retarded saxophone and love song lyrics over it, and get a pop singer to play it, and change the tempo accordingly, and then tell me it's just as beautiful. You cannot, and that is what you are denying, I suppose to excuse your sappy musical sensibilities.
>>122810202>But next time you want to hear a beautiful classical melody performed, please go ahead and put a retarded saxophone and love song lyrics over it, and get a pop singer to play it, and change the tempo accordingly, and then tell me it's just as beautiful.you’ve just described the changes made that disfigure its beauty; the orchestration, the performance, the presentation and context of the melody in the structure of the piece. none of these things have to do with melody in and of itself. there are no “classical” melodies, there are only melodies in classical contexts and melodies otherwise. this is why beethoven can quote german folksong and stravinsky can quote lithuanian folksong without being folksong. you can clearly comprehend now the idea that the same contour of notes can take on a different affect based on context and presentation, so why is it so difficult to comprehend that context and presentation is precisely what defines classical music as a practice of composing and performing music?
The Pathetique melody is beautiful for its restraint, and a swaggering Jew comes along and turns it into a headlong expression of pathos.TYPICAL!
Ravel Bartok Ligeti
>>122810251but bartok isnt a talentless hack
>>122810238Maybe he should of called it The Restraint Somata instead then?
>>122810129What are your thoughts on Bruckner 5? I know it's a fan favorite but I always have the hardest time enjoying that one.
>>122810257neither are the other two
>>122810288one of the strangest romantic era symphonies in conception, but fundamentally genius. >>122810302evidently they are.
>>122810236This is absolutely imbecilic. You can never fully extricate melody from instrumentation, performance or structure, but this in no way shows that classical melody, or any particular type of melody, DOES NOT exist. That is beyond stupid and the most disingenuous argument I have ever read in this general. The melody of a Mozart is just as uniquely classical. And we could certainly have an extensive study of the difference between classical music incorporating foreign types of music, and then later types of music bastardising classical music. That's an important distinction. Beethoven is at one with the original intention of a folk melody, it is that feeling which he desires; while Billy Joel is not being authentic to classical melody, he's wrenching it for his own close minded pop idea of music. All you have shown me is that, as expected, your conception of melody is utterly abstract and detached from the living art of music.
>>122810350>but this in no way shows that classical melody, or any particular type of melody, DOES NOT existDescribe "classical melody" then.
>>122810350>You can never fully extricate melody from instrumentationmelody and orchestration are two different things entirely that govern two completely different aspects of music. how else do you think piano arrangements of orchestral works are still recognizably the same piece? unless you’re trying to argue otherwise, in which case you’re obviously a sub-80 IQ idiot who’s not worth talking to. >The melody of a Mozart is just as uniquely classicalhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd0cT7Dnpt8explain how the chorus of this song that i’ve never heard isn’t classical despite the fact that it uses the melody of mozart’s 21st quartet in the chorus. i will continue to do this until you can explain why the melodies and ONLY the melodies of these songs somehow stop being “classical” in spite of the fact that they are unchanged in these pop song bastardizations. >Beethoven is at one with the original intention of a folk melodyLMFAO you’re smoking crack. get over yourself you insufferable pseud. the original austrian peasant who created Unsa kätz häd kaz'ln g'habt probably wasn’t even alive at the same time as beethoven, and certainly did not “intend” for their song about kittens to be used as a motivic device treated in counterpoint (not that they would even have any conception of any idea of counterpoint to begin with. we’re not even sure if they were alive when the pianoforte was invented). >while Billy Joel is not being authentic to classical melodyagain, explain how WHEN THE MELODY IS EXACTLY THE SAME. you’ve dodged this question time and time again by bringing up things that AREN’T MELODY. until you can define the parameters you yourself claim to be working with, you may as well be arguing about fairies and unicorns.
this shit bops, great way to start the dayhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71X3uv7zxsQ&list=OLAK5uy_kI_dSFfT5YevyS5ATtB8amVvh5YDwBVr8&index=1https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kI_dSFfT5YevyS5ATtB8amVvh5YDwBVr8
Any Bach organ recordings on historical organs with the tuning relatively the same as when they were when first built?Double points if it's a well engineered recording.
>>122810312I'm gonna listen to the Jochum (Dresden) recording of B5. Apparently he was obsessed by it.
>>122810486i prefer his concertgebouw live recording from 1986. that’s my favorite bruckner 5 period.
>>122810446>melody and orchestration are two different things entirely Some orchestrations do not radically affect the reception of the melody, other times they do. And certainly this becomes a thousand times more apparent when orchestrated with a pop sound. The truly classical significance of a classical melody can only be appreciated when in classical orchestration. Or are you going to tell me classical orchestration doesn't exist because a pop song can use a violin?>explain how the chorus of this song that i’ve never heard isn’t classical despite the fact that it uses the melody of mozart’s 21st quartet in the chorus.I've repeated myself a billion times already, an exact quotation of a classical melody is classical music. A shitty pop quotation is classical music thrown in the context of shitty pop. Do you even know what you're arguing about?>certainly did not “intend” for their song about kittens to be used as a motivic device treated in counterpointWhich has nothing to do with the degree in which the original spirit of the melody is preserved in Beethoven's treatment of it. Ah yes, I am a pseud if I think Beethoven has more respect for folk music than Billy Joel has respect for classical music.>again, explain how WHEN THE MELODY IS EXACTLY THE SAME.Because of all the reasons I've already said. A classical pianist can not be authentic to a melody when performing a sonata, it becomes far easier with all the additions of the pop world.
What’s that classical piece thats like black metal?
>>122810679>Some orchestrations do not radically affect the reception of the melodyhey retard, get this point. i’m not talking about the RECEPTION of the melody, i’m talking about the MELODY ITSELF. is that finally cleared up in your tiny little head?>Or are you going to tell me classical orchestration doesn't exist because a pop song can use a violin?i don’t consider john williams nor einaudi to be classical, no. >an exact quotation of a classical melodyboth billy joel and the stupid pop band i posted above quote their respective melodies NOTE FOR NOTE WITHOUT MODIFICATION TO THE CONTOUR OR RHYTHM. that is the literal definition of an “exact quotation”. your argument doesn’t even exist like you think it does. >I am a pseud if I think Beethoven has more respect for folk music than Billy Joel has respect for classical music.i’m glad we finally see eye to eye. beethoven almost certainly didn’t even have any conception of “original intent” (a very postmodern idea in music), he simply quoted the melody because he wanted to use it as the primary subject of a scherzo. the difference is that beethoven’s treatment of a single foreign melody is far more sophisticated than all of billy joel’s greatest ideas put together. >A classical pianist can not be authentic to a melody when performing a sonatathis sentence makes absolutely no fucking sense whatsoever. you are a retard.
Guys it's been settled, the opening of every sonata isn't classical music, because the only thing that determines classical music is form. So sad! I no longer have a word to describe that sound I like at the start of each sonata.Also if 6ix9ine uses sonata form then he is now classical music. It's as simple as using form for it to become classical music. Now I can no longer filter out his music when trying to explain to people what type of music I like.Damn.. what even is classical music???
>>122810679>Ah yes, I am a pseud if I think Beethoven has more respect for folk music than Billy Joel has respect for classical musicYes?>A classical pianist can not be authentic to a melody when performing a sonataWhat does this even mean?
>>122810809>the opening of every sonata isn't classical music, because the only thing that determines classical music is form.the opening of sonata form is an optional part of sonata form though. where did you get the idea that introductions to formal structures somehow exist outside of their structures and have no tangible relation to them?>Also if 6ix9ine uses sonata form then he is now classical musicif 6ix9ine composed a piece of music on staves that followed the fundamentals of voice leading and bound itself to large scale form in one way or another, then yes, he would be classical. thankfully, unlike pop musicians quoting melodies from classical music or pop musicians using orchestration derived from classical, this is a strawman that doesn’t and has never existed.
>>122810807>i don’t consider john williams nor einaudi to be classical, no.But they are using classical orchestration, are they not?>the literal definition of an “exact quotation”.And what is your point here? Again, I don't think you even know what you're arguing about.>beethoven almost certainly didn’t even have any conception of “original intent”Which changes absolutely nothing about Beethoven's ability to see the intrinsic musical character of a melody. And which Billy Joel cannot do. At anyrate, I stress again, there is an enormous difference between classical composers integrating foreign styles, and then pop singers schmaltzifying classical music. Why can't you understand something so simple?>this sentence makes absolutely no fucking sense whatsoever. you are a retard.ESL moment. Performers try to resemble the intentions of a composer when writing a melody, that's being authentic.>>122810816See above, retarded ESL.
>>122810860If you take the opening without the rest, then it's not sonata form. Do you now really need me to explain to you how this is relevant to the point, or are you smart enough to figure out the following conclusion of this?>if 6ix9ine composed a piece of music on staves that followed the fundamentals of voice leading and bound itself to large scale form in one way or another, then yes, he would be classical.And likewise any amount of academic shit is classical music for you. But I can tell you, Mozart wouldn't consider that classical music; he probably wouldn't even consider it music; because he was an artist concerned with artistic values and definitions, which is inextricably bound up with FEELING.
>>122810917>But they are using classical orchestration, are they not?yes, which is precisely why "classical orchestration" doesn't exist. there is the orchestra, and there is chamber music, but neither of these things are inherently "classical" nor do they make the music performed on them inherently "classical". >And what is your point here?that both of the shitty musical examples i posted count as exact quotations of classical melodies, and in your own words "an exact quotation of a classical melody is classical music". i hope i don't need to say the obvious conclusion to these two ideas out loud. >Which changes absolutely nothing about Beethoven's ability to see the intrinsic musical character of a melody.there is no "intrinsic musical character" to a fucking folksong melody about cats having kittens. it's just a goddamn 7 note melody. you really are a pseud huffing his own farts. >there is an enormous difference between classical composers integrating foreign styles, and then pop singers schmaltzifying classical music. yes, the difference being that one is classical while the other is pop thanks to the contexts that they are used in. not very hard to comprehend. >Performers try to resemble the intentions of a composer when writing a melodyperformers don't write melodies, what the fuck are you talking about? are you even listening to yourself? >>122810945>If you take the opening without the rest, then it's not sonata formif i took just the A subject of an exposition without the rest, it wouldn't be sonata form either. this literal cherrypicking argument is the most retarded thing i've seen you say all day, and that's saying something. >Mozart wouldn't consider that classical music; he probably wouldn't even consider it music; because he was an artist concerned with artistic values and definitionsyou must be an expert in speaking with the dead, considering that's a whole crock of shit you're stuffing into the mouth of someone who died 200 years ago.
>>122810714What kind of black metal? Obtained Enslavement (especially the Prelude) sounds much like Chopin. I would suggest Ballades(start with No. 1), but if you're not accustomed to classical it might take time to click. But it is highly rewarding.
>>122811073>especially the PreludeSorry O'Nocturne*.
Jón Leifs: "Hekla"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AQ24wuylqI&ab_channel=lexlex
>>122810984>yes, which is precisely why "classical orchestration" doesn't exist.Ahaha, lol, okay retard.>i hope i don't need to say the obvious conclusion to these two ideas out loud.No, please do, I fail to see your point.>there is no "intrinsic musical character" to a fucking folksong melodySo you're claiming that folk music has no distinctive qualities now? What an idiot you are. Hell, the simplicity of the melody itself is a quality.>yes, the difference being that one is classical while the other is pop thanks to the contexts that they are used in.One is traditional classical music, the other is pop music borrowing from classical music.>performers don't write melodies, what the fuck are you talking about? are you even listening to yourself?Uhh, durr, performers play melodies, hurr durr.>if i took just the A subject of an exposition without the rest, it wouldn't be sonata form either.Precisely, yet it is STILL classical music, the art that I love and enjoy. It appears you weren't intelligent enough to understand the conclusion of the obvious.>that's a whole crock of shit you're stuffing into the mouth of someone who died 200 years agoIt's about as knowable as saying Mozart would be against gay marriage. I know, common sense is a very powerful tool when you're a medium between the living and the dead, but it works wonders. I hear something else from among the dead, it's the voice of an artist, he's saying "You think I don't know what is essential to my art? My entire life was dedicated to art you fucking idiot". Well, that settles it.
>>122811073It might have been this idkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMbBYR_lplE&ab_channel=MuzykawRaju
>>122811160>Ahaha, lol, okay retard.you have yet to explain why any of these things are inherently classical. in fact, you have yet to explain why anything you've talked about is inherently classical when they all exist outside of classical. >No, please do, I fail to see your point.if billy joel is doing an exact quotation of a classical melody, and according to you, an exact quotation of a classical melody is inherently classical, then by your standards, billy joel must be classical, but only for that chorus in which he quotes the melody and at no other part of the song. why did i have to spell out the obvious to you again? >So you're claiming that folk music has no distinctive qualities now? it does. >Traditional folk music has been defined in several ways: as music transmitted orally, music with unknown composers, music that is played on traditional instruments, music about cultural or national identity, music that changes between generations (folk process), music associated with a people's folklore, or music performed by custom over a long period of time. note that none of this has anything to do with "intrinsic musical character", it's all based on the factual transmission and compositional nature of the music, both of which are entirely qualifiable unlike the bullshit you are spewing>Uhh, durr, performers play melodies, hurr durr.can you seriously not differentiate between PLAYING something and WRITING something? holy fuck. >Precisely, yet it is STILL classical musicyeah, almost like taking something out of the context it was created in doesn't change the fact that it was created in said context. an excerpt of music doesn't stop being bound to form just because you isolate it from the rest of the structure it was created with. >It's about as knowable as saying Mozart would be against gay marriage. aahahahaAHAHAHAHAHAHAH are we being for fucking real right now? i'm definitely arguing with a schizophrenic aren't i?
>>122811160>>122811248>One is traditional classical music, the other is pop music borrowing from classical music.yes, i'm glad we can agree that beethoven using a folksong melody in the context of classical music does not magically make him traditional folk music, and that billy joel using a classical melody in the context of pop music does not magically make him a classical composer, because the usage and contexts of these melodies is what defines their styles of music, not the melodies in and of themselves. that wasn't so hard to clear up, was it? >It's about as knowable as saying Mozart would be against gay marriagei'm going to pretend for a second that this isn't the single funniest thing that anyone has posted in /classical/ all year. we can easily presume that anyone from mozart's period living in europe would probably be against homosexuality because it was the historically documented cultural norm at the time. on the other hand, "an artist concerned with artistic values and definitions" and similar incoherent babble is not a documented cultural practice among 18th century europeans, among austrians, or even among austrian composers of the time period. it's some bullshit you made up in your head because you are a mentally ill tourist posturing as an intellectual. i hope you understand now why your "argument" is so absurdly hysterical to the rest of us.
Royer Vertigohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzxlMfUzqIM&ab_channel=WarnerClassics
a classical pianist trying to be authentic to the melody is like eating the last balloon at a weddingas in only have you in if only one
>>122811448
>>122810486Give a chance to Sawallisch and Ormandy, their versions are great
>>122811674i know hurwitz really loves that sawallisch recording but holy shit i’ve never heard a more boring bruckner recording from an otherwise decent conductor
>>122811674>>122811730I actually like Hurwitz' pick: Cleveland/Dohnanyi. I think Dohnanyi's cycle (incomplete) is really solid anyway, except for a disappointing 7th.
>>122811783i found that dohnanyi recording pretty boring as well, but i don't like dohnanyi very much to begin with.
